Shouldn't give more power to minority shareholders?
SC had recently issued a consultative paper which proposed to raise the shareholder approval level in an acquisition via assets and liabilities from the current simple majority to 75% shareholder approval.
Some investment bankers and their advisors have vociferously denounced this proposal as it could lead to giving minorities too much power and potentially leading to a situation of “greenmailing”. (thestar)
Too much power?
CIMB Group Holdings Bhd group chief executive Datuk Seri Nazir Razak: "SC proposal would severely hit M&As"
Would severely hit M&As?
Shireen Muhiudeen of managing director of Corston-Smith Asset Management:
"On March 31, we wrote to regulators, Bursa Malaysia Bhd and the Securities Commission, in response to two public consultation papers issued recently. We are quite baffled that the regulators would even consider granting such disruptive power to a minority."
Regulators shouldn't even consider mah? Disruptive power?
Just like Shireen said herself, she did sound pretty baffled.
However, TheStar Deputy news editor Risen Jayaseelan doesn't seem baffled at all:
SC is carrying out exactly what a handful of financial journalists has been vociferously calling for since 2005.
And, as Malaysia’s capital market matures and progresses, regulatory protection of minority rights becomes more important, not just because retail participation is necessary for growth, but also because foreign institutional funds buy and sell Malaysian shares, though not necessarily in sufficient quantities to acquire control.
In addition, our capital market needs to be in line with other jurisdictions such as Hong Kong, Thailand and New Zealand, where the threshold of approval under the assets and liabilities method for mergers and acquisitions had been increased recently.
The companies involved in these takeover and mergers could disappear from Bursa Listing. For example, more power to minority will give them the last chance to to squeeze a little more money out from the deal. The companies that want to acquire or merger or go private they need to offer better price to shareholders.
Note that no banks or institution will back up minority shareholders. In fact the group that opposed the amendments are investments banks (that's one of the reasons why I never feel like falling in love with investment banks especially with Goldman Sachs). Let's hope SC will go on with the amendments. I will support more power to minority shareholders any day. I am in the minority shareholders group. I am not Datuk Nazir Razak or Shireen Muhiudeen or Ananda Krishnan. They have more than 'disruptive power' already. I want just a little bit of disruptive power. If you want to take over the company which shares I am holding, you better offer me better deal.
Why so baffled?
Disruptive power to the minority
SC should be applauded for proactive stance:
Our capital market also needs to be in line with other jurisdictions
