Talk:Proxy fight

This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Business Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Business, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of business articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.BusinessWikipedia:WikiProject BusinessTemplate:WikiProject BusinessWikiProject Business Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. Finance & Investment Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Finance & Investment, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles related to Finance and Investment on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Finance & InvestmentWikipedia:WikiProject Finance & InvestmentTemplate:WikiProject Finance & InvestmentFinance & Investment Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

"Odds stacked in their favour", there is access to certain corporate resources to opponents of management, under different regimes. E.G. to call a special general meeting, propose resolutions, write to shareholders. These need to be mentioned by someone who knows the details under at least one legal framework. Also shareholder apathy... Rich Farmbrough, 12:17 27 November 2006 (GMT).

Actually, as a professional in these kind of situations, I would 100% agree with the statement "Odds stacked in their favor." In a US proxy fight management has a significant advantage because all non-voted shares are voted in favor of management. Its a legal ploy that makes mounting an effective proxy solicitation a real challenge. R550D 23:13, 27 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have to agree with the second comment. I don't see bias. In most cases, incumbent-type officials (including management) have more resources than those fighting against them.

There should not be any mention of the Yahoo deal in the article and the "Odds stacked" is a bit of an overstatement. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.128.79.126 (talk) 23:01, 13 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The "odds stacked" section should be modified in advantages and disadvantages for both perspectives: incumbant management and proxy management. --208.15.90.2 (talk) 14:06, 15 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Is there a reason why both terms are used in the article? If the two terms are being used to mean the same group of people, only one term should be used to avoid confusion. --Ababcdc1 (talk) 00:29, 21 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Proxy fight. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100218183834/http://dmwmedia.com/news/2006/01/31/frank-biondi-joins-carl-icahn-in-time-warner-proxy-fight to http://www.dmwmedia.com/news/2006/01/31/frank-biondi-joins-carl-icahn-in-time-warner-proxy-fight
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110715124904/http://proxymatters.com/2008/04/27/capital-markets-are-proxy-fight-friendly-part-ii/ to http://proxymatters.com/2008/04/27/capital-markets-are-proxy-fight-friendly-part-ii/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 22:34, 26 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]