Analysis Of Ruger Shareholder Vote
BY Herschel Smith
6 years, 6 months ago
I had lamented earlier that I hadn’t seen any good analyses on how many shareholders voted on what, the breakdown of constituency, etc. That all ends with the reporting of Richard Craver of the Winston-Salem Journal. Pay attention boys and girls at CNN, MSNBC, and the other crappy pretend journalist outlets. This is how you do analysis and reporting.
Only 30 percent of Sturm, Ruger & Co.’s 17.44 million outstanding shares were cast in favor of defeating a shareholder proposal requiring the firearms manufacturer to issue a risk report on its products.
The Sisters of the Holy Names of Jesus and Mary of Marylhurst, Ore., submitted a “gun safety” proposal. It requires the Ruger board of directors to report “on its activities related to safety measures and mitigation of harm associated with company products.”
The proposals also asked for an update on where Ruger is on developing “smart guns that could significantly reduce accidental shootings and suicides.” Ruger received identical proposals from other shareholders.
Ruger announced at its annual shareholder meeting Wednesday that the proposal passed, but did not provide the vote counts. Ruger had at last count 334 employees at its plant in Mayodan.
The company reported the counts in a required regulatory filing late Monday. Just under 90 percent of its outstanding shares were represented at the meeting.
There were 7.19 million shares voted in favor of the proposal and 3.26 million against, representing 41.2 percent and 18.7 percent of Ruger’s outstanding shares, respectively.
There were 5.07 million shares in the non-voting category – 29.1 percent of outstanding shares – while 124,947 shares were listed as abstained.
[ … ]
Mutual funds giant BlackRock has told firearms manufacturers that it wants to “understand their responses” to the Florida school shooting. BlackRock owns 17 percent of Ruger and 11 percent of American Outdoor Brands through its various mutual fund indexes. Bank of America Corp. issued a similar statement.
It is not known how BlackRock cast its votes on the shareholder proposal.
He goes on to explain that the law prevents brokers from voting on matters for clients when there are no instructions from shareholders.
So the bottom line here is that [a] a lot of shareholders voted with the controllers to force the Ruger board to commission a “study” on risks associated with gun manufacturing, and [b] BlackRock owns a lot of stock in Ruger.
I’ve said it before and I’ll repeat here. Ruger had better find a way to cut its ties with corporate America and issue – and buy – enough stock to allow the board and/or employees to have a controlling interest in the company. These are dangerous times.
I understand the need for capital and thus the issuance of public stock. But this is a bridge too far and leaves Ruger in a precarious position. That needs to be fixed as soon as possible.
Prior:
Ruger Anti-Gun Shareholders More Powerful Than We Suspected?
The Next Installment Of The War Between Amalgamated Bank And Ruger
Amalgamated Bank Pressures Ruger To Support Gun Control Measures
|
|
On May 16, 2018 at 6:00 am, ragman said:
I wonder if the Sisters in Oregon is a false front for a Soros or Bloomberg gun confiscation organization? If not, what happened to vows of poverty in the Catholic Church?
On May 16, 2018 at 8:58 am, Fred said:
Sir, I would suggest that; “[a] a lot of shareholders voted with the controllers” could more accurately read; ‘a lot of shares were voted with the controllers’. Each share is a vote not each shareholder. That’s how a large individual (or group) shareholder controls the boards of public companies.
Also Sir, The current shares have almost no value to a company (except where it owns it’s own shares). It’s the issuing of new or more shares that generates the infusion of capital investment.
The answer is to take the company private. This doesn’t make the news much but it happens all the time. And, the Money Center Banks would love to take it private because it’s a lot of work with the SEC and other regulators, and the exchange on which it’s shares trade. The risk is the need for money to enable such a move. They should find one of the lessor and smaller (not Money Center) banks to take a look at doing this.
On May 16, 2018 at 9:02 am, Chris said:
A pox on BlackRock Funds. I had some money in one of their funds for years. I dumped it all and bought a non-political fund when I heard they’ve been meddling with my 2nd Amendment rights. All freedom loving people should divest of any BlackRock funds they hold, and ask their IRA and 401(k) managers to do so too.
On May 16, 2018 at 10:42 am, Fred said:
Somewhere north of $476 million, call it 500 mil, gets you a 51% percent stake and ownership of the company and unchallengeable (except by regulators) control (If’n my math is right). However a “Controlling Interest” can be achieved if a large enough percent of voting shares can be purchased.
Year end 2017:
Cash and Cash Equivalents: 63,487,000
Including inventory and other items: 166,784,000
Total (including long term assets): 284,313,000
minus liabilities of: 54,000,000
Total equity: 230,149,000
Also, the company already owns 24,000,000 shares of it’s common stock.
– Source Nasdaq dot com.
It looks attractive to the right party to buy up shares and own it or take it private. They MAKE MONEY. This is always a plus when investing, duh, but it has to be said, *sigh*.
Also the current stock share price is right around the middle of it’s 5 years historical range. Somebody is buying it and/or not selling it one would surmise. The shares appear to have made a short term bottom in March.
On May 16, 2018 at 11:07 am, Bill Robbins said:
Let us pray that any religious organization that lobbys against lawful business or political activities lose tax exempt status and pay taxes.
On May 16, 2018 at 12:15 pm, Fred said:
Bill, that is the fallacy of the 501(c)3 code for religious orgs. Christians are not tax exempt, they are immune to taxation. If you don’t organize as a corporation under the Internal Revenue Code then you can say anything you want. Perhaps you knew this?
Of course, I’m sure that these fake Christians are a 501(c)3. All good little Statists are. And then they could be subject to losing their status and since they were dumb enough to register they could even be fined in addition to paying taxes.
On May 16, 2018 at 3:21 pm, Jack Crabb said:
“Let us pray that any religious organization that lobbys against lawful business or political activities lose tax exempt status and pay taxes.”
Surely you jest. It’s OK to be a political activist if you advocate the correct policies. Just look at all the black churches that preach leftist politics from their pulpits.
And don’t even get me started on the Catholic Church. Those boy diddling self righteous bastards there have been playing both sides against the middle since… well, pretty much their existence.