10.27.10

“Regulatory Spawn” and Proxy Advisors

Posted in Blog at 2:14 pm

On October 26th, 2010, a piece written by John Carney of CNBC was published and spread around the internet, claiming that the proxy advisors were similar to the credit ratings agencies in that their judgments were similarly biased (in the case of the proxy advisors “by a small clique  . . . whose interest may conflict with clients”) and that the only reason these existed at all was because of a regulatory mandate, which required institutional investors to protect themselves by voting in accord Read more [...]

10.25.10

Ballot-box Stuffing on Behalf of Retail Investors

Posted in Blog at 6:47 pm

The Wall Street Journal ran a piece on Friday, October 22nd, stating and appearing to give support for a proposed rules change that proxy voting by retail shareholders should be encouraged by permitting shareholders to leave standing instructions with their brokers or custodians to vote their shares in a particular way—e.g., always in support of management recommendations, or always in support of all resolutions, rather than requiring them to return a proxy card with their decisions regarding that Read more [...]

10.06.10

How do we get Financial Intermediaries to Police Themselves?

Posted in Blog at 2:20 pm

Patience Wheatcroft, one of the Wall St. Journal Europe’s regular contributors, had a piece on a U.K. regulator’s seeming willingness to add corporate culture to the list of things for financial regulators to attempt to control.  The occasion was a speech by Hector Sants, who was until recently head of the British Financial Services Authority, at the Mansion House on the subject, “Should a regulator seek to regulate culture?”  I had known Hector well in his earlier life as an analyst and Read more [...]