It is clear Bill Ackman has plans for Target. It is also clear in public he has been very complimentary of Target’s (TGT) management. It is also clear that he has avoided a direct confrontation with them for over year, until now. It is also clear that management has no intention of even listening to their largest shareholder who has made investors billions doing what he is proposing Target do, unlock value.
What does it all mean? Management at Target does not have a clue that the landscape is changing out there and being outright dismissive of shareholders while sales crater and the stock languishes, is well, not a very good idea.
Ackman has an interest in 8% of Targets shares. If you are a shareholder, you should want to know, if management says his idea are bad for shareholders, how many shares do they own. The answer? .31%. Not 31, not 3.1 but POINT .31% or less than 1%. Now that includes the Board all management. All of them.
So, what are they more concerned about really? Their jobs maybe? Ackman has an interest in 25 times more stock than they do. If you are a shareholder, wouldn’t that mean to you that he probably has a rather large vested interest in the health of the stock? Maybe management is truly more concern with their nice salaries & perks than the share price?
This is not to say that they do not care about it, just that their pay and benefits trump stock price.
Here is the most recent pay figures:
Now, it is nice to see them taking the free shares from the company. But, one has to ask, “how many shares are they actually using their own money to buy?. The answer? None. In the past year only Chairman Seinhafel made a singe purchase and that was the exercise of an option that he did not turn around and sell.
Meanwhile, Ackman, his investors and anyone else who bought shares did so with their hard earned money.
Changes on the Board would probably mean changes in management as Target sought to be managed by those with more experience in those area such as food, real estate etc.
I think it is pretty clear that managements actions are about “protecting our jobs”, not “maximizing shareholder value”.
If you are a shareholder, who are you going to want to hear from? Are you wondering why the blanket dismissal? Are you wondering, “well, what is management going to do other than sit wait for the economy to turn?”
To Our Shareholders:
You are cordially invited to attend Target Corporation’s 2009 Annual Meeting of Shareholders. The Annual Meeting will be held at 1:00 p.m., Central Daylight Time, on Thursday, May 28, 2009 at the Target Store located at 1250 West Sunset Drive, Waukesha, Wisconsin. Details regarding admission to the Annual Meeting and the business to be conducted are more fully described in the accompanying Notice of Annual Meeting of Shareholders and Proxy Statement.
At this year’s Annual Meeting, you will be asked to determine that the number of directors constituting our Board of Directors shall be 12, to elect the Class III directors to our Board of Directors for three-year terms, to ratify the appointment of Ernst & Young LLP as our independent registered public accounting firm, to approve the performance measures available under the Target Corporation Long-Term Incentive Plan, and to act on the shareholder proposal in the Proxy Statement, if presented at the Annual Meeting.
We hope you will be able to attend the Annual Meeting, but if you cannot do so, it is important that your shares be represented. We urge you to read the proxy statement carefully, and to use the WHITE proxy card to vote for the Board of Director’s nominees by telephone or Internet, or by signing, dating, and returning the enclosed WHITE proxy card in the postage-paid envelope provided, whether or not you plan to attend the Annual Meeting. Instructions are provided on the WHITE proxy card.
You should know that Pershing Square Capital Management, L.P. and certain affiliated entities, a group of hedge funds led by William Ackman that own Target shares and derivative securities (“Pershing Square”), have stated their intention to propose alternative director nominees for election at the Annual Meeting in opposition to the Board’s recommended nominees.
We strongly urge you to vote for the nominees proposed by the Board by using the enclosed WHITE proxy card and not to return any proxy card sent to you by Pershing Square. If you vote using a proxy card sent to you by Pershing Square, you can subsequently revoke it by using the WHITE proxy card to vote by telephone or Internet, or by signing, dating and returning the WHITE proxy card in the postage-paid envelope provided. Only your last-dated proxy will count—any proxy may be revoked at any time prior to its exercise at the Annual Meeting as described in the Proxy Statement.
Thank you for your continued support.
Disclosure (“none” means no position):None
9 replies on “Target’s Strategy Regarding Ackman: "Na Na, We Can’t Hear You"”
makes me wonder if there are things that have gone on behind closed doors that have soured the relationship between TGT and Ackman. Ackman has as you’ve said, been very complimentary and a gentleman in public. But, Target’s sheer avoidance makes me wonder if a riff has struck up between them or something.
too be honest i think they are terrified of wholesale mgmt changes.
Ackman can’t do jack to TGT. It’s not like they’re BGP. He deserves to get his ass handed to him on this one.
joe,
i am sensing hostility…..
point to note…. he rarely loses
Ranni: In my view, final countdown for mgmt has started.
How is Mr. Ackman proposing a change in strategy for Target?
From everything I have read he wants Target to sell off its assets (properties) to a new subsidiary that will lease the properties back to the Stores. This is what Companies do that are in trouble to get cash. It is also what hedge fund managers do who buy billions of stock on a margin call, and need to make a quick turn around for their investers. Mr. Ackman is short sighted, and only concerned with his portfolio, and not about the long term viability of Target. All you have to do is follow the money. Target Mgmt is safe, and it will be Mr. Ackman who is handed a defeat.
aaron..
please read prior posts on it. he want to dramatically alter the board to place people there with specific experience in area target is currently lacking in
he is not short sighted. he has left a slew of businesses better off after him than before (mcd, wed,cmg,thi etc..)
management at target is falling so far behind wmt they may never catch up. worst of all ,sears is actually catching them
i have no skin in the game so can not either way. if you do, i suggest you read his sec filing before you dismiss him
Like stated in the comments above, Ackman has no interest in the viability of Target Corporation. Come on man! Your totally not seeing this (not to be rude). He has a vested interest in swindling Target corporation for a quick turn around of his hedge fund. It would be a different story if Ackman had approached Target with a long term plan that complemented Target’s applaudable business philosophy. Instead Ackman’s proposal is focused on his own agenda.
I have no reason to trust his Sec filing. Madoff is a clear example of why its a moot point to trust these fronts that people like Ackman and Madoff put up in order to swindle people for their own profit. Target management is fine. Profit is not the primary function of business. I suggest that you read Joseph DesJardin’s “Business, Ethic, and the Environment” and Aldo Leopold’s “A Sand County Almanac” (the section on the land ethic).
I consider Target’s business philosophy far more important to the turnaround to shareholders. Thats the spirit of what the Dayton family would want and that is the way the company should remain. Business that uphold a strict ethic are likely to be the long term players. Those that didn’t end up like GM, Enron, Morgan Stanley, and Merril Lynch to name a few.
At least Target is able to stay in business. Although they may be slowing, I doubt that it will be long term.
Jeremy,
You blew you point when you put Ackman /Madoff in the same reply. FTR, Ackman did committ to hold stock for 5 years if elected to board and DOES OWN more than all of management…
something to think about