One person committees, and how activists think
What’s all this about a one-person board committee? You wrote a neat post about Special Committees of One, would be interesting to explore this.
What is a special committee?
Why would boards want to act by committee?
What does it mean to be conflicted, or not conflicted?
What kind of problems does a conflicted board create?
Where do special committees fit into all of this?
But the rules are different when there’s a controlling shareholder, right?
Where do single member committees come in?
And there was a new development in the Match Group case, right?
How does this matter to our favorite corporation, Tesla?
What do activists look for in deciding even to invest in one or another company?
How do different activists think differently about this process?
What about corporate governance catches your attention?
How does an activist decide to escalate?
If you’re a board, and you’re facing an activist situation, and you genuinely think that you don’t need outside interference - you believe in good faith that either things are as good as they can be, or that you have a plan for resolving problems that doesn’t need outside interference - how should that board respond if an activist shows up?
