Monthly Archives: August 2024

The Sustainability J-Curve

Allen He is a Director and Jessica Pollock is a Senior Research Associate at FCLTGlobal. This post is based on their FCLTGlobal memorandum.

Ideal vs. Reality

Companies often argue that sustainability lies at the core of their business strategy and directly impacts their long-term profitability. At the individual company level, it pays more to operate sustainably – we know that allocating capital to R&Dinvesting in employees, aligning with our stakeholders and our long-term shareholders, sets us up for far greater value creation and ROI than grasping for short-term gains.

Ideally, investors are rewarded for their patience when these sustainability initiatives pay off. But in the meantime, corporate leaders feel that their sustainability initiatives are being thwarted from almost every angle. Activists are riding an anti-ESG wave prioritizing short-term profitability, and many investors remain skeptical of corporate sustainability investments due to unclear payoffs, misaligned time horizons, and confusing messaging. Fearing for their future, many companies have changed tack from trumpeting sustainability efforts to “green hushing.”

READ MORE »

Do I need to make money to go public?

Mark Mushkin is a Partner at Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe LLP. This post is based on his Orrick memorandum.

With signs of a measured return of the IPO markets, companies and investors are revisiting the fundamental question, “What do I need to look like to go public?”

In the pre-2020 market, a “unicorn” with a $1 billion valuation and $100 million in annual revenue was a promising IPO candidate (with some variation by vertical). But with the meteoric rise – and subsequent fall – of valuations over the past several years, what’s the right litmus test for IPO success? By some calculations, over 1,000 companies today claim a valuation of $1 billion or more on a post-money basis – but only a fraction of these unicorns are likely to reach IPO, whether due to underlying business fundamentals or macro dynamics that have resulted in companies staying private longer or pursuing M&A exits (Jamie Dimon, in his annual letter to shareholders, recently bemoaned that the number of publicly listed companies today has nearly halved from the mid-1990s). In particular, after the poor performance of many companies that went public via de-SPAC, it is clear that advisors and investors continue to be selective with their money and more rigorous in their views on listed companies’ prospects.

READ MORE »

Integrating Geopolitics and Sustainability for Future-Ready Leadership

Fatima Hadj is the Chair of Securitised Products at Principles for Responsible Investment (PRI), and Chloe Demrovsky is a Senior Advisor and Frederik Otto is the Executive Director at The Sustainability Board (TSB). This post is based on their TSB memorandum.

In today’s global polycrisis, boards and executive teams alike must integrate a wider array of perspectives into their decision-making processes and align their businesses. A holistic approach that incorporates broader aspects of material risk is crucial for ensuring the resilience and sustainability of business operations. Here are key recommendations:

READ MORE »

Federal Court Issues Nationwide Injunction Blocking FTC Non-Compete Ban

Michael J. Schobel and Erica E. Aho are Partners and Jonathan C. Nickas is an Associate at Wachtell, Lipton, Rosen & Katz. This post is based on their Wachtell Lipton memorandum.

On August 20, 2024, Judge Ada Brown of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas issued a permanent injunction setting aside the Federal Trade Commission’s final rule banning non-compete agreements in Ryan LLC v. FTC. Last month, the court afforded temporary relief as to the named plaintiffs only by issuing a preliminary injunction enjoining the rule’s application against them. In its most recent decision, the court specified that its ruling has permanent, nationwide effect. An appeal is likely to follow.

Set to take effect on September 4, 2024, as previously discussed here, the final rule would have prohibited enforcement of non-compete covenants with respect to nearly all U.S. workers and would have required employers to notify affected workers that their non-competes are unenforceable. The rule provided only limited exceptions for non-competes entered into with “Senior Executives” (as defined in the rule) prior to the rule’s effective date and non-competes entered into in connection with the sale of a business. In reaching its decision, the Texas court ruled that the FTC lacks substantive rulemaking authority as to unfair methods of competition, and that the FTC’s promulgation of the final rule was arbitrary and capricious because it was unreasonably overbroad and lacked reasonable explanation.

READ MORE »

Weekly Roundup: August 16-22, 2024


More from:

This roundup contains a collection of the posts published on the Forum during the week of August 16-22, 2024

Firm Boundaries and Voluntary Disclosure


The 2024 Proxy Season in 3 Charts


Insider Trading by Other Means


Post-Doctoral and Graduate Corporate Governance Fellowships


California in Spotlight as Massachusetts Avoids Bill Targeting Private Equity in Healthcare


Bridging the gap: Comparing board and C-suite perspectives


Navigating the Nuances of Board Diversity in NASDAQ-Listed Companies



SEC Enforcement – Top Seven Developments from June 2024


Managing Cyber Risk: Breach Risk Trends in Public Companies


Managing Cyber Risk: Breach Risk Trends in Public Companies

Subodh Mishra is Global Head of Communications at ISS STOXX. This post is based on an ISS-Corporate memorandum by Douglas Clare and Brian O’Leary.

Introduction

In the two years to January 2024, almost 700 cyber incidents were reported among Russell 3000 companies in the U.S., impacting more than 10% of the firms. One-third of those involved the compromise of a supplier or other third party, and the study also identified substantial third-party aggregate risk concentration across Russell 3000 firms.

KEY TAKEAWAYS

  • One-third of reported incidents among Russell 3000 firms involved a supplier or other third-party relationship, and incidents that impacted a large number of individuals were more likely to have a third-party as the root cause.
  • Aggregate risk exposure across the index is high, with more than 90% of Russell 3000 firms utilizing certain third-party technologies, and more than 1,000 different unique supplier/technology pairings each being utilized by more than 10% of constituent companies.
  • Companies that reported cyber incidents during the analysis period have higher risk, as measured by significantly lower ISS Cyber Risk Scores, than firms with no reported incidents.
  • Of those firms reporting an incident, the score effectively rank-orders incident risk by severity, as measured by the number of individuals impacted.

READ MORE »

SEC Enforcement – Top Seven Developments from June 2024

Adam AdertonElizabeth P. Gray and A. Kristina Littman are Partners at Willkie Farr & Gallagher LLP. This post is based on a Willkie memorandum by Mr. Aderton, Ms. Gray, Ms. Littman, and Erik Holmvik.

In June, four blockbuster court decisions were issued that will reshape the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission’s (the “SEC” or “Commission”) exercise of its authority in important ways. At the same time, regular business continued at the SEC as it brought a number of enforcement actions spanning several hot-button areas, including cybersecurity, artificial intelligence, and the registered investment adviser Marketing Rule. In this alert, we briefly summarize the top seven securities enforcement and litigation developments from the last month, including:

  • Two seismic Supreme Court decisions overruling Chevron deference and reshaping administrative law;
  • The Supreme Court’s recent decision in SEC v. Jarkesy;
  • The Fifth Circuit’s ruling vacating the SEC’s new private fund rules;
  • A novel action applying Exchange Act Section 13(b)(2)(B) in the cybersecurity context;
  • An action targeting misstatements made by issuer regarding its use of artificial intelligence;
  • A Marketing Rule action arising from misleading performance advertisements; and
  • The $4.5 billion penalty agreed to by Terraform Labs and its founder following their April fraud verdict.

READ MORE »

Data Breach Securities Class Actions: Record Settlements and Investor Claims on the Rise

David Malmstrom is a Manager at Broadridge. This post is based on his Broadridge memorandum.

Data Breach Securities Class Actions: Record Settlements and Investor Claims on the Rise

Data breach related securities class action filings are on the rise.[1] These lawsuits are based on allegations that companies misrepresented or misled investors about cybersecurity events, such as data breaches or security vulnerabilities, causing stock prices to fall when the truth is revealed. Data breaches have increased steadily since 2020[2] and this surge in breaches and cybersecurity incidents has led to more shareholders filing securities class action claims. This year we have witnessed significant settlements, including three of the top ten largest data breach related securities class action settlements, totaling $560 million.

READ MORE »

Navigating the Nuances of Board Diversity in NASDAQ-Listed Companies

Lawrence Cunningham is the incoming Director of the University of Delaware’s John L. Weinberg Center for Corporate Governance.

In recent years, a push for diversity on corporate boards gained momentum, culminating in NASDAQ’s new listing rules that require companies to disclose the composition of their boards in terms of certain forms of diversity—gender, race and sexual orientation—and disclose whether they have one or more such directors or explain why not.

In line with other social trends, boards have been diversifying and most have had no trouble checking the NASDAQ rule’s box. The interesting cases are the small number that have instead opted to explain why they do not meet NASDAQ’s diversity matrix.

Bloomberg’s Andrew Ramonas scoured the current 2024 proxy statements of numerous companies and found several that provide a glimpse into the complexities companies face in this area that are often unappreciated and are worthy of consideration.

READ MORE »

Bridging the gap: Comparing board and C-suite perspectives

Catie Hall and Carin Robinson are Directors at the PricewaterhouseCoopers (PwC) Governance Insights Center. This post is based on their PwC memorandum.

How effective is the board? It depends on who you ask

In a time of change for many organizations, two recent PwC surveys show that boards and the C-suite don’t always see eye-to-eye on some key topics. We compared the results of our  Annual Corporate Directors Survey (ACDS) and Board effectiveness: A survey of the C-suite. The findings show that directors and executives have different views on topics such as board effectiveness, composition, refreshment, board understanding and knowledge of key business risks, and the ability of boards to guide their companies through a time of crisis.

We’ve identified five areas where directors’ views differ substantially from those in the C-suite. Boards should view each of these as an opportunity for productive discussion that can ultimately strengthen the relationship between them and management.

READ MORE »

Page 2 of 6
1 2 3 4 5 6