Trust and Transparency

tpltblogger6 Comments

“So why was I asked to be a trustee nominee for the vacant trustee position? I was told the shareholders want someone with corporate governance experience and that they wanted to move the trust forward in a more open and transparent direction. I can be that change agent, and I have served that role in the past. I’m an independent director as defined by the criteria established by the Securities Exchange Commission and the New York Stock Exchange. I have no conflicts of interest and will exercise my duties of care and loyalty with seriousness.” – General Donald Cook

https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/97517/000121390019007125/defa14a0419b_texaspacific.htm

6 thoughts on “Trust and Transparency”

  1. He discusses being asked to be a Trustee, not a Director, so this is old and may be perceived as being a current position.

    In any event, he’s NOT doing what he espouses in this 14A self-serving submittal.

    Like

  2. “But I will pledge that I will begin to buy some shares if elected to be the trustee, and I will encourage others. I think that we ought to have a policy that, certainly those that are executive vice presidents or vice presidents or corporate officers should have some “skin in the game,” and I know that it is something that you have expressed your views on. And I agree—that’s good governance.”

    AT THE TIME THIS CAME OUT IN 2019, I MISTAKENLY THOUGHT THAT WHEN HE SAID “BUY SOME SHARES” THAT HE MEANT THAT HE WOULD USE SOME OF HIS COMPENSATION TO PURCHASE SHARES AFTER JOINING THE BOARD. TOTALLY MY MISUNDERSTANDING — WHAT HE APPARENTLY MEANT WAS HE WAS ACTUALLY GOING TO USE THE FIRST-EVER SHAREHOLDER VOTE TO ATTEMPT TO CREATE AN INSANELY GENEROUS COMPENSATION ARRANGEMENT WHEREBY HE WOULD BE “GRANTED” SHARES IN A TAX-ADVANTAGED WAY.

    Like

  3. Sir If you are willing to leave the board we will be very pleased and thank you for doing so immediately and allow us to nominate a replacement immediately.

    You see we are interested in returning to a near 95% Gross Profit Margin again as the Trust had “forever”. Also we see no reason to pay Directors $250K and more in Committee fees and we see no reason to provide stock options to Directors IN ADDITION. We desire to see the company be a passive royalty company not an active oil company. We want all spare cash to be used to repurchase shares. We do not want liars on the board (McGinnis) nor Directors and officers who refuse to explain to shareholders why you have not, and the CEO and the two Co Chairmen are not simply telling us did McGinnis own enough stock to be the second largest Shareholder which if he was he violated SEC 13F regulations and if he was not he of course lied in his PR and filing. Why is management and the board unwilling to state whatever the facts are forthwith?

    We want a Board and directors that chooses to hold the first ever annual meeting during the holidays at the at end of the year

    . We don’t want a board that that pays a CFO with no experience others than that of an investor relations person (and when we don’t even need such a department) and an investment banker. A million dollars and obviously really more since his salary includes his moths as the IR person.

    We don’t want a board that vastly overpaid a CEO with $3million last year and who was paid Trustee approved $6 Million over the two prior years; for what? What did he do to earn those sums aside from build overhead mightily? And btw way we understand directors are required to buy shares of TPL and yet after being paid $9 million in the last three years, and I ask you how much in this year 2021, Mr. Glover THIS YEAR bought all of 287 shares and you sir have boght zero.

    I would be very glad to tell you a lot more if you will provide me with your em and phone number General. I mean no disrespect to you but would welcome an opportunity to discuss matters with you directly.

    The fact is you do not represent shareholders at all and clearly not me in any way. BTW your governance experience isn’t showing given you are or are supporting management which is today right now battling providing the facts concerning Mr McGinnis and his stock holdings and lack of same and his stating during the proxy battle his being the second largest shareholder? Why are you even okay having lawyers going to court over whether what he stated was fact or fiction? Why do we needlessly have to spend money on lawyers in a situation where you and McGinnis and others, the CEO and the two Chairmen, clearly have and know the facts? This is onerous and says to shareholders you can not possibly represent us if you won’t even speak up with the facts immediately and require corporate funds to needlessly be spent on lawyers.

    Lawrence J. Goldstein ljg@smplp.com

    >

    Liked by 1 person

  5. Both Norris & Barry had to be parties to Mission’s 172,00+ ownership claim during the proxy fight when they nominated Cook.
    That alone may have convinced some shareholders to support Cook. That’s fraud and the whole thing could rise to a criminal rather that civil issue.

    Barry, Norris, Cook & the CEO & CFO at the very least have to go. Shareholders MUST elect the Board, not appoint themselves.

    I think that it was wrong for Murray Stahl to have to agree to vote his shares with the Board. His current position to vote AGAINST McGinnis is the right one. I hope that Mr. Oliver will follow suit.

    Like

  6. I posted my ballot selections on Twitter this morning. I can’t paste the photo in the comments here, but here is a link to that photo.

    I encourage everyone to make your voice heard and vote. Given the issues surrounding the Shareholder Agreement controlling the Horizon Kinetics vote, it is more important than ever to get every last vote on this.

    Like

Comments are closed.