12 thoughts on “My Ballot”

  1. As stockholders we have to vote for what we feel will be the best for our investment. Unfortunately, management has actively continued to work against us. It’s getting rather tiring.

    Liked by 2 people

  3. This is exactly the same as my ballot. I still can not believe David Barry is trying to get away with slipping in proposal #4. In all my years of investing I have NEVER seen anything so self serving. He must be stopped from ruining this amazing company.

    Liked by 1 person

  5. Hello friends, I had a brief, but informative conversation with Investor Relations VP, Shawn Amini, last week. He is a cordial guy who is happy to talk with any investors on his cell (214-646-8334) or office phone (214-969-5530). I probably didn’t ask all the most important questions or probe enough, but here is what I learned:

    1. Proposal 4 came about from a study of all Fortune 500 companies that found all but one have additional shares authorized, but not yet issued. According to Shawn, this is standard operating procedure for corporations.
    2. If Proposal 4 were to pass, there would still need to be shareholder and Board approval for any issuing of more than 20% of the authorized shares. For example, if a proposed acquisition were to call for 25% of the authorized shares to be issued, it would require a separate vote.
    3. I expressed my outrage for having my ownership stake diluted. Shawn gave a predictable answer to the effect of wouldn’t it be better to own a smaller percent of a larger pie (higher royalty volume) than to have a larger piece of a smaller pie?
    4. He wouldn’t comment on Murray Stahl’s voting preference but seemed to indicate that Murray would not be obligated to vote with other Board members for all proposals on the proxy.
    5.) What impact would a 3 for 1 split have? Shawn explained there was thought put into this proposal and they would like to keep the share price relatively high for the “optics” and “prestige” of keeping a share price higher than other royalty-based companies. He also said that TPL is on the verge of possibly gaining entrance into major indexes if trade volume increases and there is an appetite to replace another company with a company in the Energy sector.
    6.) He disagreed with my assertion that Proposal 4 should be classified as “Non-Routine” rather than “Routine.” He said this doesn’t really have much importance, however, because brokers are increasingly not voting in line with management’s recommendations on the proposals.
    7.) I thanked Shawn for the Board’s due diligence to conclude that a declassified Board is necessary for modern governance.

    My takeaway is that I will still be voting my family’s 4,000+ shares AGAINST Proposal 4, simply because I don’t think management has earned enough of our trust and have enough M&A experience to be given a blank check (even if just for 20% of the authorized shares to be issued). It definitely sounds to me like management has an acquisition target in sight that they think will add significantly to the royalties income, and wants to be able to act quickly to make a successful bid.

    Liked by 2 people

  8. And my 2,000 shares and another 225 shares of family are also voting exactly this way.

    Its unfortunate no one other than incumbent directors are running. Really appreciate Oliver being there, but the others we could easily live without. Why do we need 10 directors? Its overhead without any value add.

    Have sent the board of directors my strong disappointment already on #4.

    Anyone have any traction getting this into the financial press on how shareholders are about to be railroaded? The more visibility that can be brought to this issue will help influence ISS, institutional shareholders, etc on what is about to happen with this anything but “routine” proposal.

    Liked by 1 person

  9. Where do i find the vote link when i own shares at interactive brokers? Can’t find the email anymore…:(

    Like

Comments are closed.