Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Facebook Shareholders Force A Vote On Ousting Mark Zuckerberg (businessinsider.com)

Posted by EditorDavid on from the unfriending dept.

On May 30th, Facebook's shareholder's will vote on whether to remove Mark Zuckerberg as chairman of the board, reports Business Insider: Business Insider broke the news of the proposal in July last year after revealing the plans of activist shareholder Trillium Asset Management, which had grown tired of the "mishandling" of scandals including the Cambridge Analytica data breach. Responding to the proposal in the SEC filing, Facebook called on investors to vote it down. "We believe our board of directors is functioning effectively under its current structure, and that the current structure provides appropriate oversight protections," Facebook said...

The chance of it becoming a reality is extremely slim, despite it being backed by investors that control around $3 billion of Facebook stock. A similar proposal in 2017 was popular among independent investors but was crushed because of Zuckerberg's voting power. This is because of Facebook's dual-class share structure. Class B shares have 10 times the voting power of class A shares, and it just so happens that Zuckerberg owns more than 75% of class B stock. It means he has more than half of the voting power at Facebook....

Facebook will almost certainly get its way. But the two investor proposals mark continued dissatisfaction among shareholders about the way Facebook is run following a year from hell for the company. It also shows that investors continue to believe that Zuckerberg has too much power.

10 of 107 comments (clear)

  1. Ugh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Insightful

    Don't like the way a company is run sell the stock. No one is forcing these people to hold shares.

  2. Activist shareholders by JaredOfEuropa · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Too much power? It's his company, and yours to choose whether to invest in it or not. Now I despise FB and everything it stands for as much as the next guy, but good on Zuck for having retained a controlling interest in his company. Maybe I've seen too much of the other extreme, with VCs asking for too large a piece of the pie in exchange for a pittance.

    --
    If construction was anything like programming, an incorrectly fitted lock would bring down the entire building...
    1. Re:Activist shareholders by dk20 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      "It's his company, "

      clearly you dont understand the equity marketsl. Rember when facebook did its IPO (Initial public offering)? The second word there is key.

      I would never invest in facebook, and it is time for a reform program to avoid all this restricted voting, superclass share nonsense.. but fundamentally, it isnt his company anymore... he took public funds, and kept all the voting rights too.

  3. The chance of it becoming a reality is extremely by ChoGGi · · Score: 3, Insightful

    slim.

    Class B shares have 10 times the voting power of class A shares, and it just so happens that Zuckerberg owns more than 75% of class B stock.

    Right, I'm sure he'll just oust himself. This is news why? Because Trillium Asset Management is bored?

  4. Trillium Asset Management? by Viol8 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Trillium Money Grabbers more like. I'm no fan of facebook - don't use it - or zuckerberg, but its his baby, he created the company and these parasites have him to thank for the increasing value of their investments. If they don't like it they're free to take their dirty gold elsewhere.

    1. Re:Trillium Asset Management? by gtall · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Then Zuck shouldn't have taken the company public if he didn't want outside investors to have a say in a company. That's the deal. It is partially their company too.

  5. Data Breach ? by Pop69 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Cambridge Analytica wasn't a data breach.

    Every piece of data they gathered was allowed by the site rules

    1. Re:Data Breach ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Insightful

      The Obama campaign made use of the same thing and was applauded for their forward-thinking use of technology, leading to his rise to presidency.

      The next president did the same with the same results.

      Clearly the problem is who did it rather than what was done.

  6. Re:huh? by tomhath · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Trillium is an activist investor, in this case "activist" meaning they want to push their social agenda on corporations.

  7. Re: Vote? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    To let that person know if the course isnâ(TM)t corrected, a mass sell-off might happen, devaluing his stock prices.