Starbucks looks set to become the latest company to reach a deal with an activist investor, with CNBC reporting that the coffee giant is close to agreeing terms to grant Elliot Investment Management a seat on the firm’s board and review its operations in China in a bid to boost profits.
On the face of it, it appears to be the latest win for a so-called activist that has taken on a company. Closer to home, drinks company C&C last week agreed to Engine Capital’s demand that the cider maker add a board member with capital markets experience – a clear suggestion that the company could end up with a for sale sign over the front door.
Activists tend to take a relatively small position in a company – usually just a few per cent – and then write to the board demanding changes in strategy. Unlike the corporate raiders made famous in the 1980s, activists are often seen as serving a useful purpose. Their defenders tend to describe them as spurring moribund companies into taking action to boost the business, and by extension, shareholder returns.
Cantillon is sceptical of this viewpoint. A fascinating paper published in the Yale Law Review in November 2022 demonstrates how little utility activists have. In short, activist investors tend to do more damage to companies they target by forcing unnecessary changes and, as they are committing a relatively small amount of cash to building up their holding, they are more likely to “mistarget” their attack. Meanwhile the much maligned corporate raider commits a huge amount of capital to buy a company and so can access non-public company information, and as a result do far more due diligence than a fund that buys, say, 3 or 4 per cent of a company and then kicks up.
Romantasy, QuitTok and other words from a dystopia-coded year
Have Ireland’s data centre builders shot themselves in the foot through their own greed?
The old order of globalisation may be collapsing – and bringing Germany with it
Wonderwallets: the cost of everything in 2024, from Oasis tickets to Leinster House bike shelter
To be sure, companies are often incentivised to settle with an activist. C&C is somewhat rudderless after yet another CEO left under a cloud. Starbucks has been struggling in recent months while ex-CEO and still the biggest shareholder Howard Schultz has been a vocal critic of the company.
But long term, will either company regret making peace with Elliot or Engine? It is reasonable to think the answer will be yes.
- Sign up for Business push alerts and have the best news, analysis and comment delivered directly to your phone
- Find The Irish Times on WhatsApp and stay up to date
- Our Inside Business podcast is published weekly – Find the latest episode here
