Going for the bonanza

24 January 2018 By Lauren Silva Laughlin Follow @TheRealLSL

The $690 mln energy company is dropping the controversial, shareholder-unfriendly wolf-pack clause it used to try to defend a now-ditched merger. But it’s not yielding much on the activist’s other demands. That may prompt Icahn to target more than just poison pills and directors.

This content is for Subscribers only

To access full Breakingviews.com content you must be a subscriber. Please use the following link to request a trial.

Context News

SandRidge Energy said on Jan. 23 it would not adopt proposals made by activist investor Carl Icahn to replace two of its five directors and change the company’s bylaws to require a supermajority vote on major acquisitions. The company also said it would not terminate its shareholder-rights plan, but would increase the poison-pill trigger to 15 percent from its current 10 percent. Icahn was pushing for a 25 percent threshold.

SandRidge did, though, eliminate the acting-in-concert clause, commonly known as a wolf-pack clause, which had been included in the poison pill.

Icahn sent a letter on Jan. 9 to SandRidge Chairman John Genova seeking to replace two of the five members of the company’s board and urging the company to drop its poison pill, adopted in the wake of Icahn taking his stake.

Last month the company dropped its plan to buy Bonanza Creek Energy after Icahn and other major shareholders opposed the deal.

Search the Archive

Going for the bonanza

This content is for Subscribers only

Email a friend

Please complete the form below.

Going for the bonanza

This content is for Subscribers only

Existing Users Log In

Email a friend

Please complete the form below.