A poison pill is a defense tactic utilized by a target company to prevent or discourage hostile takeover attempts. Poison pills allow existing shareholders the right to purchase additional shares at a discount, effectively diluting the ownership interest of a new, hostile party.
A preemptive line of defense against a hostile corporate takeover would be to establish stock securities that have differential voting rights (DVRs). Stocks with this type of provision provide fewer voting rights to shareholders.
Since March 2020, over fifty public companies have adopted poison pills (also referred to as a “rights plan”) as a precautionary measure after sharp declines in the price of most public companies' shares, resulting from government restrictions on staffing, shipping, manufacturing and consumer activity, among other ...
The rights plan functions by giving existing shareholders other than the triggering acquiror (or acquirors) of stock the opportunity to receive additional shares of company stock at a discount (or for no payment) once the acquiror's shares exceed the specified threshold without board approval.
Poison pills can be very effective in dissuading a purchase but are often not the first line of defense. This is because the strategy is not entirely guaranteed to work, as a poison pill will not necessarily prevent the acquisition of the corporation if the acquirer is persistent.
Hostile takeovers are perfectly legal. They are described as such because the board of directors, or those in control of the company, oppose being bought out and have typically rejected a more formal offer.
So far in 2006, there have been five hostile takeovers attempted, and only two have gone to the bidder. That works out to a success rate of 53 percent, based on statistics gathered by Toronto law firm Stikeman Elliott, one of Canada's leading mergers and acquisitions law firms.
Key Takeaways. A poison pill is a defense tactic utilized by a target company to prevent or discourage hostile takeover attempts. Poison pills allow existing shareholders the right to purchase additional shares at a discount, effectively diluting the ownership interest of a new, hostile party.
However, the Delaware Supreme Court upheld poison pills as a valid instrument of takeover defense in its 1985 decision in Moran v. Household International, Inc. However, many jurisdictions other than the U.S. have held the poison pill strategy as illegal, or place restraints on their use.
Greenmail is much less common today because of laws, regulations, taxes, and anti-greenmail provisions. Although greenmail still occurs tacitly in various forms, several federal and state regulations made it much more difficult.
In legislative debate, a wrecking amendment (also called a poison pill amendment or killer amendment) is an amendment made by a legislator who disagrees with the principles of a bill and who seeks to make it useless (by moving amendments to either make the bill malformed and nonsensical, or to severely change its ...
An acquiring company can achieve a hostile takeover by going directly to the target company's shareholders or fighting to replace its management. A tender offer and a proxy fight are two methods in achieving a hostile takeover.
Martin Lipton, inventor of the “poison pill” anti-takeover defense honored by IIE.
Yet No Comments