| Poison Pill |
Article Index for Poison |
Website Links For Poison |
Information AboutPoison Pill |
| CATEGORIES ABOUT POISON PILL | |
| mergers and acquisitions | |
| political terms | |
|
BUSINESS In business, poison pills (usually known by their more formal name, "shareholder rights plans"), are often used to avoid Takeover bids. These are attempts by a potential acquirer to obtain a control block of shares in a target company, and thereby gain control of the board and, through it, the company's management. There are several types of "poison pills" that can be planned by a company that thinks it may be the target of a takeover by a potential acquirer:
The poison pill was invented by noted M&A lawyer Martin Lipton of , in response to the increasing trend of Corporate Raid s by businessmen such as Carl Icahn . Although the legality of poison pills was unclear for some time, they were upheld as a valid instrument of Delaware corporate law by the Delaware Supreme Court in its November 1985 decision Moran v. Household International, Inc. It was reported in 2001 that since 1997, for every company with a poison pill that successfully resisted a hostile takeover, there were 20 companies with poison pills that accepted takeover offers. {Link without Title} The trend since the early 2000s has been for shareholders to vote against poison pill authorization, since, despite the above statistic, poison pills are designed to resist takeovers, whereas from the point of view of a shareholder, takeovers can be financially rewarding. A poison pill also carries drawbacks for the company defending against a takeover; thus if it were used too often, a competitor planning a takeover could try to entice its target to employ a poison pill strategy by spreading rumors of a takeover attempt, starting a plainly visible acquisition of stock etc. After the negative effects for the defending company have set in, it may actually be easier and cheaper to execute the takeover, as one of the effects of a poison pill on the company which executes it is a drop in stock value. Main types of business poison pill
SPORTS In professional sports, a poison pill is a component of a contract, which one team offers a player, that makes it difficult or impossible for another team (which has the right of first refusal) to match. While it can often refer to a salary structure or clause that would effect all teams equally, it has taken on a new specific meaning of a clause that has unbalanced impact. For example, in March 2006, the Minnesota Vikings offered Steve Hutchinson , an offensive guard on the Seattle Seahawks , a 7 year, $49 million contract of which $16 million was guaranteed. This contract offer had two poison pills in it. One was the salary structure, which would require the team to pay $13 million in the first year of the contract. That salary structure would apply to both teams equally, as the Seahawks would also have to pay $13 million in the first contract year, were they to match the offer. The second was a clause that required Hutchinson to be the highest paid player on the offensive line, or else the entire contract would be guaranteed. Since the Seahawks had Another Offensive Lineman with a higher salary and the Vikings did not, this clause would have required the Seahawks to guarantee $49 million, and it effectively eliminated the Seahawks' opportunity to match the contract offer. In the wake of this contract offer, similar clauses have appeared in other contract offers (including, ironically, a contract offered to Vikings Wide Receiver Nate Burleson by the Seahawks), and the term poison pill has come to be more closely identified with the asymetrical-impact clause. POLITICS A poison pill may also be used in Politics , such as attaching an Amendment so distasteful to a Bill that even the bill's supporters are forced to vote against it. This Manipulative tactic may be intended to simply kill the bill, or to create a no-win situation for the bill's supporters, so that the bill's opponents can accuse them of voting for something bad no matter what. In the U.S. , it may also refer to a Stipulation often attached to Constitutional Amendment s, which kills the amendment if it has not been Ratified after seven years. |
|
|