Poison pills are a resilient tactic employed by the directors of public companies to deter activist investors, competitors, and would-be acquirers from gaining control. Several variations exist—of which, the most prevalent is the ‘flip-in,’ executed by issuing additional shares to all shareholders, barring the potential acquirer, thus diluting the control they can exert.
Another objective is to compel the acquirer to negotiate directly with the company’s board, potentially securing a better buyout price. Courts have affirmed that poison pills are legitimate defenses and that boards are not obliged to entertain any offer contrary to the company’s long-term interests.
Key Takeaways
-
Protective Measure: A poison pill acts as a tactical deterrent against hostile takeovers by preventing significant share accumulation without board consent.
-
Shareholder Rights: It limits the maximum stake an acquirer can amass, potentially issuing new shares to dilute the acquirer’s control.
-
Proportional Response: Poison pills can entrench company managers and boards, requiring justification as a proportional response to a credible threat.
-
Board Challenges: Shareholders may attempt to overrule a poison pill by replacing the company’s board if negotiations fail.
How Poison Pills Work
The poison pill strategy is frequently termed a shareholder rights plan designed to obstruct acquisitions aiming for a controlling stake without equitably negotiating with the company’s board.
While many shares carry both ownership and voting rights, accumulating enough can grant a controlling influence. To prevent this, a target company imposes a share ownership limit—if one entity hits a threshold, usually around 15%, measures trigger that render a hostile action unfavorable.
In a flip-in scenario, existing shareholders can purchase more shares at a discount, excluding the acquirer with more than the set threshold, thus diluting their stake and averting the takeover.
Special Considerations
Proxy firms like Glass Lewis and International Shareholder Services hold a skeptical stance on poison pills, emphasizing their potential to entrench ineffective management. As of recent guidelines, ISS permits poison pills with a term under three years and a trigger no less than a 20% stake, while Glass Lewis advises minimal, purpose-specific deployment.
Advantages and Disadvantages of a Poison Pill
Advantages
-
Minority Protection: Poison pills shield minority shareholder interests against majority control takeovers.
-
Anti-Vulture Bid: They thwart bids exploiting temporary share price drops.
-
Higher Premiums: Companies with poison pills generally see higher takeover premiums.
Disadvantages
-
Short-term Impact: They can lower the share price temporarily by deterring motivated buyers.
-
Management Shield: Underperforming management could use poison pills to hinder shareholder-driven board replacements.
-
Necessity for Justification: Due to their restrictive nature, poison pills commonly include sunset provisions, meant to expire after a specific date or condition allows reconsideration.
Types of Poison Pills
Commonly, poison pills are triggered by stakeholders accruing a preset company share, thus the ‘flip-in’ type. An alternative, though seldom used, is the flip-over version, allowing stakeholders to buy shares in the acquiring company at a discount.
Unique variants like the dead-hand poison pill restrict future boards’ ability to annul the provision, only letting incumbents and carefully chosen successors cancel it.
Wolf pack clauses apply provisions to collective shareholders silently collaborating to accumulate control stakes.
Real-World Examples of Poison Pills
X (Formerly Twitter)
In April 2022, Elon Musk disclosed acquiring a 9% stake in X and threatened a hostile takeover. X responded with a poison pill using a 15% threshold. It compelled his eventual agreement to a $44 billion buyout in October 2022.
Papa John’s
In 2018, Papa John’s board adopted a poison pill to stave off efforts by founder John Schnatter to retake control. Schnatter, the major shareholder, was deterred by measures inviting existing shareholders to buy stock at discounted rates if anyone attained a 31% stake.
Netflix
Netflix announced a poison pill in 2012 to dilute Carl Icahn’s 10% stake. This tactic discouraged Icahn from gaining control, with Netflix stockholders able to enact a two-for-one purchase deal.
The Ultimate Aim of Poison Pills
Poison pills are critical safeguards against corporate control attempts without a board’s consent, ensuring that alterations are negotiated rather than forcefully enacted.
The Bottom Line
Poison pills, with built-in thresholds, are strategic provisions to prevent unwanted control, maintaining equitable negotiations for prospective acquirers. They effectively protect a company’s autonomy and shareholder value against forceful takeover tactics.
Related Terms: hostile takeover, flip-in poison pill, shareholder rights plan, sunset provisions, fiduciary duty.
References
- Wachtell, Lipton, Rosen & Katz. “Takeover Law and Practice”, Pages 121-127.
- ISS. “United States Proxy Voting Guidelines Benchmark Policy Recommendations”, Page 28.
- Glass Lewis. “Poison Pills and Coronavirus: Understanding Glass Lewis’ Contextual Policy Approach”.
- Dentons. “Shareholder Rights Plans: Recent Trends”.
- Wachtell, Lipton, Rosen & Katz. “Takeover Law and Practice”, Page 121.
- Wachtell, Lipton, Rosen & Katz. “Takeover Law and Practice”, Page 125.
- U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission. “Preferred Shares Rights Agreement, Nov. 2, 2012: Netflix, Inc. and Computershares Trust Company, N.A., as Rights Agent”.
- Carpenter Wellington. “Poison Pills as a Defensive Tactic Against Hostile Takeovers”.
- Wachtell, Lipton, Rosen & Katz. “Takeover Law and Practice”, Page 127.
- Delaware Division of Corporations. “Annual Report Statistics”.
- DealLawyers.com. “Poison Pills: Delaware Chancery Skeptical of ‘Wolf Pack’ Terms”.
- Harvard Law School. “A Pill of a Swan Song”, Page 2.
- Wachtell, Lipton, Rosen & Katz. “Takeover Law and Practice”, Pages 123-125.
- PR Newswire. “Twitter Adopts Limited Duration Shareholder Rights Plan, Enabling All Shareholders to Realize Full Value of Company”.
- Bloomberg. “Twitter Has a Poison Pill Now”.
- The New York Times. “Elon Musk Completes $44 Billion Deal to Own Twitter”.
- Reuters. “Papa John’s Adopts Rights Plan to Limit Founder’s Stake”.
- Papa John’s. “Papa John’s Adopts Limited Duration Stockholder Rights Plan”.
- Law.com. “Schnatter, Papa John’s Settle Del. Lawsuit Over Control of Pizza Chain”.
- Louisville Business First. “John Schnatter Now Owns Just a Slice of Papa John’s After Another Big Sale”.
- UC Regents, UC Berkeley School of Law. “Netflix, Good Governance and Poison Pills”.
- U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission. “Icahn Capital Schedule 13D for Netflix, Inc., Oct. 24, 2012”.
- U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission. “Icahn Capital Schedule 13D for Netflix, Inc., Nov. 5, 2012”.
- Forbes. “Here’s How Carl Icahn Made $2 Billion On Netflix”.
- Harvard Law School Forum on Corporate Governance. “Poison Pills After Williams: Not Only for When Lightning Strikes”.
