4/29/2029

Shareholder Activism in Asia Drives Global Total to Record High

Nikkei Asia (04/29/29) Shikata, Masayuki

Activist shareholders had their busiest year on record in 2024, with the Asia-Pacific region making up a fifth of campaigns worldwide, pushing some companies higher in the stock market and spurring others to consider going private. The worldwide tally of activist campaigns rose by six to 258, up by half from three years earlier, according to data from financial advisory Lazard. Campaigns in the Asia-Pacific tripled over that period to 57, growing about 30% on the year. Japan accounted for more than 60% of the regional total with 37, an all-time high. Activity is picking up this year as well in the run-up to general shareholders meetings in June. South Korea saw 14 campaigns, a jump of 10 from 2023. Critics say South Korean conglomerates are often controlled by minority investors that care too little about other shareholders. Australia and Hong Kong saw increases of one activist campaign each. North America made up half the global total, down from 60% in 2022 and 85% in 2014. Europe had 62 campaigns last year. The upswing in Japan has been fueled by the push for corporate governance reform since 2013 and the Tokyo Stock Exchange's 2023 call for companies to be more mindful of their share prices. The bourse has encouraged corporations to focus less on share buybacks and dividends than on steps for long-term growth, such as capital spending and the sale of unprofitable businesses. Demands for capital allocation to improve return on investment accounted for 51% of activist activity in Japan last year, significantly higher than the five-year average of 32%. U.S.-based Dalton Investments called on Japanese snack maker Ezaki Glico (2206) to amend its articles of incorporation to allow shareholder returns to be decided by investors as well, not just the board of directors. Though the proposal was rejected, it won more than 40% support, and Glico itself put forward a similar measure that was approved at the following general shareholders meeting in March. U.K.-based Palliser Capital took a stake last year in developer Tokyo Tatemono (8804) and argued that more efficient use of its capital, such as selling a cross-held stake in peer Hulic, would boost corporate value. Activist investors are increasingly seeking to lock in unrealized gains from rising land prices, reaping quick profits from property sales that can go toward dividends. Companies in the Tokyo Stock Exchange's broad Topix index had 25.88 trillion yen ($181 billion at current rates) in unrealized gains on property holdings at the end of March 2024, up about 20% from four years earlier. After buying into Mitsui Fudosan (8801) in 2024, U.S.-based Elliott Investment Management this year took a stake in Sumitomo Realty & Development (8830) and is expected to push for the developer to sell real estate holdings. This month, Dalton sent a letter to Fuji Media Holdings (4676), parent of Fuji Television, calling for it to spin off its real estate business and replace its board of directors. Activist campaigns have sparked share price rallies at some companies. Shares of elevator maker Fujitec (6406) were up roughly 80% from March 2023, when it dismissed Takakazu Uchiyama -- a member of the founding family -- as chairman under pressure from Oasis Management. The rise in demands from activists "creates a sense of tension among management, including at companies that don't receive such proposals," said Masatoshi Kikuchi, chief equity strategist at Mizuho Securities. Previously tight cross-shareholdings are being unwound, and reasonable proposals from minority investors are more likely to garner support from foreign shareholders. Some companies are going private to shield themselves from perceived pressure. Investments by buyout funds targeting mature companies in the Asia-Pacific were the highest in three years in 2024, according to Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu. Toyota Industries (6201) is considering going this route after facing pressure from investment funds last year to take steps such as dissolving a parent-child listing with a subsidiary and buying back more shares. Toyota Industries holds a 9% stake in Toyota Motor (7203). The automaker "may have proposed having [Toyota Industries] go private as a precautionary measure," said a source at an investment bank.

Read the article

1/16/2027

Dealmakers See More Retail Mergers and IPOs in 2026 After Tariffs Sidelined M&A Last Year

Reuters (01/16/27) Summerville, Abigail

Dealmakers predict an uptick in mergers and IPOs for retailers and consumer goods companies this year after punishing tariffs on imports to the United States had sidelined activity in the industry for the first half of 2025. Several national restaurant and convenience store chains are primed for IPOs, along with organic baby food company Once Upon a Farm, Hellman & Friedman-backed auto repair company Caliber Holdings, and Bob’s Discount Furniture, which is owned by Bain Capital, according to more than two dozen CEOs, M&A advisors and private equity investors who attended the ICR Conference in Orlando, Florida this week. “The number of high-quality companies that are in queue to go public in 2026 is higher than we’ve seen since 2021,” Ben Frost, Goldman Sachs' (GS) global co-head of the consumer retail group said in an interview. “The question is does that mean more will go public? If it does, private investors will see the ability to exit investments again (in a) regular way, which will help (private equity) activity.” Frost was one of the more than 3,000 attendees at the annual gathering, where executives from Walmart (WMT.O), Shake Shack (SHAK.N), and Jersey Mike’s were among presenters while bankers, lawyers and private equity investors spent much of their time brokering deals and landing clients behind the scenes. The upbeat mood was a marked shift from last spring after U.S. President Donald Trump's "Liberation Day" tariff announcements sent markets skidding and killed or stalled several consumer and retail deals. The second half of the year saw a resurgence in activity that brought with it several mega deals, including Kimberly-Clark’s (KMB.O) nearly $50 billion deal to buy Kenvue (KVUE.N), announced in November. "(Companies) are still really focused on growth and synergies. They’re looking at bigger deals than they’ve been willing to do for the last number of years. The back half of last year was the start of that,” Frost said. Kraft Heinz (KHC.O) announced in September it would split into two companies to unwind its 2015 merger, shortly after Keurig Dr Pepper (KDP.O) had agreed to buy JDE Peet’s for $18 billion with plans to split the coffee and non-coffee beverages into separate companies. In apparel, Gildan Activewear (GIL) bought Hanesbrands for $2.2 billion. Investors could also spur more deals and corporate breakups in the sectors, Audra Cohen, co-head of the consumer and retail group at law firm Sullivan & Cromwell, said in an interview at the conference. Corporate agitators have taken recent stakes in Lululemon Athletica (LULU.O) and Target (TGT.N), but aren't yet pushing for M&A. Lululemon hosted a morning yoga class and its management team met with analysts and investors at the conference. Meanwhile, private equity buyers are beating out companies for some deals, Manna Tree Partners co-founder Ellie Rubenstein told Reuters. Her firm sold its cottage cheese brand Good Culture to a larger consumer-focused firm L Catterton just last week. “A lot of these brands have gotten lost (inside big corporations) and the consumers don’t like it. You may see a lot of corporate carveouts this year,” Rubenstein told Reuters in an interview after her keynote address. She interviewed her billionaire father and Carlyle co-founder David Rubenstein, 76, on stage at the conference. The father-daughter pair contrasted their portfolios, pointing to Carlyle’s history of investing in fast food chains like McDonald's (MCD.N) and KFC Korea while Manna Tree saw big returns from investments in healthier food brands like pasture-raised egg producer Vital Farms (VITL.O) and Good Culture.

Read the article

4/8/2026

Japanese Companies May Face More Proposals From Activist Shareholders, Says Association Chair

MarketWatch (04/08/26) Nagahara, Kazuma

This year there could be more proposals from activist shareholders than last year at shareholders meetings in Japan, the new chairman of the Trust Companies Association of Japan said at a press conference in Tokyo last week. Kenichi Sasada, who serves as president and CEO of Mizuho Trust and Banking Co., took up the association's top post this month. At a press conference, Sasada said that at shareholders meetings last June, 113 companies received proposals from shareholders, the highest number on record. The number of (companies that received) proposals from institutional investors and activists also increased, to 52. Many of the proposals called for things like strengthening governance structures through amendments to articles of incorporation and reducing cross-held shares. About 570 companies held shareholders meetings in March this year, and 15 of them received proposals from shareholders, with eight, or about half, receiving proposals from institutional investors and activists. Activists therefore remain active. Sasada expects the number of shareholder proposals this year could exceed last year's figure. Asked what do you think about the ongoing discussions regarding revisions to the Companies Law, which include establishing a system to facilitate the identification of beneficial shareholders, he replied, "I consider it desirable for promoting dialogue between the companies issuing (shares) and their shareholders. A mechanism that allows issuing companies to efficiently and reliably obtain information on beneficial shareholders will contribute to strengthening corporate governance. Since opinions vary among our members regarding the impact (of the proposed system) on the services that trust companies provide (to issuing companies), I will explain this from the perspective of Mizuho Trust and Banking. Even if issuing companies could obtain information about their beneficial shareholders, we believe there would continue to be strong demand for our services, such as supporting (the companies) to engage with their investors and analyzing (how shareholders) intend to exercise their voting rights at shareholders meetings. We therefore expect the scope of our support to expand."

Read the article

4/5/2026

Nelson Peltz’s Bidding War Highlights $25 Billion Wave of Asset Manager Consolidation

Financial Times (04/05/26) Clarfelt, Harriet; Dunkley, Emma

When Nelson Peltz’s Trian made a $7.4 billion takeover bid for Janus Henderson (NYSE: JHG) late last year, few in the market expected Victory Capital (NASDAQ: VCTR) to swoop in and try to hijack the deal. After weeks of wrangling, an improved all-cash $8 billion bid from Trian and investors led by venture firm General Catalyst beat the Texas-based investment group’s $8.6 billion cash-and-share offer. The intense bidding war, however, was the clearest sign yet of a wave of consolidation sweeping the asset management industry, as fund houses rush to scale up globally and private equity firms pick off transatlantic businesses with growth potential. Despite the volatile market environment, there have been nearly $25 billion worth of global money manager mergers and acquisitions in the first three months of the year — more than half of the total for all of 2025, according to data from Dealogic. Just weeks before the fight over Janus kicked off, U.S.-based Nuveen, owned by a mutual financial services firm, made a £9.9 billion bid for London-based Schroders (LON: SDR). People close to the transaction pointed to the need for scale — achieved by creating a $2 trillion asset manager — and for building a presence across the United States, Europe, and Asia. Mounting costs and competition from cheap index-tracking funds are turning the screws on traditional investment houses beyond the industry’s multi-trillion-dollar heavyweights, just as active managers must also navigate rising market volatility. “The whole industry is seeing pretty consistent fee pressure from all these factors: mutual fund to exchange traded funds, active to passive,” said Ben Budish, equity research analyst at Barclays (BARC.L). “The punchline is: scale matters, especially in an industry where growth is hard.” Advisers believe these pressures will pave the way for even more mergers and acquisitions, as bigger firms seek opportunities in new geographies and private markets, while smaller businesses combine forces to avoid dying a slow death. “We are definitely expecting there to be a lot more consolidation in the industry,” said one corporate lawyer at a U.S. firm, referring to traditional and alternative asset managers. “We have a bunch of things in the pipeline,” he added, “probably more than we’ve had in the past few years." Industry participants have anticipated a period of intense consolidation for years, but accelerating activity suggests this might finally be coming to fruition. The trend is most pronounced in Europe, where 61 asset managers have been snapped up or merged this year already, totaling $19 billion — compared with $14.3 billion for the whole of 2025, according to Dealogic. In the United States, the number of deals agreed over the past three months has already reached almost a third of last year’s total deal count, although the value of deals is lower. More fund groups are making strategic acquisitions to pile into private markets products, which typically command higher fees than public equities and fixed income. In recent years, BlackRock (NYSE: BLK), the world’s largest asset manager, has scooped up private credit titan HPS for $12 billion and infrastructure investment firm Global Infrastructure Partners for $12.5 billion. But this convergence of public and private markets has applied even more pressure to smaller stocks-and-bonds firms to combine with other players — or risk falling by the wayside. “The thing with larger firms is that people can do one-stop-shopping there,” said the lawyer. “A lot of money has flowed into the larger asset managers, who just have scale; they can take swings at things...if they don’t work out, it doesn’t matter. They can do complete bolt-ons, like buying private credit, buying insurance assets.” He added that midsized asset managers with assets under management of roughly $50 billion “are going to clump together,” saying they faced a choice to “sell before it’s too late or buy so they’re not standing still."

Read the article

4/3/2026

How Nelson Peltz Chalked Up Another Corporate Break-up at Unilever

Financial Times (04/03/26) Speed, Madeleine; Levingston, Ivan

Unilever’s (NYSE: UL, LON: ULVR) decision to combine its food business with U.S. sauce and spice maker McCormick (NYSE: MKC) in a $66 billion deal has gone down badly with plenty of shareholders. But one of them got just what he wanted. Nelson Peltz, who joined Unilever’s board in 2022, has spent years agitating for a break-up of the soap-to-sauces conglomerate. With Peltz’s backing, Unilever chair Ian Meakins pushed the Hellmann’s mayonnaise maker towards a sale of its century-old food business, according to two people familiar with the boardroom dynamics. Trian, Peltz’s investment fund, has been “unbelievably pushy on this, without a doubt," said one of the people. Despite a sale being widely expected — Unilever had already confirmed it was in advanced talks with McCormick — its announcement on Tuesday sparked a 7% drop in the FTSE 100 company’s shares when investors saw the terms. Unilever shareholders will own about 55% of the new company — which will have net debt of about four times its ebitda — with McCormick owning a 35% stake. The consumer goods group plans to begin selling down its 9.9% stake a year after the deal has completed, creating the risk of an overhang on the shares. “The feedback [from Unilever investors] is that it’s not very attractive,” said Jefferies analyst David Hayes. “They say: ‘Why would I want this food company? We are stuck with a food business now and we can’t even vote on it.’” The McCormick deal was “a unanimous decision by the board, which firmly believes it is in the best interests of Unilever’s shareholders. It will enhance the group’s structural growth profile, simplify the portfolio and unlock long-term value,” Unilever said. Unilever, formed in 1930 by the merger of Dutch margarine maker Unie with British soap business Lever Brothers, has become the latest in a series of consumer conglomerates that Peltz has helped prise apart. The activist, whose investment fund Trian owns about 1% of Unilever shares, spurred burger chain Wendy’s (NASDAQ: WEN) to sell coffee chain Tim Hortons in 2006. The following year he lobbied Cadbury to sell off its drinks business and in 2011 successfully pushed Kraft, which had acquired Cadbury, to spin off its international snacks business. Trian declined to comment. Another top Unilever shareholder said they had been calling for a carve-out of its food business for years but had been told repeatedly that a separation would be too costly and complex. Management stressed that mega brands Hellmann’s and Knorr were powerful cash generators. But shareholders, most notably Peltz, intensified the pressure. And in Meakins, a steely boardroom veteran who was appointed chair in 2023, Unilever’s strategic direction was placed in the hands of somebody willing to make the bold decisions Peltz desired. Meakins appointed current chief executive Fernando Fernández, a former president in Unilever’s beauty business and a willing collaborator in the mission to sell off its food business. A person close to Unilever’s board said a separation of its food business had “been in the making for many years." Calls for Unilever to sell the division began after it rejected a $143 billion hostile bid from Kraft Heinz (NASDAQ: KHC) in 2017. Paul Polman, Unilever’s boss at the time, appeased shareholders by selling its spreads business to private equity firm KKR for £6 billion. Successive Unilever CEOs have sliced off chunks of the food and drink portfolio since: Alan Jope, who ran the group between 2019 and 2023, sold Unilever’s tea business to CVC for €4.5 billion. During the tenure of his successor, Hein Schumacher, Unilever announced the spin-off of its ice cream division. Schumacher’s dismissal in February last year was made in part because of his resistance to a full separation of the food division, according to two people familiar with the matter. The people added that the Dutchman was wary of pushing so much change through the organization in a short period of time. “After ice cream [the board] wanted a complete break-up of the company very quickly,” one of the people said. But the paucity of potential buyers complicated their efforts. Unilever recently held talks with Kraft Heinz over a potential deal, but people familiar with the discussions said the U.S. company’s weakened state would have made a combination unpalatable for Unilever shareholders. “The only real option for separating foods in a strategic partnership was McCormick,” said the person close to Unilever’s board, adding that the cash-and-stock deal could not have been done earlier because of the relative valuations of the companies. Before this week’s declines, McCormick shares had dropped by about 40% over the past three years, whereas Unilever’s had risen by about 20%. “For the first time in years it was possible to strike a deal with a very attractive valuation,” the person said. Another person close to the deal said Peltz was not the main driving force behind the transaction, although his broad desire for a split was clear. McCormick’s leaders had long eyed a merger with Unilever’s food business and it was the U.S. company’s “dream deal,” said one person familiar with the matter. After McCormick made its approach a few months ago, the deal came together at a “sprint,” according to a person close to the talks. The deal unveiled this week will unite Unilever brands like Hellmann’s, Marmite and Maille mustard with McCormick’s red-topped spice brands and Cholula hot sauce in a single portfolio bringing in $20 billion of annual revenue. Its New York listing means a chunk of Unilever’s UK shareholders could be forced to sell their shares because of restrictions over their investment mandates. The $15.7 billion in cash that Unilever will receive from McCormick will be used to offset tax and separation costs, as well as to fund a €6 billion share buyback over the next three years. While McCormick said that the cash flow of the enlarged food business would help reduce net debt to three times earnings before interest, tax, depreciation and amortization within two years, Barclays (NYSE: BCS) analyst Warren Ackerman said some investors remained wary over its finances. He added that there was a risk that a decline in McCormick’s shares — which have fallen by about 9% since the deal’s announcement — will erode the new company’s value. A recent watering-down of UK listing rules means Unilever can push through the disposal without holding a shareholder vote. Once the deal completes, Unilever will become a faster-growing beauty and personal care specialist with more cash to buy up brands in those higher-margin categories. Analysts have long speculated that selling its food business would pave the way for a large acquisition in home and personal care. Proposed targets include Reckitt (LON: RKT) or Haleon (NYSE: HLN), the consumer healthcare business that Unilever tried to buy in 2022. Fernández moved to temper those expectations during a call with shareholders on Tuesday, saying that he intended to stick with previously announced plans to make about £1.5billion of bolt-on acquisitions a year. Hayes at Jefferies (NYSE: JEF) said his comments failed to clarify how a slimmed-down Unilever would create value for shareholders. While some investors may be unhappy about the terms of the break-up, others are relieved the issue has finally been put to bed. David Samra, portfolio manager at Artisan Partners, a top-10 Unilever investor, hailed the deal as the “conclusion of a decades-long process” to normalize Unilever’s structure. “Unilever is like the British empire,” said another major investor. “It’s so big, so complex ... it had to break up.”

Read the article