As we have been on this journey for the last 2 and half years we have accumulated knowledge regarding market structure, hedge fund influence, loopholes utilized to manipulate price, and how to own shares in our own name. We have been beaten down by corrupt mods and have had to migrate a few times during this journey. We are harassed and mocked by corporate propaganda channels. We have been confined and our voice limited but our will to change how our market works will not be diminished. We need to find new ways to fight against Wall Street and expand our voice. One of the ways to give more credibility and resilience to the movement is to create an Activist Investor Group.
An AIG is a group of investors or in many cases hedge funds that utilize their share power to restructure corporations in a variety of ways. One such way is by using their shares to change the board of directors. This allows the group a direct voice in decision making in the company and how policies should be made. Most of these activist investor groups have been facing off against climate change in order to change company policy regarding its impact on the environment. I have compiled a small list of Activist investor groups so you can read what they do and the impact they have.
SOC investment Group ShareAction
“Follow This submitted another resolution, this time asking Shell to align its emission targets with the Paris climate agreement. Shell directors call this proposal a ‘fundamental misunderstanding’ and ‘unreasonable’, but 6% of shareholders voted in favour of it, double that of 2016.”
“Our money should power social progress. We hold shares in some of the biggest companies and every year, we organise questions at annual general meetings (AGMs) to challenge them on the issues that matter. We also gather together individual and institutional investors to co-file resolutions on specific topics at companies to demand change.”
There are many instances where Activist Investor Groups write a letter to the board and cause changes in the board makeup.
At Kohl’s an AIG with 10% of the shares cut down board nominees.
SpartanNash had to fight off an AIG with 5% of shares that sought to replace board members.
Exxon, Chevron, Shell all have faced off growing AIGs that seek to reform the company from the inside. With their collective power they continue to combat greedy wall street execs in order to gain their own power within the company. When searching about AIG there are many articles that present them in a negative light. Including this article about Exxon where the climate group was able to gain a couple board seats.
Activist investing is seen in a poor light by many as you are challenging the status quo. MSM put out articles bashing groups that look to utilize their share power to change a company. Many consulting groups put out guides on how to protect against activist investors. As we have experienced, directors are a way for hedge funds to control a company bringing it down from the inside. What if a group of investors that band together in common interest does the same thing? With a collective might we will be able to have a direct say in a company and influence decision making including decisions such as an NFT dividend.
Here is an article by Harvard Law that talks about shareholder Activism. CFI also discusses what shareholder activism is and even mentions Carl Icahn. The SEC released a paper called: “Proxy Access Reform: The SEC Makes It Potentially Easier for Shareholders to Nominate Directors” regarding shareholders and their role in appointing directors. There does not seem to be much material regarding shareholder groups as most of activist investors are either a hedge fund or a person such as Carl Ichan and Ryan Cohen. If we decide this is a path to take we will be trailblazing a new frontier for shareholders.
With an AIG we as shareholders will be able to engage directly with Gamestop and the Board. We will be able to put forward proposals and resolutions communicating our concern. With an AIG it will be a front that can be used to directly engage with the SEC or any other institution on a legal front.
This then leads us to the questions of how do you create such a group? One way is to create a non-profit, then will have to register the group, create branding and a name. Lawyers will have to be involved especially when setting up the bylaws and organization. Where will funding come from and how do we determine the leaders of the group?
We are creating something that has never been done before so we should be innovative in our structure and governance. We have repeatedly seen bad plans and bad actors take advantage of us and hinder any progress. Is there a decentralized structure that can be created? What safeguards can be created to prevent institutions from joining in?
More research is needed and I encourage you all to dig into what is possible with an AIG and how we can best utilize it.
It’s clear that activist investors and activist investor groups can effect change, and that they are taken seriously. If shareholders want to wield influence as a weapon, but their vote at the annual meeting is not enough - then an AIG can have much more freedom to solicit proposals and to seek comment and response from a board of directors.
An AIG of GME investors would have to be structured closer to the climate change groups which you found and identified - but maybe we can do better than a bunch of signatories pledging their hopes alongside a union leader.
My thinking is that an AIGs governance should be DAO - oriented.
For those unfamiliar - a DAO or Decentralized Autonomous Organization distributes governance amongst it’s users and can use blockchain in order to securely track voting. The DRSGME team experimented with and founded a DAO earlier this year, distributing ownership tokens as a bonus to people who donated to the original advertising campaign. It was in some ways as much to learn about decentralized governance as it was to show a commitment to the community. Most tokens went unclaimed, but the proof of concept is there.
An advantage to this would be that we could have real time polling of investors on a variety of topics - not just the ones which the AIG would be representing at the forefront. I posted some ideas for those frontline items here.
The hardest part about this that comes to mind right now is that it’s very difficult to verify an investor’s ownership status in order to know how many tokens to distribute to them.
Perhaps it would be possible to have investors sign on to the AIG and that they would continue to hold their shares for a period of time - say, until the next shareholder meeting - and include that promise as part of signing on with the AIG.
I don’t think funding is a major concern, outside of the legal costs that it would take to ensure that governance bylaws are completed correctly. If the governance style was a DAO, then the person or people that are the faces at the front wouldn’t have any power themselves to dictate how shareholder equity was used. It would be most important that they were civil and consistent actors so that they could present the AIG well if appearing in meetings.
All in all - so excited by this idea and growing conversation, and looking forward to learning more.
Lots of good information in this post and your comment here. Much to think about. Exciting.
With respect to
… I nominate, well, you. (In case anyone isn’t aware, Chives was present in the interview with Gary Gensler a few months back - and was an excellent representative.)
I would like to propose for ComputerShare to make it painless for an AIG to validate a member 💎👌