Coca-Cola shareholder claims execs will be overpaid through equity plan
A dispute has arisen between the shareholders of The Coca Cola Company and the companys executives regarding executive pay and an equity plan that one specific shareholder and investor claims is injurious to shareholders.
March 25, 2014 at 05:10 AM
2 minute read
The original version of this story was published on Law.com
A dispute has arisen between the shareholders of The Coca Cola Company and the company's executives regarding executive pay and an equity plan that one specific shareholder and investor claims is injurious to shareholders.
CNBC reports that David Winters, investor and fund manager, and CEO and founder of Wintergreen Advisors claims that Coca-Cola has concocted a plan to dilute the value of the company's shares to deliver more money into executives' pockets by way of an equity compensation plan.
Winters is quoted — by way of his letters to shareholders and the Coca-Cola board — as saying that the company's proposed 2014 equity plan “will significantly erode the per-share value of Coca-Cola shares…If approved, this plan in conjunction with previous equity compensation plans, will dilute existing shareholders by a company estimated 14.2 percent.” To which Coca-Cola obviously responds that Winters' claims are baseless and not rooted in fact.
Winters claims that the equity investment plan — which will award a mix of 60 percent options and 40 percent full value shares — will result in shareholders handing over the equivalent of $13 billion to Coca-Cola's executives over the next four years. But the company's statement responded:
“The 2014 Equity Plan incorporates a number of 'best practice' and shareowner-friendly provisions, such as no re-pricing of stock options, no liberal share counting and 'double-trigger' change in control vesting…The long-term equity compensation program is tied directly to the achievement of specific business goals and the financial health of the company…Therefore, if the company does not meet these goals, these awards are not earned. This pay-for-performance philosophy has been a consistent cornerstone of the program through the years and remains unchanged.”
This is not the only dispute going on this week over executive compensation; on a much more local level, an Indianapolis water company is now being probed by the city's utility regulatory commission for overpaying its executives, and raising water rates on citizens to do so.
Further reading:
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllRecent Layoff/Callback Litigation Underscores Perils Employers Face From Every Direction
5 minute readOld Laws, New Tricks: Lawyers Using Patchwork of Creative Legal Theories to Target New Tech
In-House Gurus Say Inattention to Human Side of Tech Adoption Can Derail Best-Laid Plans
5 minute readNike Promotes Legal Chief to Marketing Chief as New CEO Launches Turnaround
Trending Stories
- 1Wilson Sonsini Knocks Out Claims Against Inhibrx Biosciences in Trade Secrets Verdict
- 2Pass Rate on California's July 2024 Bar Exam Ticks Up to 53.8%
- 3TEST TEST
- 4$5.5M Miami Verdict: Meet the Lawyers Behind the Slip-and-Fall Suit
- 5Dropping a Client Like a 'Hot Potato'
- 6Cobb County Says Over 3K Absentee Ballots Mailed Late, Just Days Before Election
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250