SPACs: Great for Celebrities, But What About Dissenting Shareholders?
The day of reckoning may finally be upon Wall Street's long-running reality show. The overlooked concerns and drowned-out voices of the dissenting shareholders are now being heard and, in response, SPACs have been forced to become more transparent and accountable.
October 15, 2021 at 02:10 PM
10 minute read
The M&A landscape has drastically changed in the last few years as waves of investors have rushed to join the trend of setting up Special Purpose Acquisition Companies (SPACs) as a seemingly more appealing way to take a company public than a traditional IPO. However, while the recent SPAC boom can be largely attributed to the promise of a speedy and efficient path to a public market, investors, spurred by recent guidance and statements from the S.E.C., are increasingly crying halt. Minority shareholders in particular are alleging in a spate of suits that they are victim of inequities in the SPAC process. This article discusses the tactics that dissenting shareholders can deploy to redress the heavy-handed tactics of majority shareholders and SPAC management.
SPACs have been around since the 1990s, but they have sharply increased in popularity over the last few years. Katie Kolchin, Spotlight: 2020, the Year of the SPAC 3 (SIFMA Insights 2020). In 2020 alone, SPAC proceeds jumped by 462% year-over-year and outperformed traditional IPOs, while taking up about 50% of market share. Sanghamitra Saha, 2020 Has Been the Year of SPAC IPOs: Here are the Prominent 4, NADSAQ (Dec. 28, 2020). The trend continued strong this year, as 366 SPAC IPOs with gross proceeds over $112.7 billion were executed by early July, as compared to 248 total SPACs in 2020 and 59 in 2019. SPAC Statistics, SPACInsider (last visited July 9, 2021). From January to about mid-March in 2021, over 72% of all companies taken public were SPACs. Preston Brewer, Are SPACs Why Securities Litigation Is Way, Way Up?, Bloomberg Law (March 16, 2021). However, this increase in SPAC filings has recently been confronted by an increase of litigation from dissenting shareholders.
|What Is a SPAC?
The SPAC business model dates back to the much-maligned blank check companies of the 1970s, created with no purpose other than to raise capital to engage in a merger or acquisition. Julie Young, Special Purpose Acquisition Company (SPAC), Investopedia, Nov. 24, 2020). Before a SPAC forms, there is no specific target company chosen, usually only a predetermined generalized industry.
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 All$17B Episcopal Church Pension Fund Hires New Legal Chief as Staff Changes Continue
'Lifeline' for Fraud?: Chinese Lender Accused in Lawsuit by Quinn Emanuel Lawyers of Facilitating Fintech Scheme
Law Firms Mentioned
Trending Stories
- 1Why Kramer Levin Decided to Merge
- 2Judicial Ethics Opinion 24-61
- 3Decision of the Day: School District's Probe Was a 'Sham'; Title IX Administrator Showed Sex-Based Bias
- 4US Magistrate Judge Embry Kidd Confirmed to 11th Circuit
- 5Shaq Signs $11 Million Settlement to Resolve Astrals Investor Claims
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