Sentences with phrase «significant number of shareholders»

Starbucks leadership urged its shareholders to vote «no» on the proposal, despite the proposal being supported by a significant number of shareholders, according to As You Sow.

If a significant number of shareholders are paying higher taxes on those dividends, they very well might prefer that Microsoft buy back shares with the money instead (which indirectly creates higher stock prices).

However, it's obvious a significant number of shareholders (potential, or actual) will continue to view this as a stock negative until there's a specific transaction & terms on the table to evaluate.

Not exact matches

«We looked at a number of alternatives, but the strategy we settled on was the one that adds the most significant amount of shareholder value over time.

«While the company faces a number of significant challenges, including the continued rise of Amazon and Google, its high margin and large sales figures enable the company to generate significant free cash flow, which it increasingly returns to shareholders via buybacks and dividends.»

In making the tender offer, it could collect a significant percentage of shareholders willing to sell, and would go public with that number.

Actual results may vary materially from those expressed or implied by forward - looking statements based on a number of factors, including, without limitation: (1) risks related to the consummation of the Merger, including the risks that (a) the Merger may not be consummated within the anticipated time period, or at all, (b) the parties may fail to obtain shareholder approval of the Merger Agreement, (c) the parties may fail to secure the termination or expiration of any waiting period applicable under the HSR Act, (d) other conditions to the consummation of the Merger under the Merger Agreement may not be satisfied, (e) all or part of Arby's financing may not become available, and (f) the significant limitations on remedies contained in the Merger Agreement may limit or entirely prevent BWW from specifically enforcing Arby's obligations under the Merger Agreement or recovering damages for any breach by Arby's; (2) the effects that any termination of the Merger Agreement may have on BWW or its business, including the risks that (a) BWW's stock price may decline significantly if the Merger is not completed, (b) the Merger Agreement may be terminated in circumstances requiring BWW to pay Arby's a termination fee of $ 74 million, or (c) the circumstances of the termination, including the possible imposition of a 12 - month tail period during which the termination fee could be payable upon certain subsequent transactions, may have a chilling effect on alternatives to the Merger; (3) the effects that the announcement or pendency of the Merger may have on BWW and its business, including the risks that as a result (a) BWW's business, operating results or stock price may suffer, (b) BWW's current plans and operations may be disrupted, (c) BWW's ability to retain or recruit key employees may be adversely affected, (d) BWW's business relationships (including, customers, franchisees and suppliers) may be adversely affected, or (e) BWW's management's or employees» attention may be diverted from other important matters; (4) the effect of limitations that the Merger Agreement places on BWW's ability to operate its business, return capital to shareholders or engage in alternative transactions; (5) the nature, cost and outcome of pending and future litigation and other legal proceedings, including any such proceedings related to the Merger and instituted against BWW and others; (6) the risk that the Merger and related transactions may involve unexpected costs, liabilities or delays; (7) other economic, business, competitive, legal, regulatory, and / or tax factors; and (8) other factors described under the heading «Risk Factors» in Part I, Item 1A of BWW's Annual Report on Form 10 - K for the fiscal year ended December 25, 2016, as updated or supplemented by subsequent reports that BWW has filed or files with the SEC.

However, in Quebec and elsewhere in Canada, a number of large corporations have one or more significant shareholders, including Couche - Tard, Bombardier, CGI, Power Corporation, Jean Coutu Group and Transcontinental.

It should not necessary to set aside a significant proportion of shareholder capital for a limited number of upper management personnel in order to incentivize them.

Companies / brands seem to like acquiring «likes» and «followers» (enough to spend significant amounts on doing so), so you'd think they'd value and brag about the number of shareholders too.

Additionally, recognizing that a cyber - or privacy - related development can expand to encompass a number of other significant legal issues, our group works hand - in - glove with attorneys in our White Collar Defense, Regulatory and Investigations, Securities Litigation, Complex Commercial Litigation, Business Finance & Restructuring and Employment Litigation practices, among others, to address subsequent risks such as government or regulatory inquiries, shareholder, consumer, or employee class action litigation, trade secrets theft, funding or financial issues, and disputes with vendors, service providers and other third parties.

There are a number of practical advantages for such shareholders to bringing an unfair prejudice petition instead of a derivative claim (for example, the broad grounds for relief, the flexible nature of the relief that may be sought, and the fact that there are fewer procedural hurdles to overcome), and there may be significant disadvantages in bringing a derivative claim (the initial procedural phases can be costly, and relief must be sought on behalf of the company).

Here's an admittedly very rudimentary model: Facebook would pre-mine a large pool of tokens, distributing a significant number to shareholders and holding the rest in reserve to distribute to users based on some reliable metric of the traffic their original content generates.