Activists trying to unseat Ruger execs

CaliFFLCaliFFL Senior MemberPosts: 4,845 Senior Member
The bold text is what caught my attention. They are a small but loud minority. 

The plan for this year’s gathering, set for May 8 in New Hampshire, promises to renew a debate over how the company might respond to a series of mass shootings across the United States, including at schools, houses of worship and workplaces.

The activists include Majority Action, a liberal-leaning shareholder group, and religious investors affiliated with the Interfaith Center on Corporate Responsibility. While they hold a small number of Sturm Ruger shares, last year members of Interfaith Center won backing for a resolution from fund companies including top Ruger shareholders BlackRock Inc and Vanguard Group, showing an ability to set the agenda.

This year the activists said they will call on other investors to vote “withhold” on Sturm Ruger Chairman Michael Jacobi and on company director Sandra Froman, who is also a director of the National Rifle Association and was its president from 2005 to 2007.

Eli Kasargod-Staub, Majority Action’s executive director, said in an interview that Sturm Ruger should take a harder look at “smart gun” technology and hold talks with investors, dialogue it has rejected in the past.

He also said the company should step back from divisive cultural issues promoted by the NRA. Together, the topics “are the kind of issues that can and have been productively engaged on through dialogue with long-term investors at other companies,” he said.





https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-guns-sturmruger-idUSKCN1RL18M
The question isn't who is going to let me; it's who is going to stop me.

Ayn Rand

Replies

  • alphasigmookiealphasigmookie Senior Member Posts: 8,798 Senior Member
    Interesting. I've seen a bit of a rise in this sort of thing in publicly traded companies. Groups with an agenda of one type of another buying shares and then using their ownership stakes to pressure large shareholders, often mutual fund companies or pension funds to back their resolutions. It's definitely an interesting strategy for sure.  
    "Finding out that you have run out of toilet paper is a good example of lack of preparation, buying 10 years worth is silly"
    -DoctorWho
  • coolgunguycoolgunguy Senior Member Posts: 6,503 Senior Member
    A touchy issue. 

    On one hand, I'm not against any company exploring new ideas to expand product offerings.  While I believe "Smart" guns are a stupid concept, I'm not against any company investigating or producing them... but, people being people the SECOND somebody comes out with a viable offering, that company will start lobbying to make them mandatory in order to "save lives" (and make bank in the process).




    "Bipartisan" usually means that a bigger than normal deception is happening.
    George Carlin
  • TeachTeach Senior Member Posts: 18,428 Senior Member
    edited April 12 #4
    Hmmmmm- - - - -I wonder what a few shares of the democrat party would cost, and how a majority shareholder like George Soros would respond to pressure from a few very vocal protestors from our side?  
    Hide and wail in terror, Eloi- - - -We Morlocks are on the hunt!
    ASK-HOLE Someone who asks for advice and always does something opposite
  • coolgunguycoolgunguy Senior Member Posts: 6,503 Senior Member
    The only problem I see with that, is that you have to give up shares in your chosen party to "buy" (vote) shares in another. 
    "Bipartisan" usually means that a bigger than normal deception is happening.
    George Carlin
  • FisheadgibFisheadgib Senior Member Posts: 5,709 Senior Member
    Years ago the Green Bay Packers went public and thousands of people bought a few shares just so they could own a piece of them and kept the franchise from moving.  Right now Ruger is considered risky and nobody is buying big blocks but shares can be had for around 52.00 and change and if the thousands (if not millions) of people that love Ruger guns bought one or two shares, control of the company could be kept out of the hands of liberals.
    snake284 wrote: »
    For my point of view, cpj is a lot like me
    .
  • alphasigmookiealphasigmookie Senior Member Posts: 8,798 Senior Member
    A touchy issue. 

    On one hand, I'm not against any company exploring new ideas to expand product offerings.  While I believe "Smart" guns are a stupid concept, I'm not against any company investigating or producing them... but, people being people the SECOND somebody comes out with a viable offering, that company will start lobbying to make them mandatory in order to "save lives" (and make bank in the process).




    Yeah sounds about like capitalism, or at least how capitalism is done in this country currently which is more of a corporate-govenment merger
    "Finding out that you have run out of toilet paper is a good example of lack of preparation, buying 10 years worth is silly"
    -DoctorWho
  • CaliFFLCaliFFL Senior Member Posts: 4,845 Senior Member
    edited April 12 #8
    A touchy issue. 

    On one hand, I'm not against any company exploring new ideas to expand product offerings.  While I believe "Smart" guns are a stupid concept, I'm not against any company investigating or producing them... but, people being people the SECOND somebody comes out with a viable offering, that company will start lobbying to make them mandatory in order to "save lives" (and make bank in the process).

    Yep, and of course all gov't entities will be exempted. The police will demand "override" access for "officer safety". There will be a plethora of reasonable regulations. 
    The question isn't who is going to let me; it's who is going to stop me.

    Ayn Rand
Sign In or Register to comment.
Magazine Cover

GET THE MAGAZINE Subscribe & Save

Temporary Price Reduction

SUBSCRIBE NOW

Give a Gift   |   Subscriber Services

PREVIEW THIS MONTH'S ISSUE

GET THE NEWSLETTER Join the List and Never Miss a Thing.

Get the top Guns & Ammo stories delivered right to your inbox every week.