Founders Love Listing in Amsterdam. Maybe a Little Too Much., , on October 19, 2020 at 6:00 am

By
On October 19, 2020
Tags:

(Bloomberg Opinion) — Founders who want to list their company in Europe while retaining control usually have a shortlist of one bourse: Amsterdam.The Dutch capital’s stock exchange promises the flexibility of London with an added perk: It allows dual classes of stock in its benchmark indexes, meaning the biggest shareholders can keep control of the voting shares even as their financial interest is diluted. It’s a practice that’s helped attract Fiat Chrysler Automobiles NV, tech giant Prosus NV, drinks maker Davide Campari-Milano NV and, significantly, Altice Europe NV, which owns French carrier SFR.That’s significant, because Altice’s billionaire founder, Patrick Drahi, may be going too far in exploiting that particular attraction of the Dutch market. Last month, Drahi announced a 2.5 billion-euro ($2.9 billion) deal to buy out the half of the telecoms company that he doesn’t already own. It was an opportunistic move, given that Altice shares lost around half of their value during the pandemic from a February peak. Minority investors felt understandably short-changed. On Oct. 1, one of them, the hedge fund Lucerne Capital, addressed a letter of concern to the board. Drahi hasn’t responded publicly to the missive. Should they not receive a satisfactory response, Lucerne has left all options open, including legal avenues.As it stands, the takeover bid requires 95% approval from investors. If, as seems likely, Drahi fails to secure enough support, one option he has would be to seek a triangular merger, where Altice is folded into a holding company owned by Drahi. Such a move would allow him to buy out the minority shareholders with approval from a majority of votes, not capital — and he controls the voting shares. Such structures are not uncommon.This is where it could get interesting. Were he to attempt this kind of merger, minority shareholders such as Lucerne would have good reason to appeal to a court in Amsterdam called the Enterprise Chamber. It has a wide remit to protect the interests of all shareholders, and can, after an investigation, act quickly by suspending a director or transferring shares to a trustee, for instance, effectively blocking the deal.Typically, the court might have little reason to protect minority shareholders against the actions of the investor who controls the voting stock. After all, investors were hitching themselves to the strategic vision of the founder or controlling shareholder — and everything that comes with that, including cheaper stock. So, the argument goes, tough tomatoes, suck it up.But this situation, if it gets that far, would be a little different, because it wouldn’t pertain to strategic management decisions. It instead would look at whether minority shareholders were being cut out of Altice’s potential future value creation. This could offer scope for the Enterprise Chamber to rule against Drahi(1).That sort of ruling would have broad implications, particularly if ratified by the country’s supreme court. By highlighting the ability of a small court to impose measures unilaterally, such a precedent could make founder-CEOs think twice about listing in Amsterdam.“These cases make things real,” says Tim Stevens, a partner at the law firm Allen & Overy in Amsterdam who has no role in the transaction. “When companies want to list somewhere on the continent, and the Netherlands looks nice, whatever happens in a case like this has ramifications for that.”The Netherlands has become a haven for Silicon Valley-style founders trying to keep control of their companies. One founder pushing his luck could cast a pall over the party.(1) There is precedent for this. The Enterprise Chamber sought to block ABN Amro’s sale of La Salle to the then Bank of America in 2007, but was overturned by the Dutch Supreme Court.This column does not necessarily reflect the opinion of the editorial board or Bloomberg LP and its owners.Alex Webb is a Bloomberg Opinion columnist covering Europe’s technology, media and communications industries. He previously covered Apple and other technology companies for Bloomberg News in San Francisco.For more articles like this, please visit us at bloomberg.com/opinionSubscribe now to stay ahead with the most trusted business news source.©2020 Bloomberg L.P.,

Founders Love Listing in Amsterdam. Maybe a Little Too Much.(Bloomberg Opinion) — Founders who want to list their company in Europe while retaining control usually have a shortlist of one bourse: Amsterdam.The Dutch capital’s stock exchange promises the flexibility of London with an added perk: It allows dual classes of stock in its benchmark indexes, meaning the biggest shareholders can keep control of the voting shares even as their financial interest is diluted. It’s a practice that’s helped attract Fiat Chrysler Automobiles NV, tech giant Prosus NV, drinks maker Davide Campari-Milano NV and, significantly, Altice Europe NV, which owns French carrier SFR.That’s significant, because Altice’s billionaire founder, Patrick Drahi, may be going too far in exploiting that particular attraction of the Dutch market. Last month, Drahi announced a 2.5 billion-euro ($2.9 billion) deal to buy out the half of the telecoms company that he doesn’t already own. It was an opportunistic move, given that Altice shares lost around half of their value during the pandemic from a February peak. Minority investors felt understandably short-changed. On Oct. 1, one of them, the hedge fund Lucerne Capital, addressed a letter of concern to the board. Drahi hasn’t responded publicly to the missive. Should they not receive a satisfactory response, Lucerne has left all options open, including legal avenues.As it stands, the takeover bid requires 95% approval from investors. If, as seems likely, Drahi fails to secure enough support, one option he has would be to seek a triangular merger, where Altice is folded into a holding company owned by Drahi. Such a move would allow him to buy out the minority shareholders with approval from a majority of votes, not capital — and he controls the voting shares. Such structures are not uncommon.This is where it could get interesting. Were he to attempt this kind of merger, minority shareholders such as Lucerne would have good reason to appeal to a court in Amsterdam called the Enterprise Chamber. It has a wide remit to protect the interests of all shareholders, and can, after an investigation, act quickly by suspending a director or transferring shares to a trustee, for instance, effectively blocking the deal.Typically, the court might have little reason to protect minority shareholders against the actions of the investor who controls the voting stock. After all, investors were hitching themselves to the strategic vision of the founder or controlling shareholder — and everything that comes with that, including cheaper stock. So, the argument goes, tough tomatoes, suck it up.But this situation, if it gets that far, would be a little different, because it wouldn’t pertain to strategic management decisions. It instead would look at whether minority shareholders were being cut out of Altice’s potential future value creation. This could offer scope for the Enterprise Chamber to rule against Drahi(1).That sort of ruling would have broad implications, particularly if ratified by the country’s supreme court. By highlighting the ability of a small court to impose measures unilaterally, such a precedent could make founder-CEOs think twice about listing in Amsterdam.“These cases make things real,” says Tim Stevens, a partner at the law firm Allen & Overy in Amsterdam who has no role in the transaction. “When companies want to list somewhere on the continent, and the Netherlands looks nice, whatever happens in a case like this has ramifications for that.”The Netherlands has become a haven for Silicon Valley-style founders trying to keep control of their companies. One founder pushing his luck could cast a pall over the party.(1) There is precedent for this. The Enterprise Chamber sought to block ABN Amro’s sale of La Salle to the then Bank of America in 2007, but was overturned by the Dutch Supreme Court.This column does not necessarily reflect the opinion of the editorial board or Bloomberg LP and its owners.Alex Webb is a Bloomberg Opinion columnist covering Europe’s technology, media and communications industries. He previously covered Apple and other technology companies for Bloomberg News in San Francisco.For more articles like this, please visit us at bloomberg.com/opinionSubscribe now to stay ahead with the most trusted business news source.©2020 Bloomberg L.P.

,

Instant Quote

Enter the Stock Symbol.

Select the Exchange.

Select the Type of Security.

Please enter your First Name.

Please enter your Last Name.

Please enter your phone number.

Please enter your Email Address.

Please enter or select the Total Number of Shares you own.

Please enter or select the Desired Loan Amount you are seeking.

Please select the Loan Purpose.

Please select if you are an Officer/Director.

High West Capital Partners, LLC may only offer certain information to persons who are “Accredited Investors” and/or “Qualified Clients” as those terms are defined under applicable Federal Securities Laws. In order to be an “Accredited Investor” and/or a “Qualified Client”, you must meet the criteria identified in ONE OR MORE of the following categories/paragraphs numbered 1-20 below.

High West Capital Partners, LLC cannot provide you with any information regarding its Loan Programs or Investment Products unless you meet one or more of the following criteria. Furthermore, Foreign nationals who may be exempt from qualifying as a U.S. Accredited Investor are still required to meet the established criteria, in accordance with High West Capital Partners, LLC’s internal lending policies. High West Capital Partners, LLC will not provide information or lend to any individual and/or entity that does not meet one or more of the following criteria:

1) Individual with Net Worth in excess of $1.0 million. A natural person (not an entity) whose net worth, or joint net worth with his or her spouse, at the time of purchase exceeds $1,000,000 USD. (In calculating net worth, you may include your equity in personal property and real estate, including your principal residence, cash, short-term investments, stock and securities. Your inclusion of equity in personal property and real estate should be based on the fair market value of such property less debt secured by such property.)

2) Individual with $200,000 individual Annual Income. A natural person (not an entity) who had individual income of more than $200,000 in each of the preceding two calendar years, and has a reasonable expectation of reaching the same income level in the current year.

3) Individual with $300,000 Joint Annual Income. A natural person (not an entity) who had joint income with his or her spouse in excess of $300,000 in each of the preceding two calendar years, and has a reasonable expectation of reaching the same income level in the current year.

4) Corporations or Partnerships. A corporation, partnership, or similar entity that has in excess of $5 million of assets and was not formed for the specific purpose of acquiring an interest in the Corporation or Partnership.

5) Revocable Trust. A trust that is revocable by its grantors and each of whose grantors is an Accredited Investor as defined in one or more of the other categories/paragraphs numbered herein.

6) Irrevocable Trust. A trust (other than an ERISA plan) that (a)is not revocable by its grantors, (b) has in excess of $5 million of assets, (c) was not formed for the specific purpose of acquiring an interest, and (d) is directed by a person who has such knowledge and experience in financial and business matters that such person is capable of evaluating the merits and risks of an investment in the Trust.

7) IRA or Similar Benefit Plan. An IRA, Keogh or similar benefit plan that covers only a single natural person who is an Accredited Investor, as defined in one or more of the other categories/paragraphs numbered herein.

8) Participant-Directed Employee Benefit Plan Account. A participant-directed employee benefit plan investing at the direction of, and for the account of, a participant who is an Accredited Investor, as that term is defined in one or more of the other categories/paragraphs numbered herein.

9) Other ERISA Plan. An employee benefit plan within the meaning of Title I of the ERISA Act other than a participant-directed plan with total assets in excess of $5 million or for which investment decisions (including the decision to purchase an interest) are made by a bank, registered investment adviser, savings and loan association, or insurance company.

10) Government Benefit Plan. A plan established and maintained by a state, municipality, or any agency of a state or municipality, for the benefit of its employees, with total assets in excess of $5 million.

11) Non-Profit Entity. An organization described in Section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code, as amended, with total assets in excess of $5 million (including endowment, annuity and life income funds), as shown by the organization’s most recent audited financial statements.

12) A bank, as defined in Section 3(a)(2) of the Securities Act (whether acting for its own account or in a fiduciary capacity).

13) A savings and loan association or similar institution, as defined in Section 3(a)(5)(A) of the Securities Act (whether acting for its own account or in a fiduciary capacity).

14) A broker-dealer registered under the Exchange Act.

15) An insurance company, as defined in Section 2(13) of the Securities Act.

16) A “business development company,” as defined in Section 2(a)(48) of the Investment Company Act.

17) A small business investment company licensed under Section 301 (c) or (d) of the Small Business Investment Act of 1958.

18) A “private business development company” as defined in Section 202(a)(22) of the Advisers Act.

19) Executive Officer or Director. A natural person who is an executive officer, director or general partner of the Partnership or the General Partner, and is an Accredited Investor as that term is defined in one or more of the categories/paragraphs numbered herein.

20) Entity Owned Entirely By Accredited Investors. A corporation, partnership, private investment company or similar entity each of whose equity owners is a natural person who is an Accredited Investor, as that term is defined in one or more of the categories/paragraphs numbered herein.

Please read the notice above and check the box below to continue.

Singapore

168 Robinson Road,
Capital Tower, Singapore 068912
+65 3105 1295

Taiwan

5th Floor, No. 1-8, Section 5, Zhongxiao East Road, Taipei

Hong Kong

R91, 3rd Floor,
Eton Tower, 8 Hysan Ave.
Causeway Bay, Hong Kong
+852 3002 4462

Australia

44 Martin Place, Sydney 2000 Australia
+02 8319 3232

Indonesia

Millennium Centennial Center, 38th Floor, Jl. Jend. Sudirman Kav. 25
Jakarta 12920, Indonesia

Market Coverage