• 4 minutes End of Sanction Waivers
  • 8 minutes Balancing Act---Sanctions, Venezuela, Trade War and Demand
  • 11 minutes Mueller Report Brings Into Focus Obama's Attempted Coup Against Trump
  • 14 minutes What Would Happen If the World Ran Out of Crude Oil?
  • 19 mins Permafrost Melting Will Cost Us $70 Trillion
  • 1 min California is the second biggest consumer of oil in the U.S. after Texas.
  • 13 mins Let's just get rid of the Jones Act once and for all
  • 19 hours At Kim-Putin Summit: Theater For Two
  • 19 hours NAFTA, a view from Mexico: 'Don't Shoot Yourself In The Foot'
  • 1 day UNCONFIRMED : US airstrikes target 32 oil tankers near Syria’s Deir al-Zor
  • 17 hours "Undeniable" Shale Slowdown?
  • 1 day Nothing Better than Li-Ion on the Horizon
  • 1 day New German Study Shocks Electric Cars: “Considerably” Worse For Climate Than Diesel Cars, Up To 25% More CO2
  • 1 day Russia To Start Deliveries Of S-400 To Turkey In July
  • 1 day How many drilling sites are left in the Permian?
  • 20 hours Gas Flaring
  • 11 hours Liberal Heads Explode as U.S. Senate Confirms Oil Lobbyist David Bernhardt as Interior Secretary
Michael McDonald

Michael McDonald

Michael is an assistant professor of finance and a frequent consultant to companies regarding capital structure decisions and investments. He holds a PhD in finance…

More Info

Trending Discussions

Oil Companies Ignoring Investors

One unexpected casualty of the oil price downturn is the self-respect of some energy investors. Equity investors are the owners of publicly traded companies and companies’ sole purpose is to act in the best long-term interests of their owners – at least in theory. That dynamic seems to have broken down at one major OFS firm though.

Take Nabors Industries for example. Investors at the company are concerned about a host of issues from board composition and shareholder communication to the firm paying its executives too much at the expense of shareholders. In a sign of that dissatisfaction, investors voted to oust 3 of the directors from the board in the June 7th election. Those directors tendered their resignations, but all three will be keeping their jobs.

Lead director of Nabors, John Yearwood failed to get a majority of shareholder votes at the last four annual meetings – a remarkable feat given that board elections are usually more of a formality than anything. The responsibility to accept Yearwood’s resignation lies with Nabor’s governance and nominating committee. That committee is headed by Yearwood. The other two members of the committee are Michael Lin and Howard Wolf, both of whom were voted out in this year’s election. Nabor’s decided that it would not be fair to have the three directors decide their own fate, so the company appointed a special committee of independent directors to decide what to do. The newly appointed independent committee decided that Lin, Yearwood, and Wolf should all keep their posts regardless of the shareholder vote. This marks the fourth year in a row that a similar situation has played out at Nabors. Nabor’s bylaws give the company the right to ignore shareholder votes because under the bylaws such votes are considered advisory.

Nabor’s is not the only company to take this approach. Of the 2,000 companies on the Russell 3000 index, only 43 directors failed to win majority votes in shareholder elections last year. Yet of those 43 who were voted out, 38 ended up sticking around anyway according to Bloomberg. Related: What Will You Do When The Lights Go Out? The Inevitable Failure Of The US Grid

Nabors is not the only company in a dispute with some of its shareholders, but it may be the firm with the most acrimonious dispute. In six votes held recently on executive compensation, Nabor’s shareholders have voted down executive compensation plans five of the six times with little effect. Only one of the last six plans has been approved by shareholders – the 2015 pay package which cut compensation for Anthony Petrello, Nabor’s CEO, versus previous levels. In the June 7th vote this year, Nabor’s shareholders voted against the CEO’s pay package. Petrello’s pay package this year almost doubled to $27.7 million from $14.8M last year thanks in part to a merger related bonus.

Given the circumstances at Nabor’s it’s unclear if shareholders have any power to directly impact significant change. In most circumstances, the board is supposed to act as advocates of shareholders, but that approach has run into some roadblocks at the company. Nabor’s stock market value today stands at roughly a third of what it was a few years ago, likely due to a combination of investor dissatisfaction and of course the sharp plunge in crude prices. Given that, disaffected shareholders should be hoping for the alternative mechanism to enforce proper corporate governance – a takeover of the company.

By Michael McDonald of Oilprice.com

More Top Reads From Oilprice.com:




Download The Free Oilprice App Today

Back to homepage

Trending Discussions


Leave a comment

Leave a comment




Oilprice - The No. 1 Source for Oil & Energy News