So I am thinking again about this week's shareholders' meeting.
I'm trying to wrap my mind around a few things:
1. Why hold the meeting?
2. Why hold the meeting in New York City?
3. Why hold the meeting NOW?
I'd welcome other viewpoints, but here are mine:
1. Why hold a shareholders meeting? To share something with someone. I believe from the research done by shareholders it was decided that an annual meeting was yet due.
Certainly, this meeeting is a 180-degree reverse turn from our past experience as WMIH shareholders. Until now, we have had virtually no access to company executives. They do not return phone calls or emails. They do not issue press releases. They are meticulous about meeting mandatory regulatory filing requirements and then FULL STOP when it comes to reaching out to common shareholders.
Reasons for our company's actions to date might include (1) they are trying to save the company money; (2) they really don't care about small shareholders, and they have easy access to large shareholders through other channels; and/or (3) they have nothing (good) to say about our situation.
Mike Willingham, our CEO, is largely an unknown quantity in New York City. He made his name and reputation, such as it is, in Texas and in courtrooms, not in the world's financial center. It seems unlikely he is going to 'wow' Wall Street with his expertise or wit, and, as far as I can determine, he has limited experience in running a company, so I cam not sure what he stands to gain personally from holding this meeting.
It stands to reason that the company has a message to get out, and I don't think the intended audience is us.
2. Why hold a meeting in New York City? Why not, say, Seattle, where the company is based, and where (I believe) interim company president Chad Smith owns a home and has a family? Why not, say, Houston, where Mike Willingham is from? Why New York?
Clearly, the meeting is not being held for the convenience of Chad Smith or the handful of WMIH employees based in Seattle, or for the convenience of CEO Mike Willingham. One reason to avoid Seattle might be to steer clear of still-angry WAMUQ shareholders, but why move the meeting 3,000 miles across the country.
The big shareholders of WMIH, the hedge funds, are either based near to New York City, or they have people in the New York area who can attend the meeting on their behalf.
I originally thought that WMIH might be making a presentation with one eye on Wall Street, in order to identify potential suitors or partners going forward, and that Midtown Manhattan seemed a good place to introduce itself. However, with the passage of recent weeks, and with no further communication to shareholders from the company, and with no apparent effort to 'hype' the situation that I can find, it seems that this is not the case either.
I think the retail shareholders are simply bystanders in this week ahead. I think the meeting is not being held to placate us, or to impress us, or to reinforce our belief in WMIH or to scare us out or our shares or anything else. I think the meeting is big boys (bigger than us, and bigger than MW) doing a rare bit of public grandstanding.
3. Why now? Why not wait? The meeting was announced weeks ago, with the voting co-incident with the meeting, so there must be something afoot. Will MW be removed as CEO? It seems impossible, and no opposing slate of directors was nominated or pushed forward. Either the big money HF's who hold large portions of WMIH don't care about MW or have him figured out and under their strict guidance. It's impossible to imagine MW and our BOD deciding on their own to hold their first-ever shareholders meeting in the heart of New York City on a Wednesday in June.
It stands to reason that the company has something to say, something that they feel deserves a broader audience than the tiny sliver of investors who watch EDGAR for 8-K and 10-K filings. It also stands to reason that, since the meeting was announced weeks in advance, that the announcement(s) to be made must involve WMIH alone, or WMIH and a limited number of private parties. There could not have been a 'deal' struck weeks ago, and only announced this week publicly for the first time: that goes against reporting requirements for public companies and opens them up to lawsuits from every shareholder who sold shares on the recent runup from .60 to 1.00.
What could the announcement be? That's above my pay grade to know, but I do believe the following:
(8-ball)
1. WMIH is going to announce something of substance this week, their first ever newsworthy announcement(s).
2. It will be announced through regular business news channels in regular ways, not in a small room in a NYC hotel. The announcement(s) must come in advance of the meeting and come outside of market hours, so it will come either before trading in the morning of Monday, Tuesday, or Wednesday, or after hours on Monday or Tuesday.
3. The announcement(s) will be seen as 'good news' by shareholders (why go to all this trouble otherwise?)
4. I think that, rather then do a last minute announcement(s) on Wednesday morning that the announcement(s) will come earlier in the week, perhaps as soon as tomorrow, to give MW and the BOD time to gauge the private and public reactions that follow, and to structure their statements on Wednesday accordingly.
Supporting my belief that 'something is up' is the strong buying of recent weeks, that took the stock up from .60 to 1.00, and then simply stopped. CSNY wrote here last week:
Quote
Wall Street has been dead for the past couple of weeks with people in the Hamptons, on vacation, etc. When I saw the volume surge two weeks ago I knew someone wanted to get a lot of shares before the the shareholders' meeting AND the Memorial Day weekend and the week following, because a lot of traders would be heading out of town. That someone got his/her/its shares and the volume he/she/it created was exacerbated by subsequent retail buying, albeit in much smaller volume.
Clearly we had a major buyer(s) who wanted shares now rather than later and was willing to pay whatever the price to get them. Kylekrol's accumulation chart shows unprecedented buy interest over the last few weeks. Then, suddenly, the buying stopped, and the price slipped back on light volume. Either the buyer ran out of time, or he hit the ownership limits of 4.75% or both. Certainly he did not run out of money ...
^^^^^ (8-Ball) ^^^^^
Finally, the flip side of my optimism is also in play here: I am headed to New York City this week to hear good news. If there is no news, or bad news, then I will be mighty unhappy.