Breaking News & Top Stories


Third Point’s Dan Loeb pens a pointed letter to Bath & Body Works – What could happen next

An worker with a face masks and defend cleans the door of Tub & Physique Works retailer on July 21, 2020 in Pembroke Pines, Florida.

Johnny Louis | Getty Photos Information | Getty Photos

Firm: Tub & Physique Works (BBWI)

Enterprise: Tub & Physique Works operates a specialty retailer of house perfume, physique care, soaps and sanitizer merchandise. In August 2021, Tub & Physique Works (previously generally known as L Manufacturers) accomplished the separation of its Victoria’s Secret enterprise. 

Inventory Market Worth: $9.68B ($42.42 per share)

Activist: Third Level

Share Possession:  6.02%

Common Value: $38.16

Activist Commentary: Third Level is a multi-strategy hedge fund based by Dan Loeb. The fund selectively takes activist positions. Loeb is likely one of the true pioneers within the discipline of shareholder activism and considered one of a handful of activists who formed what has develop into modern-day shareholder activism. He popularized the poison-pen letter at a time when the measure was typically vital. As occasions have modified, he has transitioned from the poison pen to the facility of the argument. Third Level has amicably obtained board illustration at firms like Baxter and Disney, but additionally won’t hesitate to launch a proxy struggle if the agency is being ignored. 

What’s Taking place?

Third Level initially filed a 13D on Tub & Physique Works (“BBWI”) on Dec. 8, 2022, and expressed its concern with the corporate’s government compensation construction, its monetary self-discipline, investor communication and board composition. On Feb. 22, Third Level despatched a letter to BBWI’s board asserting that it intends to appoint a slate of director candidates for election. Third Level believes that extra oversight is required on the board in relation to company governance, government compensation and shareholder rights.

Behind the Scenes

Final Might, BBWI’s CEO Andrew Meslow stepped down from his place, citing well being causes. The board, chaired by Sarah Nash, named her as interim CEO. In its announcement, the corporate acknowledged that Nash presently served because the CEO of privately held Novagard Options, an organization that manufactures silicone coatings and sealants. As a part of this appointment, BBWI agreed to extend Nash’s annual compensation as chair of the corporate to $1,000,000 from $700,000 through the time she served as interim CEO. Moreover, the corporate agreed to pay her an annual base wage of $1,350,000 and a short-term efficiency incentive compensation goal of 190% of her base wage for her work as interim CEO. The scenario turned egregious when the board, as well as, awarded her $18 million of restricted inventory items on March 11, 2022. She would obtain this $18 million no matter how lengthy she served as interim CEO. Finally, she served as interim CEO for a full seven months for the $18 million.

Would this have occurred if an activist have been on the board? We do not assume so. For example, in April 2019, ABB chairman Peter Voser stepped in as interim CEO of ABB. He didn’t obtain any improve to his compensation as chairman and he obtained the identical wage and short-term incentives because the prior CEO and no extra long-term incentive grants or advantages, besides these legally required. He served as interim CEO for 11 months and obtained complete compensation of $4.2 million, which was $3.3 million lower than the prior CEO and $1.7 million lower than the everlasting CEO succeeding him. ABB was a $50 billion firm on the time. BBWI is a roughly $10 billion firm. Additional, Voser didn’t have one other full-time job again then. For the $4.2 million, he agreed to dedicate his full consideration to ABB. One different factor – Lars Förberg, co-founder and managing companion of activist fund Cevian Capital was on the board of ABB on the time.

Third Level additionally takes challenge with the truth that the BBWI board doesn’t designate Nash as an government chair despite the fact that she is receiving $18 million in inventory grants vesting over the following three years. Third Level believes that $6 million of compensation per 12 months renders a director non-independent. We’d are inclined to agree with that. Let us take a look at one other instance. Richard Dreiling is designated as the manager chair of Greenback Tree as a result of he’s paid a wage of $1 million per 12 months and has inventory choices to amass 2.25 million shares of inventory on the firm’s all-time highest closing worth, vesting over 5 years. Earlier than negotiating that deal, the board reached out to shareholders proudly owning greater than 50% of their inventory. The dominant theme from that outreach was that the corporate ought to do no matter was essential to safe Dreiling’s providers as the corporate’s high government for a multi-year interval. That is simply good company governance. Having beforehand grown Greenback Common from a $4.5 billion firm to a $25 billion firm in seven years as its CEO, Dreiling was imminently certified for this place. He additionally didn’t have one other full-time place, and Greenback Tree is a $30 billion firm. Lastly, Paul Hilal, founder and CEO of activist investor Mantle Ridge was on the board, introduced on Dreiling and led the board in structuring and negotiating this complete association.

In distinction, the BBWI board didn’t seem to achieve out to shareholders, didn’t have an activist or any shareholder consultant on the board and appeared to enter an “arms-length” negotiation between Nash and the board she leads. That’s the way you attain an $18 million cost for seven months of labor whereas holding on to your full-time job. So, Third Level is now going to make a books-and-records request underneath Delaware legislation to evaluate the knowledge the board relied on to justify this payout. My guess is that the assist for this choice might be underwhelming.

The Nash-led BBWI board is now doing no matter it could to guard itself from having a shareholder consultant on the board. And once I say, “no matter it could,” I imply the very least the board thinks it has to do to win. We regularly see this in activist campaigns at firms with inexperienced and/or entrenched boards. On this case, the board is “refreshing” its membership by including two new administrators to the 12-person board. This enables the board to proceed with enterprise as common, whereas on the similar time enabling it to go earlier than Institutional Shareholder Providers and argue that there is no such thing as a want for a Third Level consultant on the board as a result of it has been refreshed. Nonetheless, when a board has egregious company governance practices, its members are the final folks you wish to appoint new administrators. A board like this can want much more refreshment than simply two extra administrators.

The corporate may additionally argue that it obtained an approval vote of over 95% on its most up-to-date say-on-pay proposal in 2022. This vote was fully targeted on 2021 pay and didn’t embody Sarah Nash as a named government officer. Moreover, ISS really useful voting “for” on say on pay, but additionally stated that the $18 million Nash award and her general compensation as interim CEO might be analyzed subsequent 12 months.

Third Level’s Loeb popularized the poison-pen letter at a time when it was wanted. As occasions have modified, he has transitioned from the poison pen to the facility of the argument. Third Level’s letter to BBWI is proof of that. Third Level has amicably obtained board illustration at firms like Baxter and Disney, however the agency won’t hesitate to launch a proxy struggle if it is not being heeded. Typically the distinction between amicable activism and confrontational activism is the response of the corporate. It’s as much as the corporate as to how adversarial this engagement will get. It’s typically troublesome in activist campaigns to determine who’s sporting the black hat and who’s sporting the white hat. On this scenario, it appears apparent. Massive institutional shareholders and ISS won’t condone egregious company governance. If this goes the gap, we imagine Third Level will present the BBWI board how highly effective a very good argument is.

Ken Squire is the founder and president of 13D Monitor, an institutional analysis service on shareholder activism, and the founder and portfolio supervisor of the 13D Activist Fund, a mutual fund that invests in a portfolio of activist 13D investments.


Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *