The Interpreter Posted March 28, 2006 Author Share Posted March 28, 2006 Cedar Fair is a limited partnership. Common stock owners have virtually NO say in the operation of the company. Only the limited partners would get to vote on any acquisition, not the common stockholders. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jzarley Posted March 28, 2006 Share Posted March 28, 2006 Yep...the Board of Directors of the acquiring (and selling) company voting, yes. The general stockholders, no. The only real voting stockholders get to do is to approve (or withhold approval) for a proposed slate of directors. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Interpreter Posted March 28, 2006 Author Share Posted March 28, 2006 Actually, in many companies the selling company's stockholders would have to vote...but not here. CBS Corporation is controlled by Sumner Redstone, who has majority control of the company. My comment about Cedar Fair had to do with the fact that that company is set up as a limited partnership...in that type of arrangement, common stockholders share in the profits, but not the operations of the company. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BoddaH1994 Posted March 28, 2006 Share Posted March 28, 2006 The only real voting stockholders get to do is to approve (or withhold approval) for a proposed slate of directors. Isn't business grand? You can either vote for the board members, or choose not to vote at all. Roy E. Disney started a campaign to get people NOT to vote for Michael Eisner, and had something like a 30% success rate. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Interpreter Posted March 28, 2006 Author Share Posted March 28, 2006 And yet, Mr. Disney was successful in getting Mr. Eisner gone.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BoddaH1994 Posted March 28, 2006 Share Posted March 28, 2006 And yet, Mr. Disney was successful in getting Mr. Eisner gone.... Not entirely, his campaign was several years ago and Eisner only resigned recently. I'm sure it had something to do with his resignation, but probably wasn't the only reason. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Interpreter Posted March 28, 2006 Author Share Posted March 28, 2006 I think it can fairly be said that without Mr. Disney's unrest, Mr. Eisner would still be safely ensconced. (defined: safely in place, comfortable). Mr. Disney was an irritant to Mr. Eisner, and gradually wore him down and won others to his cause. And his public withdrawal from his campaign to drive out Eisner did not necessarily mean that he was no longer still working to get him out. He was. No, it wasn't the only reason. But it was almost certainly a reason that without which, Mr. Eisner would have survived to keep doing what was he doing to Disney. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jzarley Posted March 28, 2006 Share Posted March 28, 2006 The book "Disney War" by James Stewart tells this whole story in fantastic detail. Of the many Disney books I have read, this one is by far the best (with Kim Lemaster's "Keys to the Kingdom" running a close second...) I think it's safe to say that the 45% no-confidence vote, and losing the chairmanship of the board at the 2004 Philadelphia meeting pretty much sealed Eisner's fate... Although, Roy Disney didn't necessarily get everything the way he wanted it, the stock has rebounded and bottom-line--that was Roy's biggest concern. At the 2006 shareholder meeting, Iger was cheered by the stockholders...what a difference a few years (and a new leader) makes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Interpreter Posted April 3, 2006 Author Share Posted April 3, 2006 ...Speaking at an investor conference hosted by Bank of America, Chief Financial Officer Fredric Reynolds.....said the process to sell Paramount Parks is "well under way." The media group also plans to sell "a couple" of TV stations as well as some radio stations this year, he added.... http://tinyurl.com/r68gj This article was originally published last Wednesday, but none of the 'insiders' here who supposedly know what is going to happen to the parks ( ) have posted it, so... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WooferBearATL Posted April 3, 2006 Share Posted April 3, 2006 Well, I think we know what well under way means. I wonder when the new ownership will be made known? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cewldre Posted April 3, 2006 Share Posted April 3, 2006 the time frame I heard was July... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.