Why does governance of Hokuetsu need to be transformed now?
During Mr. Kishimoto’s 16 years as CEO, Hokuetsu has:
Failed to have effective corporate governance
Failed to realize fruitful synergies with Daio Paper
Resurrected a Poison Pill, which is detrimental to shareholder interests
Consistently eliminated potential successors for managerial positions
Consistently failed to hit many of their earnings targets year after year
And yet Mr. Kishimoto’s total control over decision-making continues. The Board should be held accountable NOW for his and its failures.
Oasis will vote to remove Mr. Kishimoto and incumbent “independent” directors, and has nominated five new highly qualified, independent and diverse directors at the upcoming AGM.
**
Why Shareholders Should Remove Mr. Kishimoto and Current “Independent” Directors NOW, please see:
Reason 1: Resurrected Poison Pill to Protect Their Vested Interests
Mr. Kishimoto and “Independent” Directors have Resurrected a Poison Pill to Protect His Vested Interests
Mr. Kishimoto has resurrected a Poison Pill that Hokuetsu itself abolished in June 2022, to protect his vested interests
The Board of Directors made a unanimous decision to support the reinstatement of the poison pill. Independent directors thus failed to perform their duties, raising concerns about their independence and integrity
Therefore, Oasis proposes to remove Mr. Kishimoto and four current independent directors from the Board of Directors and proposes a slate of truly independent and qualified candidates
Hokuetsu had decided to discontinue its poison pill in May 2022. However, Hokuetsu then decided to reintroduce such plan because Mr. Kishimoto viewed Daio Kaiun as a potential threat to his controlling position
Oasis believes that institutional shareholders are against the poison pill, and that there is a trend to abolish such poison pill plans. Thus, we view its reinstatement as evidence of a fundamental failure of corporate governance
Hokuetsu’s Poison Pill Goes Against the Corporate Governance Trend in Japan
Japan is on its way to introducing appropriate and effective corporate governance to increase value
As a part of improved corporate governance, there is a trend in reduction of the number of companies that introduce takeover defense measures
Mr. Kishimoto and the Hokeuetsu “independent” directors are going against this trend by unanimously reintroducing a Poison Pill to protect their vested interests, which is a detriment to shareholder interests
Reason 2: History of Failure to Realize Synergies with Daio Paper and Refusal to Sell its Strategic Shareholdings, incurring Significant Economic Loss
Hokuetsu’s Refusal to Sell its Daio Cross-Shareholdings Led to a
JPY40Bn Loss
in Economic Value to Hokuetsu & Its Stakeholders
Hokuetsu’s Return From Its JPY ~33Bn Daio Investment is Only JPY ~6Bn over 18 Years
Hokuetsu has made only JPY ~6bn in return, while its total investment in Daio Paper shares is JPY ~33bn
This means that Hokuetsu has made a 17% return over 18 years, or an 1.0% return on an annual basis
There is no objective reason for Hokuetsu to use such a substantial amount of its balance sheet on an investment that produces such a low annual return
Simply Investing in TOPIX Would Have Been a Better Investment For Hokuetsu
Hokuetsu share value and dividends received from Daio Paper amount to ~53 Bn JPY against a ~33 Bn JPY investment. This means the absolute return from Hokuetsu’s investment in Daio Paper is +62%.
An investment in TOPIX over the same period would have returned ~72 Bn JPY, yielding a +119% return
Hokuetsu Explicitly Mentions the Purpose of Holding Daio Paper Shares as “Cross-Shareholdings” in Its Significant Holder Disclosure
Japan’s Corporate Governance Code Encourages the Sale of Cross-Shareholdings
The Corporate Governance Code encourages the sale of cross-shareholdings
ISS & Glass Lewis Recommend Voting AGAINST CEOs with Significant Cross-Shareholdings
Reason 3: Announced Strategic Alliance with Daio Paper; However, Due To Regulatory Constraints and Inherent Conflicts of Interest, Anticipated Economic Benefits are Limited
Mr. Kishimoto Made Reckless Claims For “Strategic Business Alliance” and Against Considering Consolidation with Daio Paper
Reason 4: Sub-par Performance During Extremely Long Tenures
Mr. Kishimoto Has Held His Role for 16 Years
CEO Mr. Kishimoto (78) has served as a Hokuetsu Board member for 25 years and as CEO for 16 years
The Company deserves a new CEO to execute a bold new plan to secure Hokuetsu’s future
Mr. Kishimoto Has Failed to Deliver on Almost ALL of His Promises Over the Past Decade
Mr. Kishimoto Fired All Younger Directors in What Appears to be an Effort to Preserve His Leadership
Since Mr. Kishimoto became CEO in 2008, he has fired all the other senior directors in order to preserve his role and maintain his rule over the Company
Mr. Iwata and Mr. Nakase (whose prior experience was at the Mitsubishi Group, same as Mr. Kishimoto) have been serving for nine and seven years, respectively, and have demonstrated a lack of independence from Mr. Kishimoto