华尔街日报：特朗普政府的官员正在一项针对代理顾问影响力的行政命令，将限制机构股东服务公司（ISS）和Glass Lewis等代理顾问公司，可能包括全面禁止或限制代理顾问向股东提出的建议。官员们还在探讨限制指数基金经理的投票权，试图削弱贝莱德BlackRock、Vanguard Group和State Street等巨头的权力。 ...

I do think we've got a fundamental issue with corporate governance in publicly traded companies where you've got about half of the stock market is controlled by passive index funds and most of them outsource their decision to advisory firms particularly Glass Lewis and ISS. I call them corporate ISIS. They're just terrorists.Glass Lewis and ISS controlled the vote of half the stock market. They own no stock in any of these companies. Now, if you're a political activist, you know what a great place would be ...

Core Scientific and CoreWeave Acquisition Update - Core Scientific's stock rose over 6% to $22.08 following the rejection of CoreWeave's acquisition offer at a special shareholder meeting [1] - CoreWeave's stock fell over 5% to $132.67 after the acquisition deal was terminated [1] - The acquisition, initially announced in July, was valued at approximately $9 billion and aimed to expand CoreWeave's AI computing infrastructure [1] Shareholder Reactions and Strategic Implications - Major shareholders, including Two Seas Capital, opposed the acquisition, and influential voting advisory firms Glass Lewis and ISS recommended shareholders reject the deal [2] - Glass Lewis noted that while the acquisition had strategic merit, Core Scientific might have greater upside potential as an independent company if it capitalizes on growing computing demand [2] - Market sentiment had anticipated the deal's failure, as evidenced by the negative deal spread observed in the months following the announcement [2] CoreWeave's Response and Future Strategy - CoreWeave's CEO, Michael Intrator, stated that the company would not increase its acquisition bid and respects the decision of Core Scientific's shareholders [2] - Intrator emphasized that CoreWeave's strategic direction remains unchanged, focusing on creating long-term value through strategic acquisitions and prudent investments [2]

Tesla’s shareholders are preparing for a shareholder vote next week, and on the agenda is CEO Elon Musk’s unprecedented proposed payment plan. Board Chair Robyn Denholm discusses why Musk merits the package, and why shareholders should approve the proposal, despite pushback from proxy advisors like Glass Lewis and ISS. Plus, President Trump struck a critical minerals deal with Malaysia before landing in Japan ahead of his meeting with China’s President Xi later this week, the U.S. added an extra 10% tariff ...

Core Viewpoint - Elon Musk criticized proxy advisory firms ISS and Glass Lewis, labeling them as "corporate terrorists" for their recommendations against his $1 trillion pay package, which he argues undermines his leadership at Tesla [1][2]. Group 1: Musk's Criticism of Advisory Firms - Musk expressed discomfort with the influence of proxy advisory firms, stating they lack understanding and have excessive sway over shareholder decisions, particularly affecting passive investors like index funds [2][3]. - He argued that these firms do not have actual ownership and often vote based on political lines rather than shareholder interests, which he sees as a significant issue beyond just Tesla [3]. Group 2: Pay Package Details - The proposed pay package for Musk could amount to approximately $1 trillion over 10 years, contingent on meeting performance metrics, including increasing Tesla's market cap by over 500% to $8.5 trillion [6]. - ISS and Glass Lewis raised concerns about the size of Musk's pay package and its potential to dilute existing shareholders' holdings [7]. Group 3: Advisory Firms' Role - Advisory firms like ISS and Glass Lewis do not vote directly in shareholder meetings but provide recommendations that are analyzed by major institutional investors such as BlackRock, Vanguard, and State Street [4]. - A spokesperson for Glass Lewis emphasized that their role is to provide analysis and recommendations, leaving the final decision to Tesla shareholders [5].

The fundamental issue is that half of all publicly-traded shares are controlled by passive index funds who, for the most part, outsource their shareholder vote to the advisory firms of ISS and Glass Lewis.ISS and Glass Lewis have no actual ownership themselves and often vote along random political lines unrelated to shareholder interests! This is a major problem that is not just limited to Tesla.For example, they recommend voting against re-electing one of our excellent longstanding directors, Ira Ehrenprei ...

Executive Compensation Concerns - Glass Lewis recommends voting against Tesla's compensation package due to shareholder dilution concerns [1] - Proxy advisors question the necessity of granting more control and issuing shares that dilute the existing shareholder base, considering the CEO's substantial stake in the company [2] Tesla's Defense - Tesla argues that Glass Lewis's recommendation is misguided and ignores the significant financial results achieved under Elon Musk's leadership [3] - Tesla compares its performance to other car companies, highlighting its distinctiveness, despite previously claiming to be more than just a car company [3][4] Performance Acknowledgment - The report acknowledges the returns Tesla has achieved under Musk's leadership [4]

I believe that history will decide that Glass Lewis and ISS have been menaces to innovation, enabling passive investors who care about “tracking errors” to their indexes but do not care about much else. As one of the first investors to put an active equity portfolio into an ETF, I have been shocked at conferences and elsewhere by how little these “investors” know or care about the companies in their portfolios. ...

RT Tesla (@Tesla)ISS and Glass Lewis have recommended against Tesla’s proposals time and time again since the 2018 CEO Performance Award was introduced.It’s a good thing our shareholders ignored those recommendations otherwise they may have missed out on our market capitalization soaring by 20x from March 2018 to August 2025.Now, Glass Lewis has followed ISS and issued another misguided recommendation that again disregards the fundamental purpose of public companies and who they serve – the shareholders. Th ...

ISS and Glass Lewis have recommended against Tesla’s proposals time and time again since the 2018 CEO Performance Award was introduced.It’s a good thing our shareholders ignored those recommendations otherwise they may have missed out on our market capitalization soaring by 20x from March 2018 to August 2025.Now, Glass Lewis has followed ISS and issued another misguided recommendation that again disregards the fundamental purpose of public companies and who they serve – the shareholders. These firms do not ...