IBJNews

BrightPoint shareholder sues company over pending sale

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

A BrightPoint Inc. stockholder has filed suit against the company, charging that the $9 share price offered in its $840 million sale to California-based Ingram Micro Inc. is too low.

Hilary Coyne brought the suit July 12 against Indianapolis-based BrightPoint and several of its officers in Marion Superior Court and is seeking class-action status on behalf of all BrightPoint shareholders.

Coyne accuses the company and its officers of breaching their fiduciary duty to shareholders and is asking a judge to issue an injunction to prevent BrightPoint and Ingram from completing the deal. Damages should be awarded if a court judgment is not issued before the sale is complete, the lawsuit says.

The deal is expected to close by the end of the year, the companies said when announcing it on July 2.

BrightPoint, founded in Plainfield in 1989, provides logistics to sellers of wireless devices. It has more than 1,300 employees in the Indianapolis area and 4,000 worldwide.

Santa Ana-based Ingram Micro is set to acquire all outstanding shares of BrightPoint’s common stock for $9 per share in cash. But Coyne argues in her suit that the price is “woefully inadequate” because it’s based on current company conditions that have depressed the price rather than its 52-week high of more than $12 per share.

BrightPoint’s announcement in February that it had lost key customer Cricket Communications Inc. was "exaggerated in the market," the complaint argues, and sent the stock sliding to the $9 range.

BrightPoint’s first-quarter results released in April, however, paint a much brighter picture, the suit said, showing that company revenue increased 23 percent, to nearly $1.4 billion, from the same period in 2011. In addition, BrightPoint handled 29.2 million mobile devices in the first quarter, a 7-percent increase from the first three months last year.

The strong earnings had at least one BrightPoint analyst predicting before the sale announcement that the company’s share price could rebound to $12 in the coming months, the suit said.

BrightPoint stock was fetching $8.90 per share Monday morning, but had fallen as low as $4.50 late last month before the announcement of the sale.

The $9-per-share acquisition price is a 66-percent premium to BrightPoint’s closing price of $5.41 on the Friday before the sale announcement and a 35-percent premium to BrightPoint’s 90-day average trading price.

Coyne further argues that the sale agreement includes a “no solicitation” provision barring BrightPoint officers from soliciting other offers, and a $26 million termination penalty payable to Ingram Micro if BrightPoint backs out on the deal.

“The preferential treatment accorded to Ingram Micro has deprived and will continue to deprive the BrightPoint shareholders of the very substantial premium that unfettered and evenhanded exposure of the company to the market could produce,” the suit said.
 
A BrightPoint officer said a company policy prevented him from commenting on pending litigation.

Coyne is represented by the New York law firm of Gardy & Notis LLP and local counsel Cohen & Malad LLP.
 

ADVERTISEMENT

  • Time to go after CELL
    Brightpoint's officers have become wealthy, especially Bob Laikin, without ever having paid any dividends to its investors. They took as much as they could out of this company for years! Anything that can be done to get more from them or their acquirer is a good move in my opinion.
  • Already
    These law suits never go anywhere and should not even be reported on. Obviously, management felt the price was sufficient to sell. The sale will probably save this investor a bunch of money in the long term. CELL was going nowhere fast.

    Post a comment to this story

    COMMENTS POLICY
    We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
     
    You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
     
    Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in IBJ editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
     
    No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
     
    We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
     

    Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

    Sponsored by
    ADVERTISEMENT

    facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

    Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ on Facebook:
    Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ's Tweets on these topics:
     
    Subscribe to IBJ
    1. Can your dog sign a marriage license or personally state that he wishes to join you in a legal union? If not then no, you cannot marry him. When you teach him to read, write, and speak a discernible language, then maybe you'll have a reasonable argument. Thanks for playing!

    2. Look no further than Mike Rowe, the former host of dirty jobs, who was also a classically trained singer.

    3. Current law states income taxes are paid to the county of residence not county of income source. The most likely scenario would be some alteration of the income tax distribution formula so money earned in Marion co. would go to Marion Co by residents of other counties would partially be distributed to Marion co. as opposed to now where the entirety is held by the resident's county.

    4. This is more same-old, same-old from a new generation of non-progressive 'progressives and fear mongers. One only needs to look at the economic havoc being experienced in California to understand the effect of drought on economies and people's lives. The same mindset in California turned a blind eye to the growth of population and water needs in California, defeating proposal after proposal to build reservoirs, improve water storage and delivery infrastructure...and the price now being paid for putting the demands of a raucous minority ahead of the needs of many. Some people never, never learn..

    5. I wonder if I can marry him too? Considering we are both males, wouldn't that be a same sex marriage as well? If they don't honor it, I'll scream discrimination just like all these people have....

    ADVERTISEMENT