IBJNews

Emmis to delay shareholder vote until judge rules

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrint

Emmis Communications Corp. told a U.S. judge it will delay a scheduled Aug. 14 shareholder vote that could wipe out $34 million in unpaid preferred stockholder dividends until after she rules on a bid to block the balloting.

Corre Opportunities Fund LP and other preferred stockholders asked U.S. District Judge Sarah Evans Barker in Indianapolis for an order blocking the vote, arguing that Emmis board members and Chairman Jeffrey Smulyan failed to comply with state and federal disclosure laws.

Barker on Wednesday ended a two-day hearing with a suggestion that both parties think of a way to compensate the stockholders for their losses while allowing the radio station owner and operator to move ahead with a plan to reduce debt and stabilize its financial condition. She said she’d rule by Aug. 31.

“The board will convene Aug. 14 and adjourn,” corporation Secretary J. Scott Enright told Barker, taking action only to set a meeting for after the U.S. Labor Day holiday on Sept. 3.

With a market capitalization of about $85 million, Emmis has more than 41 million shares of stock outstanding, 2.8 million of which are preferred shares whose holders are currently entitled to automatic dividends.

Those dividends, worth 6.25 percent of the preferred shares’ $50 liquidation value, or $3.125, haven’t been paid since October 2008, the investors said in a court filing. Including those unpaid dividends, each preferred share is worth $62.12 according to a June 29 proxy statement and meeting notice.

Other proposals on the Aug. 14 ballot included elimination of future preferred dividends unless declared and with that, the abolition of preferred stockholders’ ability to elect two members to the Indianapolis-based company’s board as long as there are arrears.

All of this, Corre alleged in court papers, is a prelude to Smulyan’s plan to take the ninth-biggest U.S. radio station operator private.

“Our contention all along has just been leave us alone,” John Barrett, managing partner of New York-based Corre Partners Management LLC, which controls the plaintiff fund, said in a phone interview last week.

Barrett testified Tuesday as did Smulyan, who denied any intent to privatize the company following failed attempts to do so in 2006 and 2010.

“I’m worn out from two years ago,” the chairman and CEO said. “I just don’t want to do it. I can’t foresee a situation in which that would change.”

Smulyan owns almost 60 percent of Emmis’s common stock and controls votes for almost 67 percent of the preferred shares, meaning the votes will probably go in his favor, according to the proxy statement.

“Let’s say all requirements were satisfied,” Barker said of the dispute over whether the company properly disclosed its intent. She said there is no doubt “that Mr. Barrett and his group were victimized” when they failed to sell their shares to Emmis and Smulyan.

“They were left holding an empty bag,” she said.

While Emmis attorney Richard Kempf today told the judge the company would be harmed by being unable to improve its financial condition, investor lawyer Wayne Turner asked her to prevent the company from taking any action until after a trial on his clients’ claims.

ADVERTISEMENT

  • Public vs private
    Sounds like getting involved with Wall Street is like joining the mafia. Neither will let you out once you join.

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. In my opinion the estridge companies are crooks. They filed bankruptcy on their 'track housing' side of the business two weeks before they closed on one of my clients' homes. When my client first interviewed Estridge as a builder 6 months before, they specifically ASKED about the solvency of their business, knowing that some builders were struggling. Estridge truly misrepresented their financial situation at that time. I suppose I am more unhappy with the whole system than I am with the builder because what the heck==you can file bankruptcy on 'track homes' but still keep building and make money off of 'custom built' homes??? How ridiculous! They are all homes. How can a company be allowed to bilk thousands of dollars from their subcontractors but still be allowed to build houses?? they should have been made to pay back all their unpaid contractors before being allowed to profit from building any more houses! This alone makes them and the system crooks in my eyes. I would never build an estridge home and I would not recommend for my clients either. If they were truly 'bankrupt' how could they afford to keep building homes anyway??? The whole system needs fixed.

  2. I live a couple blocks east of the Angie's campus and my house is assessed for ~$160,000. If I could get that amount, let alone $384,000 (a 140% bonus), I'd sell in a minute. Either Angie's stockholders just got fleeced, or Angie's is getting about a 58% discount on their property taxes, if these properties are actually worth what they paid Mr. Oesterle for them. Which do you think is the case?

  3. Perhaps the IMA board is really to blame! They agreed to hire Charles. They can't seemingly find donors among themselves, or bring in new blood that will support the museums operating budget with an expanded museum and money to provide curators with something to do (ie buy art). The headlines of disarray at the museum and mass firings are hurting the reputation of the museum for some time to come. If people on the board had misgivings, perhaps they shpuld have more forcefully opposed efforts that they have seemingly been unable to fund, like expansion and the costs it has created!

  4. See, I told u Indyman and Dipsicle....this 8 days is overkill. It's barely worth a weekend....great job Tony George! Your dream has been fulfilled....he fans want the I r l back. Thats how good it was.....and that sucked.

  5. I have been in training for a short time now but right off I can see that safety and quality are the number one issues, my experience as of late has been a positive one, the employees along with Jeff the plant manager and the operation supervisor as well as the engineers are a highly motivated group of people, what an asset for the area to have and for company's in need of a quality metal products.

ADVERTISEMENT