A sharply fought shareholder contest like the one that came to a head Friday at Buffalo Wild Wings is so rare it can be difficult to understand what's going on. Attending the annual shareholder meeting in person, it turned out, didn't help.
Upon walking out there were only questions, aside from the news that longtime CEO Sally Smith would soon retire. Only on the drive back to downtown Minneapolis, after a few minutes to think, did an understanding of what just happened form.
Smith didn't get treated very well, that's what happened. At a minimum, she deserved a round of applause, and maybe with the shareholders rising to their feet.
Smith is listed as 59 years old in the proxy statement and has worked her whole adult life, so she's earned a chance to put her feet up. She got to Buffalo Wild Wings in 1994 and was put in charge as CEO in 1996, a year in which it had less than $15 million in revenue. As the official bio in the company's proxy statement put it, as blandly as such things get, "Ms. Smith has led our company through significant growth and success."
It's now a $2 billion company. Investors who had the luck or good sense to put money into the initial public offering nearly 14 years ago would have earned a return approaching 1,700 percent, based on today's price.
The activist investor who pushed an alternative slate of directors this year is Mick McGuire of Marcato Capital Management, a hedge fund manager. It's hard to imagine a person more unlike Smith. His firm is based in downtown San Francisco, and one of its main funds listed the Cayman Islands under its "place of organization."
The relationship between Marcato and Buffalo Wild Wings started with a routine e-mail exchange with Buffalo Wild Wings' investor relations director a little over a year ago. By the summer the two sides were talking regularly, although maybe a better word is arguing.
A shareholder contest in some ways resembles an election for governor, with candidates tossing all sorts of claims at each other. The core of the Marcato argument, however, was its insistence that the company "refranchise" most of its company-owned restaurants. The proceeds from the sales to franchisees could be returned to shareholders.