Greenmail


Also found in: Dictionary, Thesaurus, Financial, Encyclopedia, Wikipedia.
Related to Greenmail: poison pill

Greenmail

A corporation's attempt to stop a takeover bid by paying a price above market value for stock held by the aggressor.

Greenmail is a practice in corporate Mergers and Acquisitions. Like blackmail, the concept after which it is named, greenmail is money paid to an aggressor to stop an act of aggression. In the case of greenmail, the aggressor is an investor attempting to take over a corporation by buying up a majority of its stock, and the money is paid to stop the takeover. The corporation under attack pays an inflated price to buy stock from the aggressor, known popularly as a corporate raider. After the greenmail payment, the takeover attempt is halted. The raider is richer; the corporation is poorer but retains control. During a great wave of corporate mergers in the 1980s, the practice of paying greenmail became controversial. Critics viewed it as harmful to U.S. business interests. Portraying the transaction as little more than a bribe, they argued that some corporate raiders began takeover bids simply to earn profits through greenmail. Corporate shareholders also protested the practice. By the mid-1990s, state legislatures had taken the lead in opposing greenmail through legislation.

The increase in corporate mergers in the 1980s made the hostile corporate takeover a familiar event. Before the decade's multi-billion-dollar takeovers, corporate mergers usually involved a mutual agreement. In contrast, hostile takeovers ignore the target corporation's management. One form of hostile takeover involves stock. Whoever owns the most stock controls the corporation. Instead of entering negotiations with management, corporate raiders go to the corporation's stockholders with offers to buy their stock. Not only the means but also the goals of these acquisitions differ from those of earlier acquisitions. Prior to the 1980s, mergers generally occurred when larger interests bought up smaller competitors in similar industries, with an eye toward dominating a particular market. In hostile takeovers, corporate raiders often intend to break up and sell a corporation after the takeover is complete. Their interest commonly lies in earning enormous short-term profits from selling a company's assets, motivating corporations to try to protect themselves against takeovers.

Greenmail is one of an array of strategies, ranging from changing corporate bylaws to acquiring debt that makes the corporation a less attractive target, used to deter raiders. It is an expensive alternative, as was illustrated when investor Saul P. Steinberg attempted to take over the Disney Corporation in 1984. Steinberg was known for his concerted efforts in the takeover field, having previously targeted Chemical Bank and Quaker State. In March 1984, his purchase of 6.3 percent of Disney's stock triggered concern at the corporation that a takeover was in progress. Disney management quickly announced an approximately $390 million acquisition of its own that would make the company less attractive. After this maneuver failed, Disney's directors ultimately bought Steinberg's stock to stop the takeover. Steinberg earned a profit of about $60 million.

The Disney case illustrates a major criticism of greenmail: other stockholders blame corporate directors for showing undue favoritism to corporate raiders, who are paid exorbitant sums for stock whereas the stockholders are not. This criticism formed the basis of a lawsuit that produced one of the few court decisions condemning greenmail outright. In 1984, Disney stockholders sued the corporation's directors as well as Steinberg and his fellow investors, seeking to recover the amount paid as greenmail. They won an Injunction from the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, which placed Steinberg's profits from the sale in a trust. The verdict was upheld on appeal (Heckmann v. Ahmanson, 168 Cal. App. 3d 119, 214 Cal. Rptr. 177 [Cal. Ct. App. 1985]). In ordering the profits put in a trust, the court sought "to prevent unjust enrichment" that would otherwise "reward [Steinberg] for his wrongdoing." In 1989, Steinberg settled with the plaintiffs for approximately $21.1 million.

Although greenmail's heyday was in the 1980s, it continued to be controversial in the 1990s. Criticism of greenmail grew out of a larger condemnation of the way in which corporate raiders had rewritten the rules of mergers and acquisitions in an avaricious, shortsighted manner. Some critics viewed this trend harshly. In his 1995 work on the subject, Professor David C. Bayne portrayed greenmail as a pact involving Embezzlement by corporate directors and blackmail by corporate raiders. Bayne said greenmail is "nothing other than a recondite species of the broader genus Corporate Bribery, and as such is intrinsically illegitimate." States increasingly viewed greenmail in the same light. Most states had enacted antitakeover laws, and several had anti-greenmail provisions. The Ohio and Pennsylvania laws were among the toughest, requiring raiders to return greenmail profits to the target corporation (Ohio Rev. Code Ann. § 1707.043 [Anderson Supp. 1990]; 15 Pa. Cons. Stat. Ann. §§ 2571–2576 [Purdon Supp. 1991]). Some people doubt the constitutionality of these laws, and the issue of greenmail remains far from settled.

Further readings

Bayne, David Cowan. 2001. "Traffic in Corporate Control—Greenmail: Damages and the Disposition of the Bribe." University of Detroit Mercy Law Review 78 (summer): 617–39.

——. 1995. "Traffic in Corporate Control—Greenmail: The Definition of the Reverse Premium-Bribe." University of Dayton Law Review 20 (spring).

Crain, Mark E. 1991. "Disgorgement of Greenmail Profits: Examining a New Weapon in State Anti-Takeover Arsenals." Houston Law Review 28 (July).

"Securities and Exchanges: Greenmail." 1991. United States Law Week 60 (November 5).

References in periodicals archive ?
(108) Greenmail generally refers to a target corporation buying back a potential acquirer's shares at a premium in exchange for the potential acquirer agreeing not to own any target shares for a period of time.
Greenmail "refers to payments made by the target company to buy back shares owned by a potential acquirer at a premium over their fair market value.
Gaughan in his 1996 book Mergers, Acquisitions and Corporate Restructurings presents two opposing views of the hostile takeover: the "management entrenchment hypothesis" and the "stockholder interests' hypothesis." According to Gaughan, when managers of a corporation seek to maintain their position by actions such as greenmail or the institution of other active and preventative corporate defenses, stockholders experience reduced wealth when management takes actions to deter attempts to take control of the corporation.
(162) In this respect, some hedge funds ape the greenmail tactics of the 1980s; the difference is that greenmail is today difficult to extract from wary directors, or even illegal under state law.
Such statutes explicitly authorized the poison pill, the scorched earth defense, the 'Pac-Man' defense, the white knight defense, the crown jewel defense and the greenmail defense.
- En 1978 Julio Mario ataco a sus antiguos aliados, el denominado Grupo Empresarial Antioqueno, cuando adquirio dos millones de acciones de Suramericana, que compro por intermedio de las empresas Dupesa y Cervunion, utilizando la estrategia de greenmail para revenderlas a los industriales "paisas" y obtener asi de los antioquenos las acciones que poseian en Bavaria y Cervunion por las acciones que el tenia en Suramericana (45).
I believe they call it greenmail on Wall Street -- that is, the act of buying up enough company stock and cause it enough pain that the controlling interests will just pay to make them go away.
greenmail. "Greenmail" refers to a corporate repurchase, at a
En el marco de la etica financiera se estudian las particularidades de dos practicas en las decisiones de inversion y financiamiento: el greenmail y el tunneling.
Some types of excise taxes have separate forms, such as the heavy highway vehicle use tax (Form 290), gas guzzler tax (Form 6197), and excise tax on greenmail (Form 8725).
I hope this proposed act of "greenmail" (using the environment as an excuse to extort more money out of citizens) meets the same resistance as the poll tax did.