When I was still a software developer, I wrote an application to automate what you are just seeing the tip of for a law firm that handles literally hundreds of corporations of all types spread out over several states. Old, respectable firm.
This is routine, intended to keep corporations “agile”, yes, but also to keep the corporations legally up to date and current. My application automated virtually all of it, constructing various documents, plugging in the names, positions, etc., of the officers/directors/shareholders, the corporations, addresses for same and tailoring the documents to the type of corporation, the state it operated in, blah, blah, blah.
The end result was that the documents were stuffed and mailed to the clients, who then signed and returned them to the law firm. Bingo, bango, done. From that point, the law firm handled most things such as annual reports filed with the state (which we later converted from paper filings to fully electronic for many of them), changes in assets, stock transactions and what ever else was delegated to the lawyers.
So, anyway, as I said, this is routine. It is intended to facilitate the process of keeping everything in order and legal. I was not an investor, but I am familiar with the purpose and function by virtue of having automated it from a process involving countless lawyers and hundreds of hours of work often afflicted with clerical errors to a couple of days of envelope stuffing and data entry managed by a few paralegals. I would say go for it.
Thanks for your reply!
I can understand it for a closely held company. But a large multinational public company held by millions of investors?
It sounds like a way for activists to act in between annual meetings, striking quickly with feel-good proposals without the expense of calling a special meeting.