Is Miyoko's Creamery Preparing to Sell?
Bloomberg reports original shareholder unhappy with plan
Last month, Deena Shanker at Bloomberg reported that Miyoko’s Creamery is “raising $12 million and preparing for a potential sale of the business”.
This news comes on the heals of the announced plant closure in Petaluma, California.
A letter from the CEO to current shareholders explained the company is executing a “financial stabilization plan” in an attempt to place itself “on a path to profitability and open doors to a range of strategic alternatives, including selling the business”.
According to Bloomberg:
The CEO noted the recent closing of the company’s Petaluma manufacturing plant and said more opportunities to control costs lay ahead. “We also plan to continue discussions with potential strategic partners that could result in new partnerships or the sale of the business,” she wrote. “This plan requires an immediate injection of capital into the business.”
The letter urged all current shareholders to invest more money, warning that those who didn’t would see their stock values lowered and rights diminished:
Those who don’t will see their current stock holdings downgraded, the letter says, “without certain liquidation preference and voting rights” that they currently have.
Billy Bramblett (founder of Wildwood Natural Foods) was Miyoko’s first COO and is a former board member and early shareholder in the company. He told Bloomberg he’s not happy with this development:
“I believe that directors of a corporation have a fiduciary duty to protect the value of the shares and investment of those shareholders whose class(es) of stock they represent, and certainly in relation to what may be their own holding.”
Translation: Board members should protect all shareholders’ interests.
Stay tuned.
" Those who don’t will see their current stock holdings downgraded, the letter says, 'without certain liquidation preference and voting rights' that they currently have. "
Billy Bramblett and other early shareholders are rightfully upset. I don't know how common such a maneuver is, but this sounds like theft and/or extortion.
I thought that a properly run business could get credit from a bank, rather than demanding its own shareholders donate more money?