Chuck Nathan advises global clients on M&A, financial transactions, governance, Board issues and shareholder matters at RLM Finsbury, a leading global strategic communications firm.
Prior to joining RLM Finsbury, Nathan was partner at Latham & Watkins, a large international law firm where in his capacity as Global Co-Chair of the firm’s M&A practice he represented companies and financial advisors in many significant, high-profile mergers and acquisitions, including Roche’s acquisition of the public’s minority stake in Genentech, InBev’s acquisition of Anheuser-Busch, and LiveNation’s merger with Ticketmaster Entertainment.
Nathan has been named by the National Association of Corporate Directors as one of the 100 most influential corporate governance professionals for two consecutive years. He is currently serving as a member of a Conference Board Governance Center Advisory Board on Shareholder Engagement, and as a member of a task force dealing with Say on Pay that has been created by the Conference Board Governance Center, the American Society of Corporate Secretaries and Governance Professionals and the Center on Executive Compensation.
Nathan is the author of many articles on M&A and corporate governance topics, is a frequent panelist at M&A and corporate governance seminars and programs, teaches M&A at Yale Law School, and has chaired a number of bar association committees. Nathan received his B.A. from The Johns Hopkins University and his J.D. from Yale Law School, where he graduated summa cum laude.
Read recent articles and blog posts authored by or about Chuck Nathan:
· Conference Board, Debunking Myths About Activist Investors
· Conference Board, Myths and Realities of Say on Pay Engagement
· “Nathan the sensible” by Hoffer Kaback, Directors and Boards
· A 12-Step Program to Truly Good Corporate Governance
· Corporate Governance Activism: Here To Stay?
· “Say on Pay 2011: Proxy Advisors on Course for Hegemony”
· Future of Institutional Share Voting Revisited: A Fourth Paradigm
· Proxy Advisory Business: Apotheosis or Apogee?
· The Future of Institutional Share Voting: Three Paradigms
· The Parallel Universes of Institutional Investing and Institutional Voting
Part two in a discussion about “short-termism” and “long-termism” in the corporate and investment worlds. Management and Boards generally doubt that institutional investors approach the debate neutrally, with the proxy voting process being weighted in investors’ favor. Greater engagement is the only solution to combat this bias, but it may only be feasible for the largest companies.
Read more
“The debate over “short-termism” versus “long-termism” is raging in the corporate and investment world and is spilling over even into the 2016 Presidential campaigns. Ironically, the heat of the debate mirrors the confusion over what the debate is or should be about: Duration? Quarterly performance? Do quick gains inherently create less value than investing in big picture growth?
Read more
In recent years, restraints have been lifted somewhat with regard to corporate political spending, but, in response to increased pressure from the public, lobbying and political spending disclosure may very well be making a comeback. This being the case, organizations should have a good understanding of how disclosure should be properly and strategically handled.
Read more
In an effort to win over a majority of Allergan shareholders, both the parties angling for a takeover and the the company itself are mounting aggressive campaigns to make their cases. Due to some shady goings-on around the recent stock buy-up, Allergen is facing some considerable communications challenges, not the least of which is a sullied reputation among investors.
Read more
The principal corporate governance campaigns of the past decade have reached a plateau in terms of both investor commitment and implementation. These issues are not by any means going away.
Read more
