jeffhergert The STB did deny the CN's application for a voting trust as incomplete. The denial does allow CN to refile another application. Jeff
The STB did deny the CN's application for a voting trust as incomplete. The denial does allow CN to refile another application.
Jeff
I am aware of that, I am talking about the refiled application which is complete.
SD70Dude Did CP put their proposal to a shareholder vote before publicly announcing their merger agreement?
Did CP put their proposal to a shareholder vote before publicly announcing their merger agreement?
I am going to make a prediction here, that the STB will deny the use of a Voting Trust to CN. My reasoning is as follows. Granting a Voting Trust will put both CN and the STB in a box, CN would be crippled if the STB were to deny the acquisition after granting the Voting Trust because I don't believe that CN would be able to sell KCS for anywhere near what they paid for it. I would expect CP to come back with an offer closer to $20 billion USD knowing that CN has to sell. The STB would be constrained not wanting to cripple CN with serious debt that they would have a difficult time servicing, perhaps to the point of deferring maintenance on their own properties. If the Voting Trust is denied CN has to sweeten its offer by $1 billion USD, but I don't think this would sway the STB either way, CN willing did that to itself.
beaulieu What I find interesting is that CN shareholders will not have a vote on this acquisition/merger. Mr. Pace and Mr Ruest are spending $33 billion USD of the shareholder's equity and they won't have a say.
What I find interesting is that CN shareholders will not have a vote on this acquisition/merger. Mr. Pace and Mr Ruest are spending $33 billion USD of the shareholder's equity and they won't have a say.
It is also worth noting that TCI is CP's largest shareholder, at least as of last fall.
https://www.freightwaves.com/news/tci-fund-management-seeks-climate-action-from-cp-and-cn
Greetings from Alberta
-an Articulate Malcontent
UlrichTCI, to their credit, are activist..inspite of their 3% or whatever it is they're voicing legitimate concerns on behalf of all of us. That's not a bad thing..
It's too bad they didn't have concern for others when they scorched the earth in their past dealings.
York1 John
Legally no one can own that much of CN.
Bill Ackman and Paul Hilal both managed to effectively take over their respective railways with a lower ownership stake than Gates has in CN.
Both are still minority shareholders.. can't do much more than jump up and down until you own 51%. TCI, to their credit, are activist..inspite of their 3% or whatever it is they're voicing legitimate concerns on behalf of all of us. That's not a bad thing..
Even after the divorce settlement, Bill still owns far more CN shares than Melinda. In fact, he is CN's largest shareholder.
https://financialpost.com/news/melinda-gates-now-among-largest-cn-shareholders-after-marital-split-stock-transfer
cv_acr Um, why? It's 2%. That's hardly an influential voting stake. ....... Another 75% or so (WAG) is probably owned by various trusts, funds, and individual investors that know as much or less as well...
Another 75% or so (WAG) is probably owned by various trusts, funds, and individual investors that know as much or less as well...
York1 BaltACD In the world of vulture capitalism - 2% is not a inconsequental ownership position. With the right leverages and proxies that 2% stake can be worked to attain control. Very few individual stockholders of companies as large as CN have their holdings stated in whole percentage points. Leaving out the words, "vulture capitalism", I agree. It is important to know how someone who owns 2% of a company's stock feels about certain issues. That 2% may represent a huge voting swing on some decisions.
BaltACD In the world of vulture capitalism - 2% is not a inconsequental ownership position. With the right leverages and proxies that 2% stake can be worked to attain control. Very few individual stockholders of companies as large as CN have their holdings stated in whole percentage points.
Leaving out the words, "vulture capitalism", I agree.
It is important to know how someone who owns 2% of a company's stock feels about certain issues. That 2% may represent a huge voting swing on some decisions.
When The Childrens Fund began their 'take over' attempt of CSX I believe they owned about 3% but with shmoozing and other leverage among the Institutional owners of stock they attained control until the bottom fell out of the financial markets in 2007-2008 and they had to liquidate their holdings in CSX and a number of other venture to cover their direct financial obligations.
TCF was a vulture looking for a 'free meal'.
Never too old to have a happy childhood!
BaltACDIn the world of vulture capitalism - 2% is not a inconsequental ownership position. With the right leverages and proxies that 2% stake can be worked to attain control. Very few individual stockholders of companies as large as CN have their holdings stated in whole percentage points.
cv_acr JPS1 she will have approximately 2 percent of CN’s outstanding shares. How much Melinda knows or cares about CN or railroads in general is problematic. My guess is not much! Um, why? It's 2%. That's hardly an influential voting stake. Does it matter whether anyone owning 2% of a company really knows much about the company other than it makes money? Another 75% or so (WAG) is probably owned by various trusts, funds, and individual investors that know as much or less as well...
JPS1 she will have approximately 2 percent of CN’s outstanding shares. How much Melinda knows or cares about CN or railroads in general is problematic. My guess is not much!
she will have approximately 2 percent of CN’s outstanding shares.
Um, why? It's 2%. That's hardly an influential voting stake. Does it matter whether anyone owning 2% of a company really knows much about the company other than it makes money?
In the world of vulture capitalism - 2% is not a inconsequental ownership position. With the right leverages and proxies that 2% stake can be worked to attain control. Very few individual stockholders of companies as large as CN have their holdings stated in whole percentage points.
Chris van der Heide
My Algoma Central Railway Modeling Blog
BaltACD Is anyone following up with Melinda Gates on how she feels about CN - KCS now that she is a significant shareholder in CN?
Is anyone following up with Melinda Gates on how she feels about CN - KCS now that she is a significant shareholder in CN?
https://www.usatoday.com/story/money/2021/05/07/melinda-gates-billionaire-after-stock-transfer-bill-gates/4986298001/
Greasemonkey SD70Dude Still doesn't explain why the interchange point for coal trains was moved to Kamloops from Vancouver. The two railways have interchanged whole trains in Vancouver for decades. No reason the coal trains couldn't be operated this way. Wouldn't make much sense to route trains to Vancouver to interchange when one of the ports is in Prince Rupert. Couple that with the fact that CN gave them a better price to move them from Kamloops to the coast, and most will be able to see why the switch occurred. It's about money, not getting away from CP.
SD70Dude Still doesn't explain why the interchange point for coal trains was moved to Kamloops from Vancouver. The two railways have interchanged whole trains in Vancouver for decades. No reason the coal trains couldn't be operated this way.
Still doesn't explain why the interchange point for coal trains was moved to Kamloops from Vancouver.
The two railways have interchanged whole trains in Vancouver for decades. No reason the coal trains couldn't be operated this way.
Wouldn't make much sense to route trains to Vancouver to interchange when one of the ports is in Prince Rupert. Couple that with the fact that CN gave them a better price to move them from Kamloops to the coast, and most will be able to see why the switch occurred. It's about money, not getting away from CP.
Teck has been sending some southeastern B.C. trains to Prince Rupert for at least several years, this change involving the Vancouver-bound trains is far more recent. Their Prince Rupert trains used to keep all 4 CP units for the whole run, now they usually run with CN power and only three units.
The port Teck owns (Neptune terminals) is in north Vancouver, not Prince Rupert.
Most of I-11 would be built over existing US 93 which has already sections of divided highway
azrail If we ever get a rail line constructed between Las Vegas and Phoenix, UP between Nogales and Eastport can become a more direct transit routing. Which is geologically, monetarily, and environmentally impossible.
If we ever get a rail line constructed between Las Vegas and Phoenix, UP between Nogales and Eastport can become a more direct transit routing.
Which is geologically, monetarily, and environmentally impossible.
It's ONLY impossible simply because it happens to be a railroad. If it were a highway it would be a whole 'nother ball of wax. Plans are to build I-11 betweem Vegas and Phoenix. I think they've already built the bridge over the gorge on the Colorado River.
Greasemonkey SD70Dude And yet Teck still jumped at the first opportunity to route their coal trains off CP. Well, actually, what Teck jumped at was the opportunity to ship from different port facilities, one of which they own. Both of which are served by CN.
SD70Dude And yet Teck still jumped at the first opportunity to route their coal trains off CP.
And yet Teck still jumped at the first opportunity to route their coal trains off CP.
Well, actually, what Teck jumped at was the opportunity to ship from different port facilities, one of which they own. Both of which are served by CN.
BaltACD, right on!!! :-D
I'll add just this: KCS annual stockholder's meeting is May 20. Expect directed mailings and propaganda, leading up to what I expect to be reconsideration of the CP arrangement and, at some point, a proxy fight over the deal.
But speculation before then.
Years ago I kicked myself for not buying Wisconsin Central sooner when it was still an independant, publicly traded company. I waited too long then the CNR stepped it to buy it and I was too late !
So I looked around and the only other takeover target I could see was KCS. So, I bought 100 shares of that. That was in the early 2000s, around 2001 or 2002, I think.
So, I was actually thinking that this would've happened much sooner that it has. But that's O.K. I bought my shares at $16. I think the CNR is now offering over $300. In the end, that's quite a run up, don't you think?
kgbw49Based on what is being publicized in Newswire and other trade press, it appears CP is the more concerned party. There is no guarantee of anything of course, with the STB, but the $50 per share, $4+ billion higher offer of CN is a big, big difference. Using a WWII naval metaphor CP showed up for the battle with a heavy cruiser and CN showed up with a battleship.
The STB will be the aircraft carrier with air wings that determine the winner.
Based on what is being publicized in Newswire and other trade press, it appears CP is the more concerned party. There is no guarantee of anything of course, with the STB, but the $50 per share, $4+ billion higher offer of CN is a big, big difference. Using a WWII naval metaphor CP showed up for the battle with a heavy cruiser and CN showed up with a battleship.
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.