Parsad Posted December 8, 2011 Share Posted December 8, 2011 No go for Sardar as far as ISS is concerned. Cheers! http://www.marketwatch.com/story/iss-endorses-all-cracker-barrel-nominees-to-board-rejects-biglari-bid-for-board-seat-2011-12-08 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ragnarisapirate Posted December 9, 2011 Share Posted December 9, 2011 and the rebuttal: http://www.enhancecrackerbarrel.com/pdfs/shareholderletter3.pdf Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OracleofCarolina Posted December 9, 2011 Share Posted December 9, 2011 He may come off as a jerk to some folks, but he always writes great letters. First time I've ever seen "lugubrious" used in a sentence. I don't think he will win a board seat this go around , however CRBL seems to be moving in the right direction. I actually saw a tv commercial yesterday for them which I usually never see. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ragu Posted December 19, 2011 Share Posted December 19, 2011 No go for Sardar as far as ISS is concerned. They do have an extensive reach. It's a pity that the quality of their reasoning as it relates to Biglari's candidacy (they did have the good sense to recommend a NO on the proposed poison pill), based on what I've seen from CBRL's press release, is not commensurate with the size of their influence. Best, Ragu Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OracleofCarolina Posted December 20, 2011 Share Posted December 20, 2011 http://finance.yahoo.com/news/Preliminary-Results-Indicate-bw-584275981.html?x=0 no go for Biglari, but the poison pill did not pass Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Parsad Posted December 20, 2011 Author Share Posted December 20, 2011 He could easily take out much smaller targets, yet he chases after something more than twice his size, and not in any sort of vulnerable position. It was a significant miscalculation, and anyone could have told him that it was probably not worth the cost and effort. Cheers! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
onyx1 Posted December 20, 2011 Share Posted December 20, 2011 He could easily take out much smaller targets, yet he chases after something more than twice his size, and not in any sort of vulnerable position. It was a significant miscalculation, and anyone could have told him that it was probably not worth the cost and effort. Cheers! Thats what Phil Cooley was supposed to do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shalab Posted December 20, 2011 Share Posted December 20, 2011 He could easily take out much smaller targets, yet he chases after something more than twice his size, I think this was deliberate. He got lucky with SnS and look at the windfall he is reaping for himself. If he had won, it would have been even more lucrative than SnS. If he loses, it doesnt cost him much. It was an asymmetric bet and well worth the time. He tends to do one of these every year - I won't be surprised if put a tender for BRK or FRFHF one of these days. The guy doesnt lack chutzpah. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now