Only 58% of the shares outstanding were voted and of these 99% voted in the affirmative. Insiders owned about 40% and Morgan Stanley, which was SPRD's advisor owned about 7%. All 47% obviously voted yay. This means only 11% of remaining 53% of shares outstanding were voted. It's hard to believe so many institutional investors, who owned almost 50% of the shares out, didn't bother to vote.
Chill out. Only 1/3 of total shares are needed to vote in order for the vote to be valid. Here is from the Proxy Statement:
Q: What constitutes a quorum for the extraordinary general meeting?
The presence, in person or by proxy, of one or more shareholders representing at least one-third of the
outstanding Company Ordinary Shares as of the close of business in the Cayman Islands on the Record
Date for voting at the extraordinary general meeting will constitute a quorum for the extraordinary
Yes. Very unusual. However, it doesn't matter if the remaining had all voted 'no'. I think the new CEO was brought in (from BRCM if I remember correctly) to unload SPRD. In the interim he did a great job increasing its value, but I would have preferred Mediatek's incredible management, looking back.
Actually, it would have mattered greatly since two-thirds of the shares voted had to be in the affirmative for the deal to be approved. It's hard to believe: 1) only 58% voted when more than 90% were owned by insiders and institutions; 2) 99% of the votes were for the deal; 3) so few institutions apparently voted, especially when the price is so ridiculously low; and 4) the stock is down the day after such an overwhelming vote and the deal will probably close in a few days. The whole thing reeks....