Sun, Dec 28, 2014, 12:43 AM EST - U.S. Markets closed

Recent

% | $
Quotes you view appear here for quick access.

Hecla Mining Co. Message Board

  • g_luck777 g_luck777 May 20, 2013 11:15 PM Flag

    Anyone getting calls for votes on "HL executive compensation" (item 2)?

    I have received three calls recently from a company that was hired by HL regarding the voting of my shares on item 2 "executive compensation".....i thought this matter was already resolved, but apparently a quorum was not met and the final voting for this item is due June 15th.

    Has anyone else received a similar call? Although the representative (from a company hired by HL) did not directly say that they were drumming up votes in favor of item 2.........it was clear to me that this was the objective. I find it disgusting that HL uses company money to solicit large shareholders in an attempt to persuade them to vote in favor of increased compensation or otherwise positive benefits. After I made it clear that I would vote negatively the representative seemed uninterested in my vote.

    Please reply if you have had a similar experience. Thanks.

    SortNewest  |  Oldest  |  Most Replied Expand all replies
    • HL buys back stock, pays execs. in stock bonuses or like their miners pays bonuses based on silver profits. i'd go with either one.

      Sentiment: Hold

    • Yes, I got the call too, been expecting a push for the higher exec. pay. I voted to go along with the Board of Directors. I figure HL is not alone to have suffered during recent PM downturn. Green Creek was a good acquisition, Aurizon was too. Not a fan of Baker's lack of rah rah, but what would happen to stock right now if he walked???

    • Yep - I own more than 25K shares, and yes, they called me too.

      I've owned HL over 4 years now, and have NEVER gotten a call before, asking
      me to vote.

      I'm concluding this was all about executive comp, and I think they are compensated fairly as is, so no to bumping exec comp.

      B

    • anyway all shareholders if there are any should be voting no to the pay packages

    • Who yous kidding??? HL exactyoutives ain't kulling nobudy

      Sentiment: Hold

      • 1 Reply to blieviam
      • "Who yous kidding??? HL exactyoutives ain't kulling nobudy"

        - I didn't say that HL executives were making calls....I said that a third party company was hired to call shareholders. They have been persistent.......I have received three calls thus far from the same company. I told the first caller that i had voted my shares online via proxy-vote. Callers 2 & 3 called to "follow up" and claimed that my votes had not registered and asked if I had a proxy vote confirmation.....as I was looking up the confirmation number during the call; caller #3 went into a spiel asking if i understood item 2 vote and further stated than many people were confused about item #2 and that it wasn't actually about "executive compensation". etc. etc. It was clear to me that they were drumming up votes in favor of item #2. I found it repulsive that company money was spent on soliciting shareholder votes in an apparent attempt to approve increased benefits/compensation.

    • Executive compensation has to be not just "voted" on, it requires a higher percentage of shareholders holding outstanding shares to "participate", to make the vote "legal".......ie, a "No" vote is the same thing as a "Yes" vote because it raises the number of "voters" to the percentage required to make the minimum requirements for compensation changes.

      If you hold less than, say 25K shares, why would they be sending out the goon-squad to get you to vote? The company is owned by a select few funds, but these are basically counted as "One" vote each......so they go after the small retail holders just to get them to vote......"Yes or No" is a single vote....but even if you vote "No", all it does is raise the percentage of eligible voters to the required percentage level......which in this case is a "Yes" vote in disguise.

      Not very ethical, but there it is.

      My suggestion------do NOTHING about this issue. DO NOT VOTE ANYTHING. Leave the boxes (No, Yes or Abstain) empty.......otherwise it will pass, as all they are looking for is "high enough participation level".

      Read the fine print......it's there, but not stated in a way that correctly informs the voters as to what is really going on.

      • 1 Reply to nsxt2003
      • it requires a higher percentage of shareholders holding outstanding shares to "participate", to make the vote "legal".......ie, a "No" vote is the same thing as a "Yes" vote because it raises the number of "voters" to the percentage required to make the minimum requirements for compensation changes."

        - Interesting logic.....would seem to me that withholding votes would only result in not reaching a quorum which would call for an additional extension until a quorum could be reached.

        "If you hold less than, say 25K shares, why would they be sending out the goon-squad to get you to vote?"

        - I hold significantly more.

    • three of my bensonhurts uncles think that the hl execs are overpaid . . . . .

 
HL
2.86+0.09(+3.25%)Dec 26 4:01 PMEST

Trending Tickers

i
Trending Tickers features significant U.S. stocks showing the most dramatic increase in user interest in Yahoo Finance in the previous hour over historic norms. The list is limited to those equities which trade at least 100,000 shares on an average day and have a market cap of more than $300 million.
Prothena Corporation plc
NASDAQFri, Dec 26, 2014 4:00 PM EST
Rice Energy Inc.
NYSEFri, Dec 26, 2014 4:02 PM EST