From Bloomberg: "Shareholders were up in arms over the plan, which took the company from a high-growth prison operator to a slow-growth but high dividend paying real estate company. They were also upset that in order for the combined company to maintain its special REIT tax status, management of the prisons would be given to a closely held company owned by*** Crants and other senior management****
1) The shareholders weren't up in arms enough to vote no; a large majority of the shareholders voted yes. Sure some voted no, but to make sweeping comments based on minority views is bad journalism. Without the yes votes, there would have been no merger.
2) Doc owns ZERO of OPCO. I don't know why Litt, cleo & Bloomberg keep getting this wrong. Sure it fits their (at least Litt and Cleo's) longstanding view that Doc did the deal to line his pockets, but IT IS WRONG!!!
Of course, none of these facts mean that the merger was a good idea or that Doc is brilliant and a good guy. I just wish people who disseminate public information would check the facts.