Blackmail rules

A bit disappointing to know that someone could fall backwards blindfolded into a toxic mess and come out the winner through corporate blackmail.

Nick "Shaggy" Bolton finally showed the hand we knew he was playing all along. And no, it wasn't his famous "recapitalisation strategy". It was revealed in today's BrisConnections EGM that he was paid $4.5M by Leighton Holdings (the contractor to build, and future equity holder in, BrisConnections) to vote against the resolutions he proposed. As a result, all resolutions that could have resulted in winding up Australia's largest infrastructure project were soundly rejected.

While the outcome was not unexpected (unless you were one of the unitholders who really was hoping for the best, but now find yourself still up for the $1 instalment on your unit worth $0.001), it is rather disheartening for an idealistic capitalist to see that blackmail remains a potent way to derive returns under the guise of shareholder activism.

It would not surprise me to see the other unitholders, without the benefit of 90x return on "investment", agitating for the same payout. Somewhere, lawyers and litigation funders are salivating.