It looks like a resounding defeat on paper. None of Bill Ackman's five director candidates were elected, despite support from RiskMetrics. Fortune notes that the percentage of votes in favor of Ackman's candidates ranged from the high single digits to the low 20s. This may strike some as a blow to activist hedge funds beyond just Pershing Square Capital Management. But I think we need a parsing of the data. It would be interesting to know what the numbers would have been if the broker vote were excluded.

As you know, most brokers will vote with management when shareholders do not specify how to vote, which is often the case. The SEC seems bent on changing the rules to prevent this. Ackman also suggested that shareholders ought to be able to vote anonymously and are disadvantaged by the lack of a universal ballot. The other interpretation is that Ackman's quest smacked of short-term desperation and were not in the best interests of shareholders. What do you think? 

For more:
- here's the article

Related Articles:
Bill Ackman vs. Target, a bruising round to come
William Ackman not giving up on Target
Ackman tries a new tack
Activist hedge fund managers continue to suffer?