Join today and have your say! It’s FREE!

Become a member today, It's free!

We will not release or resell your information to third parties without your permission.
Please Try Again
{{ error }}
By providing my email, I consent to receiving investment related electronic messages from Stockhouse.

or

Sign In

Please Try Again
{{ error }}
Password Hint : {{passwordHint}}
Forgot Password?

or

Please Try Again {{ error }}

Send my password

SUCCESS
An email was sent with password retrieval instructions. Please go to the link in the email message to retrieve your password.

Become a member today, It's free!

We will not release or resell your information to third parties without your permission.
Quote  |  Bullboard  |  News  |  Opinion  |  Profile  |  Peers  |  Filings  |  Financials  |  Options  |  Price History  |  Ratios  |  Ownership  |  Insiders  |  Valuation

Bullboard - Stock Discussion Forum Quarterhill Inc T.QTRH

Alternate Symbol(s):  QTRHF | T.QTRH.DB

Quarterhill Inc. is a Canada-based company, which is engaged in providing of tolling and enforcement solutions in the intelligent transportation system (ITS) industry. The Company is focused on the acquisition, management and growth of companies that provide integrated, tolling and mobility systems and solutions to the ITS industry as well as its adjacent markets. The Company’s solutions... see more

TSX:QTRH - Post Discussion

Quarterhill Inc > Directors' Minimum Share Ownership - Not an "empty whimper"
View:
Post by shareholders1 on Nov 22, 2021 8:26am

Directors' Minimum Share Ownership - Not an "empty whimper"

"Empty whimper" ? 

Every director should be as aligned as possible, as soon as possible.

Director Tosto holds only options, so it does not appear she has elected to take shares in lieu of cash directors fees.

She would have read the prior year's Circular before accepting a nomination and seen a minimum share ownership requirement. Or the BoD should have explained the requirement. Or is it just a loose, informal  requirement, that does not need to be explained because it is not enforced?

More than one director has failed to have the minimum $ share ownership, and it has happened more than one year. 

The fact that a few directors may have much more than the minimum is not an offset to other directors/ insufficient share ownership.
Comment by cabbieJBJ on Nov 22, 2021 9:41am
I agree in principle shareholders - but your comments on Tosca are somewhat off base.  My rule of thumb is that I will not vote for a director that has not acquired at least 50% of the requirement by year 2.  Tosca has not acquired any shares up to this poinit, she was only elected to the BoD on April 14/2021.  Shorkey, for example is in serial noncompliance and will not get my ...more  
Comment by mrmoribund on Nov 22, 2021 10:00am
So I checked the circular. The minimum ownership requirement has to be satisfied within 5 years. Tosto has now been on the board for about 6 months. Important to distinguish between: (a) the rules and; (b) various moral or practical-pragmatic assertions. By the rules Anna Tosto has 4.5 years to go. Now I'll admit that one could argue that, on some kind of moral level, or on a practical ...more  
Comment by cabbieJBJ on Nov 22, 2021 11:27am
#31 on my list mrmoribund.
Comment by shareholders1 on Nov 22, 2021 2:30pm
5 years for Directors to become somewhat aligned with shareholders is acceptable? While BoD comp is about $1m (pre expense reimbursements)? Another indicator of the quality of the BoD's decisions. Maybe Paul Hill had 5 years too? But he bought in with his own cash and became aligned when  - in Month 1 or Week 1 ? Share onership by BoD may be item #31 on some sharholders lists, but ...more  
The Market Update
{{currentVideo.title}} {{currentVideo.relativeTime}}
< Previous bulletin
Next bulletin >

At the Bell logo
A daily snapshot of everything
from market open to close.

{{currentVideo.companyName}}
{{currentVideo.intervieweeName}}{{currentVideo.intervieweeTitle}}
< Previous
Next >
Dealroom for high-potential pre-IPO opportunities