Seemingly every publicly traded company has investors pushing environmental issues at annual stockholder meetings and stockholder ballot initiatives. However, this is taking it to another level when an investment firm caves and begins leveraging its $6.8 trillion against publicly traded companies.

quote:

BlackRock punishes 53 companies over climate inaction

Financial Times
15 July 2020

BlackRock has punished more than 50 companies from US oil major ExxonMobil to Swedish carmaker Volvo over their lack of progress on tackling global warming, six months after it warned of huge investment risks from climate change.

Larry Fink, chief executive of the $6.8tn investment house, said in January that BlackRock would get tough on groups that were too slow to take action on climate change, announcing a host of measures from dumping some coal holdings to using its votes at annual meetings to signal dissatisfaction with how businesses were dealing with global warming.

The move came after BlackRock faced repeated accusations that it had failed to take meaningful action on environmental issues, despite public declarations about the risks of global warming.

In a report released on Tuesday, the New York-based group said it had placed 244 companies “on watch” for insufficient progress on climate issues. It said it took voting action at the annual meetings of 53 companies (22 per cent) over climate issues so far this year, largely through voting against the re-elections of directors. Companies punished included German carmaker Daimler, US coalminer Peabody Energy and Fortum, the Finnish electricity company.

BlackRock said the remaining 191 companies “risk voting action in 2021 if they do not make substantial progress”.

“Our approach on climate issues, in particular, is to focus our efforts on sectors and companies where climate change poses the greatest material risk to our clients’ investments,” the group said.

BlackRock was criticised this year for failing to support several climate-change resolutions, including at Santos and Woodside Energy, the Australian oil companies. At Santos and Woodside meetings, resolutions to set targets in line with the Paris agreement, which aims to limit global temperature rises, received unprecedented support from shareholders. However, BlackRock voted against the proposals.

It also did not back a climate change resolution at JPMorgan, the US bank, which would have passed with the asset manager’s support. BlackRock has historically outsourced its decision on how to vote at some banks, including JPMorgan, because its largest shareholder was PNC, a bank. PNC sold its stake in BlackRock in May.

In its report, BlackRock said it supported climate resolutions at several companies, including at Exxon, Chevron and Ovintiv, the energy companies.

At Woodside, BlackRock said that while it “agreed with the intention of the shareholder proposal”, it was concerned that the resolution required the company to calculate Scope 3 — or customer emissions — by 2021, a move it did not believe was appropriate in such a short timeframe.

“We expect Woodside to continue to review and set ambitious emissions reductions targets as the natural gas sector improves its ability to understand and manage Scope 3 emissions,” BlackRock added.

Dan Gocher, director of climate and environment at the Australasian Centre for Corporate Responsibility, a shareholder advocacy group that filed the resolutions at Woodside and Santos, said that while BlackRock was at odds with many investors over its lack of support for climate resolutions, its willingness to vote against directors over climate issues was good news.

“That’s an interesting use of their power. The willingness to vote against directors is something other investors aren’t willing to do,” he said.

In his January letter, Mr Fink said global warming represented a risk to markets unlike any previous crisis.

“Even if only a fraction of the projected impacts is realised, this is a much more structural, long-term crisis,” he said. “Companies, investors, and governments must prepare for a significant reallocation of capital.”

The bullshit piles up so fast, you need wings to stay above it.

quote:

Originally posted by Fenris:
The bullshit piles up so fast, you need wings to stay above it.

It does make going to up river to Cambodia to kill a renegade American Special Forces officer seem sensible.

If Blackrock wants that much influence, they should buy up majority stakes in those companies so they can exercise ownership control. Then they would really be putting their money (actually their investors' money) on the line. It's bullshit how much influence publicly traded companies cede to these big institutional investors who generally only control single digit stakes in a company.

Imagine someone saying 'we only invest in companies that paint their lobbies purple.'

These clowns are going to miss a lot of good opportunities this way. Hopefully their clients are paying attention.

Bust up BlackRock. As an investor (all be it a small one) I expect companies I invest in to maximize my stock value and dividends. I do not give one damn about pet projects or agendas. If BlackRock is actively damaging stockholder value via their BS, they should be broken up.

I predict there will be a Bad Day at Blackrock.

quote:

Originally posted by bigdeal:
Bust up BlackRock. As an investor (all be it a small one) I expect companies I invest in to maximize my stock value and dividends. I do not give one damn about pet projects or agendas. If BlackRock is actively damaging stockholder value via their BS, they should be broken up.

$6.8 trillion (from original post)... not sure how you would bust that up in less than 10 years making all investors whole. It's not like they can just "cash out". Why don't you just sell you holdings in them and call it a day? There are plenty of non SJW places to put your money.

I don’t mind this. Let the market decide whether BlackRock is right. That’s what free market capitalism is about. People being able to control the resources they own.

If BlackRock is wrong, other smart money will go in where they’re pulling out. Those other investment companies will earn more money and BlackRock investors will pull their money out of BlackRock.

https://www.newsbreak.com/news...ges%22%3A%22en%22%7D

Texas withdraws $8.5 billion from BlackRock over ESG in biggest such divestment

By Zachary Halaschak,
4 hours ago

Texas will pull some $8.5 billion in investments from BlackRock over its ESG policies, the biggest such divestment after several Republican states have moved to cut ties with firms that conservatives see as privileging liberal goals.

Texas State Board of Education Chairman Aaron Kinsey announced the move on Tuesday. A letter was sent to BlackRock the same day notifying the world’s largest money manager. The divestment was done to comply with the state’s anti-environmental, social, and governance law, which prohibits state investment in companies like BlackRock that Republicans say boycott energy companies.

“BlackRock’s dominant and persistent leadership in the ESG movement immeasurably damages our state’s oil and gas economy and the very companies that generate revenues for our [Permanent School Fund],” Kinsey said. “Texas and the PSF have worked hard to grow this fund to build Texas’s schools."

“BlackRock’s destructive approach towards the energy companies that this state and our world depend on is incompatible with our fiduciary duty to Texans,” he added.
.
.
<snip>

^^ You know what would be better than pulling all of its investments? Pull everything except 10 shares and Texas become an activist/nuisance investor. Use the left's playbook against them, and propose shareholder initiatives that are voted on at annual meeting. They could propose things like eliminate ESG metrics at Blackrock and eliminate all personnel working on ESG metrics.

When does blackrock’s day of punishment arrive?

quote:

Originally posted by ZSMICHAEL:
I predict there will be a Bad Day at Blackrock.

I predict BlackRock will create that bad day.
Everything I've heard about that company is not good.

^^^^^
When you're affiliated with George Soros, NOTHING is good.

Blackrock is de debil!

RMD

The last post I had with the Forest Service was District Ranger at Blackrock RD on the Bridger-Teton in NW Wyoming. The district is named for a creek that heads up on top of Togwotee Pass and runs down the pass until it flows into the Buffalo Fork River at the ranger station. When I retired, I ordered a special license plate “BLKRK.” I got rid of it.

quote:

Originally posted by divil:
When does blackrock’s day of punishment arrive?

Sigforumites could band together to become activist/nuisance investors in Blackrock. We could model ourselves after Engine No. 1 that resulted in ExxonMobil adding 2 board members to their board of directors. They were able to write a shareholder initiative and get it up for vote at the annual meeting, and leading up to the annual meeting they had a pretty savvy media campaign (e.g. near as I can tell never stated how many shares they owned).

We could call ourselves Engine P210. Blackrock trades for about $800 so for 10 shares we'd need to pool $8k. We'd need a Sigforumite:

attorney to help legally formalize the group.

with media experience to help craft a strategy to get our message on conservative media

with experience writing shareholder initiatives

with website design experience to create a website explaining our shareholder initiative to kill off ESG at Blackrock

spokesperson to be the face of the group for the media

---

Ego is the anesthesia that deadens the pain of stupidity

DISCLAIMER: These are the author's own personal views and do not represent the views of the author's employer.

All that I needed to know was that Soros is a major investor in BlackRock. They want to take down America.

Texas withdraws $8.5 billion from BlackRock over ESG in biggest such divestment

Link

Texas will pull some $8.5 billion in investments from BlackRock over its ESG policies, the biggest such divestment after several Republican states have moved to cut ties with firms that conservatives see as privileging liberal goals.

Texas State Board of Education Chairman Aaron Kinsey announced the move on Tuesday. A letter was sent to BlackRock the same day notifying the world’s largest money manager. The divestment was done to comply with the state’s anti-environmental, social, and governance law, which prohibits state investment in companies like BlackRock that Republicans say boycott energy companies.

“BlackRock’s dominant and persistent leadership in the ESG movement immeasurably damages our state’s oil and gas economy and the very companies that generate revenues for our [Permanent School Fund],” Kinsey said. “Texas and the PSF have worked hard to grow this fund to build Texas’s schools.”

“BlackRock’s destructive approach towards the energy companies that this state and our world depend on is incompatible with our fiduciary duty to Texans,” he added.

BlackRock, though, argues that it is helping millions of Texans and emphasized its investment in the state.

“On behalf of our clients, we’ve invested more than $300 billion in Texas-based companies, infrastructure and municipalities, including $125 billion invested in the energy sector, including $550 million [in] a joint venture with Occidental,” a spokesperson said in a statement provided to the Washington Examiner. “We recently hosted an energy summit in Houston designed to explore how to strengthen Texas’ power grid.”

ESG is a financial concept that centers on compelling social change through investment and divestment. It is a corporate model that doesn’t solely look at maximizing profit but also incorporates other elements into financial decisions — for instance, how an investment might affect fossil fuel emissions.

There has been a Republican backlash against ESG and so-called woke corporate business practices in recent years. BlackRock, in particular, has emerged as a major target, with several Republican state attorneys general and state treasurers going after the massive firm.

“No matter whether it’s called ‘stakeholder capitalism’ or ‘transition investing,’ if the intent of an asset manager is to end America’s oil and gas industry then they can expect continued pushback from conscientious public officials looking out for their constituents,” said Derek Kreifels, CEO of the State Financial Officers Foundation.

BlackRock CEO Larry Fink has emerged as one of the most prominent faces of the ESG push. For instance, in 2020, Fink’s much-anticipated annual letter focused on climate change, saying the matter was becoming a “defining factor” in BlackRock’s assessment of companies.

BlackRock argues that it merely asks companies to provide disclosures on material issues that affect their businesses so that investors can appraise risks, such as climate change, and make informed financial decisions.

The Texas law in question that gave way to Tuesday’s divestment announcement was passed in 2021 alongside a similar measure focused on the firearms industry. Proponents argue it helps protect the state’s energy industry, although critics contend it has stifled economic activity in the Lone Star State.

A recent study on behalf of the Texas Association of Business and Chamber of Commerce Foundation found that the Texas laws would result in hundreds of millions of dollars of lost economic activity over time.

The Texas divestment isn’t the first time GOP-led states have targeted BlackRock through divesting.

South Carolina, Utah, Arkansas, Missouri, Louisiana, and other states have also divested or announced planned divestments of hundreds of millions of dollars from BlackRock and Fink.

Florida’s chief financial officer announced in 2022 that the state would divest some $2 billion from BlackRock, which was the largest such state divestment from BlackRock before Tuesday’s announcement from Texas.

^^^^^^^^

Sorry, erj_pilot, nine posts above you, beat you by 2 hours.