By Sharon Terlep
Over the years when Procter & Gamble Co. wasn't able to sell
more Tide or Pampers, the company could at least point to one clear
success: a sweeping, $10 billion cost-cutting plan executed ahead
of schedule.
Now that victory is murky.
Activist investor Nelson Peltz on Monday said he would seek a
single board seat in a shareholder vote at the company's annual
meeting, making P&G the largest company to ever face a proxy
fight.
Mr. Peltz's Trian Management Fund argues that P&G failed to
capitalize on a five-year savings plan that shrank the company by
tens of thousands of employees, more than a dozen factories and
hundreds of brands. Trian casts doubt on whether a second,
five-year, $10-billion savings plan announced by P&G last year
will produce results.
On Monday, P&G began mounting its defense, first pointing to
a series of metrics outlining the company's improved profit margin,
leaner structure and healthy cash generation.
"Over the past two years, P&G has accomplished the most
significant portfolio transformation in its history," the company
said. "Today, P&G is a leaner, more agile, more accountable and
more efficient organization."
The company also criticized Trian, arguing the hedge fund "has
not provided any new or actionable ideas to drive additional value
for P&G shareholders beyond the continued successful execution
of the strategic plan that is in place."
Trian, in meetings with P&G CEO David Taylor and other
managers, offered no specific suggestions on how the company could
better optimize cost savings, and was generally complimentary,
according to people familiar with the situation. P&G ultimately
saw no value in adding Mr. Peltz to the board, they said.
The activist isn't saying explicitly it wants more costs cut
than the $10 billion P&G has targeted, and isn't giving
specifics on how it would tackle the costs. But Trian is concerned
about whether the goal will be hit.
Trian says years of P&G's underperformance in revenue and
the stock market have raised questions about why the board should
be given another year to execute without Mr. Peltz in the
boardroom.
Central to Trian's case is the fate of roughly $3 billion of the
$10 billion in P&G's previous cost reductions. P&G said the
other $7 billion in savings were lost to currency fluctuations,
which Trian doesn't dispute.
Trian argues, however, that if P&G were operating
efficiently, the $3 billion would have shown up in increased sales
and profit growth, both of which have been stalled for years.
Trian is concerned the latest cost-cutting initiative "could be
as ineffective as the 2012 productivity program in driving sales
growth, earnings growth and shareholder creation," Trian said in a
regulatory filing Monday.
P&G shares were little changed Monday, rising less than 1%
to $87.67 in afternoon trading. The stock has gained 2% in the last
12 months, compared with a 14% return in the S&P 500.
Gary Bradshaw, a fund manager at Hodges Fund, said he would
support Mr. Peltz for the board. "I don't know he can change things
overnight but, now, earnings aren't growing and that's what will
eventually push the stock higher," said Mr. Bradshaw, whose fund
has about 150,000 P&G shares.
In a presentation to investors last month, P&G finance chief
Jon Moeller said cost-cutting alone won't be enough to turn around
years of sluggish sales. To drive faster revenue growth, the
Cincinnati-based giant also needs to reinvest savings to improve
product formulations and packaging, sales coverage and advertising,
among other areas.
Stagnation remains a challenge even as P&G is a dramatically
different company today than five years ago. It has sold hundreds
of brands and the bulk of its beauty business, including brands
such as Clairol and Cover Girl, to beauty-product maker Coty
Inc.
In June 2016, the company revealed plans for the second round of
cost cutting. P&G took heat from Wall Street after initially
unveiling the plan with scant details on where the savings would
come from. The biggest reductions will be in cost-of-goods sold,
with $4.5 billion coming from materials, $1.5 billion in
manufacturing expense and $1 billion in transportation and
warehousing savings.
Another $3.5 billion would come from cuts to marketing and trade
spending.
Trian often focuses on cost structures at sprawling companies
and is a proponent, for instance, of the zero-based-budgeting
program that has won supporters and detractors among food
companies.
In negotiations with P&G, Trian argued that if it was given
insider information and a role in the boardroom it could help guide
Mr. Taylor and the board better, according to people familiar with
the matter.
In a similar situation, Trian pushed General Electric Co. this
year on its cost-cutting plans leading to a disclosure from GE that
it would target a spending number instead of a cost-cutting number.
Trian had argued that would ensure the costs were eliminated for
the bottom line, people familiar with the matter had said. Trian
didn't seek a board seat at GE and its longtime CEO Jeff Immelt
recently announced plans to retire.
--David Benoit contributed to this article.
Write to Sharon Terlep at sharon.terlep@wsj.com
(END) Dow Jones Newswires
July 17, 2017 14:32 ET (18:32 GMT)
Copyright (c) 2017 Dow Jones & Company, Inc.
Procter and Gamble (NYSE:PG)
Historical Stock Chart
From Mar 2024 to Apr 2024
Procter and Gamble (NYSE:PG)
Historical Stock Chart
From Apr 2023 to Apr 2024