Cranberry Stressline

Archives

Feb. 8 to Feb. 14, 2000

 

Editorial

Ocean Spray Proxy fight gets down and dirty:
Three nominees for BOD are targets of blatant innuendo

2/12/00 - A  letter dated Feb. 9th which is being mailed to grower-owners of the Ocean Spray cooperative (1), in advance of the Feb. 21-23 annual meeting, is accusing by implication, several area nominees of not being open-minded and loyal. The letter, signed by twelve grower-owners, implies, in bold type and capital letters, that these nominees do not have the "highest possible integrity" and that they have not "demonstrated a willingness to put the best interests of the co-op ahead of their personal agendas."   They go on to say that their candidates (and this suggests that the candidates who they want off the slate would not want this) are committed to evaluating and planning for the future. The dozen signers of the letter would have you believe that only their slate is "aligned with the best interest of the stockholders so the company can 'get back to business'. " CONTINUED | Easy to print version |

Related editorial


Handlers and growers attend CMC meeting: Where's the fruit?

2/11/00 About 100 growers and handlers attended a meeting hosted by David Farrimond of the Cranberry Marketing Committee at the Carver, Mass. High School. Farrimond explained the details of a marketing order and fielded numerous questions. He was hampered in his responses by the fact that he is not allowed to reveal which handler or handlers have a surplus. Since Northland and Decas have stated they don't have a surplus publicly, and other independents have said the same in private communications, it was obvious to those in attendance that all or most of the a multi-million barrel surplus had to be in the hands of Ocean Spray. CONTINUED | Easy to print version


Ocean Spray BOD proxy fight continues to heat up

Letter supporting already nominated slate received

2/12/00 A second letter from a group calling itself the "Massachusetts Shareholders Group"(1: read entire letter here), which Stressline has learned was sent prior to the receipt of the letter supporting the alternate slate (2: click here), has been received by Ocean Spray grower-owners. The letter urges support of the Board endorsed proxy with candidates who were nominated in regional elections.  The letter is signed by Thomas A. Gelsthorpe, who won nomination for the 25 member board but lost in his bid to be seated on the downsized board; David Ross; Peter Stearns, who is Chair of the Massachusetts Ocean Spray Advisory Board; Ron Drolett; and Ed Gelsthorpe, who is Tom's father and a former CEO of Ocean Spray.

The letter states: "this 'alternate' proxy is an attempt by a renegade faction of growers and ex-Directors to override the policy of having each area elect its own Directors and instead select a slate nationally -- in this case, with several recent losers re-inserted in the ballot. Incumbent Directors defeated in local elections but re-inserted in the two "alternate" slates include the Chairman, the Vice-Chairman, the Chairmen of the Steering Committee and Audit Committee and the Co-Chairman of the Search Committee. Local growers rejected their current leaders for obvious reasons. These defeated Directors who reappear as the "alternate" substitutions are all long-term Directors who were well-known by their constituents and were rejected by those constituents as a result of Ocean Spray's decline."

CONTINUED | Easy to print version

 


 

Northland's Swendrowski supports marketing order, disagrees with Decas

"Putting aside whatever Ocean Spray may do, Northland simply will not destroy inventory for the purpose of reducing the amount of crop in the United States. Northland is a publicly traded company and the board of directors that I chair owes a duty to our shareholders to use the corporate assets responsibly. We are not simply going to destroy cranberries and take a loss when that inventory has real value. It is time for all handlers to put their ego’s aside, stop pointing fingers and try to solve the grower economic problem."

2/10/00 To all growers:

Considerable discussion is taking place regarding implementation of the Cranberry Marketing Order. Several growers have asked what is Northland’s position on the implementation for the 2000 crop.

As a public company, we have stated our inventory position and our projected utilization to the investment community. We will state our position again so you know our situation as you analyze our comments. CONTINUED | Easy to print version.


Eye on Quaker

Quaker Oats and Swiss phamaceutical company in joint venture

2/10/00 Potential Ocean Spray partner Quaker Oats, and the Swiss pharmaceutical company Novartis, have joined forces to develop and market foods with added health benefits in North America. Read press release HERE.


Editorial

Ocean Spray growing areas should select their board representation

National proxy fight threatens to tear Ocean Spray apart

Hal Brown

2/9/00 Ocean Spray had a unique system for assuring that members of their board were elected by the constituents who knew them best. Each growing area held elections to nominate growers to fill vacancies for board seats. Candidates were well known to the growers who nominated them, and they had ample opportunity to campaign. In addition, area advisory boards held candidates' meetings where growers could hear what they had to say, and could ask them questions. This system is threatened as a national proxy fight is taking shape. It pits region against region, large growers against small growers, and board members who fought to remove CEO Bullock against those who supported him until his mismanagement could no longer be ignored. CONTINUED HERE | Easy to print version

Letter from Decas elaborates on issues discussed at  growers' meeting
Inventory and surplus addressed, some figures corrected

2/10/00

To Whom It May Concern:

On February 4, 2000 I received a copy of the Ocean Spray Annual Report. The report included how many cranberries were delivered to and sold by Ocean Spray in the years 1995-1999. Since I had a Decas grower meeting the next day, I decided to calculate from the Ocean Spray data, along with available data from the Cranberry Marketing Committee, how much of existing inventories was in the hands of Ocean Spray compared to Independents, and to distribute this information at my grower meeting.

Given the fact that Ocean Spray claims that the surplus was created outside the co-operative without providing any documentation regarding that claim, I believe it is important to put the surplus in perspective. How can we proceed in discussing a proposed marketing order if Ocean Spray and all other major handlers deny holding any surplus berries? CONTINUED | Easy to print version


Capper-Volstead and Ocean Spray
Does the one member, one vote clause apply?

2/8/00 The Capper-Volstead Act of 1922 has remained unchanged, and rarely interpreted in court, for 78 years. Prior to 1922, farmers who attempted to work together to market their crops were in danger of violating the Sherman Antitrust Act. Senator Clapper the Capper-Volstead Act's  "purpose is to give to the farmer the same right to bargain collectively that is already enjoyed by corporations." 62 Cong. Rec. 2057 (1922). "

Intended to enable smaller farmers to compete with agribusiness by forming cooperatives that were exempt from antitrust laws, it permitted cooperatives like Ocean Spray, Sunkist and Land-o-Lakes to grow and prosper. The drafters of the act intended to provide the antitrust exemption only to farmers and the "people who produce farm products of all kinds." (Cong. Rec. 2052 (1922). It was intended to cover producers, not processors. It gave them the right to enjoy the benefits of size already enjoyed by agribusiness.

The first part of the act enables agriculture cooperatives their exemption from the Sherman Antitrust Act. The second defines the standards an agriculture cooperative must adhere to and put controls into place so the cooperatives themselves don't become monopolies.

There is a "one vote per member" clause in the second part of the act that has been drawing considerable attention among Ocean Spray growers. The Ocean Spray Board voted that decisions, like the downsizing of the board or the election of board members, will be based on one vote per share early in 1999. CONTINUED | Easy to print version

 

 

HOME