Washington Redskins owner Dan Snyder’s roots in direct marketing may have helped him as much as anything to win his nasty proxy fight with amusement park operator Six Flags’ management.
Six Flags and Snyder's Red Zone LLC investment group both confirmed last week that an independent inspector has certified that more than 57% of Six Flags’ shareholders voted to remove Chief Executive Kieran Burke, Chief Financial Officer James Dannhauser and director Stanley Schuman from amusement park operator’s board.
The shareholders voted to put Snyder, former ESPN executive Mark Shapiro and Virginia homebuilder Dwight Schar on the board instead.
The shareholders also voted to adopt Snyder's other proposals, including changes to Six Flags’ by-laws. Claiming that Six Flags’ current marketing focuses too much on thrill-ride seeking teenagers at the expense of reaching families, Red Zone has said it will change the company's advertising and marketing strategies to be more family friendly.
Snyder—Six Flags largest shareholder with 11.7% of its outstanding shares—made his fortune in the 90s as the founder of direct marketing agency Snyder Communications in Bethesda, MD. In August he launched a proxy battle aiming to replace Burke, Dannhauser and Shuman.
Six Flags responded by putting itself up for auction.
The letter Snyder sent to shareholders October to secure their votes is essentially a long-form sale-closer that uses some fairly common direct marketing techniques to drive response.
For example, the letter included a response device and a call to action. “We urge you to protect your investment in Six Flags now by signing, dating and returning the enclosed white consent card today,” Snyder’s letter said in all capital letters.
Moreover, the letter repeatedly gave shareholders a deadline and a sense of urgency: “We urge you to submit your consent as soon as possible so that our nominees can be seated on the board now,” the letter said. “New operational plans must be adopted and implemented by management this fall well in advance of the peak summer season for the Company's theme parks.”
“They definitely used the deadline [technique] to their advantage,” said Zachery Kouwe, a business reporter for the New York Post who has been following the battle. “They put deadlines in there and tried to make them seem earlier than they actually were.”
Six Flags’ management responded by saying Snyder was trying to rush shareholders into voting before they had a chance to consider all their options. “What is Dan Snyder so afraid of and why is he trying to rush you into voting? … We believe he wants our sale process to fail so that he can take effective control of Six Flags without paying full value for all of your shares.”
Six Flags also mounted a DM campaign of its own. Claiming that Snyder was trying to derail the sale process, Six Flags urged shareholders not to sign the white consent card, and even if they had signed the white card, to sign Six Flags’ blue “consent revocation card” and send it in.
“Don't be rushed by Snyder into giving your consent before you have the opportunity to evaluate all of your alternatives!” Six Flags letter warned.
In the end, however, 57% of Six Flags’ shareholders disagreed and signed the white cards.
