PPG issues statement regarding proposal to combine with AkzoNobel

PPG issued a statement, May 8, in connection with its proposal to AkzoNobel to form a combined company:

PPG is disappointed that AkzoNobel has once again refused to enter into a negotiation regarding a combination of the two companies, ignoring the best interests of its stakeholders, including long-term shareholders who overwhelmingly support engagement. PPG can confirm that its Chairman and CEO Michael McGarry and its lead independent director Hugh Grant met May 6 with Antony Burgmans, Chairman of the Supervisory Board of AkzoNobel and Ton Büchner, CEO and Chairman of the Board of Management of AkzoNobel.

Following no feedback since PPG provided its revised proposal April 24, PPG made yet another attempt to discuss the proposal on May 4, which Akzo responded to on May 5 at 15.30 CET, stipulating to meet PPG only in Rotterdam the following day, May 6, at 15.00 CET. The meeting lasted less than 90min and the AkzoNobel chairs stated at the beginning that the meeting was solely for the purpose of reviewing PPG’s revised proposal. Specifically, the AkzoNobel chairs stated up front that they did not have the intent nor the authority to negotiate. They also did not share any concerns regarding PPG’s proposal, or analysis or comparison of their new standalone strategy versus PPG’s proposal, nor would they entertain any questions or discussion about their plan or analysis.

PPG continues to believe its proposal is vastly superior in shareholder value creation and provides more certainty to employees and pensioners than AkzoNobel’s recently announced new standalone plan. PPG’s proposal represents a 50% premium over AkzoNobel’s unaffected stock price and a 24% premium to its stock price after the announcement of its standalone plan. The failure of the AkzoNobel Boards to engage with PPG to fully evaluate and discuss PPG’s proposal reflects a continued lack of proper governance and is another attempt to avoid a true comparison on stakeholder impacts of PPG’s proposal versus AkzoNobel’s standalone plan.