We previously noted that SEC Chair Gary Gensler suggested the SEC would adopt new rules governing SPACs because, in his view, SPACs are very similar to initial public offerings but lack protections available to traditional IPO investors. And now, the SEC has taken concrete steps to treat “like cases alike”
Treating “Like for Like”: SPAC Disclosure, Marketing and Gatekeeping in 2022
We reported last year that unprecedented SPAC deal volume signaled an increased risk for disputes given their unique structure, including risks associated with disclosure requirements, material non-public information, valuation, and conflicts of interest. Our assessment proved prescient, as the SEC began to flex its enforcement muscles vis-à-vis SPACs as the year progressed, and took specific notice of potential asymmetries between SPACs and traditional IPOs that may form the basis for disputes in 2022.
New in the World of SPACs: Arks, Sharks and SPARCs
Special purpose acquisition companies (SPACs) have been one of the success stories of recent years. They have attracted huge volumes of investment as professional and retail parties invest through an initial public offering (IPO) in a ‘cash shell’ company with a mandate to find a suitable unlisted acquisition target. The…
Bloomberg Law: SPAC Procedural Issues & Risks
As a part of an ongoing litigation series in Bloomberg Law, Proskauer shifts focus to the rise of SPACs and associated risks. In this article, Mike Hackett, Timothy Mungovan, Todd Ohlms, Jonathan Weiss and David Heck discuss the issues and risks that are common to the SPAC process, as…
Space SPAC Draws SEC Enforcement Action for Allegedly Misleading Disclosures and Due Diligence Failures
As one of the first of an expected series of potential enforcement actions, the SEC has brought an enforcement action against a SPAC and its major participants, highlighting enhanced regulatory scrutiny of SPACs and underscoring the importance of following appropriate diligence and other practices in the de-SPAC process. Given the…
SPACs: Sure, Proceedings Are Coming
Proskauer’s Asset Management Litigation partner Dorothy Murray recently authored an article on litigation risks of SPACs.
Dorothy details why the recent popularity of this latest incarnation of so-called “blank cheque” companies will inevitably lead to disputes, and the reasons are all connected to the very features that make SPACs so…
The Ripples Behind the SPAC Wave
The past year saw a burst in popularity of SPACs. More than half of companies that went public in 2020 did so using a SPAC on their way to raising over $80 billion in proceeds, and so far in 2021 SPAC offerings far outpace traditional IPOs. SPACs allow companies to go public with greater speed and with fewer hurdles than a traditional IPO. These innovations combined with unprecedented deal volume may signal an increased risk for disputes, especially where the SPAC process and structure can present unique pitfalls.
For example, SPACs must issue registration statements and proxies in advance of acquiring a target company, which require compliance with Sections 11 and 14(a) of the Securities Exchange Act. But unlike in traditional IPOs, SPAC target companies may disclose projections of future performance before shareholders vote on whether to move forward with a merger, and failure to meet those projections could lead to litigation by shareholders or the SEC. The SEC has issued guidance on the types of disclosures that SPACs specifically should keep in mind, including disclosures pertaining to sponsors’, officers’ and directors’ financial incentives, prior SPAC experience, and conflicts of interest with other entities to which they owe fiduciary duties. SPACs also often raise money through PIPE (private offering in public equity) transactions, which allow for private investment on special terms, but those require separate disclosures and result in an additional set of shareholders who could later bring claims. By their nature, SPACs also present a number of other regulatory risks, including risks relating to MNPI, valuation, and conflicts of interest.
Snap Judgment: Unicorns Under Pressure and Addressing Risks of Private Lawsuits
The recent IPOs of Snap, Inc. and Blue Apron indicate that while the IPO pipeline continues to flow, there may be a cautionary tale for “unicorns” – venture-backed companies with estimated valuations in excess of $1 billion.
After Snap went public in March, it posted a $2.2 billion loss in its first quarter, yielding a 20% same-day drop in stock price that erased much of the company’s gains since its IPO. A snapshot of Snap’s stock price shows the obvious risks faced by late-stage investors in unicorns. High valuations are not a guarantee of continued success, particularly where historical performance and profitability are lacking. Although one commentator recently asked: “Are Blue Apron and Snap the worst IPOs ever?”, there is plenty of time for those stock prices to recover, especially in the months after their insider lockup periods expire.