Actionable news
0
All posts from Actionable news
Actionable news in IRBT: iRobot Corporation,

Additional definitive proxy soliciting materials filed by non-management and Rule 14(a)(12) material

Proxy Statement Pursuant to Section 14(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934

¨ Confidential, for Use of the Commission Only (as permitted by Rule14a-6(e)(2))

IROBOT CORPORATION
(Name of Registrant as Specified in Its Charter)
RED MOUNTAIN PARTNERS, L.P. RMCP GP LLC RED MOUNTAIN CAPITAL PARTNERS LLC RED MOUNTAIN CAPITAL MANAGEMENT, INC. WILLEM MESDAG LAWRENCE S. PEIROS
(Name of Persons(s) Filing Proxy Statement, if Other Than the Registrant)

(1) Title of each class of securities to which transaction applies:

¨ Fee paid previously with preliminary materials:

¨ Check box if any part of the fee is offset as provided by Exchange Act Rule 0-11(a)(2) and identify the filing for which the offsetting fee was paid previously. Identify the previous filing by registration statement number, or the form or schedule and the date of its filing.

Red Mountain Partners, L.P., together with the other participants named herein (collectively, “Red Mountain”), has made a definitive filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission of a proxy statement and an accompanying GREEN proxy card to be used to solicit votes for the election of its slate of two highly-qualified director nominees at the 2016 annual meeting of stockholders of iRobot Corporation, a Delaware corporation (the “Company”).

On April 18, 2016, Red Mountain issued the following press release, which includes the full text of a letter issued to the Company’s shareholders, which was also posted by Red Mountain to www.iRobotproxycontest.com :

RED MOUNTAIN ISSUES LETTER TO FELLOW iROBOT SHAREHOLDERS RESPONDING TO BASELESS AND PERSONAL ATTACKS

Los Angeles, CA, April 18, 2016 /Business Wire/ - Red Mountain Capital Partners LLC (“Red Mountain” or “we”), an investment management firm owning approximately 6.2% of the outstanding shares of iRobot Corporation (“iRobot” or the “Company”) (Nasdaq: IRBT), today issued a letter to iRobot shareholders responding to a series of attacks contained in a letter to shareholders dated April 14, 2016, from Colin Angle, the Chairman of the Company’s board of directors (the “Board”) and its Chief Executive Officer. In response to Mr. Angle’s public reference to and selective disclosure from Red Mountain’s private correspondence with the Board, Red Mountain has also posted all of its private letters to the Board under the “ Historical Engagement ” section on its website www.irobotproxycontest.com .

Red Mountain Capital Partners LLC (“Red Mountain” or “we”) is the beneficial owner of approximately 6.2% of the outstanding shares of iRobot Corporation (“iRobot or the “Company”). As you may know, we have attempted to engage constructively with iRobot’s management and board of directors (the “Board”) for over a year to enhance value for all iRobot shareholders and, for the first time in our ten-year history, we are waging a proxy contest for the election of two directors to the Board. We strongly believe that change is necessary in the boardroom. As one of iRobot’s largest shareholders, our interests are aligned with yours, and we want nothing more than to see iRobot achieve its extraordinary potential – something we believe the Company has failed to do since its IPO in 2005.

On April 14, 2016, Colin Angle, iRobot’s Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, sent a letter to shareholders attacking the relevancy of our candidates’ experience and our understanding of the Company’s business. Mr. Angle’s latest response to Red Mountain’s campaign to improve iRobot’s governance displays the hallmarks of an entrenched board desperately seeking to avoid any outside scrutiny. The Board, which has reduced its collective beneficial ownership of the Company’s stock from 38% 1 before the IPO to less than 4% today (most of which was received as executive or director compensation), is now attempting to distract shareholders with cherry-picked performance metrics and personal attacks. We agree that “this proxy contest comes down to one point.” Should a significant shareholder be represented in the boardroom? Given the Company’s dismal track record of returns on investment (which Mr. Angle does not mention), we believe that the Board urgently requires a shareholder perspective in order to establish a culture of accountability.

By its own actions, the Board has adopted and thus validated many of the key components of the value enhancement plan we laid out in detail in April 2015. Despite Mr. Angle’s empty charge that Red Mountain “lack[s] a fundamental understanding of iRobot’s business” and that “[t]he actions that Red Mountain has proposed … were well underway before Red Mountain became a shareholder,” it is clear that the Board agrees with our understanding of iRobot’s business through its actions, and took those actions only after we published our detailed value enhancement plan on December 1, 2015, following eight months of private dialogue. As recently as September 1, 2015, in a wide ranging interview with the Wall Street Journal, Mr. Angle claimed that the robot-vacuum business “is only a small part of the ambition of the business and of the economic value of the iRobot technology base,” and expressed continued support for the Company’s investment in its Defense & Security (“D&S”) and Remote Presence businesses. As evidenced by the Board’s implementation of much of our value enhancement plan and the outperformance of iRobot’s stock price since we filed our initial Schedule 13D in April 2015, we are confident that our director nominees have the critical expertise and fundamental understanding of iRobot’s business that is necessary to create sustainable shareholder value.

1 Includes shares held by First Albany Companies and First Albany Private Funds (collectively, “First Albany”) that we believe George McNamee could have been deemed to beneficially own by virtue of his relationship with First Albany. iRobot's public filings did not include such shares in Mr. McNamee’s beneficial ownership as a Special Committee of First Albany Companies that did not include Mr. McNamee was reported to have sole investment discretion over such shares.

In his April 14 th letter to shareholders, Mr. Angle...


More