West Face Agrees to Debate About Callidus

Updated on

West Face Capital Inc. has become aware of a proposal circulating in the Toronto financial community from Newton Glassman, the Executive Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of Callidus Capital Corporation and the Chief Executive Officer of The Catalyst Capital Group Inc. Mr. Glassman has expressed a desire to have a public debate with West Face Capital, among others, about the prospects of Callidus Capital.

“I am not sure this is a serious proposal since West Face was not included in the distribution list of Mr. Glassman’s email,” said Greg Boland, the Chief Executive Officer of West Face Capital. “West Face has no interest in the success or otherwise of Callidus since our holdings of Callidus are immaterial. But if Mr. Glassman is truly serious about this, I think it would be an interesting and potentially beneficial idea. Mr. Glassman, with his legal training, knows that it would be inadvisable for West Face to participate while litigation that he initiated against West Face continues.”

West Face would be willing to participate in a public debate on Callidus, subject to both Callidus and West Face getting sponsors and the audience making financial contributions which would be donated for the benefit of two mutually agreeable charities.

West Face believes that the ground rules that it understands Mr. Glassman outlined in his proposal are a good starting framework, but West Face would add the following terms:

  1. The debate would be moderated by a mutually agreeable respected professional legal adjudicator, such as a retired judge or a senior Toronto litigator.
  2. All materials to be relied upon during the debate must be sourced from publicly available material, and shared with the other side in advance of the debate, so that both parties are able to respond thoughtfully. Other materials not circulated would be inadmissible.
  3. The debate would be limited to Callidus-related issues. Personal attacks would be off limits.
  4. The debate and supporting materials would be webcast so any interested party could observe.
  5. Following the debate, the pooled proceeds of the debate from the sponsors and the audience would be split between the two selected charities.
  6. In view of the difficulties arising from participating in a debate with Mr. Glassman while defending litigation initiated by him, West Face would require a general litigation release.

“The debate could be very entertaining to watch and, instead of wasting money in court, we could both use the event to raise money for charity and do some public good,” said Mr. Boland. “We look forward to Mr. Glassman’s response.”

Don’t forget – sign up for our free daily newsletter to stay in the activist investing know.


Leave a Comment