Arguments work on both sides, but we would not consider 5% that outrageous. We have seen far worse and generally 5% to 10% is common. One can argue it is 'just' a holding company but incentives are still needed. Insiders do own 18%, at least, so are aligned. Without commenting on its future role, Pelham does appear to be trying to take control without a full takeover offer (we also reference the mini-tender offer in this comment). It's legal and the stock is cheap, so we can't really 'blame' them but certainly management looks at it this way. Management still seems to have more experience, and a amicable solution (with Pelham getting board seats to reflect their interest) would make the most sense. But egos are getting in the way here. Without knowing exactly what Pelham would do with control, we would be on the fence here but still leaning on management's side at the moment.
5i Research Answer: