IR Monitor – 19 November 2025

In this week’s newsletter:

• Activists assemble for big M&A push in US: Bloomberg suggests that activist investors are feeling more confident about pushing companies to sell
• A lesson for UK boardrooms: you get what you pay for says the FT’s Lex column
• IR Monitor LIVE: our New York correspondent Rose Zu with the November edition
• Could Investor Relations be inflating the bubble? ‘Big Short’ investor Michael Burry accuses AI companies of artificially boosting earnings
• Reuters reports the White House is considering restricting proxy advisers 
• And finally … AI and the IRO – not yet a match made in heaven but there is hope

This week’s news

Activists assemble for big M&A push

Activist investors are increasingly propelling U.S. dealmaking, spurring a surge in recent activity: Jana Partners backed a $2.9 billion buyout of its long-time target Treehouse Foods, several activists pressed BlackLine to consider a sale, and Monro has put in place a poison pill to give itself some breathing room from Carl Icahn who wants it to explore mergers. Now that the dealmaking market has rebounded, activists are returning to M&A-focused strategies. According to Bloomberg, Elizabeth Bieber (Partner at Freshfields) noted “a robust dealmaking environment.” Neil Rudisill (Managing Director at Goldman Sachs) added, “We’re rounding out 2025 at an all-time high level of activist campaign velocity,” reflecting growing confidence in more aggressive campaigns. Large-cap companies are increasingly in the crosshairs, underscoring the need for early engagement with shareholders, robust communication of strategic priorities, and preparedness for M&A-focussed activist scrutiny. 

A lesson for UK boardrooms: you get what you pay for says the FT

The UK’s move to allow non-executive directors to be paid in shares marks a notable shift as the country attempts to compete for boardroom talent. As reported by the Financial Times (FT), the updated guidance brings the UK closer to US practice, where non-executives routinely have “skin in the game.” The gap the UK is trying to close is sizeable: S&P 500 non-executive directors earn just over $336,000 on average, with roughly three-fifths paid in stock, versus $144,000 for those at the largest FTSE 100 companies. The FT notes that while equity-based pay could shift directors’ mindsets, it also raises key concerns. For example, directors with a large personal holding may be more willing to probe Management when the share price is rising. Yet relying solely on cash has its own limitations, particularly when roles are seen as high-responsibility but low-reward, prompting the FT’s observation: “If UK investors want to stick with cash, they should offer more of it.” The article suggests the most balanced answer may be a blend of cash and stock with a three- or four-year vesting period to preserve independence and perspective. Any move in this direction will inevitably influence how investors perceive the quality of oversight at UK-listed companies.

IR Monitor LIVE: November Edition

In this month’s IR Monitor Live, our correspondent covers the latest IR developments from around the world. In the US, Snowflake filed an 8-K after its Chief Revenue Officer gave unauthorised financial guidance in a street interview with a popular Instagram account. On this side of the Atlantic, German Chancellor Friedrich Merz proposed merging Europe’s multiple stock exchanges into a single pan-European market. And in the GCC, FTI’s own Talal Almoallem notes IR is moving beyond “results day” toward a sustained focus on access, liquidity and clear communication.

Could IR be inflating the bubble? 

Michael Burry, the “Big Short” investor who recently rattled markets with sizable short positions against market darlings Nvidia and Palantir, has accused major U.S. “hyperscalers” of inflating AI-related profits through aggressive depreciation accounting, reports CNBC. In a post on X, he claimed companies are extending the assumed useful life of rapidly evolving compute assets to unrealistic life cycles to record lower depreciation expenses and pad profit margins, calling it “one of the more common frauds of the modern era” and also claims profits at Oracle and Meta could be overstated by 27% and 21%, respectively, by 2028. Burry’s claim, which CNBC was not able to verify, highlights intensifying scrutiny of AI-driven capex, depreciation assumptions, and earnings quality.

Reuters reports: the White House is considering restricting proxy advisers 

The White House is considering measures that could significantly restrict the influence of US proxy advisers, marking the latest escalation in a long-running political and regulatory debate. As reported by Reuters, officials within the Trump Administration are examining potential limits on Institutional Shareholder Services (ISS) and Glass Lewis as well as on how large index-fund managers cast votes on behalf of clients. Conservatives and a number of business leaders have argued for years that proxy advisers push votes and focus too much on climate and social issues. On the other hand, ISS and Glass Lewis maintain their recommendations are focused on investor returns. The picture became more complex when the Wall Street Journal reported the FTC is investigating ISS and Glass Lewis for potential antitrust violations linked to their competitive practices and guidance on environmental and social proposals. For listed companies, any change would have implications for how votes are influenced, contested and ultimately interpreted, reshaping the wider governance landscape.

And finally … AI and the IRO

Last week, the IR Society held an event at Goldman Sachs on AI’s impact on IROs at which the AI Working Group presented its findings on how AI is used in IR. The good news is Generative AI (GenAI) can provide market context and handle data complexity, both which ensure investor understanding of your company’s investment proposition and business model. But the not-so-good news is that GenAI is poor at simplifying complexity, focusing on material issues and communicating in an authentic voice. As usual, fear of risk can outweigh the benefits of trying new things, which is perhaps why 20% of the respondents to the IR Society’s AI survey said they have no experience using AI in an IR-related context (with 34% using it occasionally, 37% regularly and 9% claiming it’s an integral part of their workflow). Of those IROs who work with AI, 65% have said they use it for productivity, 35% use it for investor and analyst engagement, 14% use it for their finance reporting and 9% use it for their corporate website. The IR Society has since offered further practical advice for IROs.