Is Commencing a Hostile Takeover of an AZA Facility Possible?

[Iguana_Cabana]

The other day, an interesting thought occurred to me. What if a private individual with tons of zoological expertise, ultra-savvy business management skills, and boatloads of money (i.e: $200,000,000-$500,000,000) decided to commence a hostile takeover of an AZA facility? Now, I can probably almost guarantee that the AZA wouldn't let this fly even with their consent, but the whole point of a hostile takeover is to buy a property without any consent whatsoever. I am curious to find out whether this would be possible to initiate legaly. If illegal for an AZA facility, then what about taking over an already privately-owned ZAA facility instead? Thanks.

 

[birdsandbats]

A hostile takeover of anything by a private individual is theft and is illegal.

 

[DavidBrown]

The premise of your post is factually wrong in many ways.

Most AZA facilities are publicly owned and thus not for sale to any person, no matter how much money they have. The AZA is not a governmental entity that manages zoos. It is a professional organization that controls the accreditation of zoos that belong to it, and that can have real world impacts, but not direct control of management as you are implying.

A "hostile takeover" happens in the business world when one business entity wants to buy another business entity and gets in a legal fight with it to take it over if it does not want to be sold. It does not apply to the governance of zoos as you are implying.

 

[Lafone]

The other day, an interesting thought occurred to me. What if a private individual with tons of zoological expertise, ultra-savvy business management skills, and boatloads of money (i.e: $200,000,000-$500,000,000) decided to commence a hostile takeover of an AZA facility? Now, I can probably almost guarantee that the AZA wouldn't let this fly even with their consent, but the whole point of a hostile takeover is to buy a property without any consent whatsoever. I am curious to find out whether this would be possible to initiate legaly. If illegal for an AZA facility, then what about taking over an already privately-owned ZAA facility instead? Thanks.

Hostile takeovers don’t buy a property with no consent whatsoever they usually take an offer to buy direct to shareholders and bypass management or the current board, or acquire a body of shares and force the takeover via share sale / share value dominance.

A privately owned facility doesn’t have shareholders.

In your example what you are describing is actually theft (as no one is receiving any money for the transaction). So no, an individual can not possess another company without consent or indeed without paying for it.

 

[Lycaon]

How do you even plan on carrying this out?

I don't support this, I just find it ironically funny that you think you could possibly pull off such a stunt.

 

[Jurek7]

I suspect, for an investor with big money zoos would queue to be taken over

 

[turkeyfox]

With boatloads of money, it's not really a hostile takeover it's just making an offer that (whoever owns the zoo currently) can't refuse.

 

[CGSwans]

A hostile takeover of anything by a private individual is theft and is illegal.

OP is referring to a takeover of a public company in which the existing board doesn’t support the deal, and where the purchaser tries to buy a controlling stake or win enough shareholder votes to their side to gain control of the company. It’s not illegal, just unfriendly.

I doubt there are any publicly-traded zoos, apart from somewhere like DAK being a small component of Walt Disney Company.

 

[Iguana_Cabana]

Hostile takeovers don’t buy a property with no consent whatsoever they usually take an offer to buy direct to shareholders and bypass management or the current board, or acquire a body of shares and force the takeover via share sale / share value dominance.

A privately owned facility doesn’t have shareholders.

In your example what you are describing is actually theft (as no one is receiving any money for the transaction). So no, an individual can not possess another company without consent or indeed without paying for it.

Apologies for the late response, thanks for the information. I guess there is no such person as the zoo industry's equivalent of Elon Musk. Unless there is a facility ran by someone mad enough to order electric supplies carts, but I digress. Thanks anyway.