11.06.2025 01:01
Meta shareholders overwhelmingly rejected a proposal to invest company funds in Bitcoin, delivering a resounding defeat to the idea. The social media giant's recent SEC filing revealed an astonishing disparity in voting: a mere 3.9 million votes supported the proposal, dwarfed by the over 4.98 billion votes against it – representing a 99.9% rejection rate. This outcome stands in stark contrast to some other corporations' moves to incorporate Bitcoin into their treasury reserves as an inflation hedge.
This decisive rejection wasn't a surprise given the influence of major shareholders. Even Mark Zuckerberg, often characterized as a proponent of digital assets, reportedly voted against the proposal. Although his ownership stake is only 14%, his control of 61% of voting power effectively grants him a veto on significant corporate decisions. Adding to the rejection's weight, even large institutional investors like Vanguard, BlackRock, and Fidelity—despite their involvement in the Bitcoin ETF market—opposed the allocation. Their combined voting power represents a significant 8% of the company.
The proposal's originator, Ethan Peck of the National Center for Public Policy Research, a conservative think tank based in Washington, argued that Meta was suffering significant inflation-related losses on its cash holdings. Peck contended that Bitcoin offered the ideal solution to mitigate these losses, implicitly criticizing Zuckerberg and Meta director Marc Andreessen for seemingly denying shareholders access to potentially superior returns. His proposal, introduced in January, highlighted the considerable potential returns from a Bitcoin investment, painting a picture of missed opportunity for Meta's investors.
The overwhelming rejection underscores a significant divergence between the potential benefits of Bitcoin as an inflation hedge, as touted by some, and the actual risk appetite of Meta's leadership and major stakeholders. This outcome serves as a noteworthy case study in the contrasting views on Bitcoin's role in corporate treasuries, showing that even prominent figures in the tech world may not see it as a suitable investment. The sources for this information came from internet sources.
