Addressing shareholders at the company’s AGM, Tony D’Aloisio underscored the weight of this decision for both shareholders and employees, while also hinting at potential delays in the planned transaction timeline.
“We understand the importance of the Perpetual brand for our Australian businesses and the significance of this decision for some of our shareholders and employees to sell the brand,” D’Aloisio said.
He also highlighted the significant status of the brand within the Australian asset management sector, explaining the importance of negotiating an appropriate period for continued use by the Australian equities business.
While the brand will move into private hands as part of the separation from Perpetual, it will still be used by the Corporate Trust and Wealth Management divisions.
“The price included negotiated value for the brand,” D’Aloisio said, noting that the Australian equities business would retain the Perpetual name for a “sufficient period of time” following the transaction’s implementation.
D’Aloisio also reassured shareholders that the global asset management arm operates under several well-established brands, including J O Hambro, Trillium, Pendal, Barrow Hanley, TSW, and Regnan. Since the Perpetual name is not central to these businesses, he explained, the risk associated with the brand’s transition is minimised.
Looking ahead, D’Aloisio confirmed that the company still aims to put the KKR deal to a shareholder vote in early 2025.
However, he cautioned that regulatory approvals and discussions around taxes and duties could cause delays.
“As soon as we get a clearer line of sight and certainty on these, we will be able to update the market,” he said.
In the meantime, D’Aloisio said that Perpetual would continue to run its three core businesses with the same focus and intensity as before, ensuring ongoing momentum during the transition.
Last month, reports surfaced that Perpetual’s deal with KKR faces increased scrutiny as its share price continues to decline, raising concerns about the possibility that the offer could be rescinded.
During the company’s FY2023–24 results call, questions were posed regarding whether the transaction will deliver the expected returns, putting pressure on Perpetual’s strategic direction post-merger.
At the time, the then CEO, Rob Adams, said that even if the deal were to fall through – which he said is unlikely – Perpetual still believes it is best to operate its asset management, corporate trust, and wealth management businesses separately.
“Our full focus is on delivering the transaction,” Adams said, but added: “Our board is managing contingency plans. It’s not the outcome we expect, but we are managing them.”
Also at the AGM last week, Perpetual received a first strike against its remuneration report following significant shareholder opposition, despite the board’s justification of retention payments and short-term incentives to ensure leadership stability during a period of strategic review.
Some 88 per cent of shareholders opposed the adoption of the remuneration report, and the bid to elect Rodney Forrest to the board was also rejected.
