Company: STAA
Filing Date: 2025-12-11
Form Type: DFAN14A
Source: 0001213900-25-120777
Chunk: 9

Company: STAAR SURGICAL CO
Filing Date: 2025-12-11
Form: DFAN14A
Chunk 9
---
. Source: STAAR Registration Statement on Form S - 8, filed with the SEC on June 21, 2024.

Broadwood Partners, L.P. The Go - Shop Process Was Flawed 13 In our view, the go - shop was neither designed, nor was likely, to produce the best available offer and the highest price for STA AR ▪ Alcon retained matching rights and other advantages over would - be bidders that kept the process tilted in its favor — Alcon retained the right to receive notice of any superior proposals and to all critical information regarding those proposal s, as well as the opportunity to match or otherwise submit an improved bid for four days immediately following the go - shop period; those matching rights would not be lost on potential alternative bidders and their legal advisors ▪ Credible interested parties were seemingly intentionally discouraged from advancing proposals — We understand that STAAR’s financial advisor conveyed Alcon’s matching rights and other advantages to at least one potentiall y i nterested party as part of its initial outreach , seemingly to forewarn this party of the uphill battle they faced to supplant Alcon as STAAR’s preferred counterparty — We are also aware of a credible buyer with the capital, industry expertise, and strong interest in acquiring STAAR at a price hi gher than the Alcon bid that was told it had to sign a multi - year standstill to be granted access to diligence materials • This differs wildly from the NDA that Alcon itself signed (which had no standstill) – even though Alcon was an unsolicited bidde r for STAAR – and the ones supposedly offered to other parties in 2024 and early 2025, according to the proxy statement • In our view, the Board’s off - market demand was calculated to “run the clock” on the go - shop period and ward off this well - establ ished private equity firm, which it did ▪ The go - shop process was overseen by the same directors with deep and longstanding ties to Alcon, insufficient M&A experience and misaligned financial incentives — We and another shareholder proposed augmenting the Board’s composition to enhance its independence from Alcon, improve its M& A e xperience and rebuild credibility with shareholders, but the Board has refused those overtures — STAAR’s CEO had a significant incentive to favor the certainty of a transaction with Alcon because he had the opportunity to mak e $24 million for five months of work; the Board’s belated reduction in golden parachute payments