Company: STAA
Filing Date: 2025-12-10
Form Type: DFAN14A
Source: 0001213900-25-120140
Chunk: 6

Company: STAAR SURGICAL CO
Filing Date: 2025-12-10
Form: DFAN14A
Chunk 6
---

and it is unclear whether the Board exercised meaningful oversight of a process that directly impacts shareholder value at a critical
moment. Based on the limited information provided, the NDA terms appear to us to have served to discourage interested bidders.

Now Is Not the Right Time To Sell, and the Revised Offer Is Insufficient

We agree with Broadwood Partners that the absence
of competing proposals does not “validate” the go-shop process – contrary to the Company’s assertions. In our
assessment, similar to that of Broadwood Partners, the process was structured in a way that all but ensured no credible bidder would participate.
A credible acquirer would be, at best, reluctant to enter into a process where Alcon enjoyed a significant timing advantage, access to
substantially more information, the effective right to match any alternative offer, and long-standing ties to STAAR’s leadership
– especially given that Alcon itself assigned a valuation to the Company roughly double the current offer less than a year ago.

We also reject arguments made by STAAR and Alcon
to the effect that a price of $30.75 offers a “generous” premium. We take note of Alcon’s observation that its revised
offer price now represents a 74% premium to STAAR’s 90-day volume-weighted average price (VWAP) and a 66% premium to the closing
price of STAAR common stock on August 4, 2025.

But, as we have also noted before, we struggle
to understand how the Board can genuinely view the stated premium as compelling for shareholders, given that business cycles clearly impacting
the Company last substantially longer than 90 or even 180 days. In prior earnings disclosures, the Company consistently acknowledged working
through cyclical challenges, such as excess inventory and macroeconomic trends in China. Most recently, STAAR’s third quarter results
show there is solid and accelerating demand for its ICL technology in China and globally, and they indicate that the challenges of the
past year reflect temporary headwinds, not structural weaknesses.

It was never the Company’s expectation,
prior to the merger announcement, that these challenges and other headwinds would be resolved within one, two or even three quarters.
Although a 74% premium to a 90-day VWAP may appear compelling when viewed in isolation, this figure is being presented without the fuller
context of the Company’s long-term trajectory – context the Company itself has emphasized many times.

We will continue to vote our shares AGAINST the