Talk:Engine No. 1: Difference between revisions
Line 6: | Line 6: | ||
}} |
}} |
||
{{DYK talk|4 November|2021|entry=... that investment fund '''[[Engine No. 1|Engine No. 1]]''' waged a successful [[Proxy fight|proxy battle]] against [[ExxonMobil]] despite owning only 0.02 percent of the oil company's shares?|nompage=Template:Did you know nominations/Engine No. 1}} |
{{DYK talk|4 November|2021|entry=... that investment fund '''[[Engine No. 1|Engine No. 1]]''' waged a successful [[Proxy fight|proxy battle]] against [[ExxonMobil]] despite owning only 0.02 percent of the oil company's shares?|nompage=Template:Did you know nominations/Engine No. 1}} |
||
==Did you know nomination== |
|||
{{Template:Did you know nominations/Engine No. 1}} |
|||
== Introduction of Engine No. 1 == |
== Introduction of Engine No. 1 == |
Revision as of 15:51, 28 March 2022
This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
|
A fact from Engine No. 1 appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 4 November 2021 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:
|
Introduction of Engine No. 1
It is requested that an edit be made to the semi-protected article at Engine No. 1. (edit · history · last · links · protection log)
This template must be followed by a complete and specific description of the request, that is, specify what text should be removed and a verbatim copy of the text that should replace it. "Please change X" is not acceptable and will be rejected; the request must be of the form "please change X to Y".
The edit may be made by any autoconfirmed user. Remember to change the |
I work for Rubenstein and on behalf of Engine No. 1, I’m requesting an edit to the introductory portion of the page. Engine No. 1 is miscategorized as an “activist and impact investing hedge fund,” the firm is instead an investment firm, with assets that stretch outside of the definition of “hedge fund.” See sources that describe the firm as an “investment firm” below. [1] [2] [3]
Additionally, see sources covering the firm’s ETFs below. [4] [5] [6]
Hedge funds do not offer ETFs, only investment firms offer ETFs.
I believe it would be more accurate and in line with the existing supporting citations to state: “Engine No. 1 is an American investment firm.”
Nbaderrubenstein (talk) 13:07, 2 March 2022 (UTC)
References
- ^ https://www.reuters.com/business/sustainable-business/investment-firm-engine-no-1-prepares-launch-transform-500-etf-after-exxon-win-2021-06-01/
- ^ https://www.reuters.com/business/sustainable-business/investment-firm-engine-no-1-prepares-launch-transform-500-etf-after-exxon-win-2021-06-01/
- ^ https://www.barrons.com/articles/engine-no-1-transform-climate-etf-51643896022
- ^ https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-02-03/exxon-activist-engine-no-1-starts-etf-for-zero-emission-push
- ^ https://www.etf.com/sections/features-and-news/etfs-growing-proxy-power?nopaging=1
- ^ https://www.latimes.com/business/story/2021-12-28/exxon-board-engine-no-1-stock-fund-clean-energy
- Hi Nbaderrubenstein, thank you for engaging on the talk page. I agree that investment firm probably fits it better, it might have started out closer to a hedge fund but is more of a general investment firm now. I have replaced "hedge fund" with "investment firm", but kept "activist" and changed "impact investing" to "impact-focused", with a wikilink to impact investing, as sources talk about this frequently. Thoughts? FYI, the first two sources you cite are the same, did you mean to cite something else? 15 (talk) 13:53, 2 March 2022 (UTC)
Thank you for the thoughtful response, 15. Meant this to be my second source: [1]
Agreed, “impact-focused investment firm” is more accurate than “impact investing hedge fund,” thank you.
I would suggest removing the term “activist” as well. Engine No. 1 acted like an “activist investor” for the Exxon campaign, but has not since, and the term does not accurately describe the entire breadth of the firm, which includes ETFs and constructive investments. Sources below: [2] [3] [4]
Additionally, the firm has never publicly identified itself as an activist. Engine No. 1’s CEO Jennifer Grancio stated in September that the firm “was aiming to be a constructive partner to companies it invested in, not an activist hedge fund launching proxy contests.” Source below: [5]
I would instead argue that “active-ownership” is a more accurate description of Engine No. 1’s investing style. See usage here: [6]
I believe it would be more accurate if the term “activist” was removed altogether, or replaced with “active-owner,” “active-investor”, or something to that effect. Thank you.
Nbaderrubenstein (talk) 19:08, 4 March 2022 (UTC)
- Hi, I realise that there is a desire for ESG activists to contrast themselves from Icahn-type activism and that the term "active ownership" (or "constructive investments") is becoming more popular. However, we have to go by what sources say and this is not a clear-cut case of more recent sources using "active ownership" vs older ones using "activist". Further, active ownership can fall under activism if the latter term is interpreted broadly. Given the preponderance of sources describing EN1 as activist, I would like to stick to the term (although I'm fine with you requesting third opinions at e.g.,Wikipedia:WikiProject Finance & Investment or WP:3O, preferably the first).
- I appreciate you coming up with sources on the investment strategy that I was unaware of, as a description of the firm's investment strategy is certainly important. I'm sure active-ownership can be fit into the lead (something along the lines of "Describing their investment approach as active-ownership,...?) or Engine No. 1 § Investment activities at least, but will have to find some time to look at all the sources available. If you want, you can make suggestions. 15 (talk) 20:35, 6 March 2022 (UTC)
Hi, thank you for getting back to me and the suggestion to add the description of the firm as “active-owners” to the lede. I would recommend something like, “The firm’s investment approach has been described as ‘active-ownership.’” Please let me know your thoughts, thanks.
[7]
[8]
[9]
Nbaderrubenstein (talk) 20:50, 9 March 2022 (UTC)
Wanted to check back in on this, thanks 15
173.56.246.169 (talk) 12:41, 17 March 2022 (UTC)
- ^ https://www.cnbc.com/2021/12/16/engine-nopoint1-ceo-jennifer-grancio-on-the-firms-new-approach-after-winning-the-battle-against-exxon.html
- ^ https://www.latimes.com/business/story/2021-12-28/exxon-board-engine-no-1-stock-fund-clean-energy
- ^ https://www.etf.com/sections/features-and-news/etfs-growing-proxy-power?nopaging=1
- ^ https://www.taiwannews.com.tw/en/news/4415179
- ^ https://www.reuters.com/business/sustainable-business/exclusive-engine-no-1-investment-framework-aims-tie-company-valuations-climate-2021-09-13/
- ^ https://www.latimes.com/business/story/2021-12-28/exxon-board-engine-no-1-stock-fund-clean-energy
- ^ https://www.latimes.com/business/story/2021-12-28/exxon-board-engine-no-1-stock-fund-clean-energy
- ^ https://www.wealthmanagement.com/etfs/qa-engine-no-1-s-yasmin-bilger-shareholder-activism-etfs
- ^ https://www.greenbiz.com/article/8-women-shaping-future-finance-and-esg
- C-Class WikiProject Business articles
- Low-importance WikiProject Business articles
- WikiProject Business articles
- C-Class Finance & Investment articles
- Low-importance Finance & Investment articles
- WikiProject Finance & Investment articles
- Mid-importance Finance & Investment articles
- C-Class United States articles
- Low-importance United States articles
- C-Class United States articles of Low-importance
- WikiProject United States articles
- Wikipedia Did you know articles
- Wikipedia semi-protected edit requests
- Wikipedia edit requests possibly using incorrect templates