Huntsman Corporation HUN
Huntsman has underperformed peers by 575% since IPO and missed three straight Investor Day targets; elect four Starboard nominees on the BLUE card to restore board accountability.
Thesis
Starboard, Huntsman's second-largest holder at 8.6%, argues the chemicals company has strong assets but dramatically underperformed operationally, trailing the S&P 500 by 298%, S&P Chemicals by 310%, and its proxy performance peers by 575% since its 2005 IPO. Management has missed its Adjusted EBITDA targets at three consecutive Investor Days — by 44% in 2014, 11% in 2016, and 30% in 2018 — yet the Board has paid the CEO 8% to 73% above the peer median every year from FY2016 to FY2020. To fix the accountability gap, Starboard is running a proxy fight to seat four independent directors (James Gallogly, Sandra Beach Lin, Susan Schnabel, and Jeffrey Smith) with chemicals, industrial, and public-company governance credentials, asking shareholders to vote the BLUE proxy card at the 2022 Annual Meeting.
SCQA
Huntsman is a differentiated chemicals company with strong market positions, diverse product portfolios, innovative chemistries, and a difficult-to-replicate manufacturing footprint that, in Starboard's view, has substantial latent value.
Since its 2005 IPO, Huntsman has underperformed peers by 575%, missed three consecutive Investor Day EBITDA targets, and the Board has rewarded the CEO with pay 8-73% above peer median despite the failed execution.
Vote the BLUE proxy card at the 2022 Annual Meeting to elect four Starboard-nominated independent directors — Gallogly, Beach Lin, Schnabel, and Smith — who will hold management accountable and demand operational excellence.
A refreshed, independent board with deep chemicals operating experience is positioned to close the dramatic peer performance gap, lift profitability toward best-in-class differentiated chemicals benchmarks, and unlock the intrinsic value of Huntsman's assets.
The three reasons
- 1
Huntsman has underperformed proxy peers by 575% since IPO
- 2
Management missed three consecutive Investor Day EBITDA targets (44%, 11%, 30%)
- 3
CEO pay ran 8-73% above peer median despite the failed performance
Primary demands
- Elect four Starboard nominees (Gallogly, Beach Lin, Schnabel, Smith) to the Huntsman Board via the BLUE proxy card
- Hold management accountable for repeated missed Investor Day EBITDA targets
- Rein in excessive CEO compensation that runs above proxy peer median
- Install directors with deep chemicals operating experience to drive operational excellence
KPIs cited
Pattern membership
Where this document fits across the library's 12 rhetorical / structural patterns.
Notable slides (4)
Notes
Five-page shareholder letter tied to Starboard's 2022 proxy fight at Huntsman; filed as SEC proxy exhibit. Core rhetorical moves are three stacked 'failed promise' moments: (1) since-IPO peer-gap bars, (2) three-panel Investor Day miss chart with red-to-blue before/after columns, (3) CEO pay-vs-peer-median bars with % callouts on every year. Villain is framed at board level rather than naming a CEO, but Peter Huntsman is implied. Stake 8.6%, second-largest holder. No price target or valuation upside figure is given — this is a governance/accountability argument, not a SOTP or breakup pitch. Campaign_phase = proxy_fight (definitive proxy materials filed same day; BLUE card mentioned repeatedly). Visual_quality held at 2 — standard Times New Roman Word-letter body with basic PowerPoint-era bar charts; nothing editorial.