Appears Glass Lewis & Co currently maintains approximately 37% of the market share for proxy advisory services - but does that mean that all of their clients vote as per Glass Lewis reports recommend? If so, given they collectively advise $20 trillion worth of assets, would someone please explain why this is not toxic to a free market.
> given they collectively advise $20 trillion worth of assets, would someone please explain why this is not toxic to a free market
They're recommendations. Reading board proposals and working out the consequences of CEO pay packages is (a) hard and (b) not particularly rewarding. Instead of every investment firm having someone doing hard and non-rewarding work, they outsource it to these proxy advisory firms.
Keep in mind who these advisory firms' customers are: the investors. It could be impolite for XYZ shareholder to publicly vote against Elon Musk. It is easier to call one's proxy advisory firm and let them know your thoughts. (It would also be more effective, from a political perspective, at achieving her goal.)
(Nitpick: they advise in respect of $20 trillion of assets. They don't make buy/sell decisions.)
SOURCE: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glass_Lewis