Getlink SE's Voting Rights Structure: A Double-Edged Sword for Shareholders

Getlink SE, operator of the Channel Tunnel and a key player in European transport infrastructure, has long been a bastion of steady dividends and long-term operational stability. Yet beneath its reliable surface lies a governance mechanism that could reshape its shareholder dynamics: a dual voting rights system that rewards patience but raises governance questions. This article examines how the discrepancy between theoretical and exercisable voting rights—785 million versus 777 million as of May 2025—impacts investor strategy, ownership concentration, and the company's appeal to different capital pools.

The Voting Rights Discrepancy: Mechanism and Metrics
Getlink's dual voting rights system grants shareholders double votes for ordinary shares held in registered form for at least two years. This structure creates a gap between theoretical voting rights (all shares, including those with suspended rights) and exercisable rights (excluding suspended shares). As of May 2025, this gap narrowed slightly compared to August 2024:
- August 2024: Theoretical = 709.7M; Exercisable = 701.2M (Gap: ~8.5M)
- May 2025: Theoretical = 785M; Exercisable = 777M (Gap: ~8M)
Ask Aime: How does Getlink's dual voting rights affect shareholders' strategies and company appeal?
The shrinking gap suggests more shares are now eligible for double voting rights, likely due to shareholders meeting the two-year holding threshold. This trend underscores the system's design: long-term investors gain disproportionate influence, while short-term players are sidelined.
Strategic Implications: Stability vs. Governance Risks
Pros for Long-Term Investors
The two-year requirement acts as a barrier to turnover, stabilizing Getlink's shareholder base. This could reduce volatility and encourage capital allocation aligned with long-term infrastructure needs. For instance, the May 2025 General Meeting saw a record quorum of 79.09% of voting rights, signaling high engagement among core shareholders.
The structure may also deter activist investors seeking quick gains, allowing management to focus on steady revenue streams from rail freight and passenger services.
Risks for Governance and Liquidity
Conversely, concentrated voting power raises concerns about minority shareholder rights. If a small group of long-term holders controls a majority, decisions could prioritize their interests over others. For example, dividend policies or capital allocation might favor stability over growth, limiting upside for shorter-term holders.
The system could also reduce liquidity for shares traded frequently, as their voting rights remain halved until the two-year mark. This might deter speculative investors, though it could also limit short-term volatility.
Market Performance and Voting Rights Trends
Historically, Getlink's stock has mirrored its stable earnings profile, with limited volatility. However, the narrowing voting rights gap since 2020 suggests a growing proportion of shares qualify for double votes, potentially reinforcing management's grip. For investors, this means:
- Patient investors benefit from reduced turnover and dividend predictability.
- Short-term traders face higher barriers to influence and may see limited gains.
Conclusion: A Buy for the Long Game, but Beware Governance
Getlink's voting rights structure is a double-edged sword. For investors with a multi-year horizon, it offers a shield against volatility and a seat at the table for strategic decisions. The May 2025 data reinforces that long-term shareholders are consolidating influence, which could stabilize returns.
However, governance risks loom large. Short-term players and activist investors should proceed cautiously, as their voice diminishes over time. For now, the structure appears to favor buy-and-hold strategies, but shareholders must monitor whether concentrated control stifles innovation or fair returns.
Investment Thesis:
- Buy: For investors with a 5+ year horizon seeking stable dividends and low turnover.
- Hold: For those neutral on governance but willing to accept reduced voting power.
- Avoid: For short-term traders or activists seeking influence over corporate strategy.
Getlink's governance model is a masterclass in balancing stability and control—but only if shareholders align with its long-term vision.
Comments
No comments yet