Crown Castle comments on ‘unfounded’ litigation brought by Ted Miller

Crown Castle commented on the litigation brought by Ted Miller and Boots Capital Management.”The lawsuit brought by Mr. Miller is without merit and underscores that his activism campaign against Crown Castle is focused on his own self interests. These interests include, among other things, the appointment to the Board of himself and three of his handpicked nominees (including his son-in-law), and getting himself installed as a paid executive of the Company (with the title of executive chairman) after spending more than 22 years away. After previously calling for the Board to act with urgency, Mr. Miller is seeking as part of his litigation a Court order to, among other things, impede progress on the Company’s ongoing CEO search and the strategic and operating review of its fiber business.In addition to advancing a self-serving agenda, impeding value-creation work that Mr. Miller claims to support, and being premised on a host of misleading assertions and outright inaccuracies, Mr. Miller’s litigation seeks inappropriately to weaponize the Delaware Court of Chancery’s recent decision in West Palm Beach Firefighters’ Pension Fund v. Moelis & Co. in an attempt to gain an advantage in his proxy fight against the Company. Contrary to Mr. Miller’s misleading allegations and distinct from Moelis, Elliott did not control Crown Castle before or as a result of the Cooperation Agreement. Today, the Crown Castle Board comprises 12 directors, 11 of whom are independent and only two of whom were appointed with input from Elliott. In truth, Mr. Miller is the one who seeks to dominate Crown Castle by having the Company name him executive chairman and put two of his associates and his son-in-law on the Board… The Board values feedback from all its shareholders and incorporates such feedback and suggestions in its deliberations. As such, all feedback, including the suggestions from Mr. Miller, are being considered as part of the Board’s strategic review, which is focused on generating long-term value for all shareholders. Contrary to the Company’s goals, Mr. Miller’s proxy fight and his lawsuit seek above all else to prioritize his own interests, regardless of the consequences for Crown Castle’s shareholders.”