At the November Meeting, there was discussion regarding each of the above items. The Independent Trustees also met in executive session to discuss these items. The Board’s considerations included the following, among others:
Nature, Extent, and Quality of the Services. The Board discussed and considered with respect to Wilshire (1) information regarding personnel and their qualifications and services to be provided by Wilshire upon closing of the Acquisition; (2) historical performance information of the Fund, and any investment-related resources Wilshire would employ in managing the Fund’s assets; and (3) various operational considerations, including compliance policies and procedures and related matters. The Board noted Wilshire’s representations that there have been no material changes, nor any anticipated changes, to the services provided to the Fund, and its representation that the Acquisition would not impact Wilshire’s investment capacity or function. The Board concluded that the nature, extent, and quality of the sub-advisory services to be provided by Wilshire upon closing the Acquisition were appropriate and thus supported a decision to approve the Wilshire Agreement.
Cost of Services and Profitability. In analyzing the cost of services and profitability of Wilshire, the Board discussed the following factors: the proposed sub-advisory fee for managing Fund assets, noting that there were no proposed changes to such fees from the Prior Wilshire Agreement, including any breakpoints, discounts, exclusivity periods, or “most-favored nations” provisions, Wilshire’s resources devoted to the Fund, and (where available) the information provided by Wilshire regarding the profitability to Wilshire from providing sub-advisory services to the Fund, noting that any such information may not be reflective of Wilshire’s profitability following the close of the Acquisition.
The Board noted that Wilshire does not serve as non-discretionary sub-adviser to any comparable mutual funds or accounts. The Board considered the specific resources Wilshire would devote to the Fund for analysis, risk management, compliance, and order execution and the extent to which Wilshire’s investment process would be scalable. The Board noted that the compensation paid to Wilshire would continue to be paid by the Adviser, not the Fund, and, accordingly, that the retention of Wilshire did not increase the fees or expenses otherwise incurred by the Fund’s shareholders. On the basis of the Board’s review of the fees to be charged by Wilshire for investment sub-advisory services, the specialized nature of the Fund’s portfolio, and the estimated costs associated with advising with respect to or managing the portfolio, the Board concluded that the level of investment sub-advisory fees was appropriate in light of the services to be provided. It was noted that the Wilshire Agreement was the result of arms-length negotiations between the Adviser and Wilshire.
Economies of Scale. The Board discussed various financial and economic considerations relating to the proposed arrangement with Wilshire, including the potential for economies of scale. The Board noted that, consistent with the Prior Wilshire Agreement, the sub-advisory fees payable to Wilshire would decrease as the level of portfolio assets increased. The Board noted that certain Fund expenses would be subject to an expense limitation agreement and that it would have the opportunity to re-examine periodically whether there were additional economies of scale in the operations of the Fund in the future at different asset levels, as well as the appropriateness of sub-advisory fees payable to Wilshire in the future.
Investment Performance of Wilshire. The Trustees reviewed historical investment performance generated by Wilshire for the Fund and discussed such performance in light of current market conditions.
Other Benefits. The Board discussed other potential benefits that Wilshire might receive from the Fund, including, potentially, an enhanced ability to obtain general research, statistical or other services that may be of value in servicing other clients, an enhanced ability to obtain more favorable execution of portfolio transactions, profits for administrative services or any enhancement of the line of financial products and services available to prospective investors. The Board concluded that other benefits derived by Wilshire from its relationship with the Adviser or the Fund, to the extent such benefits were identifiable or determinable, were reasonable and fair, resulted from the provision of appropriate services to the Fund and investors therein, and were consistent with industry practice and the best interests of the Fund and its shareholders.
12