It’s Time to Refresh Delek’s Board and Elect New Directors. We are asking for your support to replace three incumbent, entrenched directors — William J. Finnerty, David Wiessman and Shlomo Zohar — with our three highly qualified and independent nominees — Randall D. Balhorn, George J. Damiris and Robert Edward Kent, Jr. We believe that Messrs. Finnerty, Wiessman and Zohar have been complicit in the operational and tactical missteps committed by Delek’s board over the past several years — either through direct collaboration with Mr. Yemin or lack of fortitude to challenge his iron fist (we cannot be certain unless and until Delek responds to our books and records demand under Section 220 of Delaware’s General Corporation Law).
As highlighted above, under their leadership, Delek has (i) expended time and resources on non-core activities, (ii) allowed corporate overhead costs to significantly increase, (iii) engaged in affiliate transactions at non-market values, and (iv) advanced Mr. Yemin’s personal agenda at the stockholders’ expense. Specifically, as members of Delek’s Compensation Committee, Messrs. Finnerty, Wiessman and Zohar are directly responsible for approving Mr. Yemin’s excessive compensation. We have serious concerns that Mr. Wiessman’s decisions regarding Mr. Yemin’s compensation, as well as his support of Mr. Yemin’s operational decisions, may be influenced by his prior relationship with Mr. Yemin as Mr. Wiessman served as Chairman of Alon USA Partners GP, LLC during Mr. Yemin’s tenure as Chairman of Alon USA Energy, Inc. It’s unclear what guardrails, if any, Delek has in place to avoid any improper conflicts of interest between Messrs. Wiessman and Yemin.
It’s clear from Delek’s 2020 director election that Delek’s stockholders have similarly lost faith in Messrs. Finnerty and Zohar. Out of seven director candidates, Mr. Finnerty was dead last in “For” votes and received the highest number of “Withhold” votes while Mr. Zohar ranked fifth out of seven in “For” votes and received the third highest number of “Withhold” votes.
We strongly believe that Delek’s stockholders would be better served by replacing Messrs. Finnerty, Wiessman and Zohar with new independent directors who will bring sophisticated expertise to Delek. Send a message to Delek that its operational failures will not continue to be tolerated!
We are confident that our director nominees, Randall D. Balhorn, George J. Damiris and Robert Edward Kent, Jr., have the experience and vision to fully explore all available strategies to assist in creating substantial value for the benefit of all Delek stockholders. Our nominees would offer a fresh perspective and their extensive industry experience would help to realign Delek’s operating and capital decisions. We expect that these nominees, if elected, would urge a more prudent business model favoring a competitive asset base focused on financial discipline and cash flow generation. Most importantly, our nominees will be independent from Delek’s current management – and also from CVR and its affiliates – and will disrupt the existing Delek board’s deference to management to ensure that the board acts in the best interests of Delek’s stockholders.
We are asking you to support us in putting an end to the board’s operational and tactical missteps and awarding of excessive compensation to Mr. Yemin by voting the GOLD proxy card FOR Randall D. Balhorn, George J. Damiris and Robert Edward Kent, Jr. as directors.
SETTING THE RECORD STRAIGHT
You may have received Delek’s desperate March 25, 2021 letter and later communications which are full of misleading statements and mischaracterizations. As Delek’s largest stockholder, we think it’s important to set the record straight so that your voting decision is not based on false claims or assertions.
We are not a competitor of Delek. In an effort to discredit our nominees, Delek has conveniently adopted the position that CVR is a “direct competitor” to Delek and is using this proxy contest to distract Delek’s stockholders from Delek’s “successful execution of [its] business model and strategy.” In fact, Delek refers to CVR as its “competitor” no less than eight (8) times in its March 25 letter, a surprising detail considering that Delek neglected to identify CVR as a competitor in its Form 10-K where it refers to its most significant sources of competition. Delek, not CVR, appears to be the one misleading stockholders by omitting material information from its public disclosures.
4