Clinton Group Responds To Wet Seal Board Letter

NEW YORK, Sept. 28, 2012 /PRNewswire/ -- Clinton Group, Inc. ("Clinton Group"), the second-largest holder of stock in Wet Seal, Inc. (Nasdaq: WTSLA) today issued a letter to its fellow stockholders of the Company.

The full text of the letter is included below.

Clinton Spotlight Fund, L.P. c/o Clinton Group, Inc. 9 West 57th Street New York, New York 10019

September 28, 2012

To Our Fellow Stockholders of The Wet Seal, Inc.:

The Clinton Group ("Clinton Group") is the second largest owner of the Company and is seeking to upgrade the Company's Board of Directors to ensure the Board has experienced and capable professionals that can guide the business to long-term success. The Company's performance over the last five years has been extremely frustrating and unnecessarily poor, as the Board has made a series of hiring and strategic missteps and failed to optimize the balance sheet. All the while, the Board has been content to re-nominate themselves as directors, despite the fact that none of them have specialty retail or recent operating experience.

The Company has no Chief Executive Officer. We do not believe stockholders should entrust this critical decision to the current Board. They have not made good hiring decisions in the past. We have no reason to believe their judgment on executives has suddenly improved.

We are pleased that Institutional Shareholder Services (ISS) and other research analysts agree with us that changes in the composition of the Board are warranted. We encourage you to support our proposals as well.

We also write – with apologizes for taking your time on this topic – to correct the hysterical and misleading letter issued by the Board yesterday. With the high level of support we are receiving, the Board is understandably feeling some pressure. Given their inability to defend their own track record (a stock that is down 50% on their watch while same-store sales have been negative in more than 75% of the last 60 months), they have instead turned to the refuge of the indefensible: attacking the messenger. Their letter is shameful.

1 2 3 Next › Last »