(d)
Proposal No. 4 — The Advisory Charter Proposals — to approve and adopt, on a non-binding advisory basis, certain differences between the Current Charter and the Proposed Charter, which are being presented in accordance with the requirements of the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (the “SEC”) as nine separate sub-proposals (which we refer to, collectively, as the “Advisory Charter Proposals”):
(1)
Advisory Charter Proposal A — New DraftKings will have 2,100,000,000 shares of authorized capital stock, which will consist of (i) 900,000,000 shares of Class A common stock of New DraftKings, par value $0.0001 per share (“New DraftKings Class A common stock”), (ii) 900,000,000 shares of Class B common stock of New DraftKings, par value $0.0001 per share (“New DraftKings Class B common stock”) and (iii) 300,000,000 shares of preferred stock, par value $0.0001 per share, as opposed to DEAC having 401,000,000 shares of capital stock authorized, consisting of (i) 380,000,000 shares of Class A common stock of DEAC, par value $0.0001 per share (“DEAC Class A common stock”), (ii) 20,000,000 shares of Class B common stock of DEAC, par value $0.0001 per share (“DEAC Class B common stock”) and (iii) 1,000,000 shares of preferred stock, par value $0.0001 per share;
(2)
Advisory Charter Proposal B — Holders of shares of New DraftKings Class A common stock will be entitled to cast one vote per share of New DraftKings Class A common stock and holders of shares of New DraftKings Class B common stock will be entitled to cast 10 votes per share of New DraftKings Class B common stock on each matter properly submitted to New DraftKings’ stockholders entitled to vote, as opposed to each share of DEAC Class A common stock and DEAC Class B common stock being entitled to one vote per share on each matter properly submitted to DEAC’s stockholders entitled to vote;
(3)
Advisory Charter Proposal C — Each member of the board of directors of New DraftKings will be elected at each annual meeting of stockholders (or special meeting in lieu thereof), as opposed to DEAC having three classes of directors, with only one class of directors being elected in each year and each class serving a three-year term;
(4)
Advisory Charter Proposal D — Any action required or permitted to be taken by the stockholders of New DraftKings may be taken by written consent until the time that Mr. Robins no longer beneficially owns at least a majority of the voting power of the capital stock of New DraftKings, as opposed to only holders of shares of DEAC Class B common stock having the ability to take stockholder action by written consent;
(5)
Advisory Charter Proposal E — The Eighth Judicial District Court of Clark County, Nevada, or under certain circumstances another state or federal court located within the State of Nevada, will be the exclusive forum for certain actions and claims, as opposed to the Court of Chancery of the State of Delaware or under certain circumstances another state or federal court located within the State of Delaware;
(6)
Advisory Charter Proposal F — Amendments to certain provisions of the Proposed Charter will require either the affirmative vote of the holders of at least two-thirds of the voting power of the outstanding capital stock of New DraftKings or the affirmative vote of the holders of a majority of the voting power of the outstanding capital stock of New DraftKings, depending on the number of shares of New DraftKings capital stock beneficially owned by Mr. Robins at such time, as opposed to amendments to certain provisions of the Current Charter requiring an amendment to be conducted in accordance with Delaware law, subject to certain exceptions;
(7)
Advisory Charter Proposal G — The bylaws of New DraftKings may be amended, altered, rescinded or repealed or adopted either (x) by the New DraftKings board of directors or (y) (i) the affirmative vote of the holders of at least two-thirds of the voting power of the capital stock of New DraftKings or (ii) the affirmative vote of the holders of a majority of the voting power of the outstanding capital stock of New DraftKings, depending on the number of shares of New DraftKings capital stock beneficially owned by Mr. Robins at such time, as opposed to the bylaws of DEAC requiring the approval of a majority of the board of directors of DEAC or by the holders of a majority of DEAC’s outstanding shares;