Saba Capital Management, the activist hedge fund founded by Boaz Weinstein, is mounting a hostile bid to take control of Edinburgh Worldwide Investment Trust (EWIT) by replacing its entire board with three of its own nominees. Saba, which is the largest shareholder in the trust, has put forward Gabriel Gliksberg, Michael Joseph and Jassen Trenkow for election at the upcoming annual general meeting. The fund is urging all EWIT shareholders to vote for its nominees and reject the re-election of the incumbent directors, according to multiple reports.
EWIT's most valuable asset is a stake in Elon Musk's SpaceX, estimated to be worth around £165 million. SpaceX is reportedly planning to list later this year in what could be one of the biggest stock market floats in history, with a potential valuation of as much as £1.3 trillion. The trust's exposure to the private space company has been a central point of contention in the takeover battle.
Saba's campaign has focused heavily on EWIT's decision to sell down its stake in SpaceX. According to Saba Capital Management, the board sold 35.4% of the SpaceX investment in October 2025 at an obviously low valuation. The fund claims that this sale cost EWIT shareholders an estimated £86 million, or approximately 10.8% of current net asset value, based on the reported $1.75 trillion valuation SpaceX is targeting for its forthcoming IPO. Boaz Weinstein has argued that the sale defied commercial logic. Furthermore, over the past five years, EWIT's performance ranked 66th out of 66 equity trusts with more than £500 million in assets, according to research cited by Saba.
In response, EWIT's board had proposed an exit tender offer that would allow shareholders to realise almost all of their stake, except for SpaceX, which would be held until a future liquidity event such as an IPO. However, shareholders rejected the company's proposed tender offer at a general meeting on 10 April 2026, according to research reports. EWIT chairman Jonathan Simpson-Dent has warned that Saba hopes investor fatigue will reduce turnout at the AGM, allowing Saba to win the vote and take control.
Saba's previous two attempts to unseat the board, last year and in January, were defeated after a large turnout of shareholders opposed the plans. At a requisitioned general meeting in January, 92% of EWIT investors without links to Saba voted against its resolutions, according to multiple reports. Shareholder advisory firms PIRC and ISS have recommended that investors reject Saba's nominees. PIRC expressed concerns that Saba's three candidates could undermine the board's independence, while ISS said Saba had not presented a compelling case for a change in control.
Saba has countered that the board's tender proposal would have forced shareholders into untradeable SpaceX tracker shares and exposed them to significant potential tax liabilities. The fund argues that its own Enhanced Liquidity Proposal is the best outcome for shareholders, though specific terms have not been disclosed. Saba Capital Management has stated that the board's proposal was rejected by shareholders, making its alternative more relevant.
The Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) has come under fire from leading industry figures for failing to protect small shareholders in investment trusts targeted by activists. The FCA has launched a review into the rules after Saba took stakes in investment trusts and tried to install its own directors. However, Simon Walls, the FCA's head of markets, has suggested the watchdog would be reluctant to intervene and that trusts could take legal action or amend their articles.
Several unknowns remain. The exact date of the upcoming AGM has not been confirmed, and current shareholder voting intentions and expected turnout are unclear. The precise valuation of the SpaceX stake and the impact of the October 2025 sale are disputed, with Saba claiming a significant loss and the board defending its actions. The specific terms of Saba's Enhanced Liquidity Proposal have not been made public, leaving shareholders to weigh the competing options without full information.