The long‑running tussle between Diana Shipping and Genco Shipping & Trading escalated into a public relations duel this week after both bulker owners issued fresh actions aimed directly at shareholders ahead of a looming proxy fight.
New York-listed Genco issued a detailed rebuttal accusing Diana of spreading “false and misleading claims” in its campaign to gain influence over the company, while the Greek owner unveiled a dedicated campaign website as part of its push to “unlock immediate value” at Genco.
The Diana document laid out grievances with Genco’s capital allocation and board performance and frames Diana’s push as an effort to accelerate value for Genco shareholders through board change and strategic action.
Meanwhile, in its new statement, Genco sought to dismantle several of Diana’s arguments through a “myths and facts” presentation aimed directly at shareholders.
Among the points challenged by Genco was Diana’s claim that the company had underperformed its peers. Genco argued that its total shareholder return had outpaced both Diana and the broader dry bulk sector over multiple periods, including one-year, three-year and five-year timelines.
The company also disputed Diana’s suggestion that Genco was trading at a steep discount to net asset value, arguing that the rival owner was relying on outdated fleet values and selective data.
According to Genco, current analyst estimates place the company’s net asset value between roughly $26.50 and $26.80 per share, above Diana’s previously disclosed $23.50-per-share proposal.
Genco further accused Diana of attempting to secure control of the company without paying shareholders an appropriate premium.
“There is no basis for trusting Diana,” Genco said, claiming the rival owner had a history of pursuing transactions that favoured insiders over outside shareholders.
The company also defended its financial and operating performance, pointing to stronger first-quarter results and improved market conditions across the dry bulk sector.
The company rejected Diana’s criticism of its capital allocation strategy, saying its dividend policy and share buyback programme had delivered significant returns to investors while maintaining balance sheet discipline.
Another key point in Genco’s “myths and facts” campaign focused on governance.
The company argued Diana’s proposed board nominees lacked the independence and sector experience needed to strengthen Genco’s board, while also criticising what it described as weak governance standards at Diana itself.
Genco additionally claimed that several nominees put forward by Diana had links to companies that experienced bankruptcies or substantial shareholder value destruction.
Diana, however, continued to press ahead with its campaign, arguing that change is needed at Genco to unlock value and improve strategic direction.
The Semiramis Paliou-led owner launched a campaign website aimed at persuading shareholders to support its board nominees and broader proposals ahead of the annual meeting.
Diana has argued that a combination of the two companies could create a stronger and more efficient dry bulk platform with improved scale and operational synergies. The company has steadily built up its stake in Genco and has positioned itself as pushing for governance and value improvements.
The public back-and-forth follows a series of private and public overtures that have characterised the battle to date.
Diana’s campaign website is the latest step in a playbook often used by activist investors and rival owners.
With the annual shareholder meeting approaching, both companies are now fighting to secure investor backing. In this case, the public exchange has already added a new, noisier chapter to the Diana-Genco saga and set the terms for what looks likely to be a contested fight over strategy, governance and who gets to steer the ship. Shareholder reaction will determine the next move on June 18.
