Better.com's internal power struggle intensified this week as CEO Vishal Garg nominated three director candidates to the company's board while the mortgage lender battles over voting procedures and shareholder consent deadlines.
Garg pushed the written consent deadline to October 2, extending the timeline for shareholders to vote on his slate of board nominees. Better countered that Garg has not yet produced written consents demonstrating majority shareholder support for his selections, raising questions about whether he actually controls the voting power needed to reshape the board.
The conflict centers on who controls Better.com's governance at a critical moment for the online mortgage platform. Garg has faced mounting pressure from investors and board members over the company's operational challenges, financial performance, and executive leadership. By nominating new directors, Garg attempts to install allies who would support his continued tenure as CEO and his strategic direction for the company.
Better's position suggests that shareholder approval remains uncertain. The company's statement implies that Garg may lack the votes needed to pass his board slate, even with the extended timeline. This creates a standoff where neither side can claim clear authority over the company's future.
The mortgage industry has watched Better.com's trajectory with keen attention. The company once valued at $6 billion during its 2021 peak, lost significant market value as rising interest rates crushed mortgage demand across the sector. Better laid off hundreds of employees in 2022 and 2023, with Garg personally announcing cuts via Zoom in an approach widely criticized for its insensitivity.
For Better's employees, this board fight carries direct consequences. New directors could shift company strategy, potentially accelerating more layoffs or pivoting toward profitability. For lenders financing Better's operations, board composition matters because it signals management stability and governance quality. For mortgage brokers and loan officers who use Better's platform, the outcome determines whether the company remains a reliable technology partner or faces operational disruption.
The October 2 deadline creates a compressed timeline for shareholder activists to mobilize. Institutional investors holding Better stock must decide whether to back Garg's nominees or support alternative candidates. The written consent process allows shareholders to vote without a formal shareholder meeting, speeding up the timeline but also reducing transparency.
Better's refusal to confirm Garg's majority support suggests that significant shareholders remain unconvinced by his leadership. Board fights of this nature typically escalate quickly. Garg could attempt to secure additional shareholder commitments before the October 2 deadline. Better's board could nominate alternative candidates, triggering a formal proxy contest.
The stakes extend beyond Better's boardroom. Online mortgage platforms struggled under the weight of higher rates and reduced purchase activity. Better.com's survival depends on cutting costs and returning to profitability before capital reserves deplete. Director selection will determine the strategic choices available to management over the next 18 to 24 months.
October 2 approaches quickly. Shareholders must decide whether Garg's leadership merits continued control or whether new board members could stabilize the company's future.