Just some info on what this probably is…perhaps it will show up more explicitly on Sedar as per the second half of the statement...

What type of dual class shares are there?

Generally there are three types of dual class shares. One is where there are voting shares, with one vote per share, and the other class is classified as non-voting. The second common type is super voting shares and regular one vote shares. The super voting shares gives the holder more than one vote per share. An example is Magna founder and Chairman Frank Stronach ultimately controls 74 per cent of the vote for the price of less than 1 per cent of the equity. The third type is a voting and multiple voting class, so a class with one vote and another class (multiple) with 10 votes for example.

All types give the owners of voting, super voting or multiple voting class shares control of the company.

In some cases both classes of shares trade on the stock exchange. In other cases only the non-voting or subordinate voting shares trade while the voting or multiple voting shares are privately held.

Why do some companies use a dual class structure?

There are two views on this. The detractors and the supporters.

To detractors, having a dual class share structure is about maintaining control. They point out those owners of the voting shares have more power and can entrench poor management and insulate them consequences from bad decisions they may have made. Also, dual class shares allow for owners/management to keep an iron grip on the company while putting up less than a majority of the equity. This creates the separation between those who put up the money and take the risk and those who don’t own much of the company but have the controlling votes.

Supporters of dual class shares, usually the owners of such, reason that dual class shares protect a company from any unwanted take-over bids because the founders/management control the voting shares and would not allow a take-over bid to occur. This, they say, ensures the stability of the board and management and therefore investors don’t need to worry about change in power at the top. Founders/Management has a longer term vision for the company than investors who are focused on immediate profitability that could undermine the long term success of the company.

Some other info here:

http://pervinfamilybusiness.co…..rnance.pdf