Re:Pmarca: If Microsoft goes fully hostile on Yahoo
by neilc on Monday April 28, 2008 @02:01PM
(#175818)
That makes absolutely no sense to me -- the board should have the ability to discriminate among offers on factors beyond the mere acquisition price. Suppose there is an insignificant difference in price between two offers, but one of the offers makes more strategic sense -- in terms of how the new company will align with the buyer's current interests and assets, the buyer's long-term proposed strategy, the strength of their management team, the buyer's financial condition, etc. Forcing the board to choose the higher offer seems remarkably short-sighted: shouldn't the board be concerned with maximizing long-term shareholder value?
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Re:Pmarca: If Microsoft goes fully hostile on Yahoo
by emmett on Monday April 28, 2008 @03:02PM
(#175885)
The shareholders are getting paid right now. That is their long term value. Microsoft buys Yahoo, shareholders get a 50% premium on the value of their shares cash.
Like he says, if part of the offer is in stock, you can use long term projections of the value of that stock as part of the valuation. But it's unlikely Microsoft stock will fall greatly any time soon.
Re:Pmarca: If Microsoft goes fully hostile on Yahoo
by rbanffy on Tuesday April 29, 2008 @07:02PM
(#177088)
Well... Bill promised Windows 7 by mid 2009. If it fails as completely as Vista, there won't before much long-term value for Microsoft out of the corporate high-inertia market.
Either way, it will be fun to watch.
Re:Pmarca: If Microsoft goes fully hostile on Yahoo
by johnrob on Monday April 28, 2008 @07:01PM
(#176097)
This is why I balk at public companies sporting mottos like "Don't be evil". All public companies have one and only one motto, "Maximize shareholder value". If you can carry out additional objectives, that's great, but no motto will trump profit.