Amy - Re: "2. He has a conflict of interest as a shareholder of a foundation the moment his foundation vote would conflict with his vote as a board member. His position as a board member makes him fiduciary responsible for the well-being of the company, which I believe would include avoiding a $700M fine for any cancellation of the merger due to any potential board-level activities. This would mean that if his foundation has a conflicting vote to his initial vote as a HP BOD, it would require him to step down from the foundation so that his foundation's vote doesn't conflict with his vote as a board member. By not stepping down, he has placed HP in the potential position of being liable for $700M. (Again, this has nothing to do with whether I agree or disagree with the merger.)
3. Why take it public? Anyone who has good, solid reasons can win anyone, and any board? Why take a hostile approach to business? Why not take each board member aside and win them over, one by one? Bad PR can be the kiss of death.
4. A founder should never ever get in a legal tangle with their own company, and that includes any siblings of founders. "
These are very good points - there is clearly a mess going on at HP over this merger.
Re: "If HP and Compaq falter, this impacts Intel. What is Intel's backup plan here? As an Intel shareholder, this situation doesn't make me feel comfortable. "
Intel cannot get directly involved with this merger. Their only "plan" is to keep improvong their architecture and products and marketing them to ALL customers - IBM, Dell, HP, Compaq, NEC, Hitachi, SGI, etc.
Paul |
