Your comparison to ATT/LU as an example of why JDSU could not be taken out by LU or NT is not instructive. There are many people, including myself, who were familiar with the LU divestiture who felt that it was not a wise thing for ATT to have done. Merely because LU might have been able to attract more business as a result of it having been spun off should not have been, in and of itself, the reason to spin it off. When LU was part of ATT the benefits of that relationship, imho, outweighed the benefits of the subsequent spin off.
If I understand your rationale, if a subsidiary of a company can do better on its own that as a subsidiary, it should be spun off; conversely, a company should not seek to acquire a company that can do better on its own.
Merely because JDSU might lose certain clientele if it were to be acquired by, say, LU, does not necessarily mean that would, in your words, be "very bad." The resultant synergies formed as a result of such an acquisition may, indeed, outweigh the possible loss of certain JDSU clientele. I don't think you are in a position to evaluate those synergies. It just might be more important to, say, LU, to acquire JDSU because of the advantages such an acquisition could provide to LU, than the risk of losing, say, NT, as a client.
Thus, I find myself, once again, disagreeing with our analysis. And, incidentally, I didn't purchase JDSU stock with the hope that it would be acquired. I purchased JDSU stock because of what I perceive to be its prospects of continued growth.
Tecinvestor |
