SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Strategies & Market Trends : Arbitrage Plays
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: chartseer who wrote (250)9/16/2000 9:05:35 PM
From: Paul Senior  Read Replies (1) of 376
 
PMS and FJ look risky to me. The prime reason is that the Fed's have asked for additional information on both deals. Possibly my error, but I just assume there's now added risk. I realize that just because the gov't seeks additional info. that's not necessarily a negative. Such requests, while not exactly routine, are common enough. I have no idea why the PMS deal requires more of a gov't look. The deal fell through once (at a higher price and different bidder). The longer this deal now gets postponed, the riskier it gets that the buyer could cancel or ask for a reduced price - imo (and having no facts.)

I've passed on FJ because the combination of FJ and GP will create a huge company that could - imo and with limited knowledge - cause the feds to attach stringent conditions to the deal. I do like GP at current price, and I've started a small position there. FJ now would be a great way for me to get GP at a discount - if the deal were to be consummated. I'll wait for now though.
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  

HomeMailHotSubjectMarksPeopleMarksKeepersSettings
Terms Of UseContact UsCopyright/IP PolicyPrivacy PolicyAbout UsFAQAdvertise on SI
© 2025 Knight Sac Media.  Data provided by Twelve Data, Alpha Vantage, and CityFALCON News