Gregg, absolute pleasure to read through your responses. Thank you. A few months back when I was in a moping phase re: the Mighty Q being a peanut amongst the elephants of telecom, my then line of thinking was that the Q ought to partner-up with some friendly gorilla on the theory that they were too itty-bitty to make a go of it on their own. Your nightmare scenario (what if in winning, they lose) adds a most interesting, if depressing, twist to my prior speculation.
Clearly, if the Q got to be a big enough burr under Ericy's saddle, writing a check for $80/share would be well within Ericy's financial capacity. I see that poster "Clean" has already reminded us that management's sacred obligation is to maximize shareholder wealth to which I respond yes, but . . . .Nobody in their right mind would own Q for a lousy $30-$40/share profit. The risk/reward ratio is just not there. The Q has to be a 5 bagger--minimum--in order to maximize wealth consistent with risk undertaken, IMO. In that sense I would be greatly disappointed if Q management "did their duty" in Clean's view, cause it sure as hell wouldn't be mine.
I'm still in favor of an independent Q as my first preference, but maybe with a little strategic partnering with LU/NT/ALA/TLAB to level the playing field--and maybe that's what Mexico will proffer.
In any event Gregg, I take your point that if the Q's IPRs were shifting sand then there wouldn't be so much hulla-balloo. There is, therefore we're on solid ground. Man, is this a high stakes game or what? Regards, Mike Doyle |
