Nanda,
What indications? There is a big difference between being acquired and having part of the company acquired.
Before you make blanket statements like you did, you may want to learn a little bit more about the companies, and more importantly, the personalities behind them.
All "indications" that I have seen, from interviews and articles, are that RNWK does NOT want to be acquired. This fits in perfectly with Glaser's supremely cocky, arrogant, and glum attitude he takes towards those questions, and when he speaks of the future of his company and the sector and niche RNWK serves.
If IBM or someone else took a piece of RNWK, that is good for the stock, but much, much different that an acquisition. I don't think there is any way in hell that Galser gives up control int he near future, unless they are acquired with the specific provision that he maintains complete cand autonomous control of RNWK as a standalone profit center within the acquiring company. In this way they could structure his compensation loosely upon his performance if the acquisition did not happen--providing a safety net if he does in fact, fail, yet not limiting his personal or egotistical upside.
I realize we have some wild-ass people here on the Apple delusion and the super-bulls for RNWK. Let's try and use some common sense prior to making blanket statements.
G |
