Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

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.

Technology Stocks : Ampex Corporation (AEXCA) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Carl R. who wrote (11250)	9/23/1999 9:29:00 PM
From: killybegs	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 17679

Carl, The thing to do is an IPO, then spin off the shares retained by Ampex to shareholders. That way we hold Ampex and Inextv as two separate stocks. Hypothetically, let's say we got 1 Inextv for 2 shares AXC and InextTV got a market cap valuation post IPO of 500 million or $20 per iNextv share or $10 per old Ampex share. The sum of the parts is greater than the whole. That has been the whole story here and the strategy. That's why the holding company has been set up. With any luck, in another year, do the same with Micronet..

To: Carl R. who wrote (11250)	9/23/1999 9:57:00 PM
From: WAI	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 17679

Carl, I'm pretty far out of my field here, but I'll jump in with comments and questions anyway. You said: when the IPO comes, even if Ampex retains 80% ownership of iNEXTV, AXC stock will not reflect the full value of the stock it holds. Thus it will act like a closed end mutual fund and sell at a significant discount. For examples of that look at MMGR and its sub, CARI, or look at IDTC and its sub NTOP. I haven't looked through the examples you mention (and I should), but it bugs me that the situation you describe could persist when it would be so easy to arbitrage away. I thought most CEF discounts and premiums had to do with things like liquidity and risk and undeclared capital gains. Granted, things can and do get out of whack in the market, but if there is free money on the table, someone is going to take it eventually. I'm curious about the fear being expressed in these discussions about how "we" might get screwed in an IPO. Can anyone describe a realistic scenario that involves an IPO of a subsidiary, that a) helps the company, b) benefits someone other than the common shareholders, c) benefits Bramson (keeping in mind how many shares he holds personally), and d) screws "us"? Maybe I'm just not creative enough, but the only kinds of things I can think of border on illegal. Thanks in advance, William