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 : JDS Uniphase (JDSU) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Guy Gordon who wrote (5428)	1/27/2000 7:04:00 PM
From: t2	Respond to of 24042

IF by chance JDSU is talking to SDLI, it could be something like a supply agreement they announced with ETEK at the time of the merger. We did hear CEO of Lucent say that they are working with JDSU to get around the current bottlenecks. However, i still think the possibilities mergers/acquisitions centre around Corning, SDLI or ORTEL.

To: Guy Gordon who wrote (5428)	1/27/2000 10:55:00 PM
From: Tecinvestor	Respond to of 24042

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