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 : CMGI What is the latest news on this stock? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: chalu2 who wrote (17337)	3/19/2000 8:31:00 AM
From: SHGLaw	Respond to of 19700

Chalu, it's not my analysis you disagree with, but the result. My point is that the suit is not crazy or insance. That doesn't mean that I think it should prevail. I agree that sophisticated parties enter into a deal which has the potential for wide fluctuations in consideration. When they do so, they take certain risks knowingly and should be held to the deal even though certains risks come to pass. But this is a shareholder suit, claiming management took risks with shareholder value that they should not have taken. This plaintiff didn't have a say in the deal, and now challenges the propriety of the deal. If it was engage management trying to back out, it would be entirely different. But nobody asked the plaintiff what she thought when they spent her money and put her into what she perceives as an unconscionable deal. So that's the issue, and that's why there's a court system to decide the issue. I won't slam the woman for actions, nor attack the lawsuit as crazy. But that doesn't mean I think she should win either. I've seen many a management's act that I thought was plainly wrong and contrary to the interests of shareholders go without scrutiny (not with cmgi, mind you) and wished that someone would sue the bastards. This is the way one tests the propriety of management actions, and I am all in favor of using the courts for their intended purpose: To challenge management when you believe they have failed to put the shareholder first. I have no problem with that. SHG