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 : Seagate Technology - Fundamentals -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Z Analyzer who wrote (1514)	3/30/2000 4:08:00 AM
From: Z Analyzer	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1989

With more time to think about it, there is only one conclusion I can reach. These guys are a conniving buch of crooks! I suspect a fair valuation for the parts of Seagate these scoundrels are trying to steal for $1.2 billion net is more like $8 or $10 billion! No wonder every vulture on the planet is in on the deal. By the time this deal could close, these assets could be worth far more than the value of the Veritas nuclear bomb being offered to SEG shareholders. Veritas now trades at about 60 times revenues and loses boatloads of money and is likely to do so for a long time to come under GAAP accounting. Maybe Veritas is really only worth what the market thought is was 6 or 12 months ago-clearly an unthinkable possibility! SEG has always said it would be a problem if Veritas shares were distributed to SEG shareholders because it would depress the price if everyone sold at once. This deal does not prevent this. Every Board member who voted for this should be fired. Luczo should be fired, FOR CAUSE, which presumably would mean that his stock options would be rescinded. (Remember when Chrysler attempted this with Lee Ioccoco when he attempted the takeover of Chrysler.) Can you imagine the use of Luczo's very highly compensated time plotting this robbery of the shareholders? Shareholders now have no idea what kind of deal might have been attained had he been looking for a resolution that was in their best interests instead of his own. Or had he looked for any deal at all to compete with his own. In the call Luczo talks as if the DD asstes are damaged goods-implies that Veritas would not want them, that the company can't be owned publicly because shareholders have no willingness to take the long term view of the business. To any shareholder in more than a year ago, the DD business is not damaged goods, it is the crown jewel for which the shares were purchased. Fortunately, this deal is not complex as it first seems. The portion of the arrangement which represents Grand Larceny is as staightforward a deal as possible. Boatloads of assets for $1.2 billion. Hopefully, other sharholders will raise the same question as raised by Putnam investments. Their only question was how the $2 billion figure was determined. Luczo's answer was that the total package was good for the shareholders.

To: Z Analyzer who wrote (1514)	3/30/2000 4:40:00 AM
From: Mark Madden	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1989

Z - I just went through the conference call again and read up on a few hundred Yahoo posts. The 99+ % consensus is "What a rip-off". After reading your earlier comment on the answer to "How did you arrive on $2 billion to sell all the operations" I had to laugh. The best they could come up with is they talked to other people before deciding $2 billion to the partnership (including management) was the best deal for shareholders. Steve Luczo states the company will do much better private. Unfortunately the stockholders that supported their futuristic efforts will not benefit because they have been paid off before the gain. The company will do better because the new purchasers understand long term benefits. Apparently, the stockholders Mr. Luczo has been listening to do not. The board and management will be partners with the new outside purchaser. This looks so bad for the management of SEG I have to think they are all finished. It will not take Gates or Buffet to take this company now. It only takes someone with enough money to run a decent PR campaign to force a vote by the shareholders. The shareholder now know the existing management wants to send them down the stream. Any good plan will get rid of the present SEG management and return much greater than $77.50 a share. I would expect something in the $120/share range. I have seen this occur with other stocks I have owned. Regards, Mark