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: MikeM54321 who wrote (1614)	4/1/2000 6:43:00 PM
From: Stu E.	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1989

Speaking of institutional investors, doesn't Kevin Linder contribute to this thread? What are his views?

To: MikeM54321 who wrote (1614)	4/2/2000 6:59:00 AM
From: Z Analyzer	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 1989

<<Mark- What does their skill have to do with it? What I believe a lot of us are thinking is that SEG is cutting a deal with the institutions that individual shareholders will not get a piece of. >> And you're letting your cynacism get the worst of you. First, today's performance is everything for these money managers. Second, aDDcompany going public is not likely to be a hot IPO unless htey give it away. Third, any deal that was offered to so many institutons would leak and you would have the mother of all lawsuits withoutright criminal activity involved. I can't wait til the class action lawyers get their hands on the valuations done by SEG for their investors. *Who is with me in saying that if SEG goes for $4 bil or more we have prima facia evidence that management attempted to plunder the shareholders and that they should be fired for cause.* Its interesting that we have no idea how much the remaining half of SEG software is worth so we don't really even include it's value. It will be interesting when SEG has to disclose the size of all their component businesses as well as detail their miscellaneous investments. -Z

To: MikeM54321 who wrote (1614)	4/2/2000 3:22:00 PM
From: Mark Madden	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1989

Mike - Thank you for commentary you are providing on this thread. You bring out many original thoughts that deserve discussion. Here are some of my opinions in response. 1. I think you are right that optimism has the best of me. 2. The stockholders are losing up to $30 a share in this deal. IMHO SEG does not have the resources to offer under the table deals to make up this much. The institutions have the most to lose because of their large ownership. Besides, could they trust this new ownership? 3. It is possible Steve Luczo is being forced into this deal but he has been suspect ever since the founder and previous CEO, Al Shurgart, was cut down behind his back and ousted. Steve Luczo then became CEO. It will be up to a new Board of Directors to determine if Steve Luczo stays. I think not. He knew nothing of the disk drive business a few years ago and his performance has not been good. It is the enterprise drive business that has kept SEG from losing money the past few years. Even the enterprise drive business lost market share while Steve Luczo was in charge. 4. It is possible SEG could be sold to VRTS for the benefit of the shareholders but the shareholders deserve much more than 85% of the stock they already own and 5 bucks. More likely a company like EMC could do a leveraged buyout and spin off VRTS stock for sale to VRTS. Any company that purchases SEG needs to give the shareholders the value they deserve. IMHO SEG has been a buyout candidate for months with the high value of VRTS shares. I believed a deal was not reached because SEG likely wanted $50 to $75 a share plus the VRTS value. A hostile takeover would be difficult because SEG would claim the company value is way more that any tendered amount. Now all that has changed and I expect to see several offers come forth. I expect them near June because most managers evaluating a takeover package will want to present them at the last minute. This will keep competitors from having time to implement their offer. Regards, Mark