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.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: TigerPaw who wrote (327188)	2/26/2007 3:33:49 PM
From: TimF	Respond to of 1575773

They were pressured in to giving up the land with the chemicals Come on! You don't seriously thing that was an asset they were trying to keep- do you? The land did have some usefulness as a dump for them. Still I wouldn't say they cared a great deal about keeping the asset. They rather cared that it not be used in ways that would expose the people using it to contamination and possible health risk. If they didn't care about that the easiest thing to do would have been to not turn over the property (along with the modification to the deed) but simply let the school district seize it through eminent domain. Hooker Chemical would have been in a better liability position and they would have gotten some cash out of the deal. Various people and companies "take from the law" by getting it manipulated or by skirting it after it's made. I don't think the analogy fits very well. In any case it was apparently the school district that manipulated this situation.