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.

Biotech / Medical : ARRIS - Another partner -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: chirodoc who wrote (293)	12/8/1997 8:08:00 PM
From: CYBERKEN	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 353

I thought it strange that in part of the original announcement, Arris mentioned the support of "certain stockholders" (unnamed) of around 19% supporting the merger. Now I believe that they took a head count and announced the merger after they satisfied themselves that they had enough proxy votes. IMO: probably no thumbs down, but maybe some lawsuits (the investor's mention of other large shareholders that share their view, IMO indicates a future suit). The investor also mentioned that they have already reduced their position as a result of the merger. That doesn't sound like someone gearing up for a proxy fight. As Andy pointed out, Arris has already reached a 104-week low and didn't bounce off it much despite a terrific deal with Merck. Perhaps the disaffected have already mostly voted with their feet.

To: chirodoc who wrote (293)	12/8/1997 8:47:00 PM
From: Miljenko Zuanic	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 353

To all: In my layman view BVF L.P. is playing dirty games. Their short term interest on ARRS is at stake and their naive, false and non-professional explanation of the products pipeline risk/benefit value for both company (I am not talking about shares dilution in deal, but for Mr. Lampert only ARRS shares have value and SQNA do not or are very overvalued) only show their real position. To promote their position on ARRS regardless the deal. Why they didn't reacted on the news before their cuts on ARRS (and SQNA) holding (together with some other MF which have position on ARRS and SQNA ) and show their intention to preserve both company shares value. Pretty nice manipulation. At least we have signal that their sell-off is done for now and, I hope, they will not have power to effluence vote results. At least, they will not my (ARRS and SQNA). mz BTW, did anyone make some effort to take a second look at APC-366 and possibility that ARRS will continue development of this drug for asthma. ARRS CEO sounded very optimistic in his answer to M. King (from Vector) on question regards the APC-366 future.