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 : Siebel Systems (SEBL) - strong buy? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Melissa McAuliffe who wrote (1239)	3/12/1998 4:28:00 PM
From: Kevin Rose	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 6974

Hi Melissa: I agree with your assessment on my objectivity; I am biased. I have always tried to make that known in my postings. However, if you excluded all objective postings from SI, that would leave Trader Dave, and Shege only on a good day :) I try to balance some of the discussions, with my own CLFY-centric view of things. There seems to be enough SEBL- and VNTV-centric opinions already. What little value I can add has to do with being in the middle of the battle. However, I am extremely limited in the information that I can disclose (for obvious reasons). I have tried to limit my comments to information in the public domain and my personnal opinion. Hopefully, that furthers the whole point of SI: meaningful discussions with differing opinions and viewpoints. Fortunately, CLFY being such a great place to work (warning: bias alert!), I am not restricted on posting, given that I follow the insider rules. Don't know Tom Seibel. Have listened to some conference calls. He is a very impressive speaker (I have heard this from others who have seen him speak). The meat of my opinion on the merger was gathered from public sources (e.g. their web page, etc). I don't know if I made this point before, but I really don't want to see SEBL stumble. It would drive the whole sector down, affecting all companies (remember when we dived, and dragged the rest down?) But, when investors drive SEBL up to unfathomable valuations, it increases the risk to all companies in this sector. We can only hope that SEBL holds onto their valuation as CLFY and VNTV rise. re: SCOP. I'm sure they contemplated such a move previously. What I am saying is that the necessary technical due diligence was hurried. That, after all, will be a key determining factor as to the success of the merger. My opinion (ack! more color commentary!) is that Mr. Seibel is more interested in the market impact of the merger and does not really think that the technical details are all that important. Leave that to the geeks to sort out, right? Many a merger has stumbled for exactly this reason. btw: I am certainly not offended by being called 'biased'. Good luck with your SCOP/SEBL investment.

To: Melissa McAuliffe who wrote (1239)	3/12/1998 5:44:00 PM
From: Kevin Rose	Respond to of 6974

Hi Michelle: Sorry, just realized I didn't answer one of your questions. About the 10 days for the SEBL/SCOP deal to come together. Got it from First Call based on an Adam Harkness piece published 3/11. It conveys a discussion with Michelle Axelson, CFO of SCOP, which says that the acquisition came together quickly, 10 days from approach to close. I think you can get it from First Call (I don't think I can post it here). Boy, I guess that means less than 10 days of technical evaluation (objection! conjecture!) Good luck.

To: Melissa McAuliffe who wrote (1239)	3/12/1998 9:14:00 PM
From: snail	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 6974

I have been involved in acquisitions. Surprises are the rule, not the exception. The larger the acquisition, the more problems. If the decision was fundamentally sound then obstacles are overcome but many deals fall apart or turn sour. Sometimes the reason is simply incompatible corporate cultures. It is not wise to downplay the risk. Even the smartest and toughest make mistakes. This investment just got riskier, does the reward seem comensurate?