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 -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: stock bull who wrote (5354)	8/1/1998 8:49:00 PM
From: Stitch	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 7841

stock bull, I agree that it is not unusual to see a former investment banker end up in a "line" job. It is considerably more unusual to see the original founder, technologist, visionary to last as long in the job as Al Shugart did. That he proved to be worthy of the task to build Seagate over these many years is a remarkable tribute to his skill and acumen as a technologist, businessman, and leader. I have talked to Luczo and find him extremely bright and very capable of grasping technology and its ramifications. In fact, I am quite comfortable with Seagate's change in leadership but very agitated with the way that it was done. best, Stitch

To: stock bull who wrote (5354)	8/3/1998 1:51:00 PM
From: William Epstein	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 7841

stockbull; I don't know enough about the depth of Seagates's management team to answer your questions. In fact, I have been asking about them since I began to participate here. However, it seems likely that Shugart's policies forced them to fire him because they are more concerned about a possible takeover than their markets or profits at the moment. A takeover means, that they all lose their jobs. If I were in that situation I might do the same thing. It doesn't help the company but it buys them time to make some decisions about what they are going to do. They must get their stock price higher to protect themselves and the company. They need some running room. That part is good for shareholders, near term. They still have cash, assets and a dominant market share. If they can hold, get the stock up and avoid a takeover they may yet, turn it around. I am guessing that is thinking inside the board room. Their bankers may be pressuring them too. If current management gets thrown out then the bankers go too. Usually,. a palace coup cannot be done without enthusiastic support from the bankers. That is probably why Shugart went quietly. He wasn't deposed by 1 or 2 but by the whole gang. Running a large public company is not simply doing business and making profits. That's the main idea but there are many other considerations. Remember please, that you must survive long enough to change things or make a profit and I think that after a year of losing money this must be very much on their minds. I might add, that in a CNBC interview the CEO of Quantum said, that he and his board saw nothing about their markets to make them change their thinking or change their business model. They feel it is still valid. The Seagate board may feel the same way about their business. If so, then they don't want to sell the company they want to remain independent and they don't need a financial genius to turn it around. William Epstein