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 : MRV Communications (MRVC) opinions? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Sector Investor who wrote (11125)	10/31/1998 12:07:00 PM
From: Bruce L	Respond to of 42804

Sector Investor: I also wanted to add my thanks for your unselfish contribtution to this thread. Just awesome. Personally, I can't recall ever seeing a more insightfull or valuable post on SI. Thanks. Just a short observation about your question about 'what a company can do to protect its existence.' In the hostile takeover context, a body of law has developed. Its essence is that the Board of Directors' primary duties are to the stockholders as a whole as opposed to the officers and/or major stockholders controlling the company. This is why the B of D can never summarily reject a hostile takeover but must make a "good faith" effort to evaluate it, often using investment bankers etc to backstop their decision in the event of a lawsuit seeking personal liability. And it is also why many "poison pill" provisions have been invalidated by the courts. I'm not an expert in this field and haven't heard of a B of D being barred from buying shares during a takeover attempt, but its possible it may have happened. Thanks again, Bruce