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 : Munch-a-Biotech Today -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: LLCF who wrote (294)	3/19/1999 12:23:00 AM
From: aknahow	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 3158

I agree totally with this part of your post: <What I'm saying is when a large company (INTC) announces a takeover (LEVL) the acquirer doesn't run out and buy the stock first. All hell would break lose and the whole street would know about it.> Dupont did not add to its' holdings of Pioneer right before it made the announcement that it would acquire the rest of the company. I am saying that in most deals that get done the acquiring company takes a position long before any public announcement. TMO used to be against hostile takeovers and if rebuffed they would sell off the position they had taken . I also believe that where one company holds a sizeable position in another that an eventual takeover is more likely. The problem is that these events may take many years to come to pass. Also David, I sometimes argue one thing and then later another. I think the cheapness of the third tier makes partnering less viable since if a company is worth only $100,000,000 how can you do a $50,000,000 deal for 50% of the profits, if any, when the whole company was available for twice that. I really agree that many can be bought for a song, but since they have not been gobbled up I am looking for reasons they are not really that attractive.