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 : Ballard Power -world leader zero-emission PEM fuel cells -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Hawkeye who wrote (4146)	4/30/1999 5:33:00 AM
From: Sleeperz	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 5827

No, I think M&A is driven by then need to make more money, to increase share price, to make the shareholders happy and those that have stock options. Recently the talk is global economy so companies are merging to form global companies and from the low price of oil early this year. Now that oil is not hovering around $10 but $18, it is a no brainer they are going to make lotsa $$$$$$, since they all restructured to make money at $10 a barrel. With there $$$$, Big oil will back anything that uses gasoline that could be SOFC. Whenever there is a M&A lots of employees get cut, underperforming divisions are soldoff, cutoff or closed. So then there is less competition and then they have more control over the pricing. BP and Amaco, Exxon and Mobil, all had gas stations that competed with each other. Just like when MB and Chrysler merged, one less competitor and certain synergies, MB high end, Chrysler lowend. But Chrysler also cut off the Plymouth line and the Dodge line. CL Do you think their M&A activity might be driven by a survival instinct?

To: Hawkeye who wrote (4146)	5/30/1999 12:35:00 PM
From: Brumar89	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 5827

Do you think their M&A activity might be driven by a survival instinct? Have been watching big oil for a couple decades. This is just the old herd instinct operating. Years back they all herded into synthetic fuels - oil shale and coal; then into minerals. There were rationales. Then they all herded back out. There was a rationale for that too - core competency. The idea they need to be big to operate in big risky projects in Asia or Africa is false - joint ventures exist partly to spread risk. Within these mammoth companies, they all go through periodic restructurings which are largely much ado about nothing too. While they cut head counts and costs, they also absorb attention within the company. What do you think is going to going within Exxon, Mobil, Chevron, Texaco, et al for the next few years - the merger and the necessary restructurings, firings . . . nothing else.