Re: Yet Another Arnold Article


"Wayne Niddery [TeamB]" <wniddery@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:4314d587@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

> > If there was any doubt before, this should put the tools business
> > into play.
>
> Why? He has only stated what is true - a BOD *cannot* ignore any such
offer
> if at all reasonable. It would also be true if someone offered to purchase
> the ALM tools. If such an offer seemed to be in the best interests of the
> shareholders and the BOD refused to consider it, they could be sued. Thus
> his statement is not in any way putting up a "For Sale" sign outside of
this
> general context.

So if it's obvious - and in fact mandatory - why did he mention it?


.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Yet Another Arnold Article
    ... >> If there was any doubt before, this should put the tools business into ... > This might sound like a stupid question, but what do you mean by "put the ... > tools business into play"? ... There's no such thing as a stupid question, but they are the easiest to ...
    (borland.public.delphi.non-technical)
  • Re: Yet Another Arnold Article
    ... At 22:21:11, 30.08.2005, Angra Mainyu wrote: ... > If there was any doubt before, this should put the tools business into ... > play. ... Prev by Date: ...
    (borland.public.delphi.non-technical)
  • Re: Yet Another Arnold Article
    ... > If there was any doubt before, this should put the tools business into ... This might sound like a stupid question, but what do you mean by "put the ... tools business into play"? ...
    (borland.public.delphi.non-technical)