back to article Sun shareholders act to block Oracle deal

Larry Ellison might be expressing his love for Sun Microsystems' Sparc, but there's no guarantee the architecture will actually finish up in his arms. A group of Sun shareholders have gone to court in an attempt to block the Oracle chief executive's proposed $5.6bn acquisition of the company. Shareholders have filed three …

COMMENTS

This topic is closed for new posts.
Anonymous Coward

Fair price?

Keep this up and Sun will be filing for bankruptcy.

What value will the stock be then?

0
0
Dead Vulture

Sun had $7B in cash three years ago

Why would we sell Sun for $5.5B (minus cash on hand) today?

I sure hope Scott and his little mini-me ponytail boy are not getting a bonus out of this buy out deal.

How can you lose the whole value of Sun plus $2B in three years and get paid tens of millions of dollars? I don't get this country.

They should be tared and feathered as I do not believe in violence.

0
0
Thumb Down

Anon: Selling the Company

Anonymous Coward posts, "I sure hope Scott and his little mini-me ponytail boy are not getting a bonus out of this buy out deal."

My understanding is that there was monetary incentive to sell the company for them. This is the way their salary structures were set up, part of their contract - this is what the Sun Board of Directors wanted.

Anonymous Coward posts, "How can you lose the whole value of Sun plus $2B in three years and get paid tens of millions of dollars?"

Sun was close to breaking even, producing innovative new products, and competing well in the market place on a feature by feature basis. The market and consumer just did not accept the message they had after the dot-com bust - their reputation never recovered. They were PAID to sell the company - this was part of their compensation package... this was part of their job.

It was up to the new CEO to top the bleeding, bundle Sun into a company worth purchasing, and the old CEO to help. This is how you get paid - doing your job.

Some of us in the marketplace wishes something else could have happened, but Scott and the CEO were told this is what needed to be done, through their compensation packages.

0
0
Flame

not just sun

Anonymous ~~~ How can you lose the whole value of Sun plus $2B in three years and get paid tens of millions of dollars?

The stock markets started to plunge once investors started feeling that there was going to be "change" in America All stocks (not just Sun) payed the price. All of those people who wanted "change" in America got their wish - a global recession.

0
0
Flame

Re: not just sun

"The stock markets started to plunge once investors started feeling that there was going to be "change" in America All stocks (not just Sun) payed the price. All of those people who wanted "change" in America got their wish - a global recession."

Hilarious! The Democrats were taking control and that's why there's a recession - it was nothing to do with the widespread fraud, idiotic lending practices, expensive wars, backward attitudes in big business (keep those SUVs coming, eh, bankrupt auto-makers).

This reminds me of the jokes back in the 1980s when UK unemployment was at 3 million people and it was said that if Thatcher and the Conservatives were to lose a general election, they'd blame the incoming government for making unemployment go up to 4 million people overnight. In other words, the figures were massaged and the true figures would then be leaked to make the new government look bad.

So, yes, blame the global recession on Obama and friends if you want. It's that kind of ignorance that got the US into the mess it's currently wallowing in right now.

0
0

RE:AC not just sun

Nahh... the question "How can you lose the whole value of Sun plus $2B in three years and get paid tens of millions of dollars?"

Is a fair enough question.

SUN always wanted to compare itself against HP and IBM, and if you compare the stock price of these three companies to their stock price 3 years ago.. you get HP up 10%, IBM up 25% and SUN down 50%, and they were down 80%+ before the takeover plans were announced.

You can also see that Dell have lost almost 50% of their marked cap.

So the (almost) pure hardware vendors have lost out, and the broader Service/SW/HW etc. companies have profited. And SUN top management have failed to transform SUN into something that could survive on it's own. And now that task has landed on the table of Larry. Now lets see if he can do it....

// Jesper

0
0
Anonymous Coward

Shut up prats!

Jeez, the company, after flying so high and being the darling of the dotcom boom is heading mud-ward at an alarming rate, they need this to survive.

I will give you a one word warning you must heed morons, a company name, DIGITAL!

0
0
Anonymous Coward

Golden Parachutes

For a fact, all Sun's directors and vice presidents get a parachute of 18 months salary plus all eligible bonuses as the part of the deal, even if they leave voluntarily within one year of acquisition. Top execs get even more. This is what IBM didn't like to pay, and this is why Scott and PonyTail didn't sell themselves to IBM.

If you combine all the numbers it is $1b+ that will go to Sun's management elite rather than to the shareholders. This is not a secret info and I wonder why The Register doesn't mention it.

0
0

Thats right blame it on the Democrats

The stock markets started to plunge once investors started feeling that there was going to be "change" in America All stocks (not just Sun) payed the price. All of those people who wanted "change" in America got their wish - a global recession.

I wondered how long it would be before Obama got blamed for this recession, Maybe Sara Palin would have done a better job?

0
0
Silver badge
Pirate

RE: Thats right blame it on the Democrats

And I wondered how long it would take the Obamatrons to swing into action. The cause of the current recession is the glut of bad debt in the US economy. Despite the European ego-trip, the European economy and just about every economy is the World is linked to the US economy via the financial system. So when the US economy gets a cold, the rest of the World sneezes.

So how did the US build up such a glut of bad debt? The majority is due to bad mortgage lending, so-called subprime mortgages. There is a good explanation at http://blog.emerginvest.com/what-is-going-on-an-explanation-for-the-non-financial-person/ from October 2008 which sums up the financials pretty well without going into the politics. What happened was people that couldn't afford mortgages were told the rules would be relaxed so they could get houses. This was done in the name of "equality" and "equal opportunities", all very noble. Those mortgages were then sold by brokers to financial institutions as investments. The housing market boomed, pension funds (which invested in mortgage purchases) looked rosey, and everyone was happy. Until the point where lots of those bad mortgages failed, and the investors stopped buying mortgages from the brokers, the pension funds tanked, and house prices dropped like a stone. Banks couldn't lend to each other as they were busy propping up the bad investments and swallowing the costs of foreclosures from not just bad mortgages, but unhappy homeowners that just stopped paying their mortgages even though they could, becasue the value of their property had dropped so badly it didn't make sense for them to continue paying. Ironicly, seeing as they were also the people with money in the pension funds, they got clobbered twice by this rediculous example of "caring socialism".

So, whom encouraged the bad mortgage strategy? Now we get round to the Dummiecrats. Just look at the mess created by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, so-called "equality" groups like ACORN, and the way the Dummiecrats blocked Bush's attempts to stop the whole Fannie and Freddie disaster. Obama has been deeply linked with ACORN and the efforts to block Republican efforts to bring Freddie and Fannie into line, so it is only right he should take a large chunk of the blame, rather than lecturing Wall Street on "good practices" and trying to pass it off as "the monetary excess of the Bush years".

But Sun's problems started years before Obama got started. The key to Sun's problems were a lack of diversity and a key reliance on the SPARC Slowaris sales in the dot-com bizz. Whilst the sales piled in all was Sunshine, but when that market tanked in the dot-bomb, Sun failed to diversify or innovate as well as hp, IBM or even Dell already had. Sun was dead on its feet and looking for buyers last year before the economic downturn hit, so using the downturn as an excuse is just more Sunshiner avoidance of the facts.

0
1
Gates Horns

Don't forget

That "conservative" Bush doubled or tripled government expenses, doubled the size of the government so that it isn't the sea levels that rise. No, it is the soil with less and less productivity and more and more dead weight that is slowly sinking.

Of course democrats that couldn't stop Freddy and Fanny because they had too much of their dollar bills stuffed up their rear, definately capsized the SUV that was driving with the breaks on.

Don't forget the other democrat/Clinton invention: default credit swap so that bad mortgages could be sold across the world.

2008/2009 recession: 99% government 1% Astrology.

0
0
This topic is closed for new posts.

Forums