backtop


Print 4 comment(s) - last by Arkive.. on Mar 25 at 1:46 PM

Other proposals would mean Dell Inc. would remain a public company

We've been following the saga of Michael Dell and a consortium of other companies who have been attempting to purchase Dell Inc. and take the company private. Michael Dell, Microsoft, and the Silver Lake Group made an offer to Dell's board to purchase the company at $13.65 per share. This deal would see Michael Dell putting up his 14% ownership as part of the deal and remaining on as CEO.

While early reports indicated that the buyout offer from Michael Dell and the other companies was going to complete rather quickly, that turned out to be untrue. Things are now looking even worse for Michael Dell and a consortium of companies backing him with alternative proposals being offered up by Blackstone Group LP and billionaire investor Carl Icahn.

According to recent reports, the special board committee set up by Dell Inc. continues to support the pending sale to Michael Dell and Silver Lake Partners. However, the committee is said to be evaluating the new takeover proposal to decide if either of the new offers is better than what Michael Dell and his cohorts are offering.

Icahn has proposed $15 per share for a 58% stake in Dell. Blackstone has offered over $14.25 per share according to a source who claims to be familiar with the discussions.

One key difference with the new offers is that we would still see a portion of Dell stock remain public. The deal offered by Michael Dell and Silver Lake is for all outstanding shares and would take the company private.

Source: Dell



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

Conflict of interest?
By drycrust3 on 3/25/2013 11:47:13 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
The deal offered by Michael Dell and Silver Lake is for all outstanding shares and would take the company private.

I thought his job was to run the company in a way that was in the best interest of the shareholders, and instead of pushing his company to reconfiguring towards tablets and smartphone production, we find him wasting time in matters that arguably aren't in the best interest of the shareholders.
I just can't see how he could expect to remain as the CEO when he put in an offer to buy the company from the very shareholders that elected him, but there are now higher bids on the table than his, and those bids would also expect him to resign if they were successful.




RE: Conflict of interest?
By Mr Perfect on 3/25/2013 1:39:54 PM , Rating: 2
But is the best interest of the shareholders the best interest of the company? Companies(not necessarily Dell here, but companies in general) tend to make a lot of boneheaded moves just to stay on track with their quarterly reports, while screwing over their long term prospects. As a consumer, I was kind of looking forward to a tech company that wouldn't be at the whims of Wallstreet.


RE: Conflict of interest?
By Arkive on 3/25/2013 1:46:14 PM , Rating: 4
No, a conflict of interest would be if he intentionally ran the company in a way that lowered the stock value so he could cash in on panic and a lower buyout. If he wants to buy the company because shareholders are too worried about protecting their money instead of innovating than good for him for trying to make that happen.


"I want people to see my movies in the best formats possible. For [Paramount] to deny people who have Blu-ray sucks!" -- Movie Director Michael Bay














botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki