Print 23 comment(s) - last by Just Tom.. on Sep 21 at 12:01 PM

Michael Dell  (Source:
Michael Dell can finally take his company private with Silver Lake Partners

Michael Dell, founder of Dell Inc., has been trying to take the company private for a while now, and it looks like he has succeeded. 

Dell's shareholders approved Michael Dell's $25 billion offer to take the company private. He'll acquire the company along with global technology investment firm Silver Lake Partners. 

Dell stockholders will receive $13.75 in cash for each share of Dell common stock they hold. They'll also receive payment of a special cash dividend of $0.13 per share, for total of $13.88 per share in cash.

“I am pleased with this outcome and am energized to continue building Dell into the industry’s leading provider of scalable, end-to-end technology solutions,” said Michael Dell. “As a private enterprise, with a strong private-equity partner, we’ll serve our customers with a single-minded purpose and drive the innovations that will help them achieve their goals.”

This is great news for Michael Dell, who wants to take the company private and fix it outside of the public's eye. He was also up against billionaire Carl Icahn for ownership of the company. 

Back in July, Icahn provided $3.42 billion (66 percent) of the debt financing for the bid, and secured $5.2 billion total along with investment bank Jefferies & Co.

The Associated Press reported that Icahn wrote a letter to shareholders saying that he ""still thinks Michael Dell's bid to take his company private undervalues the business and freezes shareholders out of any future gains. But Icahn also said it would be 'almost impossible' to defeat that offer." Icahn announced he was backing out of the bid for Dell earlier this week. 

The transaction should be completed before the third quarter of Dell’s fiscal year 2014, and it will have to receive regulatory approval. 
Dell will continue to be headquartered in Round Rock, Texas.

Michael Dell is taking the company private for good reason. It lost one-third of its value last year alone. PC sales are slow since PC demand can't keep up with that of mobile devices, and Dell has to hear about its financial failures from shareholders each quarter.

In May, the company reported a 79 percent decline in profits, with net income falling to $130 million from $635 million compared to the same quarter of 2012. This is mainly due to a shrinking PC market.

Source: Business Wire

Comments     Threshold

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

By btc909 on 9/12/2013 6:49:24 PM , Rating: 2
I sold at $17 almost 2 years ago. Hopefully Dell will get back to it's early 90's roots. Bring back support to the US. Offer Windows 7 on many more product lines.

RE: Good
By Samus on 9/12/2013 10:40:18 PM , Rating: 2
I wish them luck. It's time to give Lenovo some real competition since HP clearly isn't doing it. As much as I love some of the Elitebooks, they haven't fundementally changed in design for 3 years. It's as if they don't care and are too lazy to innovate.

Dell had some stellar laptops in the 90's, and just recently started having some real winners like the D610. Early 00's they had some true bombs such as the 700m/710m and basically any 1000-series Vostro. Reliability was terrible. Support was terrible. The company fell apart when Michael Dell's voice wasn't heard. At least he was able to push through Gold Support when the board decided to outsource the rest of it.

RE: Good
By Cypherdude1 on 9/13/13, Rating: -1
RE: Good
By themaster08 on 9/13/2013 7:50:38 AM , Rating: 2
She got it in 2003
It's 10 years old, what do you expect?

RE: Good
By PorreKaj on 9/13/2013 7:55:37 AM , Rating: 2
A 10 years of use, an old laptop dies, and for that you would never recommend Dell?

Please remember to tell people why you won't recommend Dell, I'm pretty sure they'll stop taking your recommendations seriously.

I'd say it has earned the right to rest.
I mean, it's not like it was a Latitude D410 ;-) That thing could survive a nuke.

Have a nice weekend.

RE: Good
By PorreKaj on 9/13/2013 8:19:10 AM , Rating: 2
Just to point out, I too was hit by the bad capacitor era.

The Optiplex GX270 was especially hit hard, we had several visits from technicians every week for a period.

Dell dropped the ball, no doubt. But in your case it isn't relevant.

RE: Good
By jjlj on 9/13/2013 9:44:34 AM , Rating: 2
it was more than just dell hit by it. the world supply was contaminated. My 08 era LCD TV had bad caps in the PS and Samsung was sued in a class action and ordered to fix them. I had 2 TV's fixed for free.

Where I work we have a bunch of Acer lcd's from 05 - 09ish that had bad caps we replaced and are getting many more years use out of them.

RE: Good
By lexluthermiester on 9/15/2013 11:14:05 AM , Rating: 2
Actually, Dell didn't drop the ball at all. It had to do with the vender's formulation of the capacitance fluids inside the faulty capacitors that caused them to fail. Dell had no knowledge or control over it. But once the problem came to light, they were on it fixing every system that was reported.

That guy got 10 years out of that system! That is nothing less than exceptional. See my above post...

RE: Good
By bug77 on 9/13/2013 7:58:24 AM , Rating: 2
Yes, clearly because your mom's capacitors failed (after 10 years), Dell knew about the problem and never informed their customers. The logic here is irrefutable.
It is also impossible to remove the hard drive, install it in a working computer and retrieve anything your heart desires.

When you find the manufacturer with 0% defects after 10 years, you let me know. Ok?

RE: Good
By Cypherdude1 on 9/13/2013 8:37:11 PM , Rating: 2
In my opinion, Dell knew about the bad caps. How could they NOT know? Why didn't they inform her and offer a new refurbished mainboard years ago? BTW, I DID remove the HDD. I DID remove all the files she wanted. It's impossible to copy the Outlook Express 6.0 files because Microsoft used a proprietary format. If she had used Thunderbird, I could have copied the files.

To make things clear, it was a Dell Dimension 2350 DESKTOP which failed. I gave her a Lenovo Laptop in 2011 which she is now using.

RE: Good
By Cheesew1z69 on 9/13/2013 8:45:20 PM , Rating: 2
RE: Good
By OoklaTheMok on 9/13/2013 1:34:04 PM , Rating: 2
Pull the drive and get the data off of it. It's not rocket science. Just because the computer died doesn't mean all the data is lost.

But seriously, claiming that a 10 year old computer should never fail is ridiculously delusional. I won't even let my parents have 5 year old computers. All things fail eventually.

RE: Good
By lexluthermiester on 9/15/2013 11:44:00 AM , Rating: 2
She got it in 2003.

Key point here; 10 year life-span for a board with electrolytic capacitors! Nothing less than wonderful! And I'll explain below...

ALL of the larger blue capacitors had expanded and failed.

First, they've BLACK sleeved. ALL mountable electronics have color coding to help with identification. Second, This is normal given the level and length of use. See below...

Because the Dell froze immediately, it was impossible to retrieve any of her emails and email addresses. They were on Outlook Express.

You can not blame a 10 YEAR OLD PC for loss of data. YOU needed to be more responsible for backing up said data on a regular basis. Dell nor anyone else is responsible for YOUR lack of foresight. And Outlook has a very handy and EASY TO USE backup function to help prevent these kinds of problems. How about you hold YOURSELF accountable instead of passing the buck to a company that built you a system that lasted 4 years longer than it was designed to.

I will never buy or recommend a Dell.

That statement says greatly more about you than Dell. You see, the failure of those capacitors is NOT due to any manufacturing defect. Electrolytic capacitors have a defined lifespan of about 5 to 6 years total running time, because they degrade over time due to the materials they are made of. Now I'll bet you listened to that old wives-tale that says you should just leave you PC on all the time. NO ONE should EVER leave a PC on longer than is needed. Electronics of all types wear out the longer they are used. This is a universal law and can not be avoided. You got 10 years out of that PC, which means you got much more than your money's worth.

RE: Good
By lexluthermiester on 9/15/2013 11:05:29 AM , Rating: 2
the Elitebooks, they haven't fundementally changed in design for 3 years.

There's an old saying, if it's not broken, don't fix it. And when something is as well built and aesthetically pleasing as the Elitebooks, you don't mess with it. Improve it's internal components and performance, but keep the same ideal and formula.

The company fell apart when Michael Dell's voice wasn't heard.

And this is the main reason Mr. Dell is taking things private. People who know him and his ideologies knows he is Dell's best chance at a better future.

RE: Good
By flatrock on 9/16/2013 8:58:39 AM , Rating: 2
After the third laptop my wife got from Dell died after about 2 years of home use I convinced her that buying a fourth was a waste. After two years she was already looking to get a newer model, but I would expect a well built laptop to still work for one of the kids for a couple years after that.

Extended warranties should be something you purchase against the relatively small risk that the product won't last three years, not the inevitability that it won't last that long.

I wish Mr. Dell the best of luck in returning the company to the point where they were a company that delivered premium quality products. But I'm going to have to see some convincing evidence of that before I buy any more Dell products.

I didn't experience the support nightmares that some people have told of, but I also work with a number of people who were born in India, so perhaps I just understand the accent better than most.

My issues have been a matter of the quality of the components.

Wish more companies would do this
By Mathos on 9/12/2013 5:25:18 PM , Rating: 5
I can understand, that being publicly traded, has advantages like being able to make more when you need to. But I see the downside of it as well.. Which is why I wish more companies would go back to being privately owned.

As soon as most companies go public, and you have outsiders trying to manipulate executive decisions with money. Or they constantly expect more profit every quarter. The company stops being beholden to their customers and employee's and becomes beholden to those share holders.

Ends up being why quality, customer service, and expansion tends to stop or drop sharply after companies go public, or have been publicly traded for some time.

ISP's are a good example. I remember when cable companies in the early 80s were rushing to get cable laid in as many area's as possible, to snag those customers, even out in the country. But, back then, most of them were privately owned. I lived 15 miles from the closest town, on a dirt road, and we still had cable tv, and even cable internet when it started being deployed, back in 01 or 02. Now, if you live outside of town, it's tough luck, because it wouldn't be profitable for their shareholders.

RE: Wish more companies would do this
By Just Tom on 9/12/13, Rating: -1
RE: Wish more companies would do this
By xrror on 9/12/2013 8:10:50 PM , Rating: 5
No, I think what he's saying is that there's the hope privately held companies don't sacrifice everything else in the quest to maximize profits.

You know, like not selling your grandmother under a bus to save 5 cents to "increase shareholder value" for some short term cash grab. Continuously. Quarter after quarter. Into the ground.

If you ever start a business you care about, never go public. Because shareholders don't care about anything but more money in their pockets, and that money will always be at the expense of the company - and shareholders will elect management that will squeeze that money out by any method that can be gotten away with.

Now if you could care less about your company, than by all means IPO and jump out.

By Just Tom on 9/21/2013 12:01:19 PM , Rating: 2
Privately held companies of any significant size certainly do seek to maximize profits. And if you think they wouldn't sell your 'grandmother under a bus' as quickly as any publicly traded company I think you are naive. Heck, Burger King and Kock Industries are privately held. Do you think they are not out to maximize profits? Most privately held companies seek to maximize profits just like most publicly traded companies. However, they do tend to look at profits over a longer time period because there is less of a need to placate the stock markets.

RE: Wish more companies would do this
By purerice on 9/13/2013 3:55:55 AM , Rating: 1
... your ignorance precedes you. You decided from the beginning that shareholders were the problem and formed a story to fit that conclusion. Any rural telecom/ISP depends on one of 2 forms of capital: debt or equity.
Debt-based venture capital can choke out profits while equity-based venture capital can choke out control. Going public encourages equity-holding venture capitalists to cash out in favor of potentially millions of individual shareholders. When that happens, outside power is diluted in favor of insiders. 5 million investors each holding 100 shares of stock are much less intrusive than 10 investors each holding 50 million shares of stock.

Most companies that go public only issue 10-30% of their shares to the public anyway. AMZN is mostly owned by family members, for example. No outsider can tell Jeff Bezos what to do.

The problem you describe only happens when the founders get greedy and sell more and more of their own shares or company's shares for personal profit and when they do that, they never had the market's interests in minds in the first place. Michael Dell himself approved of plans to outsource call center and other jobs. The only protesting voices were some of the shareholders. Now Michael Dell has surrounded himself with a team of rubber stampers who will let him do whatever he wants to save money which is what he has shown he wants to do. He's no hero by any means.

By spamreader1 on 9/13/2013 9:34:58 AM , Rating: 2
There's more to it than that. In his original example, when cable first started being brought to the masses in small town USA, many potential customers wondered why they'd give up nearly free TV from OTA on a $50-$200 antenae setup every so many years to $50-100/mo.

Word of mouth is a POWERFUL advertising tool. Sure it might incur some marginal debt to deliver services to those few users outside of small town usa in "the sticks", but those users do business inside small town usa. They take their money and spend it in the businesses in town. And to a large degree the entire town often relied/relies on those people that live in "the sticks" for food products, fabrication, maintenance, construction, etc.

When you throw in "bean counters" that don't grasp that whole community picture like a private business person might. Then that all goes out the window, and you have potentially lowered your overall profit simply by changing a good word of mouth advertisment to a this company sucks word of mouth advertisment.

I don't think his original post was meant to say that all public companies are evil, just pointing out some potential pitfalls to them. For that matter not all private companies are run that well either, so at the end of the day it's still capatilism at it's best/worst for better/worse.

Things you ought to know
By henhill69 on 9/16/2013 11:39:28 AM , Rating: 2
Latest updates given by Dell Inc.@

By froj on 9/14/2013 2:43:32 PM , Rating: 1
as Thelma implied I cant believe that any one able to get paid $8545 in 1 month on the computer. find out this here ...........

“Then they pop up and say ‘Hello, surprise! Give us your money or we will shut you down!' Screw them. Seriously, screw them. You can quote me on that.” -- Newegg Chief Legal Officer Lee Cheng referencing patent trolls

Copyright 2016 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki