My take is to repeat my earlier opinion that the R's will never give up the family legacy and thus opining that such a 'complexity' - as seen by the potential bidder- makes the transaction problematic to progress ?.
The bidder will want 100% ownership. I don't think that outcome is likely, IMO.
Maybe the bidder should write to shareholders directly and state the basis of the offer?. I've seen that done before. But of course a blocking stake is insurmountable, unless the price is right to remove the blockage. I don't think it will be here.
“One thing [Senna] said that I think fits our situation quite well,” Altug offered, “Is he said: ‘you cannot overtake 15 cars when there’s sunshine, but you can when it’s raining’
Just reminiscing from a while ago
“ At the top of every bubble, everyone is convinced it's not yet a bubble.”
It seems a bizarre world wherein the interests of a non shareholding potential acquirer are exclusively prioritised over the interests of the existing owners of the target company via the legalese of a confidentiality “agreement”. (Invariably not an "agreement" at all, more a non-negotiable requirement of the Johnny comes lately acquirer.)
Bookmarks