An excerpt from another report yesterday. It would appear to indicate that Pentax et al. may not be opposed to a merger, they just changed their mind regarding the conditions of the formerly proposed merger.
----------------------- Watanuki, who was formerly a corporate vice president, also left the door open to a future tie-up in a "broader sense," which could involve steps including a tender offer by Hoya or a joint venture. "I've never expressed opposition to a merger," he said. Although Watanuki declined to comment on specific details of how he had come into his new post, he said the former management "was not open" and had caused in-house confusion. The comment suggested that former president Fumio Urano was too forceful in pushing for the Hoya deal, prompting a split within the company. Tom C. >From: Thibouille <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Reply-To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >To: "Pentax-Discuss Mail List" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Subject: Re: From a Recent Press Release... >Date: Thu, 12 Apr 2007 22:14:53 +0200 > >It seems Pentax is/was/will be bit that much interested into a merger >but Urano was. It's not clear at all (yet) if Pentax (its >shareholders) are really interested in a merger or if Urano's proposal >was "well why not after all". > >2007/4/12, Tom C <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > Why would it make it suspect? They are the majority shareholder. >Almost > > all (if not all) shareholders are in it for primarily one thing - >making > > money. > > > > If making the most amount of profit in the shortest amount of time is > > Sparx's goal, it's also the goal of many other shareholders. > > > > I'm not stating anything regarding the possible demise of Pentax other >than > > what is publicly available. I do think their prediction of "It will be >hard > > for Pentax to survive on its own in five to 10 years' time" is a >truthful > > statement. If it were not, Pentax would have had no interest in a >merger > > with Hoya and Hoya would not have made indications that they would >consider > > divesting themselves of the low-margin divisions of Pentax, post-merger. > > > > Tom C. > > > > > > >From: "P. J. Alling" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > >Reply-To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > >To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > >Subject: Re: From a Recent Press Release... > > >Date: Thu, 12 Apr 2007 14:49:44 -0400 > > > > > >The point is success to Sparx is not necessarily, in fact probably > > >isn't, success to Pentax. In fact in Sparx is better off if Pentax is > > >sold. That makes Sparx's predictions of Pentax's demise suspect. I'm > > >not saying that those predictions are wrong, but I'm considering the > > >source. > > > > > >Tom C wrote: > > > >> From: "P. J. Alling" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > >> Reply-To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > >> To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > >> Subject: Re: From a Recent Press Release... > > > >> Date: Thu, 12 Apr 2007 13:21:00 -0400 > > > >> > > > >> Then again Sparx group seems to have a vested interest in Pentax > > >getting > > > >> out of the Photography business, in fact any business. They wanted > > >that > > > >> before Pentax's recent success in the DSLR market and like any >group of > > > >> analysts they hate to be wrong. Sometimes so much so that they >ignore > > > >> results. You should keep in mind that Sparkx Group has no vested > > > >> interest in the actual survival of any company, (except maybe for > > > >> themselves), to them its only money, and maximizing return is all >they > > > >> care about. Better for Pentax to be bought by Hoya and >dismembered, > > > >> > > > > >from their point of view, (which will net them relatively high >profits > > > > > > > >> on the sale of their holdings), than continue to survive and pay > > > >> dividends with only a normal appreciation in value over time. > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > > > > Pentax's recent success in the DSLR market though, has been >relatively > > > > small. Small overall market share, small profit margin, even though >they > > >are > > > > turning a profit. It makes it very hard to compete. > > > > > > > > Yes I know that Sparx and many other investors may have no vested > > >interest > > > > in the survival of the company. That's exactly why some of us have >been > > > > saying for several years that we were worried with regard to >survival of > > >the > > > > brand. That, and we thought Pentax was making stupid moves in the > > >business > > > > (which may have been the only moves they could make, based on cash >flow > > >and > > > > profitability). > > > > > > > > It has little to do with Pentax's past history as a leader in the >50's > > >and > > > > 60's, the quality of their lenses, or whether we personally like the > > >Pentax > > > > brand. > > > > > > > > Tom C. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> Tom C wrote: > > > >> > > > >>> "The No. 1 shareholder, with a stake of 23.9%, is independent >asset > > > >>> management firm Sparx Group Co. (8739). "It will be hard for >Pentax > > >to > > > >>> survive > > > >>> on its own in five to 10 years' time," Sparx President Shuhei Abe > > >says." > > > >>> > > > >>> I'm not saying the sky is falling. But I also would not be >surprised > > >if > > > >>> > > > >> the > > > >> > > > >>> recent posturing is not just a way to further up the > > >ante/purchase-price > > > >>> > > > >> of > > > >> > > > >>> Pentax. If that threshold is met, Hoya could acquire the most > > > >>> > > > >> profitable > > > >> > > > >>> part of the business, while possibly selling off or eliminating >the > > > >>> underperforming 2% profit camera-side of the business. > > > >>> > > > >>> Remember, during most acquisitions, mergers, shutdowns, the modus > > > >>> > > > >> operandi > > > >> > > > >>> is business as usual until the day an announcement is made. We've > > >seen > > > >>> > > > >> that > > > >> > > > >>> in operation already with the way the Samsung partnering was > > >announced, > > > >>> > > > >> the > > > >> > > > >>> way the merger was announced, and now the suddenness with the >backing > > > >>> > > > >> away > > > >> > > > >>> from the deal. > > > >>> > > > >>> Time will tell. > > > >>> > > > >>> Tom C. > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > >> -- > > > >> Entropy Seminar: The results of a five yeer studee ntu the sekend >lw uf > > > >> thurmodynamiks aand itz inevibl fxt hon shewb rt nslpn raq liot. > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> -- > > > >> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > > > >> [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > >> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >-- > > >Entropy Seminar: The results of a five yeer studee ntu the sekend lw uf > > >thurmodynamiks aand itz inevibl fxt hon shewb rt nslpn raq liot. > > > > > > > > >-- > > >PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > > >[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > >http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > > > > > > > > -- > > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > > > > >-- >Thibault Massart aka Thibouille >---------------------- >K10D,Z1,SuperA,KX,MX, P30t and KR-10x ;) ... > >-- >PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List >[EMAIL PROTECTED] >http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
