On 4/16/07, Tom C <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >On 4/16/07, Tom C <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Sorry for being so lengthy... > > Well I'm quoting Sparx because I assume they have far more information about > the internal workings of Pentax than you or I, and I asume they are more > savvy in the areas of corporate governance than myself, as it's not my field > of expertise. :-)
Hey, is not my field either, I'm just saying that even having access to that information Sparx will filter and say whatever is good for the interest of Sparx, nothing more, nothing less. > > Not trying to argue, but what knowledgable source *would* one go to as a > "trustworthy source for an analysis of Pentax in the long term"? I don't know if there's any source, ,that doesn't make Sparx a reliable one. > I can > assume not Pentax itself as they also have appear to have a healthy > self-interest. Isn't everyone else just guessing? Yes we are. > I think I'm right in an overall sense that a board of directors > must/should/eventually respond to the wishes of it's shareholders. As a > major shareholder, Sparx likely wields a fair amount of influence. So when > a corporation out of neccesity acts in a manner consistent with the majority > of it's shareholders, then even though the "company" and the "shareholders" > are two separate entities, the "company" in many ways *acts* with the mind > of it's shareholders. Urano in one release stated, that in this case > Pentax's board, by rejecting the merger, did not act in the interests of > it's shareholders. Urano also said that he is worried about his employees, so I assume he is speaking of shareholders in a broader sense, more like stakeholders. > > As you say, one can read between the line and deduce that Pentax themselves > must have been worried about their long term future, otherwise there likely > would have been no consideration of a merger. > I agree with that, future is not as easy as much of us would like to see it, I can even admit that maybe Hoya is a good thing for Pentax, who knows, maybe is not as bad as trying alone without funding. Future will tell. But even if this happen to be in sync with what Sparx is saying, whatever Sparx says, means, nothing, because is heavily tainted with their short term interests. Peace. Fernando -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
