Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
That is the risk of going Public. He only purchased shares to sell this company and make Millions if not Billions. He could care less about any of the employees. He is your typical Gordon Gecko.
I would say he is more like Edwin Lewis in Pretty Woman
In my very limited business knowledge- this to me is an example of how the greatest thing about this country is also the worst. I can buy stock in a company, become a majority owner, and pretty much dictate what happens based on my owning that majority....without having any knowledge of business or the company. And like waldokitty said, destroy the company, put thousands of people out of a job, but walk away with giant lump sum of money. It just doesn't make sense how this happens and is allowed.
Yes, you can because as a majority stakeholder you have the most skin in the game. I find fault with the notion that an investor who has a net worth of 24.5 billion has no knowledge of business or the company. The simple fact he is willing to layout that much money shows he infact does know what the heck he is doing. Becasue it usually does not happen the way TWA happened, plus there was a whole lot more to that than WKitty's one sentence. It's not about destroying the cpompany and putting people out of jobs. It is about taking companies who are under valued and under performing buying up large stakes and forcing change like he did with Oshkosh and Chesapeake. The end results are stronger companies who are better able to perform giving him the best ROI.
As an activist investor, he likes the company but hates the management. The sale is a threat to get his people on the board so they can get rid of management or sell the company and the new owners will get rid of current executives.
Either way he believes management is what is holding the company down and by getting rid of them the company can become profitable therefore giving him a good ROI as a majority stockholder. In the case of a sale as a majority stockholder he can get a premium for his shares also giving him a good ROI.
It could be along those lines or something completely different in his mind. The man is worth 24 billion and does this for a damn good living, he's got some gameplan to make it a good investment.
Carl Icahn does what's best for Carl Icahn and that's it. He couldn't care less about anyone else or any other company. He's doing it to make a quick buck for himself and for no other reason.
I thought Oshkosy didn't happen. He just made a bunch of money off the increase in share price due to his attempt/pressure?
But why did the share price go up?
"Oshkosh directors and executives countered with a strategy to aggressively cut operating costs to bolster profit margins, while introducing new products and technologies and building international sales.
“It’s been a good experience for us to go out and listen to our shareholders,†Oshkosh Corp. spokesman John Daggett said. “They approve of what we’re doing but have suggestions and we need to be diligent in taking care of our customers and satisfying our shareholders.â€
The total buyout did not happen but his pressure forced management to make concession that were ultimately better for the company and it's investors, him being one of them. Isn't that his whole point, make the necessary changes to become a more profitable company or face potential sell-off. Who is the winner here? Everyone, Oshkosh's stock is at a five year high which is good for Icahn and other investors, and more stable profitable company is good for consumers and employees.
FDS is in the same boat. You want Icahn to shut-up and move on, make the necessary changes to be a better company for investors and consumers. All he wants is the change, to him it doesn't matter how the change happens wither they do it internally or he forces it externally.
Can someone explain why this person is called an activist investor? Why buy stock in a company to force a merger to another company??
This just seems wrong.
It's very simple. Carl Icahn does not care about any business, his only goal is to profit from it and then kill it by driving its debt into an abyss. He is a master at looking for failing companies. "Activist investor" is a politically correct term for Greedy & Ruthless. If he becomes majority shareholder, you will see Family Dollar disappear with a short period of time...guaranteed!
......It's not about destroying the cpompany and putting people out of jobs. It is about taking companies who are under valued and under performing buying up large stakes and forcing change like he did with Oshkosh and Chesapeake. The end results are stronger companies who are better able to perform giving him the best ROI.
This is MSM koolaid. It's completely about selling off assets created by many to benefit the few. It's why the USA's entire industrial base is being transferred to places like China, India, etc. We can debate whether it's his "right" to do this, but the fact of the matter, we can't all live mowing each others grass. It's happens, for now, because it's easier to print $s instead of creating things. That party won't last.
Icann isn't an "investor". He is a speculator who is only interested in returns and it doesn't matter to him how it's done including profiteering off the misery of others.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
