JP Morgan issues rumors about paying LESS for BSC, to avoid what happened with Yahoo.

Discussion in 'Stocks' started by crgarcia, Mar 16, 2008.

  1. An initial bid for less than they actually intend to pay, the offer gets rejected, then they rise the bid.

    Look at Yahoo, rumors were close to the real bid, and they just didn't got the deal.
  2. Different situation, YHOO could survive by themselves.
  3. sharp10


  4. This is so retarded.

    JPM issues bid, offer gets rejected, BSC declares bankruptcy, CEO thrown in jail.

    MSFT - YHOO situation is not even close.

    This is suppose to be finance, Capitalism! Greed! This friendly bullshit is a joke. JPM should've offered $10 max.
  5. Why DONT they just go bankrupt? Assets - Liabilities = Owners equity. Isnt that what they teach in accounting 101? Sell everything off and pay shareholders 80$ per share!
  6. xxxskier

    xxxskier Guest

    absolutley no comparison to yhoo msft deal. yhoo has zero debt and is profitble. if msft walks, yhoo is a viable business on its own.
  7. why would the ceo be thrown in jail? everything was fine until thursday morning. you should be throwing the person in jail who started the rumor, who brought down BSC
  8. mokwit


    Those danged shawts cheatin 'onest folks outa their savins. Wait 'till the Gummint heahs 'bout this.
  9. You idiot, this is not a bid/reject tug o war like yhoo and msft.

    The bsc/jpm $2 deal is pretty much done, just a matter of letting the ink dry and close it out, which i am sure the feds will help to speed it up.

    I am sure there will be many law suits etc in the coming weeks, still wont change the fact - $2 a share
  10. How do you know asset - liabilities is NOT negative? The situation must be really bad for the $2 a share. And if bsc goes bankrupt, it will set off a nuke in the financial market. Many firms have counterparty risk with bsc.
    #10     Mar 16, 2008