my guess yes and no they need the manufacturing and a purchase of 1.6b but it came with xerox covering 800 million debt (Lexmark) so at 1.6B minus Lexmark's debt good price for what you get but xerox itself does not have the revenue Steve b can talk about verticals' and macro and micro trends blah blah blah two sinking ships imo. time to move on
10 replies (most recent on top)
The end result will be the same as when Kmart bought Sears!
All show …
Fluffs the portfolio for a buyer.
I'm sure it helps the senior executives, whose bonuses are likely tied into some criteria that helps them no matter how good or bad the end result is.
No. Stall tactic. Buys another excuse.
2 declining companies when combined can only lead to one outcome - further decline. This is a simple logical outcome.
Debt from Lexmark offsets any potential incremental revenue or profit in the near term. Stakeholders/investors will not see any incremental benefit fro this transaction inthenear term and may see it as a liability if Q3 numbers show no benefits
No
Yes for many reasons; Xerox needs a manufacturer, a narrative for shareholders and bolster revenue albeit not near enough to get them back to profitability.