https://www.silverliningsinfo.com/multi-cloud/61b-broadcom-vmware-merger-probably-toast-says-legal-expert
12 replies (most recent on top)
many people keep claiming that it's good for VMware when it clearly is not.
These folks are the sheep, waiting for the sla-ghter.
Go VMware! Straight to the dustbin of history.
sounds more like corporate raiding than anything else to me
Yes, this is wha my caption obvious said.
Now you just need to understand it.
Welcome to Wall Street
I don't see what VMware proper gets out of it, how it helps spur more innovation,
or how this would benefit current VMware customers
This isn’t what this deal is about. It is about making money for execs and for
shareholders - full stop. Customers and employees can simply go sûck it. Wait until the
huge increase in stock price after 10k or so are laid off within a few months post
acquisition and then many more for years to come. It is as if no one knows how the
business works in the US…
Thanks, Captain Obvious, but the point is that many people keep claiming that it's good for VMware when it clearly is not. Other than the VMware execs, Silver Lake Partners, Michael Dell and Dell, nobody on the VMware side of things benefits, whether it be the customers, employees or even current VMware share holders other than those folks.
Based on what Broadcom has done in the past and would likely do with VMware should it ever succeed in acquiring it, sounds more like corporate raiding than anything else to me. Every time I think of what they did with previous acquisitions, the image of Martin Shkreli comes to mind...LOL.
I don't see what VMware proper gets out of it, how it helps spur more innovation, or how this would benefit current VMware customers
This isn’t what this deal is about. It is about making money for execs and for shareholders - full stop. Customers and employees can simply go sûck it. Wait until the huge increase in stock price after 10k or so are laid off within a few months post acquisition and then many more for years to come. It is as if no one knows how the business works in the US…
They’re not asking for VMware asset divestitures. The remedies are for Broadcom assets…
Broadcom will offer to divest parts of VMWare. These parts will be the Dogshat parts the make no money and have no path to every be profitable. Broadcom will sell them to one of the many poorly run software companies who will pay dearly, pi-s money on them for several years before shutting them down. Broadcom has done this many times.
Speculation on top of speculation. Nothing said here or in those articles matter or impact the decision. Stock price is still going up.
What does VMware get?
Focus.
Coordinated product development so there is interoperability.
Strong personalities that have selfishly delayed transformation efforts might finally be asked to leave.
The end of Groundhog Day in product development.
Broadcom is unlikely to agree to structural remedies to address regulatory concerns,
LaComb says. These remedies would require Broadcom to divest its server hardware
segments. That divestment would eliminate significant revenue for Broadcom and
“eradicate synergies from the merger, making the merger significantly less attractive,”
...
“The deal offered to VMware is a good one, and Broadcom is a better software and
services company with it.”
I get what Broadcom would get out of the "merger" and to some extent its shareholders longer term, but for the life of me, other than a few fat cat executives at VMware and Michael Dell that will get nice golden parachute payouts from a deal closing, I don't see what VMware proper gets out of it, how it helps spur more innovation, or how this would benefit current VMware customers.
It’s getting more expensive for BC to acquire us. Is it willing to part with some of its assets to pacify the regulators? And if it refuses, does BC have the wherewithal to battle it out in courts? I don’t think this saga will have closure this year. It might go through next year after remedies or lawsuits have been provided and settled.
Not really. Lawyers are the ones saying the merge may not go through. The 2 guys who said it will are not litigators. For context, CMA ki-led the Facebook Giphy deal because they wouldn’t agree to remedies. And the article points out that BC won’t agree to divest its money making hardware. Go ahead and be dismissive. I think it can go either way depending on how BC responds. Given its history with the regulators, it’s not a guarantee. I thought FTC is the biggest hurdle but they can only sue and not outright block it. CMA has that power. BC not responding to the initial findings made a gamble.
Click bait.
One fella says nah, a couple of other fellas say yeah.
More baseless bollox.