HP3000-L Archives

March 2002, Week 2

HP3000-L@RAVEN.UTC.EDU

Options: Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
John Burke <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
John Burke <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Thu, 14 Mar 2002 20:11:58 -0800
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (47 lines)
From: Bob Combs [mailto:[log in to unmask]]

> I appreciate the feedback that the Interex Board has been getting. The
> Board made its decision to support the HP-Compaq merger after weighing
> all the facts.  It was an informed and studied decision made with
> various input. The Board felt the decision was the right thing to do,
> and is in the best interest of Interex members.

> While I recommend that others vote for the merger, each individual
> should vote their proxy shares according to their individual wishes. In
> the end it is the proxy vote that will determine HP's future path.

Thank you for replying. However, you fail to address at least three issues
that have been raised about the Interex Board's press release. As a 20+ year
member (at the site level), I would like to know:

1. Why does a supposedly "independent" organization own HP stock?
2. Why did the Board claim to speak for the membership and, in fact, imply
that the membership was behind the merger (and not just individual Board
members)?
3. Interex has been conducting a poll at its web site. Why haven't the
results been shared?

The Interex Board was elected (oops, that's right some are appointed and
thus have allegiance only to those who appointed them) to run Interex, not
give financial advice on highly complicated mergers. A quick review of Board
members does not show any obvious expertise in high tech mergers.

I happen to believe the merger is a loser (too high cost, too high risk, too
little potential reward); however, even if I agreed with the merger, I would
still believe:

1. Interex should not own HP stock (or any stock for that matter).
2. The Board should stick to running Interex and not get involved in proxy
fights.
3. If Interex conducts a poll it should announce the results - the Board
should not presume to speak for the membership on issues not relating to the
running of.

[In case you are wondering, I was in favor of the proposed PWC merger. I'm
not against all change.]

John (yes I'm voting my meager 1200 shares against) Burke

* To join/leave the list, search archives, change list settings, *
* etc., please visit http://raven.utc.edu/archives/hp3000-l.html *

ATOM RSS1 RSS2