Subject:
|
Re: Not looking good for eToys...
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.market.shopping
|
Date:
|
Sun, 31 Dec 2000 00:39:36 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
347 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.market.shopping, Jeff Shiner writes:
> Actually I suspect that a conventional retailer or white knight could NOT
> buy eToys.
> Under Section 203 of the Delaware General Corporation Law they are forbidden
> to engage in a business combination with an interested stockholder for a
> period of 3 years following the date that that person became an interested
> stockholder.
> Now I am not a legal expert by a long shot but this section does apply to
> eToys as stated in their form 8-K filing and seems to make it difficult for
> a white knight or retailer to purchase or merge with them.
That's a hostile takeover defense and Delaware law is friendly to
corporations so I doubt this would apply to a friendly (white knight)
takeover...
Consult your M&A guy if you're thinking of buying them, don't take MY advice...
++Lar
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: Not looking good for eToys...
|
| (...) Here is an associated snipper from one of eToys legal filings: "IT MAY BE DIFFICULT FOR A THIRD PARTY TO ACQUIRE US EVEN IF DOING SO WOULD BE BENEFICIAL TO OUR SECURITYHOLDERS. Provisions of our amended and restated certificate of (...) (24 years ago, 31-Dec-00, to lugnet.market.shopping)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: Not looking good for eToys...
|
| (...) Actually I suspect that a conventional retailer or white knight could NOT buy eToys. Under Section 203 of the Delaware General Corporation Law they are forbidden to engage in a business combination with an interested stockholder for a period (...) (24 years ago, 30-Dec-00, to lugnet.market.shopping)
|
5 Messages in This Thread:
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
