Feeds

Emulex rebuffs Broadcom's advances again

Naff off. Or come back with more cash

Intelligent flash storage arrays

Comment Emulex has reinforced its opposition to a revised Broadcom bid to take the company over. In its latest rebuttal to Broadcom's latest $9.25/share offer, it virtually repeated the statement it made following the first unsolicited attempt.

The Emulex statement says the Broadcom offer "significantly undervalues Emulex's long-term prospects", as did the first takeover approach to the Emulex board. It says that Broadcom knows of secret Emulex design wins for its converged networking technology that make the company more valuable.

The Emulex response is on shakier ground when it says that the Broadcom offer does not take into account "initiatives being undertaken by Emulex that will start to meaningfully impact earnings within the next year and beyond". Promising jam tomorrow when a company has under-performed and is losing market share to a competitor (QLogic) does not inspire confidence.

The Emulex rejection statement contains repetitive stuff about its depressed share price, which is weak, and then says the bid would be funded "in significant part by Emulex's own cash resulting in Broadcom offering only $5.59 per share for the operations of Emulex; and Is highly conditional, creating substantial uncertainty as to whether Broadcom would be required to consummate the Offer."

Emulex also rejects the Broadcom attempt to nullify its poison pill takeover defence, the Content Solicitation.

How do we read all this? One way is to say it's a request for a higher offer, one that is expected by many commentators in the financial media. The points about under-valuing Emulex and using Emulex's own funds, and the lack of clarity about Broadcom's commitment to consummate the offer can be taken as negotiation ploys through and through.

But suppose Emulex's board really did not want the offer to succeed. What could it say? It could say what it has, and add that Broadcom, knowing the board was opposed to the offer at $9.25, and knowing it preferred private communications, had come back with exactly the same offer price, publicly.

It had pitched it direct to Broadcom's shareholders without raising it and trying to get Emulex's management on board. Where is Broadcom's goodwill and intent to achieve a mutually beneficial outcome? "Absent" is what Emulex could say. It hasn't done so.

Emulex's board could also try pointing out the lack of a good fit between Broadcom's wired Ethernet technology products and its own Fibre Channel HBAs progressing to FCoE CNA adapters on the one hand, and the silicon technology for use inside storage arrays on the other.

The problem here may be that the two things are not chalk and cheese, but more cheese and biscuit; the CNAs do have, on the surface, a good fit with Broadcom's switches. They could play nice together.

Emulex's board hasn't done this either. We're left with Emulex's board repeating "Go away", and not explaining why Broadcom should do so except that its bid under-values the company. We don't know what Emulex's board wants. It could, some might think, be putting forward a more determined defence than it has been, and the lack of this could be assisting the assessment that it simply wants more money.

Yesterday Emulex's share price finished at $10.63. Following today's second rejection of the bid the stock has risen to $10.72. Clearly the market expects, and hopes for, a higher offer by Broadcom. It seems to be saying: "Come on guys. What stockholder is going to accept $9.25 from you when the open market price is $10.72 and rising. If you're really serious then dip your corporate hands in your corporate wallet and find more cash."

The market could be disappointed; the bid might not succeed. ®.

Choosing a cloud hosting partner with confidence

More from The Register

next story
Just don't blame Bono! Apple iTunes music sales PLUMMET
Cupertino revenue hit by cheapo downloads, says report
The DRUGSTORES DON'T WORK, CVS makes IT WORSE ... for Apple Pay
Goog Wallet apparently also spurned in NFC lockdown
Hey - who wants 4.8 TERABYTES almost AS FAST AS MEMORY?
China's Memblaze says they've got it in PCIe. Yow
IBM, backing away from hardware? NEVER!
Don't be so sure, so-surers
Microsoft brings the CLOUD that GOES ON FOREVER
Sky's the limit with unrestricted space in the cloud
This time it's SO REAL: Overcoming the open-source orgasm myth with TODO
If the web giants need it to work, hey, maybe it'll work
'ANYTHING BUT STABLE' Netflix suffers BIG Europe-wide outage
Friday night LIVE? Nope. The only thing streaming are tears down my face
Google roolz! Nest buys Revolv, KILLS new sales of home hub
Take my temperature, I'm feeling a little bit dizzy
prev story

Whitepapers

Choosing cloud Backup services
Demystify how you can address your data protection needs in your small- to medium-sized business and select the best online backup service to meet your needs.
A strategic approach to identity relationship management
ForgeRock commissioned Forrester to evaluate companies’ IAM practices and requirements when it comes to customer-facing scenarios versus employee-facing ones.
High Performance for All
While HPC is not new, it has traditionally been seen as a specialist area – is it now geared up to meet more mainstream requirements?
Saudi Petroleum chooses Tegile storage solution
A storage solution that addresses company growth and performance for business-critical applications of caseware archive and search along with other key operational systems.
How to simplify SSL certificate management
Simple steps to take control of SSL certificates across the enterprise, and recommendations centralizing certificate management throughout their lifecycle.