Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

A Tone Deaf President: A Hyperventilating Opposition
MND ^ | February 22, 2006 | Will Malven

Posted on 02/22/2006 1:39:33 PM PST by Nasty McPhilthy

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 61-8081-100101-120121-133 last
To: RightWhale

I don't know what the requirements were - the point is that NO American company bid for P&O - that should tell you enough right there.


121 posted on 02/22/2006 4:11:02 PM PST by clawrence3
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 120 | View Replies]

To: clawrence3

Yeah, it will do. If I were in the business and had enough to bid, I would do so. If I didn't have enough, I wouldn't bother the Port Authority for nothing. The contract would state up front how much would be the minimum to be considered as a serious bidder, either net worth or a line of credit, either way. Staff of large horsepower can be hired overnight--they come out of the woodwork when they smell money.


122 posted on 02/22/2006 4:17:14 PM PST by RightWhale (pas de lieu, Rhone que nous)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 121 | View Replies]

To: Dark Skies

Former U.S. Sen. Bob Dole was reported Wednesday as having been tapped to lobby the ports deal through Congress and company CEO Bilkey said the company is willing to do whatever the Bush administration asks to enhance shipping security to ensure the deal goes through. "We're very much committed to that," he said. "We think it's a great strategic fit."


123 posted on 02/22/2006 4:30:04 PM PST by clawrence3
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 114 | View Replies]

To: Dark Skies
no one makes a purchase of this size with cash

Yes they do. DPW may be borrowing the money from a bank, but they will be wiring 6+B in cash to the seller's accounts.

They are not just handing over a promissory note in exchange for hard assets.

If I had to guess, I would say that this deal was put together by some London investment bankers...and then taken to DPW.

I'll bet you are exactly right.

Most deals of this magnitude are hatched by a banker dreaming of a fat advisory fee.

124 posted on 02/22/2006 6:07:32 PM PST by wideawake
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 93 | View Replies]

To: wideawake
Yes they do. DPW may be borrowing the money from a bank, but they will be wiring 6+B in cash to the seller's accounts.

In the world of finance, that still isn't what one might call a cash transaction.

If you buy a car and pay cash...you don't borrow to raise the cash...same principal in the mergers and acquisitions biz.

Unless it has changed since I was in it...

125 posted on 02/22/2006 7:20:01 PM PST by Dark Skies ("Free speech is THE weapon of choice against islam.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 124 | View Replies]

To: Molly T.

No. This was done according to the law. And all this hoopla is asking for violation of law.


126 posted on 02/22/2006 7:55:10 PM PST by ClaireSolt (.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 98 | View Replies]

To: wideawake
Surely you are intimately aware of the ole "pride goeth before the fall" thang. I know I am...been there, done that.

If you are still on the left side of that event, bow down to Him and jump to the right. IMHO.

127 posted on 02/22/2006 8:34:17 PM PST by Dark Skies ("Free speech is THE weapon of choice against islam.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 124 | View Replies]

To: Dark Skies
In the world of finance, that still isn't what one might call a cash transaction.

Uh, yes it is.

Whenever an acquisition occurs, the financial community's first question is: was it done for equity or cash?

If DPW is not using equity to acquire this business, then it is using cash - whether that cash is borrowed or comes from operations is of absolutely no concern to the seller.

To him, it is cash.

128 posted on 02/23/2006 4:46:17 AM PST by wideawake
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 125 | View Replies]

To: Dark Skies

What prompted this outburst?


129 posted on 02/23/2006 4:47:19 AM PST by wideawake
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 127 | View Replies]

To: wideawake
Sorry bout that...I was just frustrated with what seemed like a p!ssing contest over semantics.

I apologize for being abrupt.

130 posted on 02/23/2006 7:36:01 AM PST by Dark Skies ("Free speech is THE weapon of choice against islam.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 129 | View Replies]

To: Dark Skies

Fair enough. I apologize for offending you.


131 posted on 02/23/2006 7:39:54 AM PST by wideawake
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 130 | View Replies]

To: wideawake

Thx!


132 posted on 02/23/2006 7:47:48 AM PST by Dark Skies ("Free speech is THE weapon of choice against islam.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 131 | View Replies]

To: mdwakeup

"True, but there are lots of ways to defer those taxes, and they get credit for income taxes they actually pay to non-US jurisdictions."

The "credit" never seems to quite cover the actual amount lost, and deferring taxes generally involves accepting some other penalty in their stead. Both conspire to drive down ROI.


133 posted on 02/23/2006 10:52:38 AM PST by BeHoldAPaleHorse (Tagline deleted at request of moderator.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 113 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 61-8081-100101-120121-133 last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson