GREY:ATBPF - Post by User
Comment by
Forestviewon Apr 21, 2021 10:06am
87 Views
Post# 33036377
RE:RE:RE:RE:Just a thought
RE:RE:RE:RE:Just a thoughtQuite frankly, the MC shouldn't be a big part of the equation. The Board of ATE, along with Dan et al., would sell the buyer on the Market potential of its drugs/H2S platform. From there, the price is set. Whether the company has a MC of $200M or $2B should be irrelevant. It's what the drug will do in the market. MC will really only play a part in determining the impact to shareholders once the deal is announced. I would certainly hope that the Board would stick to their guns and sell based on value of product, and not MC of company.
Anyone else have a viewpoint?
Straylight wrote: I have been wondering about this for a while now. If I was big pharma and looking at doing a buyout, anything you can do to lower the MC of the company is going to strengthen your bargaining position.
I don't know enough about how they operate to say what the likelihood that they are doing that is. But at least from a purely theoretical standpoint if you were willing to buy a company out for say $4B and the current MC is $200m, the closer you can keep it to $200m the less likely you will need to spend the full $4B that you may have been willing to spend. It may cost a few hundred thousand or even million to buy and dump shares but you would be saving way more than that in the long run.