ARM likely to be taken over by Softbank

[watercooled]

As I said a cash injection for AMD could be really helpful for AMD and the market as a whole (competition), but the x86 cross-licensing deal looms over any acquisitions. I do wonder if that's why the likes of Samsung haven't snapped them up yet.

On a positive note for this Softbank acquisition, and as I alluded to in my last post; Softbank at least seems like a relatively neutral company in this market, as opposed to an ARM customer like Apple/Samsung/Qualcomm buying them and damaging the ecosystem for their competitors.

Cross-post: Yeah I meant in terms of staff rather than unit sales.

The problem I have with shareholders is they (unless I'm misunderstanding it) will happily sink a company for the sake of a quick buck? For the most part they're just interested in turning a profit than the health of the company or the bigger picture?

[kalniel]

The problem I have with shareholders is they (unless I'm misunderstanding it) will happily sink a company for the sake of a quick buck? For the most part they're just interested in turning a profit than the health of the company or the bigger picture?

Depends on the shareholder - many invest for the bigger/long term picture, some just want a quick buck. The market doesn't ask for intentions - if people are willing to sell and people are willing to buy then shares trade. Thing is even if you want a quick buck, it's in your interest to be able to sell to someone else who continues to expect a profit in the future.

[watercooled]

Depends on the shareholder - many invest for the bigger/long term picture, some just want a quick buck. The market doesn't ask for intentions - if people are willing to sell and people are willing to buy then shares trade. Thing is even if you want a quick buck, it's in your interest to be able to sell to someone else who continues to expect a profit in the future.

True, I hand't really thought of it like that. Like I say this isn't something I understand terribly well.

[watercooled]

I've just been giving this some more thought (perhaps trying to convince myself it's not such a bad thing given it's a company I really admire); ARM is a public company so their direction is/was largely governed by shareholders anyway - it's not like they were completely free to do as they wished.

Now (if I understand it correctly) they will be basically operating as an independent, private company and have to answer to a Japanese company which seems OK with longer-term investments.

So it's not like they've gone from independent to bought-out; they've gone from publicly owned to privately owned. So six of one, half-dozen of the other?

And given Softbank are neither a customer nor a competitor, it's in both their interests to not mess things about and risk losing their licensees which are bread-and-butter for ARM at the end of the day.

[kalniel]

Now (if I understand it correctly) they will be basically operating as an independent, private company

They'll now (if the shareholders agree) become an asset of a different publicly owned company (Softbank). Operation is up to Softbank, which ultimately will be answering in turn to their own shareholders. Leaving existing management structure/way of operating in place is likely to be good for shareholders of Softbank so how it's likely to be - perhaps with some additional investment.