| T.R | Title | User | Personal
Name | Date | Lines |
|---|
| 2408.1 | | SA1794::CHARBONND | self is in mutiny | Thu Mar 11 1993 13:56 | 1 |
| IBM-DEC merger impossible due to anti-trust laws.
|
| 2408.2 | In your dreams, Fleischman | VIA::LILCBR::COHEN | | Thu Mar 11 1993 17:05 | 12 |
|
Oh yeah, great. As if one beached whale wasn't enough.
Although the bureaucracy created from such a merger would
certainly be quite .... "creative".
I suppose a merger of that kind would qualify under the
non-competitive clause of the anti-trust laws except
this would be the first time the clause was applied to
the two merging companies!!!
Bob Cohen
|
| 2408.3 | having problems with the language... | MU::PORTER | savage pencil | Thu Mar 11 1993 21:40 | 3 |
| Can't a merger only cause "anti-trust" if we're trusted
before the merger?
|
| 2408.4 | | STAR::BECK | Paul Beck | Thu Mar 11 1993 21:47 | 1 |
| If the government cried anti-trust, we'd have to cry uncle...
|
| 2408.5 | Anti-trust in the Computer Industry!, Still laghing over that one | KEIKI::WHITE | We have Top Men working on it,Top Men | Fri Mar 12 1993 02:33 | 13 |
|
Actually the real mergers are -
IBM & APPLE
DIGITAL & Microsoft
SUN & Novelle
HP & AT&T
It would take the government 10 years to sort this out or so
the theory goes.
|
| 2408.6 | non-compete, how appropos | BOOKS::HAMILTON | All models are false; some are useful - Dr. G. Box | Fri Mar 12 1993 11:39 | 7 |
|
re: .2
Non compete wouldn't be a problem, since the behemoth couldn't
compete! :-)
Glenn
|