Why would it make it suspect? They are the majority shareholder. Almost all (if not all) shareholders are in it for primarily one thing - making money.
If making the most amount of profit in the shortest amount of time is Sparx's goal, it's also the goal of many other shareholders. I'm not stating anything regarding the possible demise of Pentax other than what is publicly available. I do think their prediction of "It will be hard for Pentax to survive on its own in five to 10 years' time" is a truthful statement. If it were not, Pentax would have had no interest in a merger with Hoya and Hoya would not have made indications that they would consider divesting themselves of the low-margin divisions of Pentax, post-merger. Tom C. >From: "P. J. Alling" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Reply-To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Subject: Re: From a Recent Press Release... >Date: Thu, 12 Apr 2007 14:49:44 -0400 > >The point is success to Sparx is not necessarily, in fact probably >isn't, success to Pentax. In fact in Sparx is better off if Pentax is >sold. That makes Sparx's predictions of Pentax's demise suspect. I'm >not saying that those predictions are wrong, but I'm considering the >source. > >Tom C wrote: > >> From: "P. J. Alling" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >> Reply-To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >> To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >> Subject: Re: From a Recent Press Release... > >> Date: Thu, 12 Apr 2007 13:21:00 -0400 > >> > >> Then again Sparx group seems to have a vested interest in Pentax >getting > >> out of the Photography business, in fact any business. They wanted >that > >> before Pentax's recent success in the DSLR market and like any group of > >> analysts they hate to be wrong. Sometimes so much so that they ignore > >> results. You should keep in mind that Sparkx Group has no vested > >> interest in the actual survival of any company, (except maybe for > >> themselves), to them its only money, and maximizing return is all they > >> care about. Better for Pentax to be bought by Hoya and dismembered, > >> > > >from their point of view, (which will net them relatively high profits > > > >> on the sale of their holdings), than continue to survive and pay > >> dividends with only a normal appreciation in value over time. > >> > >> > > > > Pentax's recent success in the DSLR market though, has been relatively > > small. Small overall market share, small profit margin, even though they >are > > turning a profit. It makes it very hard to compete. > > > > Yes I know that Sparx and many other investors may have no vested >interest > > in the survival of the company. That's exactly why some of us have been > > saying for several years that we were worried with regard to survival of >the > > brand. That, and we thought Pentax was making stupid moves in the >business > > (which may have been the only moves they could make, based on cash flow >and > > profitability). > > > > It has little to do with Pentax's past history as a leader in the 50's >and > > 60's, the quality of their lenses, or whether we personally like the >Pentax > > brand. > > > > Tom C. > > > > > > > >> Tom C wrote: > >> > >>> "The No. 1 shareholder, with a stake of 23.9%, is independent asset > >>> management firm Sparx Group Co. (8739). "It will be hard for Pentax >to > >>> survive > >>> on its own in five to 10 years' time," Sparx President Shuhei Abe >says." > >>> > >>> I'm not saying the sky is falling. But I also would not be surprised >if > >>> > >> the > >> > >>> recent posturing is not just a way to further up the >ante/purchase-price > >>> > >> of > >> > >>> Pentax. If that threshold is met, Hoya could acquire the most > >>> > >> profitable > >> > >>> part of the business, while possibly selling off or eliminating the > >>> underperforming 2% profit camera-side of the business. > >>> > >>> Remember, during most acquisitions, mergers, shutdowns, the modus > >>> > >> operandi > >> > >>> is business as usual until the day an announcement is made. We've >seen > >>> > >> that > >> > >>> in operation already with the way the Samsung partnering was >announced, > >>> > >> the > >> > >>> way the merger was announced, and now the suddenness with the backing > >>> > >> away > >> > >>> from the deal. > >>> > >>> Time will tell. > >>> > >>> Tom C. > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >> -- > >> Entropy Seminar: The results of a five yeer studee ntu the sekend lw uf > >> thurmodynamiks aand itz inevibl fxt hon shewb rt nslpn raq liot. > >> > >> > >> -- > >> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > >> [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > >> > > > > > > > > > > >-- >Entropy Seminar: The results of a five yeer studee ntu the sekend lw uf >thurmodynamiks aand itz inevibl fxt hon shewb rt nslpn raq liot. > > >-- >PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List >[EMAIL PROTECTED] >http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
