Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

SUSE to go private

suse.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–170 of 245 posts

Re: SUSE to go private

#161

Post by buzer »

zinekeller wrote: post #157
theonemind wrote: post #152

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For me in the US, it’s a strange notion that you could compel someone to buy the last 10% of the company. That does not always seem possible. What happens if you literally can’t do it? That’s probably rare, but if 90% of the company is most of your assets, and you’ve somehow borrowed against it already, it could be almost literally impossible.

Read it carefully, they have the right but not the obligation to buy the remaining stake so this is not applicable at all.

They do have obligation to buy if the minority shareholders demand it. If they don't want to trigger the requirement they need to keep their ownership under 90%.

There's also requirement (with some exceptions) to make offer to buy publicly listed company's shares when the shareholder's control over the votes increases above 30% and 50%. Normally the price in that case would be the highest price that shareholder paid for the shares during previous 6 months.

Re: SUSE to go private

#163

Post by buzer »

theonemind wrote: post #152
buzer wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In Finland if someone controls over 90% of the shares they have right to forcefully buy rest of the shares (and also obligation if someone wants to sell at at that point). So if they wanted to go fully own the company they need to high enough offer that they will at least hit 90%. I'm not sure if you could from public company to private without all shareholders agreeing to it as that would benefit large shareholder a…

For me in the US, it’s a strange notion that you could compel someone to buy the last 10% of the company. That does not always seem possible. What happens if you literally can’t do it? That’s probably rare, but if 90% of the company is most of your assets, and you’ve somehow borrowed against it already, it could be almost literally impossible.

In worst case if someone is demanding it and it went through the arbitration process (and possibly appeals) it would be the same as any other debt. If the shareholder is a company the debtor could initiate the bankruptcy procedures. Of course it's possible that they could end up not getting full amount (if anything) from the estate if there are more debts than what assets were worth.

If they are private person they can attempt to judgement via court and let enforcement authority liquidate their assets or garnish their wages.

Re: SUSE to go private

#164

Post by devjab »

treesciencebot wrote: post #81

Is there any reason for the buyer here who already owns almost 80% of the company to offer a 67% premium for the remaining 20% of the shares? What would have happened if they offered a 30% premium or a 15% one (from what I understand, they have both simple majority and qualified majority so that means they don't really need to ask anyone for anything). It's not like they want to get 100% ownership since this is a pur…

There can be a lot of reasons and I’m not sure you can find an answer unless they directly give you one.

I would guess that it’s part decorum part attempt to minimise the administrative burden. Many European PE’s operate on a “there is enough money to be made by being fair” sort of motto. This can be because they mean it, but it’s also because not being “evil” it a marketable product to many EU investors (this is likely true outside the EU as well, but I only know about EU markets). Then there is the part where private companies are still responsible for keeping track of ownership, as well as informing them. Even if they plan on letting investors trade on some internal platform it’s still a rather large administrative burden that becomes easier the fewer shareholders they have.

This is still just me guessing, but the way I read this it’s a simple message. Investors get a nice out and they’re going to be disappointed if they don’t take it.

Re: SUSE to go private

#166

Post by sharts »

riffic wrote: post #108

20 something years of using Linux and I have never had the urge to even look at Suse. who's life is affected by this?

Who knows? I like the distro but don't use it anymore because nobody else does.

Re: SUSE to go private

#167

Post by zeruch »

Blackstrat wrote: post #124
zeruch wrote: post #119

It's not going private. It's getting ready to spiral out in typical PE fashion. Start planning your migrations folks, as its all downhill from here.

Sadly, I’ve been through the PE takeover experience. It wasn’t pleasant and the surviving company bore little resemblance to prior self. The best that can be said for the experience was they gave me a decent buyout. Leap was my main driver for a good number of years though of late Arch in VM has been my daily. I see a migration from SUSE in the near future.

"Sadly, I’ve been through the PE takeover experience."

Same (more than once)...in both cases there were a few positives and a cavalcade of negatives, with the latter category expanding like a famished amoeba.

I could fix the whole PE realm in one move: require PE firms to operate as fiduciaries, with severe penalties for failure to comply. The whole sector would collapse or stop sucking, and I don't care which happens.

Re: SUSE to go private

#168

Post by stephenr »

Takennickname wrote: post #149
canucker2016 wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

No. I think he means he took all the employees in SUSE SA, and made them run on some of his treadmills. But I could be wrong.

Pfft what benefit is running them on treadmills.

At the very least he should run them in the Iditarod.

Re: SUSE to go private

#169

Post by [deleted] »

bloopernova wrote: post #8

What are the success stories of private equity firms taking over a corporation? (Where success is the products are still made, quality and staffing is maintained at previous levels)

[deleted]

Re: SUSE to go private

#170

Post by V99 »

jb_gericke wrote: post #153
swozey wrote: post #139

I hope that SUSE saved the staff of Rancher from the previous assholes who ran the place. God that was an absolutely awful company to work for. I'm glad they started their own stupid acorn or whatever service nobody will ever use. Rancher had a lot of incredibly intelligent people who were treated like absolute shit.

I believe the founding Rancher members left to start Acorn ( https://www.acorn.io ) some time ago.

We did, and are seemingly the assholes to which he refers.
Post reply on HN