back to article Samsung/Cheil merger goes on: Soz Elliot, not this time, says court

A court in South Korea has rejected an attempt by US activist fund Elliott Associates to overturn a merger between Samsung and Cheil Industries. In May, Sammy announced its merger with fashion, leisure and construction biz Cheil Industries, a company in which the tech giant already owns a sizable stake. But after recently …

  1. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    knobs

    If you don't like what the company is doing, take your money elsewhere, nobody is forcing you to buy their shares.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: knobs

      Or, "if you think you're going to lose money, you'd better sell now".

      1. Peter Gathercole Silver badge

        Re: knobs

        I suspect that it's not a case of them thinking they're going to lose money. Sam*eil (or Ch*ung maybe) will almost certainly make them more money than most corporate investments.

        It's more a case that they think that Samsung on it's own will make more money, and will be easier to influence than the enlarged combined company, in which the individual investors will have a diluted share holding.

        1. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: knobs

          almost certainly make them more money than most corporate investments.

          Corporate investments - yes.

          Corporate inFestments - AKA "activist" pillaging raid aiming to destroy any possibility of future value through short term gain - no.

    2. Anon Adderlan

      Samsung Korea

      > If you don't like what the company is doing, take your money elsewhere, nobody is forcing you to buy their shares.

      The whole point of having shares is to have a say in how a corporation is run. And where should they take their money when Samsung keeps absorbing other corporations?

      These corporations win by making sure there's nowhere else to take your money. And Samsung is a favored child in South Korea, to the point that it might as well be a ruling dynasty. Both these things need to be actively fought against for there to even BE somewhere else to take your money.

      This is why (at least in the US) public companies are managed under different laws than private ones. But sure, take your money elsewhere while you can.

  2. Swarthy

    One thing I don't understand about these "Activist investors"...

    If these guys know how these companies should be run so much better than the companies they are trying to push around, why don't they just start their own corporation and run it "right"? It's not like they don't have the capital, and they swear they have all of the business acumen...

    Okay, I get it but I don't like it... I understand that they are trying to massively inflate the company value in the short term, and then let it implode later. Whereas with their own corp, the implosion would hurt them.

    These guys believe that thinking "long term" is to plan to short the stocks when the implosion, that they caused, happens.

  3. Mage Silver badge
    Pirate

    But after

    As stated before the proposal was public before this Icanh like parasite bought shares.

    Unless you are buying shares from the company directly you are a speculator, not an investor. Pedantic I know.

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon

Other stories you might like