Submit your comments on this article |
Home Front Economy |
InBev, this Bud's not for you |
2008-06-27 |
![]() Anheuser board set to discuss InBev bid - Jun-19He also said that Anheuser had concluded the $65 per share bid was too low in comparison with the value that could be delivered by the company’s own strategic plan, and assumed cost savings that Anheuser could realise on its own. In a step towards achieving over $1bn of cost savings in the next two years, Anheuser said it would cut 10 to 15 per cent of its salaried workforce of 8,600 through an early retirement programme. It also said it would increase planned share buy-backs this year to $3bn from $2bn previously and to $4bn from $1.8bn in 2009. It also forecast that its earnings per share this year would increase in the low double digits, ahead of Wall Street’s current consensus estimate of an 8 per cent increase in earnings. However, it did not announce any plans to dispose of non-core assets such as its theme parks or packaging operations. ![]() InBev, the world’s largest brewer, said on Thursday in court documents that it was prepared to launch a proxy battle seeking the removal of Anheuser’s entire board, citing “delays and apparent plans to attempt to block the acquisition”. It also said it still wanted a “constructive dialogue” over its $65-a-share offer. The exchange set the stage for a high-profile international battle for control of Anheuser, which controls almost half of the US beer market. InBev’s court filing said that it had been told by Mr Busch before launching the bid that he was opposed to any offer, and that Anheuser was “not for sale”. Mr Busch, according to InBev, also said he and his board were committed to the company’s independence. InBev, meanwhile, is asking the Court of Chancery in Delaware, where Anheuser is incorporated, for a declaratory ruling that would confirm the shareholders’ right to remove all 13 of Anheuser’s board members, without giving cause. The brewer is asking for clarification of the legal status of five of the directors appointed in 2006, before changes were made that allow the removal of board directors by written consent. John Coffee, a professor of corporate law at Columbia University, said the move to request the ruling from the Delaware courts was highly unusual, and characterised the filing as “an initial opening tactic” by InBev’s legal team. Anheuser said on Friday it would contest the action. |
Posted by:GolfBravoUSMC |
#4 Joe's on the right answer again! GO BLATZ !!!! |
Posted by: Muggsy Gling 2008-06-27 22:54 |
#3 Agree wid #2 > attempts at outside takeovers will continue to occur and are in LT are more likely to succeed than fail. * NEWS > Looks like SCHLITZ Beer is coming back to MILWAUKEE??? WOT > FASCISM = LIMITED [Ultra]LEFTIST-SOCIALISM, COMMUNISM, GOVTISM, etc. = LIMITED ULTRA-LEFTISM. 2008-2012 [2020] > OWG GLOBAL GOSPLAN/COMPLAN/ SOVPLAN > when FASCIST STATE AMER "JUNKERS GRUPPE" becomes GOSGRUPPE/COMGRUPPE = GRUPPE GOSBUREAU, etc., espec after 2012??? FUTURAMA > "Fry, you can't go against MOM - SHE'S THE WORLD'S BIGGEST AND MOST LOVABLE INDUSTRIALIST"!? D *** NG IT, HOW CAN "BLATZ" BEER WIN THE WAR!? |
Posted by: JospehMendiola 2008-06-27 19:29 |
#2 ...In other words, "Yeah, we were willing to fork over one of America's most treasured brands, but the money wasn't right." Mike |
Posted by: Mike Kozlowski 2008-06-27 18:55 |
#1 American beer fighting for survival! Bud drinker or not, the last thing we want is our American beer owned by Belgium. Go Bud Go! |
Posted by: 49 Pan 2008-06-27 17:52 |