back to article HP Ink: No way, Xerox. We're not accepting your takeover. Well, we'd never say never. Maybe even maybe? Hello, you still there? Please?

HP on Monday delivered better quarterly financial results than expected. Crucially, it extended an olive branch to Xerox, offering a potential path to a mutually acceptable merger deal while continuing to dismiss its suitor's current proposal. The PC'n'printers maker reported sales of $14.6bn from the first quarter of its …

  1. simonlb Silver badge
    FAIL

    "the current Xerox acquisition offer is not in the best interest of HP shareholders"

    Nothing about the best interests of the company or its employees, just make sure the shareholders get a bigger dividend or potential profit should they want to cash out. This is what makes me sick of these companies now because the arseholes in charge just do not give a fuck about anything except making a little more cash for themselves and to hell with anything else.

    1. Montreal Sean

      Re: "the current Xerox acquisition offer is not in the best interest of HP shareholders"

      @simonlb

      I noticed that too, no mention of what's best for the employees. I guess employees don't count.

      Also I noticed this one:

      "Some of the "value creation" in the company plan may take the form of continued workforce reduction. About 800 employees left HP in Q1, said Fieler."

      The employees didn't leave, they were laid off. Fieler's an asshat.

    2. Huw D Silver badge

      Re: "the current Xerox acquisition offer is not in the best interest of HP shareholders"

      Spot on. As I commented in an earlier piece on the HP-Xerox fun, you will also never see anything done for the best interest of the customers

    3. MJB7 Silver badge

      Re: "the current Xerox acquisition offer is not in the best interest of HP shareholders"

      You do realize the directors of a company are legally obliged to put the interests of the shareholders first?

      Of course, they can legitimately argue that having a reputation for looking after customers is good for shareholders because it encourages repeat business. Similarly looking after employees means that the good people stay and help support the business and make money for the shareholders.

      However there is no doubt that the board are *supposed* to look out for the best interest of the shareholders.

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: "the current Xerox acquisition offer is not in the best interest of HP shareholders"

        "You do realize the directors of a company are legally obliged to put the interests of the shareholders first?"

        A mangled myth, however under US law shareholders are responsible for the election of the board, so that may align to something similar in real terms.

      2. jelabarre59 Silver badge

        Re: "the current Xerox acquisition offer is not in the best interest of HP shareholders"

        You do realize the directors of a company are legally obliged to put the interests of the shareholders first?

        And continuing to screw over the customers (who are the source of that income/profits) or the employees (who make the product those customers buy) will not provide that value to the shareholders. Even for the employees that remain, morale will become so low they won't care of the product is any good or not, and might even sabotage things from within as a form of revenge. And disgruntled customers are more vocal than happy ones (I know *I* go out of my way to complain about shoddy products).

    4. Korev Silver badge
      Coat

      Re: "the current Xerox acquisition offer is not in the best interest of HP shareholders"

      Oh come on Private (laser)jets don't come cheap

    5. Ugotta B. Kiddingme Silver badge

      Re: "the current Xerox acquisition offer is not in the best interest of HP shareholders"

      Not only are the directors of a company are legally obliged to put the interests of the shareholders first, as stated by MJB7, but also consider that the employees make up a significant chunk of shareholders through their company retirement system, commonly known as a 401k savings plan. And I'm not just talking about middle and upper managers who may get stock options as bonus - I'm also talking about developers and wrench turners and paper pushers and everyone else in the employee chain as well.

      Yes, it would be MUCH preferred for them to say "what's in the best interests of our employees and our company" and genuinely mean it. However, anyone who has been there for more than a few years and participates in the 401k plan isn't COMPLETELY screwed. Mostly, but not completely. I have first-hand knowledge of a similar situation.

      1. Grooke

        Re: "the current Xerox acquisition offer is not in the best interest of HP shareholders"

        On the other hand, it's often advised to not hold too much of your employer's stock in your 401k. You already "invest" your future earnings in the company so it is better to diversify into, for example, an index fund. It's also a gamble that your employer will outperform the market during your entire career.

        1. Korev Silver badge

          Re: "the current Xerox acquisition offer is not in the best interest of HP shareholders"

          It's also a gamble that your employer will outperform the market during your entire career.

          My employer mitigates that to an extent by matching shares on a 2:1 basis. I assume other employers will often do the same.

  2. Doctor Syntax Silver badge

    Returning capital

    In other words "we'll buy back shares" which takes money. Where does that come from?

    They can borrow it which means that the remaining shares are loaded with debt. That, of course, is also the Xerox takeover solution.

    Alternatively they can divert money that might have been reinvested or used to pay dividends to shareholders. The latter isn't a good idea if you're a shareholder looking for dividend income.

    One possibility, which they can't possibly say out loud because it goes against everything stock markets assume, is that they realise the hardware market is now saturated; there's nowhere to grow and it makes more sense to trim manufacturing capacity to mostly replacement needs. They also need to trim ink prices to stop subsidising H/W sales that aren't going to be made.

    1. Dan 55 Silver badge
      Alert

      Re: Returning capital

      Entertaining the idea that a printer manufacturer will trim ink prices? What madness is this?

  3. Gothmog
    Coat

    New entity called....

    H-Pox?

    1. Intractable Potsherd Silver badge
      Coffee/keyboard

      Re: New entity called....

      See icon - - - >

  4. luis river

    Future big debt, both options.

    Returning capital

    In other words "we'll buy back shares" which takes money. Where does that come from?

    They can borrow it which means that the remaining shares are loaded with deb, Well said Dr. Syntax !!, That kind HP inc maneuver is don´t constructive but defensive, I said in other words, HP inc is true doomed,"with o without" Xerox, the unique difference is what managerial "chairs" they are !

  5. JakeMS
    Mushroom

    Sorry for the ink sales drop

    That's my fault! My bad! I reduced all my subscriptions to their minimum offers because I found it is now suitable for my printing needs. I've been working on reducing the need to print as much as possible.. So I've dropped from their most expensive subscription, to their cheapest. Sorry guys!

    1. Andy Non Silver badge

      Re: Sorry for the ink sales drop

      I ditched HP printers and ink completely and switched to using (Brother) laser printers. Much more economical.

      1. Fatman

        Re: Sorry for the ink sales drop

        Me Too!

        At home, I have a very low volume printing requirement, and just wasting ink """cleaning the ink cartridges""" suddenly didn't make sense; especially after taking a look at the cost of ink. So I went for a low end Brother wireless lazer printer, and tossed the HP inkjet into the garbage can.

      2. -tim
        Pint

        Re: Sorry for the ink sales drop

        I picked up a monochrome laser that claims to be a Fuji Xerox which seems to have been made in the very same factory in Viet Nam where the nearly identical but slightly more expensive Brother printers are made.

      3. conscience

        Re: Sorry for the ink sales drop

        I ditched them too. As I have infrequent and quite variable printing needs, I was sick of their crappy printers clogging up with ink or simply breaking, so I grabbed an impressive Oki mono laser printer instead. I find it is miles better and saves me a fortune, and which with one spare refill is good for 140,000 pages. Plus Oki have Linux drivers on the website.

        I don't know how HP's laser printers compare, but with their reputation being as bad as it is with their inkjets, I wasn't even interested in finding out. I'd say HP are doomed.

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

Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2020