| T.R | Title | User | Personal
Name | Date | Lines |
|---|
| 366.1 | Unsubstantiated rumor, printed without authority | REGENT::EPSTEIN | Bruce Epstein | Fri Aug 14 1987 09:51 | 4 |
| The talk floating around after the last shareholder meeting (which
authorized the maximum number of outstanding shares to be 3 times
what it is currently) was that "as soon as DEC stock stayed above
180 for an entire week, it would split 3 for 1".
|
| 366.2 | | ANNECY::ROBERTS | Nigel@AEO, DTN 887-4077 | Fri Aug 14 1987 11:21 | 18 |
| I'd appreciate some more information about DEC's stock splits, and
about stock splits in general. I recall DEC's stock last split about
1� years or so ago.
Is a stock split similar in execution to a "rights issue" on the
London Stock Exchange? Or does is simply mean that every shareholder
(sorry, stockholder) gets 3 for 1 (or whatever) automatically.
Someone I know told me he had some Australian shares which had a
rights issue, but he lost out, because the paperwork took a long time
to arrive, so he missed out on his entitlement because he passed
a deadline.
I'm interested in this because I just bought some stock in a company
on the NYSE, and there's all these unsubstantiated rumours about
a stock split, you see ...
Nigel
|
| 366.3 | no paper work for the stock owners | MED::MIREIDER | Robert Mireider 86x0 �diag support | Fri Aug 14 1987 11:38 | 6 |
| A stock split is across the board there is no paperwork involved for
the stock owner. IF I had 100 shares of DEC Stock today and they split
3 for 1 I would have 300 shares shares.
Rights issue sounds like if DEC were to issue new stock and offered it
to current owners first. I would have to rights to buy it first.
|
| 366.4 | | NETMAN::SEGER | this space intentionally left blank | Fri Aug 14 1987 13:46 | 4 |
| The key point to the split is nobody makes any extra money in the deal. As .-1
said, his 100 shares would turn into 300 but at 1/3 the value.
-mark
|
| 366.5 | sort of | INK::KALLIS | Raise Hallowe'en awareness. | Fri Aug 14 1987 16:46 | 7 |
| Re .4:
Yes and no. Usually, after a split, over a short period of time,
the stock value rises. It isn't a guaarantee, to be sure, but it's
something...
Steve Kallis, Jr.
|
| 366.6 | Discussed Elsewhere | SDSVAX::SWEENEY | | Fri Aug 14 1987 20:42 | 1 |
| About 50 notes on splits in BMT::INVESTING
|
| 366.7 | Official response? | REGENT::EPSTEIN | Bruce Epstein | Fri Nov 06 1987 16:57 | 5 |
| Now I hear that there was an 'official' announcement that there
will NOT be a split. Is there an electronic version of that
announcement around, and would anyone care to post it?
Bruce
|
| 366.8 | So what else is not happenning? | SDSVAX::SWEENEY | Patrick Sweeney | Mon Nov 09 1987 08:46 | 29 |
| This is not the official announcement:
1. Digital will not split its common stock 2-to-1 or 3-to-1 until
market condiditions are move favorable.
Also not being announced today:
2. Ken Olsen, president of Digital Equipment Corporation is not
announcing his retirement.
3. No managers are being named vice presidents.
4. No members of Digital's Board of Directors has resigned nor
deceased, nor are any new directors being appointed today.
5. No corporation with whom we are in litigation with has agreed
to settle with us.
6. Digital has not brought suit against any third-party vendor today.
7. Digital has not brought suit against any customer or entity of
the United States government today.
8. Digital is not declaring a cash dividend.
9. Digital is not acquiring Apple.
10. Neither General Electric nor AT&T is acquiring Digital.
|
| 366.9 | | CALLME::MR_TOPAZ | | Mon Nov 09 1987 09:07 | 6 |
| re .8:
I notice that you did not deny that Digital is moving its
corporate headquarters to Minot, ND.
--Mr Topaz
|
| 366.10 | yes we have no... today | HUMAN::CONKLIN | Peter Conklin | Tue Nov 10 1987 22:34 | 4 |
| re .8:
And as of this week, Digital is not working with any outside authors
to write "the Digital story" or a bio on Ken.
|
| 366.11 | | COOKIE::WITHERS | Same Sow, Same Ear, Same Silk, Same Purse | Thu Nov 12 1987 20:23 | 8 |
| Re: .9
I'm afraid that its not that Digital is not moving its corporate
headquarters to Minot, N.D, but its also not moving HQ to Sioux
Falls, S.D. to not be next to Citibank's card processing center
(not a not-major custoomer). :-)
BobW
|