> I believe there's probably quite a few people who have worked for 
> so-called
> wholly-owned subsidiaries...I know I have in the past...and taken out of 
> the
> context of the conversation "nothing" probably IS too strong a word to 
> use,
> but not in this case methinks!  You have to look at the past actions of 
> ...

You are correct in that a subsidary can be a puppet company, but one huge 
change does take place.  Accounting is done seperately.   CodeGear and how 
they do will now be seperated from the rest of Borland.  This will allow 
shareholders and everyone else to see how CodeGear is actually doing... how 
viable it is.  They should have done this up front and then looked for a 
buyer, but in typical corporate management thought there revenue from this 
division would get some people really interested.

Personally, I think CodeGear will be left alone to focus on the language 
market.  Not because Borland can't interfere (they still can quite easily), 
but because I don't think they have focus on that market space any more or 
more to the point just don't care.  The person they hire to run CodeGear 
will most likely have a set of numbers to meet quarterly and that will cause 
him/her to start managing CodeGear better.  I certainly wouldn't want to be 
the guy/gal that has to turn it around, but you can bet that Borland 
management will put the screws to someone to get revenue up in that 
subsiderary.

Also, don't be surprised if somewhere down the road they spin it off into a 
completely different company.  If they get the revenues up by moving into 
other platforms, they only need one big hit and IPO-a-go-go.  If it falters, 
they will likely lop it off.  If revenues stay flat, they will likely go 
with the status quo since revenue is a huge determination in a companies 
stock price.

All of this is IMO obviously. 

__________________________________________________
Delphi-Talk mailing list -> [email protected]
http://www.elists.org/mailman/listinfo/delphi-talk

Reply via email to