CompuServe Thread

#Shareholders update

27 messages in this thread
#120157From: Rob SalmonOct 30, 1993 10:00 AM
For what it's worth, I recently received compensation from Commodore under the stockholder class action suit filed about 18 months ago. The amount of compensation was *MUCH* more than I had expected. Isn't this the second time in recent years that Commodore has had to pay off the stockholders for being less than forthright and honest? Given the repetitive actions, the Shareholder Movement might be able to charge Gould with racketeering. Such a charge under Rico provisions might shame him into turning over the company to someone else. Who, though? Poor old C= might end up with the Tramiels back.
#120170From: RICHARD BOOMSMAOct 30, 1993 11:32 AM
RICO ?!? Isn't that stretching it, just a little? CBM is/isn't many things, but organized crime? Well, then again………
#120177From: Marlene Zenker/SYSOPOct 30, 1993 1:28 PM
I think that's only first time that CBM has had to "pay off". I knew there was a class action suit, but your message was the first I've heard about how it actually ended up. It'll be interesting how the Shareholder Movement ends up. I'll be sending in my proxies to them when the time comes… Better to have them get the votes then the alternative. 🙂
#120190From: Michael GerardOct 30, 1993 2:56 PM
Can a US Federal grand jury indict a foreign corporation under RICO?
#120242From: Rob SalmonOct 30, 1993 10:39 PM
Can a foreign corporation be indicted? I'm not a lawyer – so I won't speculate; but certainly foreign assets in this country can be seized. My recollection is that there was an earlier suit – about six years ago. The plaintiffs were a couple of institutional holders who accused C= of issuing deliberately misleading statements. I'm not sure C= was found guilty; they may have settled without admitting guilt. But I'm quite sure they paid off. And now they've done it again. Repetitive criminal behavior is called racketeering. 🙂
#120258From: Don Curtis/SYSOPOct 31, 1993 12:14 AM
Of course a foreign corporation can be indicted. As long as they broke the law on US soil, they're liable for criminal prosecution.
#120484From: don myklebustNov 2, 1993 12:21 AM
What was wrong with the Tramiels? Nepotism? Well, ok… They would have marketed the Amiga, though.
#120514From: Rob SalmonNov 2, 1993 10:46 AM
>>What was wrong with the Tramiels? Nepotism? You could probably add peculation, misrepresentation, component substitution without compensation, stock manipulation, and a variety of other interesting practices without risk of libel. Of course, a coating of success can cover up lots of surface flaws. 🙂
#120540From: Paul HigginbottomNov 2, 1993 7:59 PM
It's easy to criticize, but they (the Tramiel's) took Commodore from a typewriter repair shop in Canada to a multinational company with more than one billion in sales. Not bad going. Gould's (current chairman) backing money helped, but he was largely in the background. I agree the Tramiel's would not be good for Commodore (or anyone) now, since they're "business model" it out of sync with the nature of today's marketplace, but to only criticize their past is not exactly fair. On the other hand, Mehdi Ali (current President) can ONLY be criticized. Commodore has gone into a steady decline since he became President. Commodore's progress has moved inversely to his salary (gag). He's knowledgeable about finance, but knows nothing about how to run a computer company.
#120571From: Rob SalmonNov 3, 1993 1:08 AM
I guess there's blame enough to spread around. 🙂 If Ali's so knowledgable about finance, how come C= so often blames losses on currency fluctuation. Hasn't he heard of hedging? I know it's easy to criticize. It's amazing the company stays in business at all.
#120594From: Jerry RockwellNov 3, 1993 12:13 PM
Speaking of Atari, have you been watching their stock lately. Mostly based on their Jaquar (64 bit game machine to be released soon) and IBM backing, their stock ( ATC ) has gone from under $5.00 a few weeks ago to 11.875 as of the last hour.
#120704From: Steve AhlstromNov 4, 1993 12:06 PM
Jerry, My understanding is that there is no "IBM backing". IBM's involvement is strictly that of supplying a manufacturing line. If you're looking at their stock (ATC) starting at "under $5.00" to the current 11.875 you missed a large move. 2 weeks before it hit $5.00 it was 62 cents a share and had been under $1.00 for many weeks. -sja
#120735From: John ChangNov 4, 1993 8:44 PM
Have you seen Commodore's stock price today? Closed up $1.00+ today. If the trend continues, someone is coming to dinner! John Chang Observing Amiganoid
#120794From: Michael GerardNov 5, 1993 7:29 AM
Here's the 52 week pricing history for CBU: COMMODORE INTL LTD COM Cusip: 20266010 Exchange: N Ticker: CBU Friday Weeks Weeks Weeks Friday Date Volume High/Ask Low/Bid Close/Avg ——— ———- ———- ———- ———- 11/13/92 836,400 7 7/8 7 7 1/2 11/20/92 344,100 7 3/4 7 7 5/8 11/27/92 331,600 7 5/8 7 1/8 7 3/8 12/04/92 1,766,100 9 1/4 7 3/8 8 5/8 12/11/92 978,900 8 5/8 7 1/2 7 3/4 12/18/92 691,200 8 7 1/2 7 3/4 12/25/92 562,800 7 3/4 7 1/4 7 3/8 # 1/01/93 1,134,800 7 1/2 7 7 1/8 # 1/08/93 1,208,600 7 1/4 6 1/8 6 1/4 1/15/93 756,400 6 3/4 6 1/4 6 1/4 1/22/93 826,900 7 1/4 6 1/4 7 1/4 1/29/93 1,044,200 7 5/8 6 3/8 6 1/2 2/05/93 1,523,800 6 3/4 5 1/4 5 1/2 2/12/93 879,600 6 3/8 5 5/8 6 2/19/93 423,000 6 1/8 5 5/8 5 7/8 2/26/93 666,200 5 7/8 5 3/8 5 1/2 3/05/93 592,700 5 5/8 5 1/4 5 3/8 3/12/93 1,054,800 5 3/8 4 3/4 5 1/4 3/19/93 733,400 5 5/8 5 1/8 5 1/2 3/26/93 446,900 5 1/2 5 5 4/02/93 293,900 5 1/8 4 7/8 4 7/8 4/09/93 303,900 5 1/8 4 7/8 4 7/8 # 4/16/93 579,700 5 4 3/8 4 5/8 4/23/93 520,600 5 4 1/4 4 1/2 4/30/93 352,700 4 1/2 4 1/4 4 1/4 5/07/93 792,400 4 3/8 3 1/2 3 5/8 5/14/93 757,700 4 1/2 3 5/8 4 3/8 5/21/93 398,400 4 1/2 4 4 1/8 5/28/93 643,900 4 1/4 3 3/4 4 6/04/93 2,434,100 3 3/8 2 5/8 3 6/11/93 1,105,500 3 1/4 2 7/8 2 7/8 6/18/93 607,900 3 2 5/8 2 7/8 6/25/93 757,100 2 7/8 2 1/2 2 3/4 7/02/93 446,400 3 2 5/8 3 7/09/93 877,200 3 7/8 3 1/8 3 5/8 7/16/93 386,900 3 3/4 3 1/2 3 5/8 7/23/93 229,300 3 5/8 3 3/8 3 1/2 7/30/93 231,400 3 1/2 3 1/8 3 3/8 8/06/93 228,700 3 5/8 3 1/4 3 5/8 8/13/93 396,100 3 7/8 3 1/2 3 5/8 8/20/93 189,400 3 5/8 3 3/8 3 5/8 8/27/93 171,000 3 1/2 3 3/8 3 1/2 9/03/93 352,600 3 7/8 3 3/8 3 3/4 9/10/93 223,400 3 3/4 3 1/2 3 5/8 9/17/93 233,400 3 5/8 3 1/4 3 1/4 9/24/93 212,200 3 1/2 3 1/8 3 1/8 10/01/93 226,100 3 1/4 3 3 1/8 10/08/93 334,500 3 1/2 3 3 1/4 10/15/93 248,200 3 5/8 3 1/4 3 1/4 10/22/93 415,800 3 1/2 2 7/8 3 10/29/93 174,000 3 1/8 3 3 11/04/93* 1,065,200 4 5/8 2 7/8 4 5/8 * indicates a partial period # indicates 'last' is from an earlier date in the period
#120629From: Paul HigginbottomNov 3, 1993 8:18 PM
Hedging is possible if you have something to hedge with. Commodore's cash position is awful.
#120762From: Don Curtis/SYSOPNov 5, 1993 12:24 AM
Wes, Interesting….when I grew up, there was a Commodore Business Machines in Conshocken (sp?) Pa. They didn't fix typewritters, they made adding machines. Don
#120848From: Paul HigginbottomNov 5, 1993 9:49 PM
Commodore began its existence as a typewriter repair shop in Toronto Canada in 1957 or 58.
#120858From: Don Curtis/SYSOPNov 6, 1993 12:45 AM
Wes, Yup…you're correct…I just checked the magazine database and it said Tramiel started a typewriter repair shop in 1958. Don
#120882From: Jim Drew/UUINov 6, 1993 2:01 AM
I am not quite sure where people get their information about Commodore's beginnings, but I know that 'Commodore Business Machines' started as a U.S. corporation (official filings data Oct. 1972). I have one of their original adding machines (calculator), and I still have my original 'PET2001' that I got in early 1976 (beta tester)…and I was 11 years old at that time. 🙂 I still have one of everything CBM has ever made, and I still beta test for them.
#120896From: Dale LarsonNov 6, 1993 6:39 AM
I keep trying to tell everyone that CBM is only the US subsidiary of a multi-national entity… You've made enough off Emplant already to afford a Lamborghini. You bum! 🙂
#120902From: Christopher TolmieNov 6, 1993 8:10 AM
Do you have the C= Navigator handheld calculator? I bought one of these for aviation use. It could give bearing, distance, and other flight parameters by entering in the LAT LONG, etc into it. Must have over fifty keys.
#121004From: Don Curtis/SYSOPNov 7, 1993 12:18 AM
I was basing my information on what someone here had said, that I originally disagreed with…that was later verified by a magazine article I found in the Ziff-Davis magazine database that stated that Commodore had its beginnings in a typewriter repair shop in 1958 run by Jack Tramiel. My own opinion prior to that was that Commodore Business Machines was a Pennsylvania company, was originally based in Conshocken and made mechanical adding machines.
#121104From: Jonathan SchmidtNov 8, 1993 6:39 AM
Yeah, I think my dad bought a Commodore calculator that only did + – * and / about 15 years ago or so… maybe more for about $125.
#121031From: John DraperNov 7, 1993 10:44 AM
Commodore started in Toronto, Ontario, as an office supply company, selling filing cabinets, calculators, and so on. Your name sure looks familiar, Jim. 🙂
#121033From: Betty Clay/SYSOPNov 7, 1993 11:11 AM
I have one of their calculators – a fine scientific model – and one of their watches. But I've stopped being a Commodore museum, and have given away most of my older machines. But you have one of everything they made? Including a filing cabinet and a desk? Do you have B machine? And a Z machine?? A SuperPet? (Just gave one of those away). A Plus4 and a C16? Must be an interesting collection. But Commodore did start in Toronto long before 1972. They started their US operations in that year, I believe, but they had existed as a Canadian company for a long time before they came to the US.
#120946From: Rob SalmonNov 6, 1993 2:05 PM
One of the companies I work for has a Commodore filing cabinet with a "Made in Canada" legend. They don't know how old it is, but their president won't let them throw away anything, including ideas. 🙂
#120761From: Don Curtis/SYSOPNov 5, 1993 12:14 AM
Don, Really…like they marketed the Atari ST? What a failure that machine is/was. Don