Sounds like those currently in charge of Microsoft. Minus perhaps the short-term profits. There's a reason why it is usually struggling companies (financially or in reputation.. or both) targeted by these so-called "activist" investors. You know Ballmer's successor will make Ballmer appear an excellent manager by comparison, regardless of what internal/external pressures influence the decision on his successor.

Essentially what happened with Dell Inc here (just MSDell is looting the company), minus the other half of your sentence. Assuming Dell's situation is as precarious as the prostit- err "professional directors" of the board claim, perhaps the debt load to fund the buyout could bankrupt them (especially if economy -- corporate/government spending especially -- dives) and maybe we would see the other half yet, but doubtful. He has an inside seat and is laughing to the bank on pulling a steal versus him having previously authorized share buybacks when the stock was double, triple, even nearly quadruple the current amount. Yeah, poor decisions as a public company indeed.

Actually Skype was domiciled in Luxembourg if I recall correctly and at the time of purchase, an article indicated that, had they been a US corporation, Microsoft might have had to offer $2 billion less (to be equivalent) due to the huge tax "penalty" of having to repatriate so much money on to US shores. Oh well, such stupid purchases probably make more sense in a near-zero interest rate borrowing environment for AAA-rated corporate credits, as much lower hurdle needed to swing it financially if it isn't being called a "strategic" acquisition.

Back before going entirely audiobooks/podcasts, there was an auto insurance radio ad I heard that featured the sound of a near-collision (honking, swerving, or similar) which I'd imagine someone's blamed a crash on. Too bad they were probably never co-defendants in a suit, as they sure deserved it!

Still better off going after the execs and really too bad it's only if a company either fails or stumbles badly in an accounting fraud that prison enters the picture.. unless an exec fed insider information to a hedge fund or similar big money. Only lawyers benefit from these class actions and they ARE the ones who initiate it. In the press releases announcing it, they try to find someone to serve as "lead plaintiff" and usually get either a city, fire or police pension to step forward. So it really is putting the cart before the horse, knowing you can snag the horse later. But I guess there's a cap to how much you can probably squeeze out of management/board memberships (and companies often also pay for the insurance policy protecting them against such lawsuits), so false perception of getting value comes from suing the company.. but pretty sure even if Microsoft's insiders own between 20-50% of the company, they still will be among those included in any "settlement" as these usually end.

As this article seems to deal with Brooklyn, to answer your question, and as it is kind of a funny coincidence on name, there is a section called DUMBO http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DUMBO that seems to have a reputation for being hip and I guess innovative. I would think the idea is that they just want to locate in an activity hub, though funny it should be Brooklyn rather than outside NYC (but inside greater NYC area) in somewhere like White Plains, NY or thereabout, northern New Jersey, or places like Stamford or Norwalk, Connecticut if the motive is huge commuter access and established infrastructure. As a Tri-stater (I live on the Connecticut side), it does seem funny of course to want to locate in a very high cost area.

Actually any shares not voted will be AGAINST the deal as part of the board's approval for Dell to buy the company. It's the folks who blindly vote with the board's recommendation who are lame. Given nature of proposed buyouts, likely arbitrageurs rushing into stock who will vote in favor of deal unless it's a close call while ordinary investors and those not wanting to take risk of it declining should it be rejected who will be getting out. $13.65/shr though is a paltry price though for a company that did share buybacks in the 20s, 30s, probably even 40s and 50s a share.

There is an exception under the US Securities laws against market manipulation that allow an IPO's underwriters to make a "stabilizing bid" (IPO price) to keep a stock from falling as a "market" is created for the new issuance. Needless to say they did not support the stock after the first day of trading :) http://www.investopedia.com/terms/s/stabilizingbid.asp

Sounds like any profession for the average person (of more limited means) where you are better off working for someone else, as only limited economic gain in working for yourself versus a "psychic" analogy. Trades consume a decent amount of money and often take some time to develop. Maybe that could be an idea for a future site/platform to track the performance of their recommendations, even if the wise people read their research and ignore their recommendations.