frtgrdn21, I agree with you 100%. It makes absolutely no sense that ILMN is trading $7.50 higher than the offer price. There was nothing in ILMN's pre-announcement on January 25th that indicates that ILMN has regained their technological edge over Life Technologies' Ion Torrent technology.
We will find out soon enough how much damage Ion Torrent did to ILMN last quarter.
Since you asked, this little dust up started after I'd responded to your post with the CNBC Schwan interview (thanks for that by the way), commenting that my read was that his words could be interpreted to indicate the possibility of a higher offer down the road. Creamer immediately accused me of putting words in his mouth. I pointed out that I wasn't even talking to (or about) him, he responded by calling me an illerate, and .....
Most of the time I wouldn't even bother responding to this type of petty sniping, but made an exception in this case. I'll try to let it go, but doubt that Creamer will.
On your other point " Roche's CEO just came out and stated that ILMN is a broken down company, that lost its edge and needs a huge amount of cash to get it back", I'm not getting that from the CNBC interview, if that's what you're refering to. In fact, he said (from the transcript) "are you confident if that, in fact, occurs that illumina will be able to maintain in any way, shape, or form, its price or ability to earn as much money as people think? yes, i am. illumina is the leading player in the chain sequencing market. and importantly, if you look over the past years, illumina has always been able to progress the technology. indeed, it's a fast-changing -- fast-changing area, but i'm convinced by combining the capabilities of illumina and reporter by further investing into the technologies, we have all it takes to keep ahead of the curve".
Doesn't sound like a company he's trying to talk down as I interpret it.
What are you guys talking about?!? Roche's CEO just came out and stated that ILMN is a broken down company, that lost its edge and needs a huge amount of cash to get it back. Meanwhile you guys are calling each other names and acting like little children. Can we please keep our eyes on the ball.
You've chosen to misinterpret his message - yet again. He's not putting the board on ignore, just you. As far as missing any "jucy tidbits", doubtful that any are going to come from you.
Your input seems limited to spouting your opinion and little else, tending to abusive language and an inability to respond rationally to those who have a different opinion. If anyone doubts this, all they need to do is check your posting history on CREE, RMBS, etc. There's an evident pattern that emerges of name calling and occasional profanity.
Trollboy His @$$holiness,
Your loss is ILMN public shareholders gain - go ahead, put your blinders on! You'll be missing all the forthcoming juicy tidbits that shed light on this bizarre insider trading/market manipulated transaction.
One last question that you have so far refused to answer, "who is paying you to be on this message board and artificially support the current $52 share price when there is only one offer on the table for $44.50?"
Your humble servant