Hmm. There's a good article in "Alpha" that basically says that the offer was "a little low," and then goes on to make what I think is a reasoning error - it says, "Well, you get $13 in cash 'for sure,' and SBSI is a much better 'operator,' so you might wind up with nice capital gains if your patient." (I'm thinking that what that means is that SBSI is screwing OABC's shareholders, but maybe if you "go along with them," you'll "be made whole."
OTOH, it sure seems like OABC is doing all sorts of stuff wrong for several years now. A Texas bank should not have an ROAA around 0.25 - not 5 years after all that tumult. But I'm thinking that what everyone has seen at least once re residential real estate - well, it's true here in NYC - that a low-ball "offering price" winds up generating a kind of bidding war. I mean OABC may have had Sandler advising them. What were the inv. bankers thinking? ... Maybe, their game is - No obvious purchaser was willing to come up with anything close to $30, ... but maybe one of them will re-think things now that it's "going, going, ..."
Seems plausible, because one sees plenty of takeover battles where an improved offer is just 5 or 10% above what proves to be the runner-up, ... and with SBSI's shares bleeding badly, a cash or cash/stock deal at $27 or so (from ?) sure makes sense to me - and not just on a wishful thinking basis. One cannot believe that SBSI is looking for a $10 MM breakup fee - so maybe, they improve their offer and we do get close to $30.
... To be continued (I HOPE) (the last chapter in the OABC book)