My guess is a deal would be with a financial buyer, not another railway. It would be all about the CSX senior zombies saving their own positions, not delivering operational improvement and value to shareholders.
That deal was offered, and they sabotaged it like cockroaches.
"I have no interest." EHH, April 21, 2015.
Helluva time for someone who spent his formidable career on speaking the blunt truth to start telling whoppers now.
As a shareholder, I'd like to suggest the following idea:
Re: train speeds.
When assembling unit trains, add a few grain cars to the mix. The Canadian government would spend the next few months in top secret emergency meetings trying to figure it out.
" Must speed up grain....must slow down oil....mind being blown...".
You won't hear from them for 2 or 3 elections.
....we did not run an efficient operation,” said UP President and CEO Lance Fritz.
So...efficiency is important ? Is there any easy way to measure this ? Is there anyone who knows how to improve rail operations ? Anyone ?
Have you got a touch of Alzheiner's, Unca Larry.....?
"Have you look at how the Buck is doing against other currencies?....So we're srtill ahead...putz!"
Bwa ha ha ha ha ha hah a
Lets; say this is now the sign that a takeover / mercy killing is coming.
Based on Q2 results, the stock was trading at $32ish....that was already still swollen with some lingering speculation of a T/O ---maybe by 2 or 3 bucks? ---- but for simplicity let's completely ignore that.
Let's say there's a knock out bid out there. 40% premium.
So $45. IMO, any more than that and a bidder risks being ridiculed in public as a complete rube.
We're at $37. So there's a possible $8 left. IF there's a TO. And IF the bid is stupid-generous.
Downside? No T/O bid, stock drifts back to $32 (or worse). Lose $5.
This is not news. It perfectly consistent with HHs public position all along, for anyone who was listening.
The reason the CSX discussions failed were because the entrenched management there love their corner offices and egos too much, that they don't give a rat's pitutty about delivering value to shareholders, and that they haven't for a very long time.
To be clear: Such a "solution", as described above, is good for the incompetent management team, as they keep their jobs. And its good for current shareholders, because they make a good return.
But it isn't good for North American railroading. To sell out to a bunch of comatose coupon clippers, and to further entrench a bunch of incompetents who already hide from all risky innovations, to improve operations, is bad for the overall economy.
The renaissance of freight rail would effectively be derailed for the sake of keeping some boobs in jobs they never should have had to begin with.