|Bid||5.980 x 0|
|Ask||6.000 x 0|
|Day's Range||5.970 - 6.030|
|52 Week Range||5.700 - 7.090|
|Beta (5Y Monthly)||0.18|
|PE Ratio (TTM)||19.35|
|Earnings Date||Nov 08, 2023 - Nov 13, 2023|
|Forward Dividend & Yield||0.15 (2.53%)|
|Ex-Dividend Date||Jun 14, 2023|
|1y Target Est||7.10|
Subscribe to Yahoo Finance Plus to view Fair Value for 1475.HK
May 24 (Reuters) - (The opinions expressed here are those of the author, a columnist for Reuters.) In an extraordinary letter docketed on Tuesday, a Delaware judge said he did not intend to accuse plaintiffs lawyers of sexism when he said that one of their theories in long-running litigation against Oracle Corp founder Larry Ellison and CEO Safra Catz “had some odor of denigrating the abilities of women executives to succeed based on their merits.” “I have, I fear, done plaintiffs’ counsel a disservice,” wrote Vice Chancellor Sam Glasscock of Delaware Chancery Court in Tuesday’s letter. Glasscock’s letter addressed a footnote in his May 12 decision clearing Ellison and Catz of breaching their duties to shareholders.
(Reuters) - (The opinions expressed here are those of the author, a columnist for Reuters.) A Delaware judge delivered a gut-punch to plaintiffs lawyers when he sided on Friday with Oracle Corp founder Larry Ellison and co-CEO Safra Catz in a long-running case accusing them of overpaying for NetSuite Inc to score a big payday for Ellison. But that wasn’t the only blow: The judge also took a swipe at law firms Robbins Geller Rudman & Dowd and Friedlander & Gorris for theorizing that Oracle board member Renee James, a onetime president at Intel Corp who chaired the special board committee that negotiated the $9.3 billion deal to acquire NetSuite in 2016, was not independent because she needed Ellison’s help to advance her career. That theory, wrote Vice Chancellor Sam Glasscock of the Delaware Chancery Court, was not just “strongly disproved” by the evidence at trial but also seemed to have a misogynistic subtext.
A Delaware judge has ruled in favor of Oracle founder Larry Ellison in a shareholder lawsuit alleging that he coerced the technology company’s board into paying a grossly inflated price to acquire software company NetSuite Corp. in 2016. Vice Chancellor Samuel Glasscock III on Friday rejected the plaintiffs’ allegation that Oracle’s acquisition was not entitled to the deference traditionally shown corporate decision-makers under Delaware’s “business judgment” rule. The shareholders argued that the $9.3 billion deal should be subjected to a more rigorous “entire fairness” review because Ellison was both a controlling shareholder of Oracle at the time and owned almost 40% of shares in NetSuite, which he cofounded in 1998.