As to financial resources, I would say that Reed Elsevier easily matches
Thomson. And, this is the last chance for Reed-Elsevier to buy up a big
piece of the legal publishing market, which they clearly wish to do
(remember that Mead also owns Michie!). So, I think Reed-Elsevier may
even overpay. In the long run, for Reed, plus or minus 100 million may
be worth it. On the other hand, Thomson may bid out of fear that
Reed-Elsevier may obtain it. Were I Reed-Elsevier, I would be in with a
preemptive bid and push for a fast closing. Clearly, a long drawn out
process will not do Lexis any good.
So, I stick with my odds of 3-2 for Reed over Thomson.
On Fri, 27 May 1994, Karl Gruben wrote:
> Alan,
> I just read in Publishers WEekly that the Thompson Professional
> Publishing Groups profits were up around 5% and gross sales were up
> around 7%. My money's on Thompson - they're geared up for (heavy in CDs
> and electronic publishing) while Reed is not.
>
> * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
> Karl T. Gruben * Internet vinelk@class.org *
> Vinson & Elkins * Telephone 713-758-2679 *
> 1001 Fannin * Fax 713-758-2346 *
> Houston, Texas 77002-6760 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
>
> On Fri, 27 May 1994, Alan Sugarman wrote:
>
> > The other most serious contender in addition to Thomson is Reed-Elsevier
> > which owns Butterworth, Equity, and Martindale H.
> >
> > The next most serious contender is the Times Mirror Corp.(Matthew
> > Bender).
> >
> > Reed has the most ready cash at hand.
> >
> > Is say the odds are 3:2 that Reed will take it and 100% that it will be
> > Reed, Thomson, or Times Mirror.
> >
> > Alan Sugarman
> > HL
> >
> > On Thu, 26 May 1994, Jim Milles wrote:
> >
> > > >Date: Wed, 25 May 1994 16:31:14 -0700
> > > >From: Walter Duflock <walt@Integrate.com>
> > >
> > > [stuff deleted]
> > >
> > > >2) West would probably be making a mistake if they tried to
> > > >purchase MDC. First, the antitrust forces are already excited about
> > > >taking on Microsoft, so they'd be very interested in this (sure,
> > > >everyone on this list knows that if you define the market as "on line
> > > >information services" there's no monopoly BUT if they define the
> > > >market as "on line LEGAL information services" you could definitely
> > > >claim that a West/MDC merger is an attempt to monopolize the market)
> > > >transaction. Second, West would have all the librarian barbs that
> > > >are currently split among the vendors aimed solely at them :<) Just
> > > >a thought.
> > > >
> > >
> > > Seriously, I doubt that West is even a contender. The anitrust
> > > objections seem too formidable, and as much as any of us like
> > > WESTLAW, I doubt that any of us would really want them to be our
> > > ONLY online vendor.
> > >
> > > The most likely purchaser seems to me to be Thomson and Thomson.
> > > This would be a good thing; they could bring the kind of
> > > editorial quality to the database that has been lacking, and
> > > would very likely strenghten LEXIS's foreign and international
> > > holdings. That would really give WESTLAW a run for the money.
> > >
> > > Jim Milles
> > > Head of Computer Services
> > > Saint Louis University Law Library
> > > millesjg@sluvca.slu.edu
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : 03/09/00 PST