[NaClH2O]

Interesting headline. Not Robert's problem on how Bloomberg spun "over priced" IMO it sounds to me like the grandson is just rattling cages because he likes to rattle cages. We'll see come 6/19 (day after the shareholder meeting) It's at that time we'll see if his proposal has "legs".

NaC(what me worry?)H2O

[Ira]

I guarantee you that the first thing this SOB does is double the price of that M42 adapter.

HAH!

[mikemike]

Someone had better explain this one to me because after reading the whole thing I don't get why he considers it a failure at all. If I am reading this article correctly Pentax made a decent profit over operating costs in a bad global recession. This is BAD?

What he is saying is that the pentax acquisition was bad for Hoya shareholders not for Pentax or for Pentax's customers.

This is like the argument that Oracle overpaid for Sun, it hurts oracle's shareholders but it hasn't necessarily been a bad thing for Sun's customers or even Oracle's customers.

What it has not been is like the Sprint/Nextel merger where Sprint overpaid, the networks were incompatible, and everyone from shareholder to customer has suffered.

[Aristophanes]

With 3 capital companies holding over 50% of Hoya's shares, Hoya is ripe for splitting up as the sum of its parts may be worth more than its carrying costs. We'd have to know more how leveraged Hoya is, and if the Pentax buyout (when interest rates were actually higher) had a definitive impact.

The buyout at a 10% premium may mean that Pentax is a net money-loser. It could post a very modest profit for 20 years, but still be a net loss to Hoya. It's retail presence is so small that the impact on gross revenues cannot be significant to Hoya overall. Margins on retail are thin, relying more on market share, brand loyalty, and volume, of which Pentax has only one attribute. That's where small market share really hurts. Retail products and brands can be a real drain (marketing costs, distribution, reactive product cycle) on more focused, bottom line companies looking for real returns ASAP from specific market segments where they have advantage through historical expertise.

It's a story to keep an eye one. In some ways, the criticism is classic hindsight. Buying Pentax today would've cost far, far less in nominal terms. But we could say that about many businesses right now.

[Urkeldaedalus]

There has been the sense that Hoya has had some buyer's remorse after purchasing Pentax, but I've felt that has improved recently with the financial commitment Hoya has made improving the company in the last year.

What Mr. Yamanaka appears to be doing is using this buyers remorse as leverage to get the reforms that he wants, possibly increasing his own control of the company. Note this:

Overseas shareholders such as JPMorgan Chase & Co., Capital Research & Management Co. and Deutsche Bank AG, owned 51 percent of Hoya’s outstanding shares as of March 2009, according to the company’s data. Yamanaka said he owns less than 1 percent.

[Ira]

With 3 capital companies holding over 50% of Hoya's shares, Hoya is ripe for splitting up as the sum of its parts may be worth more than its carrying costs. We'd have to know more how leveraged Hoya is, and if the Pentax buyout (when interest rates were actually higher) had a definitive impact.

The buyout at a 10% premium may mean that Pentax is a net money-loser. It could post a very modest profit for 20 years, but still be a net loss to Hoya. It's retail presence is so small that the impact on gross revenues cannot be significant to Hoya overall. Margins on retail are thin, relying more on market share, brand loyalty, and volume, of which Pentax has only one attribute. That's where small market share really hurts. Retail products and brands can be a real drain (marketing costs, distribution, reactive product cycle) on more focused, bottom line companies looking for real returns ASAP from specific market segments where they have advantage through historical expertise.

It's a story to keep an eye one. In some ways, the criticism is classic hindsight. Buying Pentax today would've cost far, far less in nominal terms. But we could say that about many businesses right now.

Huh?




Your avatar suits you.

[kevinschoenmakers]

And I, son of my father, think it was an Epic Win for Pentax.

Hahaha, that made laugh out loud.

Buyer's remorse.

I do agree that Pentax medical equipment division has not had as much success. Olympus is just butchering them in that arena.

[falconeye]

Uh, I did read it Mr. Falconeye. That's what the Bloomberg article I referenced is titled.

Sorry, please don't feel personally offended.

What I wanted to say:

The Blomberg title is targeted at investors and means it was a mistake to buy Pentax (at this price). That's pretty much without concern to non shareholders. This grandson holds 1% of Hoya and so paid 10 million $ for Pentax. Or the equivalent of 10000 K-7. He wasn't asked even. Wouldn't you call your girlfriend buying you 10,000 K-7 from your money a mistake?

However, your title is targeted at Pentaxians and means Pentax is failing. While the article even says the opposite (Pentax turning profitable). Sometimes, copying a title out of context is a bad idea. Your case being an example.

Which is why I asked you to change it.

[MrPetkus]

The Blomberg title is targeted at investors and means it was a mistake to buy Pentax (at this price).

No, I don't think so. It's about a man's quest, acting alone or collaboratively, to change the complexion of Hoya. I agree that Bloomberg's title is stupid because it doesn't reflect the story's content. However, it's not my job to paraphrase or censor the story's title in order to mollify delicate Pentaxians.

Bloomberg's title should've been "Hoya founder's grandson seeking reformation of corporate practice within Hoya."

Is his target Pentax? No. Rather:
1) Term limits on board membership and pay disclosure.
2) Cumulative voting wherein shareholders can withhold votes for a nominee with dissenting views while casting multiple votes toward those nominees possessing the same "vision".

He believes the purchase of Pentax at an inflated price could be attributed to such shady and nepotistic practices. He also believes these reformations will increase the company's value and ability seize new opportunities.

Personally I believe grandson's motivation is nationalistic in nature, a "Take Hoya Back" drive. Hoya is predominantly owned by foreign investors and the board of directors is primarily composed of outsiders. Corporate coffers have taken a hit.

[MrPetkus]

Sorry, please don't feel personally offended.

Not offended at all. It's just a message board. A good one but one nonetheless...

[falconeye]

in order to mollify delicate Pentaxians.
[...]
Personally I believe grandson's motivation is nationalistic in nature

Actually, it was more about avoiding confusion rather than mollification. But never mind.

Yamanaka's thinking may be national or not. He's living in London and studied in New York. He may as well just try to ameliorate things. I actually invited him to join our discussion

[Blue]

I think the grandson is a failure and should be immediately sterilized and sent to work for Canon. Or to phrase it another way, if he gives a damn about Hoya as a whole, why would he public air out dirty laundry on the other side of the globe? Could it be he thought his trust fund would have been bigger?

[Ira]

I think the grandson is a failure and should be immediately sterilized and sent to work for Canon. Or to phrase it another way, if he gives a damn about Hoya as a whole, why would he public air out dirty laundry on the other side of the globe? Could it be he thought his trust fund would have been bigger?

I'm telling you:

THAT'S the reason he's going to double the cost of that stupid M42 adapter!

I think he is a forum member, the grandson.