Welcome! Login or register.
FAQ     Search
It is currently Tue Oct 16, 2018 10:16 pm
View unanswered posts | View active topics All times are UTC - 7 hours
Board index » General » General Discussion

Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 1 post ] 
Author Message
Sonyaany

Joined: Tue Sep 22, 2015 8:52 pm
Posts: 183
 Post subject: nike roshe run boys
PostPosted: Sat Mar 05, 2016 12:06 am 
cut winner in Oracle antitrust trial

Reviews Top Categories Phones Laptops TVs Tablets Cameras Appliances Car Tech Audio Desktops Software Headphones Printers Networking Wearable Tech Deals

How To Top Categories Computers Home Entertainment Internet Phones Photography Security Tablets ForumsLog In to CNET Join Oracle, PeopleSoft and Germany's SAP dominate the market of enterprise software for major corporations. They provide applications for payroll, human resources and other functions to major manufacturers, telecommunications firms and other big operations. The Justice Department is trying to stop Oracle from pursuing a $7.7 billion hostile buyout of PeopleSoft, arguing that a market overshadowed by SAP and a bigger Oracle wouldn't have sufficient competition to drive prices down and innovation up. Justice Department rested. Each side is expected to make closing statements on July 20, then await Judge Vaughn Walker's decision on whether Oracle may pursue the acquisition.

Walker is expected to issue his ruling in August or September. In the meantime, observers are split on exactly who came out ahead.

A handful of technology analysts said Oracle's vigorous opening arguments set the tone of the trial and that the government never fully recovered from a stumbling start on the first day. "I think (the Department of Justice) is on really shaky ground and has been from beginning," AMR Research analyst Jim Shepherd said.

What bothers many technology analysts about the government's case is that it's concerned with a relatively small slice of the overall enterprise software market. The market for so called high function human resources and financial programs at the heart of the case generates about $500 million or so of the more than $20 billion that companies spend each year on business applications, according to the Justice Department. Oracle says it's even smaller than that.

"I think the risk that (the government) runs here is that the Nike Air Max 2016 definition is so narrow that the court may not see the market as big enough to regulate," Forrester analyst Paul Hamerman said.

A former Justice Department antitrust official found the government's case more compelling. Stan Gorinson, now a partner with Kilpatrick Stockton, noted that the government didn't have to bear as great a burden of proof as in a criminal trial. As the plaintiff in a civil case, Justice Department attorneys must only persuade the judge that arguments tilt in their favor by 50.1 percent.

Another attorney, hired by investor clients to monitor the trial from the courtroom, said he believes the Justice Department will ultimately prevail. The attorney, who asked not to be named, said the government met its burden of proof in "introducing good evidence."

Witnesses for the plaintiffBradley, under cross examination by Oracle, was steadfast in her belief that Verizon, a PeopleSoft customer, would "lose either way" if forced to chose between a merged Oracle PeopleSoft or industry leader SAP.

Keating testified that the system integrator's customers chose SAP, Oracle or PeopleSoft for their projects, with Lawson Software a distant fourth. Keating gave an overview of how system integrators and the industry work and provided a detailed, coherent explanation for the judge, the investor attorney said.

The Justice Department was also able to establish its case that Oracle's pricing is affected by whether PeopleSoft is competing for the same customer, he said. Internal discount forms showed Oracle was aware when it was competing against PeopleSoft in the bidding process and would seek executive approval to offer a larger discount, according to court documents.

But the Justice Department also called some witnesses to the stand that did little to advance its case. Marco Iansiti, a Harvard Business Nike Clearance School business professor, was one, the investor attorney said. "A lot of his testimony was shaky. When he talked about his (merger) analysis, Oracle got him to admit he had not factored in outsourcing or the 'do nothing' choice as options."

Oracle takes its stand

After the Justice Department's two weeks of presenting testimony, Oracle took the offensive with Nike Store Online Shopping a pared back list of witnesses it even reversed its plan to call PeopleSoft CEO Craig Conway to testify.

In an unusual move that some say backfired for Oracle, the company paid a "fact witness" to testify in the case. But hiring Ken Harris, a former IT executive at the Gap, Nike and Pepsi, may have hurt Oracle's cause, attorneys say.

"Hiring a fact witness is new to me. It sounds to me like he wouldn't have much credibility," Gorinson said. "Hiring an expert witness is common because they're experts in their field, but fact witnesses are to testify about the facts in the case."

Judge Walker seemed to have taken note, referring to Harris at one point during his testimony as "your paid witness," rather than by his name.

Near the end of the trial, Oracle CEO Larry Ellison said that Oracle's bid for PeopleSoft was not about market dominance or destroying a rival, but keeping his company competitive in a difficult market. The often combative Ellison was more contained than his flamboyant reputation might have suggested, but he was unflinching and good humored under cross examination. But not every observer was enchanted.

"Why did they bring him to testify?" the investors' attorney wondered. He said Ellison's testimony mostly reiterated what Oracle had already presented to Judge Walker. The investors' attorney said Ellison's argument, that expanding Oracle by swallowing a major rival would foster competition in the market, goes against common antitrust theory.


Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 1 post ] 
Board index » General » General Discussion
Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum
Jump to:  
cron
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group
Localized by MaĆ«l Soucaze © 2010 phpBB.fr

Powered by Guildomatic