Slashdot Mirror


U.S. Attempts to Block Oracle Bid for PeopleSoft

AliasF97 writes "Thought you all might be interested in this story about the U.S. government attempting to block Oracle's bid for PeopleSoft via a civil anti-trust lawsuit. Seems to me that the courts are going to have their work cut out for them on this one. Also, the photo of Ellison is kind of comical. If you were to throw a black cape and a tall hat on him, he could be a circus magician."

9 of 275 comments (clear)

  1. Proof by faldore · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Where's the proof? I think before the feds stomp in to throw their weight around in the business arena, they better have a damn good reason they're spending my tax dollars to mess with the free market. And they'd better be prepared to prove it.

  2. Oracle still gets the benefits by kbeech · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Since the threat of takeover looms until the case is resolved, or they drop their takeover bid, Oracle gets 'vaporware' benefits from having it out there, since long-term support for Peoplesoft products is threatened by the takeover, making potential customers wary of making a decision to buy now.

  3. Oracle's Evil ERP Empire by Unoti · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I'm glad to see this! The Justice Department decision may have come after a big campaign from PeopleSoft, but that doesn't mean that blocking it is a bad thing for consumers. Working on Oracle Applications is like working in a gold mine: you've got to sift through 20 tons of mud to get 6 ounces of gold. Oracle needs healthy competition, and it could become a monopoly. I'd hate to see it become the the Microsoft of the ERP market.

  4. Stock Price by nija · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Orcl - 13.27 down .01
    PSFt - 21.78 down .35

    I'm going to make a prediction that because of this the news, Psft's prices are going to go up and Orcl will go down.

    PeopleSoft has been fighting this tooth and nail. They actually seem like they want the keep the company. As opposed to just wanting to cash out and saying screw the people.

    From this prespective, it seems like a Corporation is stucking UP to the Big Guy, instead of sticking it TO the little guy.

  5. Re:Ellison is pure evil by oozer · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Yeh, it's kind of like that "my enemy's enemy is my friend" thing. It shouldn't work like that. People should realise that companies like Oracle and Sun are just as evil as Microsoft and would easily stoop to any of the tactics that MS have employed over the years to get ahead.

  6. Re:mod parent up by Unoti · · Score: 5, Insightful

    This isn't about the database market, it's about the ERP market. In that market, some things Oracle has done are cause for concern.

  7. Practical reason for stopping Oracle by JDRipper · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I work for a major university in California. We're currently implenting Peoplesoft's Student Administration product. (Which is a giant piece of crap BTW, but it's better than other products out there. I wish we had developed our own solution.) If Oracle buys out Peoplesoft, we would have to spend millions to get a new product. (We don't believe Larry when he says that Oracle will continue to support Peoplesoft's products.) If you consider that this software is used by a large number of schools in the US, you can figure out that this will be a HUGE expense (Hundreds of millions of dollars) for all these schools to switch to some new product in a few years. Who will pay this cost? You will. Either in school bonds or higher student fees. Larry ain't gonna pay for it. He's got to pay for his jet fuel.

    --
    "You know Myra, some people might think you're cute. But me, I think you're one very large baked potato."
  8. Reasonable application of antitrust law by mbrother · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Oracle has made it clear their plan is to take Peoplesoft apart and get access to their customer base for Oracle software, phasing out Peoplesoft entirely. They basically want to buy Peoplesoft to eliminate a competitor, leaving the market to Oracle and SAS (the European gorilla in the field). This is not good for Peoplesoft or Peoplesoft customers (and there are a *lot* of them out there) or the market in general. This is only good for Oracle (duh). Many hear complain about Microsoft -- well, do you want another Microsoft in the tech field? Larry Ellison does. The US Government does not. By the way, the Peoplesoft stock price going down instead of jumping to 26 (the Oracle bid) says what the market thinks about the takeover happening.

    --
    Professor of Astronomy, Author of Spider Star & Star Dragon (Tor)
  9. Re:Fuck Antitrust Laws! by nomadic · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Oh, god, here we go again.

    Yup! The same government that created one of the most famous of all monopolies and enforces it by preventing competition. Not a very useful law.

    That makes no sense. The postal service is a government function. That's why congress was given the sole authority to create a postal service in the Constitution. Don't see people raising their own for-profit armies in the US, do you?

    You're not laughing.

    Yes I am. You amuse me.

    If it weren't so common for government schemes to backfire completely, you'd probably think this was funny too.

    That's why no government program ever works, and why we live in a squalid, impoverished anarchy.

    It gets better. The antitrust laws are used against companies that practice "anticompetitive practices." What counts as "anticompetitive?" Anything aimed at doing better than your competition.

    No, by that twisted logic every industry leader in every field would be the target of a federal suit.

    Well, here's my last and favorite part. Even assuming that the government is right about everything (I know it's hard...just pretend), the laws are still worthless. The government assumes that if a single company becomes the sole producer in a market, they might jack up the price of their product, hurting the little guy

    The laws weren't created in a vacuum--they were enacted BECAUSE of how monopolies were treating consumers.

    Now, the main reason Objectivists dislike these laws is because they're a blatant initiation of force.

    Objectivists don't like these laws because they're humorless, incredibly naive little people.

    If a single producer jacking up his price is really the problem they're trying to solve, and given that they don't care about property rights in the slightest, why not wait until a single producer actually does do that? That's right. If they're going to trample rights, why not just wait until the "bad" thing has actually happened? By their own standards, the antitrust laws are useless.

    Because prevention is better than a cure. Corporations aren't people. They shouldn't get the same rights.