Really solid article here discussing Section 8 of the Clayton Act and why, even if BBBY+NWL meet the de minimus sales loophole (2% of revenue or less), regulators might still demand Brett step down from the Newell board to allow Icahn #BBBY M&A.
foley.com/en/insights/pu…
🧵👇
foley.com/en/insights/pu…
🧵👇
"The essence of these safe harbors is that an interlock will not be prohibited if the two corporations only compete for a small portion of business … In practice … safe harbors are sufficiently complicated … that they should not be relied upon without a detailed analysis." 
Despite BBBY's accounting for < 2% of NWL's revenue preventing an Icahn NWL/BBBY board interlock, regulators could have standing to ask for more concessions.
Recent NWL board changes as well as Brett Icahn's resignation and divestment of 50.2% of his personal NWL equity could very well be antitrust concessions to receive HSR M&A consent from regulators.
Note: none of my tweets should be construed as legal, tax, financial, or investment advice. I'm sharing my personal research as an individual investor for educational purposes.
⚠️ INVESTING IS RISKY ⚠️
I hold a BBBY position because my personal risk tolerance is off-the-charts.
⚠️ INVESTING IS RISKY ⚠️
I hold a BBBY position because my personal risk tolerance is off-the-charts.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
