See: https://www.bloomberg.com/research/stocks/private/sn...

Note the word "acquired" and not merged. Maybe you were not aware at the time that Dixons were having financial troubles.

http://www.digitalspy.com/tech/news/a389122/dixons-t...

As reported on digitalspy and other websites that Dixons had a long history of problems and which resulted in stores closing way before Carphone Wharehouse got involved.

Edited by robertcrowther (Sun 17-Jun-18 09:49:50)

Respectfully, if I'm looking for financial analysis, I'll go elsewhere.

It's no surprise that, even back in 2012, Dixons Retail was responding to the consumer preference shift to out-of-town.

It's also no surprise that some financial journalists/editors describe almost any merger as "an acquisition." This is often more about editorial style guides than an analysis of the two companies' balance sheets.

Expert sources described the proposal as "a merger of equals," (e.g., this analyst-reax piece).

And the final shareholder comp. reflected a merger of equals: "Dixons and Carphone shareholders will each own 50% of the combined group under the deal..."

I do like the way you had a snub at financial journalists/editors, but then go on to use their material to try and back up your point of view especially considering the source is the left wing Guardian newspaper.

Either you didn't read what I wrote, or you're a troll.

Whichever it is, I shan't be feeding you.

Your reply came off as dissiing my sources. Sorry if you got offended from me showing you from multiple sources that I was correct and I'm not a troll just because you could not understand something I was saying. No hard feelings

No food for you