View Single Post
  #449  
Old Posted Aug 6, 2014, 4:24 PM
rgolch's Avatar
rgolch rgolch is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 887
Quote:
Originally Posted by SamInTheLoop View Post
I can tell there is still confusion about what these corporate tax inversions are about - this was not a potential operational HQ move - it was essentially little more than a prospective move on paper strictly for tax purposes - not a move that really impacts real estate decisions of its operational HQ.
That may be true for other inversion, but that was absolutely NOT the case in the Walgreens situation. There was ABSOLUTELY a power grab by Stefano Pessina to wrest control of the combined company, and stockholders and investor definitely wanted him to control the entity. If you read any of the recent business news regarding what's be happening, there have been a few recent departures at Walgreens to allow some Alliance people to have representation. They didn't move because they realized it would be a PR nightmare.
Reply With Quote