AbbVie has retracted comments made about shareholder support for its $51 billion bid for London-listed Shire. The CEO may have simply misspoken, but it is still a tactical M&A error, says Breakingviews.
-- -- struggling -- getting its hands slapped preaching you can take care of the rules. Is -- a good thing or isn't so. Complicating the whole takeover process of apology writing about this we've fixed it I don't mean. The most important part of this bid process. I didn't have stolen a tick up there is an important principle. So it would be. What's happened is a good thing that I trust -- very good one happened Tom. The CEO of that -- came -- -- said -- investors would generally supportive of the transaction. And you're not allowed to give. Clues like that -- process. And that's just -- technically yes but what happens is that chief executive. Has as it was -- and excellent. A little bit and he should -- in a statement since being. Published there that are on -- such assertions the principal reasons. That unit. We shouldn't be dealing in. And if achieve that success has support from shelves he needs to be able to have some evidence to support is that why well. We will clean neat let somebody that's on the table have been noting there had vigorously but often exceed found -- -- -- quite represented that the so. You've got it back want to point this on this interpretation. But the thing is that -- McDonald gave an impression so I'm. Teachings and may very well product that. That there's a whole episode -- support but -- -- Others will look at it and take that. How acceptance. The banks it's pointless so it might create an hour and a momentum which isn't that so that's that's -- overstate the importance of this but let us out. The -- -- make sure that we do understand the rules of sound then that a reasonable if some two months it's just. Typical British and -- -- something. Statements you've been in his. And that there's a part of the reason these rules exist and that it is right -- you and I know how similar rooms in the things. Yeah. Very broadly speaking this that it could be beaten the rules are about exciting but that doesn't that lead differently. At different and deceased at. And different. Particular parts of the rule book I just think I mean and let's face it. It's it's done now but he's retracted columns from. It doesn't really change the fact that he feels go to support them and show us. I'm feel that he might be speaking for them it doesn't really changed but it isn't it doesn't stop. Well it doesn't really change it now but it's been attracted -- content. Web. But actually I think it could go the other way because he's had to work retract the story people -- -- pops season wound. -- -- mistaking -- we'll -- saying too much does this -- supports. Actually exist. And -- on a couple of -- more negative. -- them -- shot cultures and what we'll site and then today. And definitely the biggest mistake and what in the book but it's tactical and I just consistent as we get a sense that. Well 11. Should should that this US he known best -- and -- get a sense you know phony as -- known about this that. -- trying to fund things. -- -- -- -- -- I'm not a I don't I don't believe that old a mean. You've been a decent cultural and familiarity. With the rules of frightening and -- -- gonna make a bid for UK company won't open and us itself with. Absolutely every house pockets of those mostly politics pieces of if you and I missed it a good thing is that you know. These rules exist for very good reasons some very good reason why these particular rule which -- breached. Has to be respect -- enough for. A good place having. Correct it seems to be. This could hubris -- thanks government -- and argues that the US has talked that he sensing that he PST. On actual problem sources.