Tyler, Maybe someone - your management professor included - should take a look at the numbers.For 2002 Deere's revenues were 13.9 billion - nearly half of that, or 6.738 billion were from AG equipment which alone generated an operating profit of 439 million. By comparison AGCO's results for the year were 2.541 billion in revenue, an 88 million net income which became an 84 million dollar loss after accounting charges. So ask yourself - 1: Why would Deere want to sell off a business that generates half their revenue and is by itself far more profitable than AGCO. 2: What band of fools is going to lend AGCO 6 or 7 billion to buy Deere's AG business as AGCO already has 86 cents of debt for every dollar in assets they control. Deere has underperformed the S&P 500 over the last 15 years -but it's done better than the S&P over the last 2 years - so the shareholders aren't that unhappy right now. Meanwhile the numbers of farms keeps declining worldwide - so Deere knows that the AG tractor business is going to evolve into an arena where they'll sell 1 quarter of a million dollar monster tractor instead of ten 4020 types. Net, net, Deere will be in the AG business for a long time to come - so if you want to give that internship a try, best thing to do is get in touch with Deere. Steve
|