That name is meaningless and generally just juvenile. It makes it hard to take you seriously when you do this.
This is also not an appropriate use of "sic".
> Although, I've seen a few deals structured in a way to make it seem like a smaller company is buying a larger one to avoid a review [at&t <-> SBC, Sears Holdings <-> K-Mart].
Smaller companies buying larger companies don't skip regulatory scrutiny. It's a fairly common practice to structure mergers this way, but not because it changes the level of regulator involvement.
That name is meaningless and generally just juvenile. It makes it hard to take you seriously when you do this.
This is also not an appropriate use of "sic".
> Although, I've seen a few deals structured in a way to make it seem like a smaller company is buying a larger one to avoid a review [at&t <-> SBC, Sears Holdings <-> K-Mart].
Smaller companies buying larger companies don't skip regulatory scrutiny. It's a fairly common practice to structure mergers this way, but not because it changes the level of regulator involvement.