I don't think that's true. Oracle just came in with clearly higher price then anybody else was willing to even consider.
They could also have fired a lot of people and likely survived. But the CEO clearly had no interest in that path.
They could also have fired a lot of people and likely survived. But the CEO clearly had no interest in that path.
I am using computers since 1986.
In the "Background of the Merger" section of that document, there is an incredibly detailed (and interesting!) story of three companies: Party A, Party B, and Oracle. (As was well-known at the time, Party A is IBM and Party B is HP.) As that narrative makes clear (and contrary to your assertion), it was Sun that rejected IBM's definitive agreement, not the other way around. You can certainly argue that IBM's acquisition of Sun would have failed to complete for other reasons (regulatory and so on) -- but your assertion that "IBM did an offer that was shortly thereafter withdrawn" is simply (and demonstrably) wrong.
[0] https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/709519/0001193125091...