There seems to be a repeating cycle here. Many of you may not recall the mid 90's with Rational gobbling up similar product lines from multiple vendors. At one point they had a couple of different functional tools, a hodge podge of performance tools and then ROSE. It left the message to the end customer on which tools would go forward and which ones would not muddied in the marketplace....and (then) Segue and Mercury took advantage of it wherever they could to seed FUD into sales efforts. It worked.
I think there is a significant risk of the same muddied message occuring here with multiple competing product lines. Before you went forward with a purchase for either compuware or borland historic QA tools wouldn't you want the futures absolutely clarified so you don't waste time and money going down the wrong path? The beneficiaries in these cases are ususally the "safe" bets. And by "safe" in this case I mean buying from someone "big" with a consistent message. The beneficiaries are likely to be HP and IBM.
I believe this has already started to some extent. The word from inside Borland was that the takeover talk had killed off what little business they did have, as potential customers wanted to see what was happening. It looks like the future is still not certain for any of the test tools MF own, so as James says, this plays right into IBM and HP's hands.