Category: application software

A severe case of buyer’s remorse for SAP

Brenon Daly

Contact: China Martens

Hindsight is a wonderful thing. Would SAP still have gone ahead with the $10m January 2005 purchase of fledgling third-party apps support player TomorrowNow (TN) had it had any inkling then of the financial cost more than five years later (a $1.3bn payout to Oracle and a ton of legal fees), as well as the dent to its previous sterling reputation? TN was always a loss-making business for SAP and at its height attracted less than 400 customers, a tiny proportion of the tens of thousands of Oracle apps customers.

SAP had been hoping to only have to pay out $40m over the intellectual property theft case that Oracle initiated against its bitter ERP and CRM foe and its TN business back in March 2007. Oracle alleged that TN, with SAP’s knowledge, had engaged in ‘massive theft’ of its software and related support materials through a series of illegal downloads with TN staff using customer passwords to access Oracle’s technical support websites for its JD Edwards, PeopleSoft and Siebel families of ERP and CRM apps. TN had then allegedly used the stolen materials to support its customers, offering them support at 50% less than Oracle’s rates.

More recently, SAP set aside $120m, but had in no sense been prepared that the jury would find so strongly in favor of Oracle, which had been looking for $1.7bn or more. SAP is set to appeal and ‘pursue all its options’ to reduce the award. This whole saga is far from ended – already, it’s been the stuff of Silicon Valley soap operas, with Oracle CEO Larry Ellison speaking out against new Hewlett-Packard CEO Leo Apotheker, a former CEO of SAP, and failing to serve a subpoena on him in a bizarre take on the video game Where in the World Is Carmen Sandiego?

Over the course of the case, Oracle had sought to continually expand the scope of the lawsuit, while SAP had tried to limit its focus. A few months into legal proceedings, SAP had admitted to some inappropriate downloads of Oracle material at TN, but shortly before the trial began, it decided not to contest contributory infringement, effectively contradicting earlier assertions that SAP executives didn’t have knowledge about what was going at TN.

The jury decision in favor of Oracle could well have a chilling effect on the remaining third-party support market. It’s one that never took off to the degree that its advocates had been expecting. In January, Oracle filed suit against the leading third-party support vendor, Rimini Street, which is headed by a cofounder of TomorrowNow. The suit was very similar in tone and scope to the TN one, but went into less specifics. It’s going to be interesting to see what happens now, since Rimini Street has been gearing up for a legal battle of this sort for some time.

Much has changed since SAP bought TomorrowNow, a unit it put up for sale, and, after finding no buyers, shuttered in October 2008. The move was triggered by Oracle’s multibillion-dollar purchases of ERP and CRM players PeopleSoft and Siebel. The widespread expectation was that Oracle would push those acquired customer bases to adopt its own E-Business Suite apps, but there was no large user exodus and Oracle has delivered new versions of its purchased apps. Indeed, Oracle has also tempered its big push around a new generation of apps, dubbed Fusion, with the initial release due next year.

So, customers in general are under much less pressure to migrate from the apps they’re currently using. At the same time, those same users are facing increased maintenance fees, which are a steady revenue source for both Oracle and SAP. It’s effectively at present in both companies’ interests to have no third-party apps support market. It will be interesting to see whether each of them revisits the concept to be one where they could have some revenue involvement. Over time, each player will face having to support a wider and wider variety of apps, versions and deployments, and they may find that taxing on their resources and therefore not as lucrative as in the past. Both companies are keenly aware of the gradual wearing-away impact of the SaaS apps market, where maintenance fees are substantially less or are factored into the cost of per-user, per-month subscriptions.

Not pretty, but it’s done at Novell

Brenon Daly

Contact: Brenon Daly

After holding out for more than eight months, Novell finally accepted on Monday a $2.2bn buyout offer from private equity-backed Attachmate. From the outside, it looks like a case where the buyer – or maybe more accurately, the hedge fund that put the company in play – simply wore down Novell. Under terms, Attachmate will hand over $6.10 in cash per share, or roughly $2.2bn, for Novell.

Yet if we step back and look at the offer, we can’t help but notice that the company is now embracing a bid that only values it slightly more than the original offer that put it in play. For the record, Novell’s board said three weeks after receiving the unsolicited bid from gadfly investor Elliott Associates that the offer of $5.75 for each share ‘undervalues’ the company and its prospects.

Apparently, Elliott’s opening bid wasn’t all that lowball because the company is selling for just 6% more than the offer that ‘undervalued’ it. We would also mention that Novell traded above the $6.10 bid several times over the summer, albeit on pure speculation. (JP Morgan Securities advised Novell, while Credit Suisse Securities and RBC Capital Markets worked for Attachmate.) The deal is expected to close in the first quarter of 2011, pending shareholder approval.

To be fair, the fact that Novell’s board got shareholders even a slight bump above the original offer should be viewed as a sell-side accomplishment. After all, Novell is a hoary, mixed-bag of businesses, with each unit attracting specific suitors. All of that made for an undoubtedly complicated process, with multiple permutations on bidders and bidding teams, as we understand it. (Companies we heard that may have taken a serious look at some point at Novell – or at least some of its businesses – include VMware and Oracle, among others.) Indeed, as part of the transaction, Microsoft will be acquiring a sprawling portfolio of 882 patents from Novell for $450m.

And beyond all of the complications around matchmaking is the fundamental fact that Novell just isn’t that attractive, regardless of whatever business we look at inside the company. Each component of its revenue (license, maintenance/subscription, services) has dropped so far this year, which is part of the reason why Novell has come up short of Wall Street expectations every quarter this year. Overall, sales have dropped 6% in 2010, and current projections call for Novell’s revenue to decline next year, too. So as we look at it, the board probably did a fair job to get Novell valued at $1.2bn (net of cash), which works out to basically 1.5 times sales. Novell shareholders will now have their say on the outcome of the more than eight-month process.

Ariba ‘mines’ for its latest deal

Brenon Daly

Contact: Brenon Daly

After three years out of the market, Ariba returned to M&A on Thursday with the $150m purchase of Quadrem. Both the current deal and the previous one help bolster the supply-chain vendor’s offering in new markets. In the case of Procuri, which was acquired in September 2007, Ariba picked up a company that was targeting small businesses. With its latest transaction, Ariba adds an offering geared for corporate giants, specifically some of the largest mining companies on earth. It also gets further into markets outside the US.

Quadrem was founded 10 years ago, and is still majority owned by a quartet of multinational mining giants (BHP Billiton, Anglo American, Rio Tinto and Vale SA). While sales to mining companies accounted for essentially all of Quadrem’s revenue in its early days, the vendor diversified into other industries in recent years. Currently, mining generates about half of Quadrem’s revenue, with the other half coming from other industries such as oil and gas as well as manufacturing.

Under terms of the deal, Quadrem’s four principal companies have extra incentive to keep using Quadrem even after the sale to Ariba closes, which is expected by next March. The reason: Ariba has held back $25m in payment and will kick in another $25m to the four companies as long as they are still using the network three years from now. Ariba says it expects to pay out the full amount. (Morgan Stanley advised Ariba on its purchase.)

Assuming that Ariba does indeed hand over the full $150m, the transaction would value Quadrem a smidge above two times this year’s projected sales of about $70m. For its part, Ariba trades at more than twice that valuation. It currently garners a market cap of about $1.7bn, compared to projected sales for calendar 2010 of about $370m. Incidentally, since Ariba last announced an acquisition three years ago, its shares have basically doubled while the Nasdaq has flatlined.

Making a middleware mini-mammoth

Brenon Daly1 Comment

Contact: Brenon Daly, Dennis Callaghan

Imagine combining Informatica and TIBCO Software into a middleware mammoth. Now, shrink the scale by almost 100. Move it from the US to Europe. And make it open source rather than proprietary software. In a roundabout way, that’s what we see in Talend’s recent acquisition of SOPERA. At least in part.

Since its founding in 2005, Talend has focused on offering an open source alternative to Informatica. (As we noted earlier this week, Informatica is a rather rich target. The data-integration vendor currently garners its highest price in a decade, valuing it at roughly 6 times projected 2010 sales.) Talend has enjoyed a good deal of success, doubling revenue last year and likely to finish next year with sales of roughly $50m, according to our understanding.

In addition to its core data integration, Talend also provides a data management suite combining master data management, which it snagged via the acquisition of Amalto Technologies in September 2009, and data quality. Now, it will also be serving up SOPERA’s application integration, where TIBCO is probably the best-known vendor. For its part, SOPERA has a much more modest business than its acquirer, claiming 60 customers, compared to the 1,500 paying customers that Talend has. SOPERA was actually founded inside the IT department of Deutsche Post a decade ago.

Though small, the purchase of SOPERA is nonetheless significant. As my colleague Dennis Callaghan has indicated, Talend now has a more compelling story to tell in open source middleware, especially as more enterprises take advantage of hybrid cloud environments, with applications running in private and public cloud environments that need connectivity and data sharing between them

The rich valuation of integration

Brenon Daly

Contact: Brenon Daly

A lot of attention (and the accompanying financial rewards) around data management has tended to pile up in security, storage, analytics and other well-known market segments. Rather quietly but consistently, data integration has joined the list of richly valued markets as customers use these offering to get at the massive stores of information that run their businesses. The premium valuation is showing up both on Wall Street and, just recently, in M&A, too.

Take the case of Informatica. Shares of the data-integration provider have nearly doubled over the past year, and currently fetch their highest price in a decade. Informatica currently trades at a $3.8bn market capitalization, a rather rich six times its projected 2010 sales of $640m. The company has always stressed that part of its value has been in its independence among the software giants, but Informatica has nonetheless attracted M&A speculation in the past.

Those highly valued (and highly visible) public market vendors have helped drive up the valuation of smaller data-integration startups. For instance, we estimate that IBM paid about $200m for Cast Iron Systems, which we understand was running at about $30m in sales. And just last week, Dell reached for Boomi in a deal that valued the company at more than twice that multiple. (Subscribers can see our full report, which includes our estimates on the revenue as well as the price of Boomi.)

Rich tech companies put away their checkbooks

Brenon Daly

Contact: Brenon Daly

Where are the corporate buyers? That’s what we were wondering when tech M&A activity in October came in well below both the year-ago period and the monthly average so far this year. Consider this: October stands as the first month in 2010 that so-called strategic buyers didn’t announce a single transaction valued at $1bn or more.

Instead, the shopping in October was led by private equity (PE) shops, notably The Carlyle Group. The buyout firm announced the two biggest tech deals of the month, with back-to-back acquisitions of CommScope and Syniverse Technologies. Carlyle values those two purchases at $6.5bn – representing half the value of all tech M&A spending in October. (See our full report on October’s M&A totals.)

Carlyle’s big pair of deals in October follows a more representative September, when IBM and Hewlett-Packard held the top two spots for large deals. (IBM paid $1.8bn for Netezza on September 20, a week after HP said it will pay $1.65bn for ArcSight.) More broadly, tech companies have posted a number of 10-digit transactions since the summer, with Intel notching two of them, plus the typically acquisition-averse SAP doing the largest deal in its history in May.

It’s hard to figure out exactly what’s keeping companies out of the market these days. Third-quarter financial results, many of which were announced in October, have been solid for the most part. Similarly, guidance for the fourth quarter and into 2011 has been relatively upbeat. Reflecting that, the Nasdaq tacked on nearly 6% in October, helping the tech-heavy index approach the highs that it hit both back in April and in mid-2008. Further, the cash just keeps gushing into the treasuries at many tech companies.

Oracle goes shopping in e-commerce

Brenon Daly

Contact: Brenon Daly

Oracle says it will pay $1bn in cash for Art Technology Group, the second public company the consolidator is set to erase from the Nasdaq so far this year. Terms call for Oracle to shell out $6 for each of the roughly 165 million shares outstanding for ATG. That represents a 46% premium over ATG’s closing price in the previous session and the highest price for the stock since 2001, and almost twice the level it was trading at in August. (ATG also got roughed up on the market in February, when it did a secondary offering.)

Although investors weren’t thrilled with the dilution, the secondary did essentially double the company’s cash on hand. Backing out that amount gives the proposed transaction an enterprise value of $850m. That’s 4.25 times ATG’s projected 2010 sales of $200m – a fairly rich multiple for a company that was growing at 11-12%. We suspect that the premium came because Oracle had to top another bidder. In our minds, the most likely other suitor would be Autonomy Corp. Morgan Stanley advised ATG on the deal, which is expected to close early next year.

Oracle parlays new interest in chips into small stake in Mellanox

Brenon Daly

Contact: John Abbott

When Oracle started hinting recently about its growing interest in chip vendors, Mellanox Technologies was at the top of our list of potential acquisition candidates. It turns out that Oracle is indeed interested in Mellanox, but only in a chunk of it. Oracle said earlier this week that it bought 10% of Mellanox’s ordinary shares on the open market.

Oracle didn’t reveal the price it paid for Mellanox or when it was in the market. But on a back-of-the-envelope basis, the stake probably represents about a $70m bet on Mellanox. (The company has about 35 million shares outstanding, and the price has been bumping around $20 each for much of the past month.) Other significant investors in Mellanox include Fidelity Management & Research, with an 11.7% stake, Alger with 7.5%, and the company’s CEO, Eyal Waldman, who owns 5.3% of the company.

As it picked up the chunk of equity, Oracle was quick to add that the purchase is for investment purposes only, and is not the start of a larger play for Mellanox, friendly or otherwise. Its stated motive is to solidify common interest in the future of InfiniBand.

Mellanox is one of only two suppliers making silicon for InfiniBand switches and adapters, the other being QLogic. It formed a close relationship with Sun Microsystems eight years ago, and more recently, its chips have been used within Oracle’s Exadata and Exalogic data-warehousing and storage appliances. In return for Oracle’s dollars, Mellanox will make Oracle Solaris one of its core supported OS platforms. But it will continue to work with Oracle’s rivals, including IBM, Hewlett-Packard and Dell.

As far as datacenter communications fabrics go, InfiniBand has maintained its technical lead over Ethernet and it looks like it will be doing so for a while to come. Even so, Mellanox has also launched a parallel set of 10Gb Ethernet products in the past few years in order to maintain its growth. And it’s also been looking to diversify into the consumer space, if reports that it recently tried (apparently unsuccessfully) to acquire fellow Israeli company CopperGate Communications for $200m are true. Privately held CopperGate develops chips for home entertainment devices and digital home broadband networking.

Symantec still struggling with storage

Brenon Daly

Contact: Brenon Daly

Symantec gives its latest quarterly update on business after the closing bell Wednesday, with Wall Street wondering if the company will ever emerge from its ‘Veritas hangover.’ The storage business, which Symantec picked up in its $13.5bn purchase of Veritas in late 2004, has long weighed on Big Yellow’s overall performance. The division posted the sharpest revenue decline at Symantec’s three business units in the previous fiscal year, and was the only one that shrank again in the first fiscal quarter. The storage business will likely shrink again in the just-completed second fiscal quarter.

None of that, of course, is new. In fact, more than two years ago, we noted how Symantec was busy knocking rumors about unwinding any of the underperforming Veritas assets. But ever since rival McAfee sold to Intel, the paltry valuation of Symantec has come into sharp relief. Consider this: Symantec generates three times the sales of McAfee ($6bn vs. $2bn) but garners less than twice McAfee’s valuation (current market cap of $12.5bn vs. McAfee’s $7.7bn equity value in its sale to Intel).

Perhaps that valuation discrepancy alone accounts for the market buzz we’ve heard recently that Symantec may be (once again) considering shedding Veritas. That move has been looked at a number of different times, in a number of different ways, over the years.

Most recently, we heard a variation on it that had the storage business going to EMC in return for the RSA division and some cash. Another rumor had the business landing at a buyout shop. (Although shrinking, the storage business is still Symantec’s largest unit, and runs at the highest margin in the company. It generates more than $1bn in operating income.) Whatever the destination, it may well be time for Symantec to acknowledge that its grand experiment of a combination of storing and securing information hasn’t gone according to plans. Wall Street has certainly given that verdict, having clipped Symantec shares in half since the Veritas deal was announced.

Small purchases add up big for IBM

Brenon Daly

Contact: Brenon Daly

Shortly after IBM bagged Netezza, we noted that Big Blue had been doing some big-game hunting in recent deals. It turns out that’s also true when it takes aim at private companies. In fact, we estimate IBM has spent more on startups than it has on the public companies it has taken home over the past year.

First, we should qualify a bit of our math. In the past 12 months, Big Blue has announced 17 acquisitions. Included in that flurry of dealmaking is the purchase of a pair of public companies (Unica and Netezza), the pickup of a billion-dollar carve-out (the Sterling Commerce business from AT&T) and the acquisition of 14 privately held companies. IBM has not disclosed a single price for any of the more than dozen private companies it has snared since last October, even though some of them are costing the company – that is to say, its shareholders – several hundred million dollars a pop.

Nonetheless, we have estimates of the price tags of nine of the 14 deals. (These estimates have all been corroborated by at least two sources familiar with the transactions.) According to our estimates, more than half of the acquisitions (five of nine) cost IBM more than $200m each. Altogether, we estimate the nine deals set Big Blue back $2bn. That incomplete bill for the private company purchases is only slightly less than the $2.3bn that IBM disclosed it is spending on Unica and Netezza.