Category: VC

Correlated markets?

Brenon Daly

Contact: Brenon Daly

To look at the recent performance of the Nasdaq, you’d hardly know that capitalism (as we know it) almost died a year ago. The tech-heavy index was largely unchanged on Wednesday but has posted gains for three straight sessions, having added 9% so far in September. That’s part of a longer run that has seen the Nasdaq tack on 35% since the beginning of 2009 and 70% since bottoming out in early March. In fact, the index is essentially where it was a year ago, before banks started going under, the credit market froze and the US government fired up its printing presses to give us all enough money to buy our way out of the recession.

The optimism that’s been boosting the equity markets is starting to carry over to the M&A market, with several signs from big-time buyers pointing to a return to health:

  • Dell’s recent reach for Perot Systems stands as the largest tech transaction in five months.
  • Google inked its second acquisition in as many months, after being out of the market for nearly a year. (The search giant added reCAPTCHA last week after picking up On2 Technologies in early August, its first purchase of a fellow public company.)
  • Adobe and CA Inc announced their largest deals in four-and-a-half years and three-and-a-half years, respectively, in the past week.
  • Microsoft grabbed a bucketful of small companies to add technology to its ERP division, a business that has largely been shaped by a pair of billion-dollar buys earlier this decade.

Of course, we need to consider this resurgence of deal flow in the context of an overall sluggish M&A market. With a week and a half left in the third quarter, spending on deals is running at just $28bn. While that would put activity roughly on par with where it was last year, it is only half of the amount of third-quarter spending in 2007 and one-third of the total in Q3 2006. Another way to look at it: the roughly $84bn that we’ve seen so far for all of 2009 is basically what we used to see in a single quarter during the boom years.

Q3 tech M&A activity

Period Deal volume Deal value
Q3 2009 (through August 22) 672 $27bn
Q3 2008 733 $32bn
Q3 2007 825 $58bn
Q3 2006 1,029 $102bn
Q3 2005 811 $87bn

Source: The 451 M&A KnowledgeBase

Intuit mints a rich deal

-Contact Thomas Rasmussen, Brenon Daly

We might be inclined to read Intuit’s recent purchase of Mint Software as a case of ‘If you can’t beat ’em, buy ’em.’ The acquisition by the powerhouse of personal finance software undoubtedly gives the three-year-old startup a premium valuation. Intuit will hand over $170m in cash for Mint, which we understand was running at less than $10m in revenue. (Although we should add that Mint had only just begun looking for ways to make money from its growing 1.5-million user base.)

More than revenue, we suspect this deal was driven by Intuit’s desire to get into a new market, online money management and budgeting, as well as the fear of the prospects of a much smaller but rapidly growing competitor. (Intuit and Mint have been talking for most of this year, according to one source.) In that way, Intuit’s latest acquisition has some distinct echoes of its previous buy, that of online payroll service PayCycle. For starters, the purchase price of both PayCycle and Mint totaled $170m. And even more unusually, bulge bracket biggie Goldman Sachs advised Intuit on both of these summertime deals. (Remember the days when major banks would hardly answer the phone for any transaction valued at less than a half-billion dollars? How times change.) On the other side of the table in this week’s deal, Credit Suisse’s Colin Lang advised Mint.

Intuit M&A, 2007 – present

Date Target Deal value
September 14, 2009 Mint Software $170m
June 2, 2009 PayCycle $170m
April 17, 2009 BooRah <$1m*
December 3, 2008 Entellium $8m
December 19, 2007 Electronic Clearing House $131m
November 26, 2007 Homestead Technologies $170m

Source: The 451 M&A KnowledgeBase *451 Group estimate

M&A market timing at CA

Brenon Daly

Contact: Brenon Daly

After a two-year hiatus that ended last fall, CA Inc has returned to the market with newfound enthusiasm. With the vendor’s purchase on Monday of network performance management provider NetQoS, CA has now inked six acquisitions over the past 12 months. That comes after an extended period (September 2006 to October 2008) when the normally acquisitive company stepped out of the market entirely.

During that time, CA’s four large rivals (BMC, Hewlett-Packard, IBM and Symantec) announced a total of 61 transactions between them. Collectively, the quartet of buyers paid roughly 5.7 times trailing 12-month (TTM) revenue in the deals they did. (That’s the median valuation from the more than 20 transactions that either had terms disclosed or where we estimated the numbers.)

So from CA’s perspective, sitting out a period marked by historically high valuations might not be a bad thing at all. Consider this: CA’s purchase of NetQoS cost it $200m in cash, which worked out to 3.6x TTM sales. If we slap the prevailing multiple from the period CA was out of the market (5.7x TTM sales) onto CA’s most-recent deal, the price for NetQoS swells to $320m. Obviously, there were vastly different assumptions about growth rates in late 2006 and early 2007 than there are now, which goes a long way toward explaining the nearly 40% ‘discount’ that CA got by inking the NetQoS purchase on Monday rather than when the market was hot.

Goodbye Montgomery, hello ArchPoint

Brenon Daly

Contact: Brenon Daly

Following the historic upheaval at investment banks last fall, the changes have begun to filter down to the smaller firms, as well. For instance, Morgan Keegan & Co picked up tech boutique advisory shop Revolution Partners last December while hedge fund Ramius LLC has reached for Cowen Group in a deal that’s expected to close by the end of the year. And now we understand another change is set to play out in the tech banking business in the coming weeks.

A core quartet of bankers will be leaving Montgomery & Co to establish an independent tech M&A advisory firm, ArchPoint Partners. A source tells us that Rob Louv, Dan Williams and John Cooper will be ArchPoint’s managing partners, with Susan Blanco joining as a senior director. Initial plans call for San Francisco-based ArchPoint to possibly double its number of employees by the end of 2009, and perhaps double that figure again next year.

We are told the split from Montgomery will be pretty clean, with ArchPoint carrying over 10-20 existing clients. It has already brought in five or so clients on its own name, although the boutique won’t formally launch until next month. (ArchPoint already has its own license, and has no outside investors. Founders Cooper and Louv are backing the firm.) The split from Montgomery comes as the group has a bit of momentum behind it. Montgomery banked MX Logic in its sale to McAfee, the largest security transaction since last October and one that came with a refreshingly healthy multiple of 4 times MX Logic’s estimated sales.

Summer sun dries up deal flow

Brenon Daly

Contact: Brenon Daly

It really was the lazy days of summer, at least in terms of tech deal-making. With summer officially wrapping up on Labor Day, spending on M&A is running at less than one-fifth the level it has been in any of the three previous years. (For our purposes, we mark summer as beginning on Memorial Day and ending on Labor Day.) In that period this year, acquirers spent a mere $18bn – down from $139bn in the same period in 2008, $101bn in 2007 and $123bn in 2006.

And spending has slowed recently, dipping to just $4.3bn since August 1. (Nearly half of that came in a single transaction, eBay’s divestiture of its Skype property to a PE-led consortium.) Granted, it’s not uncommon for spending to dip in late summer, as even the hardest-working deal-makers look to kick back on the beach for a bit. But this year, it appears as if folks went ahead and remained on vacation. Speaking of which, we will not be publishing on Labor Day but will pick up again on Tuesday, the other side of summer.

Unexpected partners in e-discovery dance

Brenon Daly

Contact: Brenon Daly

After a flurry of more than a half-dozen e-discovery acquisitions from mid-2007 to mid-2008, deal flow has dried up in the sector. Buyers during the active period included companies that, broadly speaking, have an interest in storing, managing and searching electronic information, including such tech giants as Seagate Technology, Iron Mountain and Autonomy Corp. Collectively, spending on all the e-discovery deals in that one-year period topped $800m.

And then, like the rest of the M&A market, e-discovery activity dropped off dramatically. In this vacuum, rumors started bouncing around. The main one, which we noted last October, had Symantec looking closely at Kazeon. The two companies have been partners for a year, with Kazeon able to integrate with Symantec’s Enterprise Vault and Enterprise Vault Discovery Accelerator. (We also did a broader matchmaking report on the sector right around that time.)

And while a pairing between Kazeon and Symantec may well have made sense, the e-discovery vendor ended up selling to EMC on Tuesday. (Terms were not disclosed, but one report put the price at $75m. We think that may well turn out to be a bit higher than the amount EMC actually paid, particularly since we understand that Kazeon was only running at about $10m in sales.) So we were a bit off on our pairing for Kazeon, just as we were off on our assumption that EMC would reach for its longtime e-discovery partner, StoredIQ. Undeterred by that, we find ourselves nonetheless wondering if StoredIQ will end up at Symantec. There’s certainly some logic to that pairing. But then again, that was also true for the other deals we came up with that never got signed.

Will Taleo exercise its M&A option?

Brenon Daly

Contact: Brenon Daly

Having crossed the anniversary of its acquisition of Vurv Technology earlier this summer, Taleo recently indicated that it is looking to return to the M&A market. (Shares of the human capital management vendor trade essentially where they did when the company closed its $128m consolidation play with Vurv, while the Nasdaq is down about 12% over that same period.) Taleo’s pickup of Vurv was its largest-ever transaction, roughly doubling the number of customers for the company. The success that Taleo has enjoyed with migrating Vurv users to its own platform stands in sharp contrast to the other main consolidation play by a publicly traded rival, Kenexa’s $115m reach for BrassRing in 2006.

If we had to speculate on Taleo’s next M&A move, we suspect it would involve exercising a kind of ‘call option’ that it has on a startup. What do we mean by that? Last summer, when Taleo had its hands full with Vurv, it also made a $2.5m equity investment in a Redwood City, California-based startup called Worldwide Compensation (WWC). So rather than take on another acquisition immediately, Taleo smartly structured its investment – its only such investment – to give it right of first refusal to pick up all of WWC at any time through the end of 2009.

The investment in WWC comes with a partnership that adds WWC’s compensation management offering to Taleo’s core performance management products. In the second quarter, Taleo reported that it had three joint deals with WWC involving enterprise customers. As pay-for-performance offerings get more widely adopted, we could certainly imagine a case where Taleo would want to bring WWC in-house. In that regard, we might view the WWC investment as just a ‘try before you buy’ arrangement for Taleo.

ConSentry: more VC dollars for the NAC bonfire

Brenon Daly

Contact: Brenon Daly, Paul Roberts

It’s difficult – if not impossible – to point to any area of technology this year with a more consistently god-awful ROI than network access control (NAC). At this point, the return for VCs on their bets in the NAC market is literally pennies on the dollar. The latest addition to the imbalance between money invested and money returned: ConSentry Networks. As my colleague Paul Roberts recently noted, the company died earlier this month at least in part because it was counting on users defecting from either Cisco or Juniper Networks.

But that flawed business plan didn’t stop ConSentry from pulling down some $81m in backing over the past six years. The venture dollars incinerated by ConSentry brings the total amount burned by NAC vendors that have gone out of business in 2009 to at least $212m. Add to that the money raised by the one exit the NAC space has seen this year (Mirage Networks’ scrap sale to Trustwave), and the total swells to $252m. And the grand return on that quarter-billion-dollar cumulative investment? Mirage probably got about $10m for its business.

Bleak outlook for social networking M&A

-Contact Thomas Rasmussen

In a sign of just how far the social networking market has fallen, brightsolid’s $42m purchase earlier this month of Friends Reunited from ITV Plc stands as the largest deal in the sector so far in 2009. The price is a mere 5% of the value of the largest social networking acquisition in 2008, which was AOL’s $850m all-cash pickup of Bebo. (We would also add that the sale of Friends Reunited netted ITV just one-fifth the amount it originally paid for the property in 2005.) On top of the notably smaller transactions, deal flow so far this year has been characterized by relatively paltry valuations. Friends Reunited garnered just 1.6 times trailing sales, compared to the estimated 42 times trailing revenue that Bebo got from AOL. Add all that together and it’s pretty clear that the bubble of social networking M&A has popped. In the space so far this year, we tally just 28 deals worth a total of $55.5m, compared to 53 transactions valued at more than $1.3bn in 2008.

As an aside, we would note that the acquisitions of Friends Reunited and Bebo have more in common than just ranking as the largest deals of their respective calendar years. The stalking horse bidder for Friends Reunited, Peter Dubens through his investment vehicle Oakley Capital Private Equity, has a close business relationship with Bebo founder Michael Birch. Dubens and Birch formed PROfounders Capital earlier this year under Dubens’ Oakley Capital umbrella. Oakley Capital reportedly offered to buy Friends Reunited for $25m, but declined to bump up its bid above even one times sales. Without reading too much into that, we might be tempted to conclude that except for Facebook, the little value that remains in most social networks is likely to only decline.

Sourcefire: No sale turns into a great deal

Brenon Daly

Contact: Brenon Daly

With Barracuda Networks looking to gobble up Austrian IT security vendor phion, we thought we’d look back on the other time the rapacious privately held firm eyed a public company. Last summer, Barracuda launched an unsolicited bid for Sourcefire, initially offering $7.50 per share but later raising that to $8.25. The bumped-up bid valued Sourcefire at roughly $215m, but that wasn’t enough for Sourcefire’s board of directors.

We’ve noted in the past that the decision by a company to go it alone can prove very costly to shareholders, at least in the near term. Removing the takeout premium and letting a company trade on its own fundamentals can end up crushing a stock. Recovering that lost ground can be a long and painful process. (Just ask shareholders of Yahoo and Mentor Graphics, who see shares in those companies changing hands these days at just half the level that suitors were willing to pay for them last year.)

However, it’s a completely different story for Sourcefire. It has actually turned out to be one of those rare cases where a target says a bid ‘undervalues’ the business and Wall Street agrees. After telling Barracuda to buzz off, Sourcefire shares got dragged down by the recession and traded below the bid until early April. But since then, the stock has surged to its highest level since the vendor went public in March 2007. Sourcefire shares are currently trading at about $20, or nearly 150% higher than the price Barracuda was willing to pay for them. Looked at another way, Sourcefire’s decision to stay independent has created more than $300m of additional value for its shareholders than the Barracuda bid would have delivered.