Category: VC

VMware: a ‘table-clearing’ bid for the clouds

Brenon Daly

Contact: Brenon Daly

About a year and a half after Paul Maritz got picked up by EMC, the former Microsoft honcho has struck his signature deal for his new employers. When EMC reached for Pi Corp, which had yet to release a product, we figured the move was basically ‘HR by M&A.’ And that has turned out to be the case, as Maritz took over leadership of EMC’s virtualization subsidiary VMware in July 2008. He stepped into the top spot just as VMware’s once-torrid revenue growth had dwindled to a trickle. Sales at VMware rose 88% in 2007 and 42% in 2008, but are projected to inch up just 2% this year.

To help jumpstart VMware’s growth, Maritz looked to the clouds, pushing through the acquisition of SpringSource earlier this week. At roughly twice as much as VMware has spent on its previous dozen deals, the SpringSource buy is the virtualization kingpin’s largest purchase. It was also, as we understand it, a deal very much driven by Maritz. (Because the purchase topped $100m, it also had to be blessed by VMware’s parent, EMC. This indicates that Maritz enjoys a level of support at the Hopkinton, Massachusetts, HQ that probably wasn’t extended to his predecessor, VMware founder Diane Greene.)

As we have noted, no bankers were involved in negotiations and one source indicated that terms were hammered out directly by Maritz and his counterpart at SpringSource, Rod Johnson, in a scant three-and-a-half-week period. Not that there was much negotiating needed. As we understand it, Maritz approached Johnson with a ‘table-clearing’ offer of $400m. SpringSource didn’t contact any other potential buyers, and in fact, the five-year-old startup only weighed VMware’s bid against the possibility of going public in 2011. (Subscribers to the 451 M&A KnowledgeBase can click here to view our estimates on SpringSource’s revenue, both trailing and projected, as well as its valuation.)

However, the source added that getting to an IPO would have likely required another round of funding for SpringSource. The dilution that would come with another round, combined with the deep uncertainty about the direction of the equity markets, tipped SpringSource toward the trade sale. In the end, that decision – and how Maritz executes on his step into application virtualization – will go a long way toward shaping his legacy at VMware.

Will Fortinet go shopping after going public?

Brenon Daly

Contact: Brenon Daly, Paul Roberts

Not that Fortinet actually needs more cash to go shopping, but the company will likely substantially fatten its treasury by the end of the year. Officially, the security vendor, which has been generating cash for the past three years, said in its IPO prospectus this week that it plans to raise $100m. However, we suspect the actual amount that it raises could be as much as $200m, a fitting offering for a firm that may well hit the market with a valuation in the neighborhood of $1bn. (Which exchange Fortinet debuts on is still undecided. We can only imagine the fight between the NYSE and the Nasdaq over listing a big-time IPO like Fortinet in such a lean time for new offerings.)

Whatever the amount of money Fortinet ends up raising in the offering, it will have plenty to go shopping. (Not to mention the fact that it will also have freshly minted shares if it wants to do a larger deal.) My colleague Paul Roberts, who heads our security practice, put together a possible shopping list for the company back in April, based on our understanding that Fortinet was a few months away from filing to go public. Roberts discussed a number of possibilities for Fortinet, including network access control and perhaps WAN traffic optimization.

However, he argued that Fortinet would perhaps be best served by making a play for an enterprise security information management (ESIM) provider to make sense of all the information generated by the various offerings. And, as fate would have it, Fortinet already knows one ESIM vendor rather well. Since 2004, the company has been OEMing eIQnetworks’ Network Security Analyzer and reselling it as FortiReporter.

EMC and advisors: All or nothing

Brenon Daly

Contact: Brenon Daly

After EMC doled out no fewer than nine credits to different banks for working on its acquisition of Data Domain, we were curious how the deal credits would flow around the largest-ever purchase by EMC subsidiary VMware. (The unusually long list of advisers for EMC on Data Domain made us think – of all things – about the quip about compensation under some communist regimes: People pretended to work and the government pretended to pay them.) As it turns out, EMC/VMware swung to the other extreme, with not a single bank working for the virtualization giant in its purchase of SpringSource.

That’s not unusual, since VMware hadn’t really used bankers in the dozen or so acquisitions that it had inked before SpringSource. But those deals were mostly small. In fact, the cumulative spending for all of its earlier buys totals only about half of the $420m in cash and stock that VMware is set to hand over for SpringSource. By our tally, VMware’s pending purchase is the third-largest pickup of a VC-backed tech firm so far this year. Not that the print will show up for any bank. SpringSource didn’t use an adviser, either.

Versata bags Everest

Brenon Daly

Contact: Brenon Daly

In half of the recent buys by Versata Enterprises, Updata Advisors has worked on behalf of the acquisitive enterprise software provider. In the latest purchase, however, the boutique advisory firm swung to the other side of the desk. On Friday, Versata, the Austin, Texas-based company that used to go by the name Trilogy, picked up Everest Software for an undisclosed sum. (We hear from a source that Everest was running at a bit more than $10m in revenue. However, the vendor’s top line suffered recently because it sold predominantly to retailers, as well as SMB customers – both of which have been hit disproportionately hard by the ongoing recession.)

Since December 2007, Updata has advised Versata on its acquisitions of Nuvo Network Management, TenFold and Evolutionary Technologies International. Switching over to the sell side for Everest is perhaps understandable for Updata because its sister firm – Updata Partners, which does venture investing – had put money into the CRM vendor. Other backers of Everest include Sierra Ventures, Boulder Ventures and Actis Capital. Founded in 1994, Everest had pulled in around $20m in funding.

Incidentally, we would note that in a press release announcing its sale, Everest took the unconventional step of thanking all of its backers. Even though we understand that the investments in Everest didn’t necessarily produce the returns that had been hoped for, it’s nonetheless a classy move by Everest. Too few companies do that. Most executives and investors simply and quietly move on to ‘the new, new thing’ without taking time to acknowledge the money and time that people put into the first venture. So the sale of Everest probably wasn’t a high-dollar deal, but the firm did take the high road.

id Software exit signals continued consolidation in gaming

-Contact Thomas Rasmussen

While we have been expecting continued consolidation in the gaming sector for a long time now, we didn’t see this combination coming. Id Software, a staunchly independent, Mesquite, Texas-based shop best known for founder John Carmack and the Doom franchise, sold recently to Rockville, Maryland-based ZeniMax Media. ZeniMax is a relatively small, privately held publisher, having picked up Bethesda Software in 2001. However, the firm has wealthy backers. It raised $300m in 2007 from private equity shop Providence Equity Partners and according to a US Securities and Exchange Commission filing, raised another $105m in debt financing on July 7, which was specifically earmarked for the acquisition of id. Given that ZeniMax undoubtedly wants to retain id’s employees (even giving a seat of the board to id CEO Todd Hollenshead), we suspect ZeniMax also had to tap into its equity to cover the purchase price, which wasn’t revealed.

This deal makes us wonder about the outlook for the remaining independent legacy videogame studios. Specifically, we’re referring to Bellevue, Washington-based Valve Corp and Cary, North Carolina-based Epic Games. Not that we’re suggesting any formal shopping is taking place. But if the id exit shows us anything, it is that in a time when development costs are skyrocketing and financing is harder to come by, it might be wise for studios to join forces with a larger publisher. That’s particularly true as the current economic slump has painfully shown that the videogame industry is not as ‘recession-proof’ as some people had hoped. Shares of Electronic Arts, which serve as a kind of proxy for the entire videogame industry, have been cut in half over the past year, compared to a mere 6% decline in the broader software stock index during the same period.

Videogame-related M&A by the big four, 2006-present

Acquirer Number of acquisitions Total known deal value
Activision Blizzard 10 $5.69bn (includes merger with Vivendi)
Electronic Arts 9 $771m
Microsoft 4 $235m
Sony 6 N/A

Source: The 451 M&A KnowledgeBase

IBM’s ‘Tuesday twofer’ still leaves it behind most years

Brenon Daly

Contact: Brenon Daly

In a highly unusual move, IBM did the M&A equivalent of a ‘Tuesday twofer,’ buying both big and small yesterday. In terms of the high-dollar deal, Big Blue said it will hand over nearly $1.17bn in cash for predictive analytics software vendor SPSS. The purchase of SPSS is the company’s largest transaction since it shelled out $5bn for Cognos in November 2007. In fact, we suspect the $1.17bn paid for SPSS is roughly the same amount that IBM spent on the nine deals it has announced (many of them with prices undisclosed) since picking up Cognos.

On the smaller side, IBM also said yesterday that it has acquired startup Ounce Labs, which makes source code analysis software. Terms weren’t revealed, but we wouldn’t be surprised to learn that the amount IBM paid for Ounce Labs was just 1% of the price it forked over for SPSS. Ounce Labs had raised some $29.5m in venture backing.

As a final thought on Big Blue’s doubleheader yesterday, we would note that the two purchases double the number of acquisitions that IBM has announced so far this year. The total of four deals in 2009, however, is basically half the number it had announced by this time in any of the previous three years.

Turning down the trade sale

Brenon Daly

Contact: Brenon Daly

Since the Wall Street crisis erupted last fall, the M&A advice most companies have gotten has been not to sell unless they absolutely have to. That sentiment has quieted overall dealmaking activity, as well as pressured valuations across the board. It turns out that not even promising startups could escape the malaise. Later this afternoon, Tim Miller, our head of financial markets, will present our findings on the status of the AlwaysOn Global 250 to the seventh annual Summit at Stanford University. One key finding about the AO 250 startups: only 12 companies sold in the year since the previous conference, which is just half the number in each of the three previous years. Tech giants that have picked up AO 250 startups since the last conference include CA Inc, Omniture, Nokia and Hewlett-Packard.

While the number of trade sales declined notably for AO 250 companies, there was a significant pickup in the other exit option, an IPO. Three AO 250 companies managed to make it to the public markets over the past year, creating an aggregate market valuation of some $2.5bn. Those offerings came despite talk about the IPO window being closed. Further, all of them are trading above their issue price even though the broader market has been rather inhospitable lately. The Summit at Stanford opens Tuesday and runs through Thursday afternoon. For more details on the conference, see the event page.

Adknowledge inks super deal for social advertising dominance

-Contact Thomas Rasmussen

Rumors of the sale of Super Rewards (also known as SR Points) have been swirling for quite some time. On Wednesday, acquisitive Adknowledge announced that it is indeed the winning bidder in a competitive sales process for Vancouver-based Super Rewards, a bootstrapped, 40-person incentives-based online advertising startup. (We understand that Super Rewards is profitable and generating approximately $60m in gross revenue – a number the firm says could hit as much as $100m this year. Of course, the company’s net revenue is much lower, likely in the neighborhood of one-fourth the gross amount after revenue share.) The purchase of Super Rewards marks the sixth acquisition for Adknowledge in less than two years, and we estimate this transaction is by far its largest yet. The deal also marks a shift in the M&A strategy of the Kansas City, Missouri-based online advertising giant, which has typically been more inclined to pick up heavily discounted distressed assets.

Nonetheless, Adknowledge, which we estimate was running profitably on close to $200m in revenue prior to the acquisition, has made a smart purchase in reaching for Super Rewards. Incentives-based advertising companies like Super Rewards have received quite a bit of attention recently because they seem to have found a way to actually make money off of social networks. (The fundamental business principle of profitability has largely eluded the social networks themselves.) Much like other online advertising niches, it is a sector that stands as a small, faster-growing piece of a much larger overall market. But in order to reach their full potential, incentives-based advertising vendors need the scale brought by established and wealthy companies like Adknowledge, which boasts more than 50,0000 advertisers. Because of that, we weren’t surprised to see Super Rewards gobbled up – and we wonder if the same thing might not end up happening to the firm’s two main rivals.

We’re thinking specifically about Fremont, California-based Offerpal Media and San Francisco-based Peanut Labs, which have taken approximately $20m and $4m in venture capital, respectively. The largest independent startup remaining in the niche sector, Offerpal Media recently said it was doing around $40m in revenue. Potential acquirers include dominant online advertising players such as Microsoft, Google, Time Warner’s AOL and ValueClick. In particular, we suspect ValueClick could be ready to shop as a way to stand out from its larger competitors. The Westlake Village, California-based company certainly has the means to do a deal, since it has no debt and some $100m in cash. Other potential suitors for incentives-based advertising startups include large-scale application platforms such as Facebook and NewsCorp’s MySpace that would benefit greatly from bringing the ad service in-house.

Adknowledge M&A

Date announced Target
July 22, 2009 KITN Media [dba Super Rewards]
March 12, 2009 Miva Media
November 6, 2008 Lookery (Advertising business assets)
November 3, 2008 Adonomics [fka Appaholic]
December 6, 2007 Cubics Social Network Advertising
November 8, 2007 Mediarun (UK and Australia divisions)

Source: The 451 M&A KnowledgeBase

Halfway through a rough year

Brenon Daly

Contact: Brenon Daly

Since we’re at the midpoint of 2009, we thought we’d tally what we’ve already seen in M&A this year and project what we’re likely to see for the remainder of the year. First, the look back at the first two quarters of 2009: The $58bn in announced and estimated deal spending so far this year is the lowest level of January–June tech shopping in a half-decade. More dramatically, spending on deals in the first two quarters of 2009 is only about one-quarter the amount spent during the comparable period in any of the past three years. June was a particularly slow month, after there were a flurry of deals in April and May.

As to what the rest of 2009 will look like, we suspect it will closely resemble the second half of last year. For the record, the announced spending from July–December 2008 hit just $72bn. Obviously, it’s difficult to predict a lumpy business like M&A. But the way the economy is dragging along right now, we’re inclined to think that big buyers will look to take small bites for the rest of the year. That’s what they did in the second half of 2008. Indeed, it wasn’t that the traditionally busiest buyers in tech took themselves out of the market altogether. Rather, they just scaled back their purchases, despite holding tens of billions of dollars in cash. For instance, the largest transactions inked in the back half of last year by tech giants such as McAfee, Oracle, IBM, Google and Microsoft – among many other companies – were all less than a half-billion dollars.

Q1-Q2 tech spending

Year Deal volume Deal value
2009 1,400 $58bn
2008 1,557 $228bn
2007 2,005 $294bn
2006 2,019 $268bn
2005 1,388 $162bn
2004 999 $111bn

Source: The 451 M&A KnowledgeBase

A ‘paper’ windfall in LogMeIn IPO

Brenon Daly

Contact: Brenon Daly

One of the investment banks that profited the most from Wednesday’s strong debut of LogMeIn wasn’t even on the prospectus. Instead, it was in the prospectus. McNamee Lawrence, an advisory shop with no underwriting business, realized a tidy little $2m windfall from the IPO.

Heading into the offering, McNamee Lawrence held some 99,000 shares in LogMeIn that it picked up in late 2004 for helping to place the startup’s series A funding round, as well as other advisory work. McNamee Lawrence took a small amount of money off the table, selling some 21,000 shares at the $16 initial pricing of LogMeIn. That netted the bank about $336,000. It still holds some 78,000 shares, which had a paper value of about $1.6m, based on the price of LogMeIn shares on Thursday afternoon.

Granted, the holdings of McNamee Lawrence are only a tiny slice of the overall 21.4 million LogMeIn shares outstanding. And the firm’s stake is a fraction of the major owners of LogMeIn, Prism Venture Partners and Polaris Venture Partners. Prism holds shares worth about $80m, while Polaris, which sold $7.4m worth of shares in the offering, still owns a chunk valued at about $59m.

Still, the shares represent a nice windfall for McNamee Lawrence. (In addition, some of the firm’s partners put money individually into LogMeIn in the company’s seed round in early 2004.) Of course, the practice of taking paper as payment was pretty common across all kinds of service providers back in the Bubble Era, when startups routinely handed out options and warrants to cover bills from banks, lawyers and even landlords. After so many people got burned by taking worthless options and warrants in the early 2000s, however, cash returned as the currency of choice.