Tag: Dell

Dell’s less than ‘compellent’ bid

Brenon Daly

Contact: Brenon Daly

In what would be the third significant acquisition of a publicly traded storage vendor in the past four months, Dell said Thursday that it would offer $27.50 in cash for each share of Compellent (see our full report). The storage company reported 32.8 million shares (on a diluted basis) in its latest quarterly filing, giving the proposed transaction an equity value of $902m. (The final share count would likely be higher due to options vesting and so on.) But if we assume an equity value of $900m, the enterprise value of the deal would come in at roughly $840m. That’s 5.4 times Compellent’s sales of $155m in 2010 and 4.3x its projected 2011 sales of $195m. We would note that valuation is less than half the level commanded in the recent takeouts of both 3PAR (a bidding war pushed the level to 11.2x trailing sales) and Isilon Systems (12.8x trailing sales).

Of course, valuation is very much the issue in this ‘take-under.’ Dell’s bid of $27.50 compares to Compellent’s previous closing price of $33.65. Clearly, much of that advance came as a result of acquisition speculation, as Wall Street watched other storage vendors of roughly the same vintage get taken off the market. On its own, Compellent started the year trading at roughly $23, dropped to about $12 after whiffing its first quarter, and only got back above $20 in late October. Shares closed Thursday at $29.04 (on volume that was seven times heavier than average), indicating that investors aren’t necessarily willing to sell their shares to Dell at a lower price than they can get from one another.

Blue-sky thinking on a bidding war for Isilon

Brenon Daly

Contact: Brenon Daly

Based on the two previous multibillion-dollar deals in the storage industry, we should be bracing for a bidding war around Isilon Systems. Recall that Data Domain last year and 3PAR this summer each attracted after-the-fact suitors that drove up the price on both by more than a few dollars. But in the case of Isilon, we don’t actually see the process going to a public auction.

For starters, there’s the not-insignificant matter of the buy-in bid, which currently values Isilon more richly (on a price-to-sales ratio) than either Data Domain or 3PAR. (As we note in our full report on EMC’s planned purchase, Isilon is being taken off the market at its highest-ever price, roughly five times the level where the company started the year and roughly twice where it traded just three months ago.)

Setting aside Isilon’s acrophobia-inducing valuation, which company could we imagine putting in a topping bid? Admittedly, that requires a rather vivid imagination, but one name we could come up with is Dell. (My colleague, Henry Baltazar, looked at Isilon and other potential targets for Dell in a recent report.) The company has already demonstrated a willingness to spend big to build out its storage portfolio, taking home EqualLogic three years ago and making an unsuccessful run at 3PAR this summer. (If nothing else, Dell’s effort to land 3PAR signaled that the tech giant doesn’t appear content to simply continue its long-term reliance on EMC for storage business. We suspect that marriage of convenience may well be on the rocks.)

Not that we necessarily expect it to happen, but Isilon would nonetheless bring Dell a fast-growing storage vendor (roughly 60% revenue growth for 2010) and a solid roster of more than 1,500 customers, which is roughly twice the number it would have picked up with 3PAR.

Granted, there would be some overlap with the NAS technology Dell obtained with Exanet earlier this year. But Isilon would significantly enhance that, as well as fit well with Dell’s more recent storage purchase, Ocarina Networks. (Isilon and Ocarina actually had a partnership, putting Ocarina’s digital image de-duplication technology in front of Isilon. That’s particularly useful for storage requirements for media and entertainment companies, which account for one-third of revenue at Isilon.) Again, we highly doubt that Dell plans to start a bidding war for Isilon. But it’s enough to get us thinking.

Winners and losers in data warehousing

Ben Kolada2 Comments

Contact: Ben Kolada

Just a month after Greenplum was swallowed by EMC for an estimated $400m, fellow data-warehousing startup Kickfire was sold for probably one one-hundreth of that amount to Teradata. Why did the two data-warehousing vendors – both venture-backed, Silicon Valley startups targeting the same market – see divergent outcomes? The answer to that multimillion-dollar question lies in each company’s targeted markets.

The scrap sale of Kickfire was the end result of a misguided approach by the Santa Clara, California-based startup to the low end of the data-warehousing market. Basically, Kickfire was trying to sell appliances through an expensive direct-sale model. However, the economics of a high-cost business model for a low-cost product only work on big sales. Kickfire never got anywhere close to that, collecting only about a dozen customers in its four years of business. (We would contrast Kickfire’s business model with that of its closest competitor, Infobright. That company, which sells a software-only product through an indirect channel, has more than doubled the number of customers over the past year to 120.)

As Kickfire was struggling to sell to small businesses, 30 miles up the road in San Mateo, California, Greenplum was ripening nicely by selling to enterprises. The company’s high-revenue customer accounts helped it quickly grow total sales to just shy of $30m at the time of its sale to EMC. (That works out to an eye-popping valuation of 14 times trailing sales – a multiple that’s twice as high as any valuation the data-warehousing sector has seen in major acquisitions.) Part of the reason it garnered such a high price is that Greenplum counted some 140 customers at the time of its sale.

Other data-warehousing vendors have also experienced the highs of the enterprise market. Netezza and Teradata both made it to the public markets. (Although we heard a rumor that Netezza was almost erased from the market. Word is that EMC first talked to Netezza, even floating a bid earlier this year that basically would have valued Netezza at its current price on the NYSE. Needless to say, talks didn’t go too far between the two Boston-area companies.) And of course, DATAllegro was scooped up by Microsoft for an estimated 7x trailing sales.

With all of this consolidation playing out, we expect that much of the attention in the data-warehousing space is now turning to Aster Data Systems. The fast-growing vendor, which is based in San Carlos, California, has raised $27m in venture backing. If Aster Data gets snapped up in a trade sale (like many of its rivals have), we wouldn’t be surprised to see Dell as the buyer. The two companies are currently partners, and Dell has shown an increasing interest in big data following its continued attempts to buy 3PAR.

A hoarse auctioneer for 3PAR?

Brenon Daly

Contact: Brenon Daly

The back-and-forth bidding for 3PAR moved higher again Friday, as the counteroffer to the counteroffer pushed the value of the high-end data storage vendor to $2bn. In the latest move, Hewlett-Packard lobbed a bid of $30 for each share of 3PAR, topping its offer from Thursday of $27 per share that had been matched by Dell. If 3PAR opts for HP’s bid, Dell has three days to come back with an offer of its own, according to terms. Dell, which opened the process 10 days ago with a bid of $18 per share, has already matched two efforts by HP to derail the deal.

As is pretty much always the case when would-be buyers with deep pockets go against each other, the price of the target company moves higher. (It’s fundamental supply-and-demand economics, after all.) Yet in the case of 3PAR, we’re not talking bids that are sweetened with a teaspoon or two of sugar – we’re talking cups of the stuff. (To recap the investment banks that are helping to advise their clients on how much sugar to dole out: Qatalyst Partners is banking 3PAR, while Credit Suisse Securities is banking Dell and JP Morgan Securities is banking HP.)

The latest offer values 3PAR at basically $830m higher than the opening takeout valuation, which was already the highest the storage company had ever seen. (In fact, Wall Street valued 3PAR at less than $800m before all this bidding started. Shares had basically bounced around $10 each for most of the year.) HP’s offer gives 3PAR an equity valuation of $2bn, two-thirds higher than Dell’s initial bid that gave it a $1.25bn equity valuation. For those wondering about the ‘price discipline’ at the two suitors, we would note that the going rate for 3PAR is now 10 times trailing sales.

There’s only one 3PAR

Brenon Daly

Contact: Brenon Daly

Let’s see, where have we heard this before? A storage company with hundreds of millions of dollars in revenue finds itself in a billion-dollar bidding war between two tech giants, advised in the process by high-end boutique Qatalyst Partners. Last summer, scarcity value drove the price of Data Domain; today it’s 3PAR.

Looking to trump Dell’s existing agreement for 3PAR, Hewlett-Packard on Monday lobbed a topping bid for the high-end storage provider. HP, advised by JP Morgan Securities, is offering $24 for each share of 3PAR, giving the proposed transaction an enterprise value of $1.56bn. (That’s according to our math, compared to the $1.66bn that HP gives its bid.) In any case, the offer is some $380m, or 33%, richer than Dell’s initial bid. Recall that Dell’s offer of $18 valued 3PAR at the highest level ever for the stock.

One interesting observation about HP’s topping bid: it is exactly the same percentage (33%) that EMC had to hand over for Data Domain, which had agreed to sale to NetApp. Of course, this is HP’s first counter, while EMC had to bump its own bid. (Initially it offered $30 for each Data Domain share, but ultimately paid $33 per share when it closed the deal in July 2009.) Of course, there was little hope of NetApp matching EMC in a bidding war for Data Domain. In the case of 3PAR, however, rivals Dell and HP are on much closer financial footing. Terms of Dell’s original agreement with 3PAR call for a $53.5m breakup fee

Dell’s not-so-identical twin storage deals

Brenon Daly

Contact: Brenon Daly

From an investment banking perspective, both EqualLogic and 3PAR started out and finished their lives in much the same way. The two storage vendors filed to go public within a week of one another back in August 2007, and – pending the close of 3PAR’s sale – both will end up inside Dell. Yet while the final destination is the same, the two vendors’ not-so-parallel tracks to Round Rock, Texas, underscore the fact that the tech M&A market, as well as the capital markets, still have a long way to go to recover from the Credit Crisis.

Consider this: In the sale announced Monday, 3PAR garnered just half the multiple that fellow storage vendor EqualLogic got in its sale to the same buyer, at least based on one key metric. 3PAR sold for 5.6 times trailing sales, while EqualLogic went for 12x trailing sales. We would chalk up the eye-popping premium for EqualLogic mostly to the fact that Dell had to effectively outbid the public market to prevent the company from going public. More to the point, Dell had to outbid a bull market, as the Nasdaq had tacked on 20% in the year leading up to its purchase of EqualLogic in November 2007.

As any company – including 3PAR and Dell – can attest, the bull market ended abruptly and painfully just days after the EqualLogic trade sale. So now we’re left with a market where Dell can offer the highest-ever price for 3PAR shares (representing a staggering 87% premium) and still get a ‘half-off discount’ on valuation compared to its earlier billion-dollar storage deal. But then Dell knows all about discounts over that time period. The company’s market cap has been cut in half (to $25bn from $50bn) from the day it announced its EqualLogic acquisition to Monday’s announcement of the 3PAR purchase.

RainStor, the structured data retention and compression startup that recently renamed itself from Clearpace, has raised $7.5m in series B funding. The round brought in two new investors – Storm Ventures and data integration software specialist Informatica (which licenses RainStor’s technology as part of its Applimation data archive suit <!– /* Font Definitions */ @font-face {font-family:”Cambria Math”; panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4; mso-font-charset:0; mso-generic-font-family:roman; mso-font-pitch:variable; mso-font-signature:-1610611985 1107304683 0 0 159 0;} @font-face {font-family:Calibri; panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4; mso-font-charset:0; mso-generic-font-family:swiss; mso-font-pitch:variable; mso-font-signature:-1610611985 1073750139 0 0 159 0;} @font-face {font-family:Verdana; panose-1:2 11 6 4 3 5 4 4 2 4; mso-font-charset:0; mso-generic-font-family:swiss; mso-font-pitch:variable; mso-font-signature:536871559 0 0 0 415 0;} /* Style Definitions */ p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal {mso-style-unhide:no; mso-style-qformat:yes; mso-style-parent:””; margin:0in; margin-bottom:.0001pt; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:12.0pt; font-family:”Times New Roman”,”serif”; mso-fareast-font-family:Calibri; mso-fareast-theme-font:minor-latin;} a:link, span.MsoHyperlink {mso-style-noshow:yes; mso-style-priority:99; color:blue; mso-text-animation:none; text-decoration:none; text-underline:none; text-decoration:none; text-line-through:none;} a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed {mso-style-noshow:yes; mso-style-priority:99; color:purple; mso-themecolor:followedhyperlink; text-decoration:underline; text-underline:single;} p.bodytxt02, li.bodytxt02, div.bodytxt02 {mso-style-name:body_txt_02; mso-style-unhide:no; mso-margin-top-alt:auto; margin-right:0in; mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto; margin-left:0in; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:12.0pt; font-family:”Times New Roman”,”serif”; mso-fareast-font-family:Calibri; mso-fareast-theme-font:minor-latin;} .MsoChpDefault {mso-style-type:export-only; mso-default-props:yes; font-size:10.0pt; mso-ansi-font-size:10.0pt; mso-bidi-font-size:10.0pt;} @page WordSection1 {size:8.5in 11.0in; margin:1.0in 1.0in 1.0in 1.0in; mso-header-margin:.5in; mso-footer-margin:.5in; mso-paper-source:0;} div.WordSection1 {page:WordSection1;} –>
/* Style Definitions */
table.MsoNormalTable
{mso-style-name:”Table Normal”;
mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0;
mso-tstyle-colband-size:0;
mso-style-noshow:yes;
mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-qformat:yes;
mso-style-parent:””;
mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt;
mso-para-margin:0in;
mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt;
mso-pagination:widow-orphan;
font-size:11.0pt;
font-family:”Calibri”,”sans-serif”;
mso-ascii-font-family:Calibri;
mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin;
mso-fareast-font-family:”Times New Roman”;
mso-fareast-theme-font:minor-fareast;
mso-hansi-font-family:Calibri;
mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin;
mso-bidi-font-family:”Times New Roman”;
mso-bidi-theme-font:minor-bidi;}

by Brenon Daly

From an investment banking perspective, both EqualLogic and 3PAR started out and finished their lives in much the same way. The two storage vendors filed to go public within a week of one another back in August 2007, and – pending the close of 3PAR’s sale – both will end up inside Dell. Yet while the final destination is the same, the two vendors’ not-so-parallel tracks to Round Rock, Texas, underscore the fact that the tech M&A market, as well as the capital markets, still have a long way to go to recover from the Credit Crisis.

Consider this: In the sale announced Monday, 3PAR garnered just half the multiple that fellow storage vendor EqualLogic got in its sale to the same buyer, at least based on one key metric. 3PAR sold for 5.6 times trailing sales, while EqualLogic went for 12x trailing sales. We would chalk up the eye-popping premium for EqualLogic mostly to the fact that Dell had to effectively outbid the public market to prevent the company from going public. More to the point, Dell had to outbid a bull market, as the Nasdaq had tacked on 20% in the year leading up to its purchase of EqualLogic in November 2007.

As any company – including 3PAR and Dell – can attest, the bull market ended abruptly and painfully just days after the EqualLogic trade sale. So now we’re left with a market where Dell can offer the highest-ever price for 3PAR shares (representing a staggering 87% premium) and still get a ‘half-off discount’ on valuation compared to its earlier billion-dollar storage deal. But then Dell knows all about discounts over that time period. The company’s market cap has been cut in half (to $25bn from $50bn) from the day it announced its EqualLogic acquisition to Monday’s announcement of the 3PAR purchase. e

Storage sector M&A holding steady

Ben Kolada

Contact: Ben Kolada, Henry Baltazar

In its eighth storage play, IBM announced last week that it is acquiring data compression vendor Storwize. The move, which came quickly on the heels of Dell’s purchase of data de-duplication provider Ocarina Networks, brings the number of storage deals we’ve tallied in 2010 to 19. That’s roughly on par with the volume of storage transactions in the same period last year.

Of course, deal flow in the sector last year was dominated by a bidding war over Data Domain, which sold to EMC for $2.3bn after NetApp put the data de-dupe specialist in play but then got topped. We would note that EMC – the most active acquirer in the storage industry, having picked up some 15 storage companies over the past eight years – has been out of the storage market since it bought Data Domain. However, the storage giant may figure into the industry’s most recent deal. What do we mean?

Big Blue’s purchase of Storwize appears to be a reaction to EMC’s announcement in May that it was adding compression to its midrange Clariion and Celerra platforms. (The Storwize deal was first rumored in June, just after EMC’s announcement.) Storwize is unique in the storage space because it offers real-time data compression of up to 80%. Further, my colleague Henry Baltazar claims that IBM has already been working with Storwize for about a year. Storwize’s appliances run on System x servers, which Big Blue points out should ease the integration process – and help it to match the competitive moves by rival EMC.

Rumor mill churning on CommVault

Brenon Daly

Contact: Brenon Daly, Henry Baltazar

To paraphrase Mark Twain, a rumor can travel halfway around the world while the truth is still putting on its shoes. At least that’s the case with M&A gossip right now. Rumors are flying, in many cases given wing by some of the unusual multibillion-dollar pairings that have popped up in recent weeks. Who would have thought, for instance, that Cisco would have gone shopping in Norway (of all places) to ink its largest deal in a year and a half? And who would have picked Dell as the buyer for Perot Systems? (Except for that guy who traded Perot options on inside information, that is.)

All uncertainty, of course, serves as fertile ground for speculation and rumors. Earlier this week, The Wall Street Journal reported that Brocade Communications may have selected a banker to help it with a sale. While we’ve noted in the past that Brocade is likely to get snapped up, we have our doubts that anything is imminent. (And we doubt even more that Brocade would ever end up at Oracle, as the WSJ speculated.) But since we love rumors as much as the next person, we figured we’d pass along one that we’ve heard making the rounds this week: CommVault may be in play, with NetApp as the possible buyer.

We’ve mulled over a CommVault-NetApp pairing in the past, most recently after the storage giant lost the bidding war for data de-duplication specialist Data Domain this summer. But we’ve never felt that the two companies fit tightly together all that well. (Still, one recent competitive development may spur NetApp to make a move. Symantec, which had been a longtime partner of NetApp, rolled out its own NAS software offering. To counter Symantec’s move on its turf, NetApp could use the archiving and de-dupe offering that would come with CommVault. Whether that’s enough to drive a deal, well, we’re not so sure.)

There are still a lot of differences between the two companies. For starters, CommVault pretty much sells straight software, while NetApp wraps its IP in hardware. (Further, its boxes are at least partly an alternative to CommVault’s offering.) Also, CommVault, while now targeting enterprise sales, primarily pursues the low end of the market while NetApp sells at the high end. Add to that a newly appointed chief executive who might want to actually move into the corner office before making an acquisition that would (for good or ill) reshape the company irrecoverably, and we just don’t see NetApp reaching for CommVault.

Instead, we have our own leading candidate for CommVault: Dell. On the heels of its purchase of Perot, Dell went out of its way to say that it was still very much planning to do deals, and storage has been a focus of its shopping in the past. CommVault and Dell already have an OEM arrangement and share thousands of customers. The fact that CommVault recently rolled out a relatively low-cost de-dupe offering would make it even more attractive to Dell, we suspect. CommVault, which is solidly profitable, has a market capitalization of $870m but holds about $120m in cash, lowering its enterprise value to just $750m.

Brocade on the block? Of course it is

Brenon Daly

Contact: Brenon Daly, Simon Robinson

Having recently marked the anniversary of its largest-ever acquisition, Brocade Communications may now find itself on the other side of a transaction. At least that’s the speculation from The Wall Street Journal, which reported Monday that the storage and networking giant has retained a banker (reportedly Frank Quattrone’s Qatalyst Partners) to shop it. While the report was enough to goose the stock to its highest level since June 2008 (shares were up 15% to $8.82 in Monday-afternoon trading), it’s worth pointing out that being shopped is a long way from getting sold.

It’s also worth mentioning that speculation about Brocade being in play is nothing new. As my colleague Simon Robinson noted in late March, the consolidating networking landscape makes Brocade a likely target. (After all, Brocade itself is an example of the consolidation. A traditional SAN networking provider, Brocade spent $2.6bn to expand into IP networking with its landmark purchase of Foundry Networks.) In the report, Robinson taps IBM as a likely buyer for Brocade as a way to gain an immediate presence in the networking space as well as strengthen its lead in the server sector. (Big Blue is one of the largest of Brocade’s OEM partners, which now number 23 companies.)

Hewlett-Packard is a less likely acquirer, in our view, because of the substantial overlap between HP’s newly reinvigorated ProCurve line and Foundry. That said, Brocade is a key supplier of datacenter infrastructure technology, so it is likely to be of interest to sever vendors like HP. Brocade’s appeal might be even sharper now that HP and Cisco Systems, which were once chummy, have found themselves on opposing sides in their efforts to equip the modern datacenters.

One additional buyer that certainly makes sense for Brocade, even more so because of a recently strengthened OEM arrangement, is Dell. The hardware provider, which has already bought its way into storage and other IT infrastructure markets, recently bolstered its OEM arrangement with Brocade to include IP networking and fiber-channel-over-Ethernet gear. (For the record, the WSJ article doesn’t mention Dell as a possible acquirer but, inexplicably, includes Oracle as a suitor. We suspect that Larry Ellison has plenty of other areas of software to consolidate before a hardware-heavy purchase that pits Oracle against Cisco.)

In terms of valuation, we would note that with the M&A-inspired speculative buying, Brocade shares have more than tripled so far this year. (Trading in Brocade stock through mid-Monday was already more than five times heavier than average.) The run has given Brocade an enterprise value (EV) of $4bn, including the jump on Monday. That values it at almost exactly the same level as Cisco on an EV-to-trailing-EBITDA valuation and a slight discount to the networking giant on an EV-to-trailing-sales multiple.

Dell-Perot Systems: an expensive Texas tie-up

Brenon Daly

By Brenon Daly

To understand just how richly Dell’s bid values Perot Systems, consider this: the last time shares in the services company traded at the level Dell is paying, Dell’s own long-slumping stock was changing hands above $40. That was back in early 1999, just after Perot Systems went public. (As a side note on the IPO, five banks are listed on the prospectus; Goldman, Sachs, which advised Perot in Monday’s sale to Dell, is not one of them.) By early 2000, shares of Perot had dropped to below $20, and never again pierced the $20 level, much less the $30 for each share that Dell is handing over in its proposed $3.9bn purchase.

The offer means Dell is paying a price for Perot that the company hasn’t seen on its own in a decade. Put in numbers, Dell’s bid values Perot at 68% above the closing price in the previous session, and some 78% higher than the average price of shares over the prior 30 trading days. For its part, Dell stock was bouncing around $16 on Monday, having dipped about 4% on the announcement.

And when compared to a similar move by a hardware vendor to bolster its services arm, Dell’s planned purchase of Perot comes in at about twice as expensive as Hewlett-Packard’s $13.9bn reach for EDS in May 2008. Dell is paying 1.4 times trailing 12-month (TTM) revenue and 12.9 times TTM EBITDA for Perot. That compares to HP’s acquisition, which valued EDS at 0.6 times TTM sales and 5.7 times TTM EBITDA.