Tag: GOOG

SaaS deals echo in security industry

Brenon Daly

Contact: Brenon Daly

There are more than a few echoes of Symantec’s purchase of MessageLabs last October in McAfee’s reach last week for MX Logic. In terms of strategy, both acquisitions added millions of end users of on-demand security to the two largest security software companies, which have been slowly looking to increase that side of their business. MessageLabs had attracted more than eight million users at 19,000 customers, while MX Logic brings more than four million users at 30,000 customers.

As far as deal terms go, both buys were done at a similar valuation. Symantec paid 4.8 times trailing sales for MessageLabs, while we estimate McAfee is paying closer to 4 times trailing sales for MX Logic. (If we include the potential $30m earnout in the price, the multiple hits 4.9 times MX Logic’s trailing revenue.) And, we would add that both deals stand as the largest security transactions of their respective years, with the sales of these private software-as-a-service (SaaS) companies eclipsing the prices paid even for public vendors. Symantec shelled out $695m in cash for MessageLabs, topping McAfee’s $497m pickup of Secure Computing as the largest security deal in 2008. So far this year, McAfee’s $140m purchase of MX Logic is the industry’s biggest security transaction, slightly ahead of the contested take-private of Entrust for $124m.

We also suspect that both SaaS acquisitions will pay dividends for Symantec and McAfee. (We have heard from several sources that Symantec is particularly high on its reach across the Atlantic for MessageLabs.) Undoubtedly, these deals will deliver a higher return than the other large SaaS security acquisition, Google’s pickup of Postini. Done two years ago, that buy handed Postini a valuation that’s twice as rich as either MessageLabs or MX Logic. But unlike the moves by Symantec and McAfee, Google didn’t snag Postini for its security offering. Instead, the search giant had the ill-conceived notion that a startup could serve as the platform for its push of Google Apps. Not surprisingly, that idea hasn’t panned out. We certainly haven’t heard much about Postini in the two years since the search giant bought it.

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

Q2 earnings to shape Q3 M&A

-Contact Thomas Rasmussen, Xiaoyue Ma

Is there a correlation between the equity markets and M&A? Anecdotal evidence sure seems to suggest so. After a hot start to the second quarter for both the stock market and deal flow, tech M&A slowed as the Nasdaq cooled in recent weeks. In fact, spending on deals in June was less than half the level that it was in both April and May. Many would-be buyers now seem to be looking to earnings season – both for a report on second-quarter results and the outlook for the balance of the year – to determine if they’ll be going shopping again. We have heard this throughout the year from companies that have both the means and the desire to shop, but have refrained from any meaningful deals because of the uncertain outlook.

That sentiment was clearly evident when we tallied the results of our June survey of corporate development executives, who are pretty much the only acquirers in today’s market. When we analyzed the findings and separated respondents at large firms from those at smaller ones, almost two-thirds of large buyers predicted they will be more acquisitive in the second half of 2009. This stands in stark contrast to the results of our survey conducted last December, in which large acquirers were significantly more bearish on M&A, with less than one-third of respondents indicating they would do more purchases. We should note that the June survey was done when the Nasdaq was trading at its highest level since last October, while the December survey was done at a significantly more bearish time.

Given that there hasn’t been a raft of negative pre-announcements by tech vendors so far, second-quarter results may well come in somewhat stronger than many expect. In fact, tech bellwethers IBM and Google, up 20% and 30% year-to-date, respectively, will report after the bell Thursday and the overall consensus seems to be positive. Big Blue recently reiterated its fiscal year forecasts of at least $9.20 and $10-$11 in earnings per share for 2009 and 2010, respectively. If the tech earnings season does indeed go smoothly, we would anticipate companies to pick up their pace of acquisitions.

Drawing the line between M&A and the equity markets

Period M&A spending Nasdaq median Nasdaq median % change from prior month
October 2008 $20bn 1,711 N/A
November 2008 $13bn 1,532 -10.47%
December 2008 $7bn 1,531 -0.05%
January 2009 $3bn 1,521 -0.70%
February 2009 $2bn 1,494 -1.72%
March 2009 $4bn 1,444 -3.35%
April 2009 $21bn 1,646 13.97%
May 2009 $17bn 1,731 5.17%
June 2009 $10bn 1,832 5.84%
July 2009 N/A 1,787 -2.45%

Source: The 451 M&A KnowledgeBase and the Nasdaq

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

Navigating for relevance in a changing landscape

-Email Thomas Rasmussen

It’s becoming increasingly evident that once-dominant makers of personal navigation devices, such as Garmin and TomTom, have lost their way. They have seen billions of dollars in market capitalization erased as smartphone manufacturers have encroached on their sector, largely through M&A. Consider the most-recent example of this trend: Research in Motion’s acquisition of startup Dash Navigation earlier this month.

RIM’s buy is more of a catch-up move than anything else. Rival Nokia has already spent the last few years – and several billion dollars – acquiring and building a dominant presence in the location-based-services (LBS) market. And let’s not forget about the omnipresent Google. Starting with its tiny 2005 purchase of Where2, the search giant has quietly grown into a LBS powerhouse that we suspect keeps even the larger players up at night.

The Dash Navigation sale may well signal the start of some overdue consolidation, a trend we outlined last year. Specifically, we wonder about the continued independence of TeleNav, Telmap and Networks in Motion. TeleNav, for instance, is the exclusive mapping provider for the hyped Palm Pre through Sprint Navigation. But with the trend for open devices, we wonder how long that will be the case.

What’s the outlook for mobile payment startups?

-Contact Thomas Rasmussen

The consolidation in the mobile payment market that we outlined recently is still on. Startup Boku announced on Tuesday a $13m venture capital infusion in the form of what we understand was a $3m series A round followed quickly by a $10m series B round a little over a month later. Benchmark Capital led the latest round, with Index Ventures and Khosla Ventures also pitching in some cash. The money was used to acquire two competitors, Paymo and Mobillcash. We estimate that very little of the cash was used to buy the vendors. We understand that the purchase of Paymo, which raised a reported $5m itself, was primarily done in stock. The deals were largely a way for Boku to gain customers and technology, as well as expand its international reach. It’s increasingly important for mobile payment startups to do something to stand out among the dozens of rivals also trying to crack this market. What’s unusual about Boku is that this strategy is playing out so quickly. The company only incorporated in March.

The real question for Boku and other promising startups in the mobile payment space such as RFinity is what will ultimately happen to this hyped market. Despite hundreds of millions of dollars poured into startups, they haven’t been able to generate much revenue, certainly not to the level that would make them viable businesses at this point. We believe the best outcome for these firms is an exit to a larger strategic acquirer. An example of this that may well be in the offing is Obopay, which took an investment from Nokia a few months ago. We suspect that could be a ‘try before you buy’ arrangement for the Finnish mobile company. Research in Motion and others could look to use acquisitions to catch up, as well.

However, we wonder how long it will be before other smartphone providers, platforms and mobile operators do as Apple has done. Micro-transactions are a huge selling point for the new iPhone 3.0 update and, frankly, one of the few bright spots for the mobile payment sector. However, all transactions for iPhone applications are done through Apple itself, leaving companies such as Boku out in the cold. If other vendors – including RIM, Palm Inc, Google, Microsoft and even application platforms like Facebook – stay in-house to develop the technology, there isn’t much need to go shopping. That could well hurt the valuations of mobile payment startups, even those that survive this current period of consolidation.

Could ad slump lead to ValueClick exit?

-Contact Thomas Rasmussen

Recently, we’ve covered the hardships of online advertising companies. However, for a clear example of just how tough the environment really is, we point to the weakness at ValueClick, one of the few remaining publicly traded pure-play advertising firms. Amid an advertising slump and tough competition, the vendor has seen its first-quarter revenue decline 20% from the same quarter last year and its own projections point to a similar decline for the current quarter. With the advertising market seemingly trapped in the doldrums for the foreseeable future, we wonder if an opportunistic acquirer might consider a run at ValueClick.

ValueClick trades at an enterprise value of about $800m. This is about half its 2008 high, and down about two-thirds from 2007, when Google and Microsoft were throwing billions of dollars around to secure market leadership. With $592m in trailing 12-month (TTM) revenue, the company trades at a scant 1.3x sales. This is a far cry from the multiples paid for aQuantive and DoubleClick of 10x TTM sales and 12x TTM sales, respectively.

With $100m in cash and no debt, ValueClick CEO Tom Vadnais has indicated that the company is interested in doing some shopping of its own. However, given the dire state of the economy, we think a takeout is a much more plausible outcome over the next year or so. The potential acquirers include the usual suspects such as Microsoft, Google and IAC/InterActiveCorp; soon-to-be-independent AOL; and large media companies. However, we would hasten to note that most of these vendors have full traditional advertising portfolios, so an acquisition of ValueClick would merely be for boosting market share.

Reality check for mobile ad networks?

-Contact Thomas Rasmussen

Mobile advertising startup Ad Infuse received an infusion of reality last week. The vendor, which has raised $18m in venture backing, had to put itself up for sale after it was unable to secure follow-on funding this year. After being shopped around since last summer, Ad Infuse sold for scraps to UK-based mobile advertiser Velti. We estimate that Velti paid less than $1m for Ad Infuse, which we understand generated just $1.3m in revenue in 2008.

The distressed sale of Ad Infuse comes on the heels of SmartReply’s tiny all-equity purchase of mSnap, as well as several deals involving other niche advertising networks this year. Where does this leave the remaining mobile ad networks that we were bullish on last year as the logical next step of growth for online ad startups?

We suspect there is more VC portfolio cleanout coming, since there are still too many mobile ad startups. That’s not to say there aren’t a few firms that haven’t had some success. For instance, three-year-old mobile ad network AdMob, which has successfully ridden the coattails of Apple’s iPhone AppStore’s rise by providing a way for iPhone developers to monetize their users through ads, is currently at an estimated $30m run-rate. (AdMob has raised nearly $50m to date from Sequoia Capital, Accel Partners, Draper Fisher Jurvetson and Northgate Capital.) And on a smaller scale, AdMarvel is just getting started with what we can best describe as a mobile version of the popular video ad startup Adap.tv. It has raised just $8m to date and is in the process of closing a $10m follow-on round, something its competitor Ad Infuse was unable to accomplish.

Much like what we anticipate will eventually happen in the online video ad space, there will soon come a time when ad giants such as Google and Yahoo will have to buy their way into the mobile sector. In a rare sign of foresight, AOL is the only media behemoth with a sizable presence in the mobile ad vertical following its $105m acquisition of Third Screen Media in 2007.

Will OpenTable’s IPO lead to M&A?

-Email Thomas Rasmussen

Just three months after filing its initial IPO paperwork, OpenTable set the terms of its $46m offering last week. At the high point of the $12-14 range for its shares, the company would sport a valuation just shy of $300m, or about 6x trailing 12-month (TTM) revenue and 50x TTM EBITDA. For the past three years, OpenTable has grown revenue at a compound annual rate of about 43%. Despite skepticism about the IPO market and OpenTable’s prospects during a period when its primary customers (restaurants) are struggling, the online restaurant reservations service should debut on the Nasdaq under the ticker ‘OPEN’ in the next week or two. OpenTable’s offering comes as Solarwinds is also slated to go public, after its prospectus aged for more than a year.

OpenTable has not disclosed how it will allocate the funds that it will raise in its offering. However, we believe it might be gearing up to make its first foray into M&A. One indication: the presence of Allen & Co as one of OpenTable’s four underwriters. Sure it had a hand in Google’s IPO, but Allen & Co is certainly known more as a media banker than a tech underwriter. OpenTable’s offering is being led by Merrill Lynch, with ThinkEquity and Stifel Nicolaus also on the ticket.

If OpenTable were to shop, we suspect it could well look to bolster its international operations. Since 2004, the San Francisco-based company has sunk millions of dollars into expanding outside the US, but has little to show for it. Its international business, which is burning money, accounts for just 5% of total sales. (The vendor recently pulled out of Germany and France.) We see a parallel between what OpenTable has run into in its unsuccessful international expansion and the early woes that its rich Web services cousin eBay experienced in trying to translate its business outside of its home market. After struggling to address foreign markets by just expanding its existing online auction service, eBay has been picking up local foreign sites that fit the nuances of business and culture in those markets. Ebay has spent billions of dollars lately buying its way into foreign markets.

Will mobile payment startups pay off?

-Contact Thomas Rasmussen, Chris Hazelton

In 2006 and 2007, mobile payment startups were a favorite among venture capitalists. The promise of dethroning the credit card companies by bypassing them had VCs and strategic investors throwing hundreds of millions of dollars after such startups. During this time, a few lucky vendors managed to secure lucrative exits. Among other deals, Firethorn, a company backed with just $14m, sold to Qualcomm for $210m and 3united Mobile Solutions was rolled up for $70m as part of VeriSign’s acquisition spree. Recent prices, however, haven’t been anywhere near as rich. Consider this: VeriSign unwound its 3united purchase last month, pocketing what we understand was about $5m. Similarly, Sybase picked up PayBox Solution for just $11.4m, while Kushcash and other promising mobile payment startups have quietly closed their doors.

Last week, Belgian phone company Belgacom took a 40% stake in mobile payment provider Tunz. Tunz has taken in a relatively small $4m in funding since launching in 2007, but with VCs sidelined, we believe this investment was a strategic cash infusion to keep alive the company behind Belgacom’s mobile payment strategy. It may well be a prelude to an outright acquisition. With valuations clearly deflated and venture capitalists nowhere to be seen, we believe mobile service providers are set to go shopping for payment companies. Who might be next?

Yodlee, mFoundry and Obopay are three companies that have made a name for themselves in the world of mobile banking and payments. Each has secured deals with the major banks and wireless companies, but still lacks scale. Further, all of them are facing increased competition from deep-pocketed and patient rivals such as Amazon, eBay’s PayPal and Google’s CheckOut. Still, we believe they are attractive targets for wireless carriers or mobile device makers, who are increasingly on the lookout for additional revenue streams.

In fact, Obopay received a large investment from Nokia last week as part of its $70m series E funding round. Nokia’s portion is unclear, but Obopay tells us the stake gives Nokia a seat on its board. (Additionally, we would note that this investment comes directly from Nokia, rather than its venture arm, Nokia Growth Partners, as has typically been the case). This latest round brings Obopay’s total funding to just shy of $150m. Although we wonder about the potential return for Obopay’s backers in a trade sale to Nokia, the mobile payment vendor would clearly be a great complement to Nokia’s growing Ovi suite of mobile services. (We would also note that Qualcomm put money into Obopay and considered acquiring the company, but instead went with Firethorn.) Likewise, Yodlee and mFoundry’s roster of strategic investors and customers reads like a short list of potential buyers: Motorola, PayPal, Alltel (now Verizon), along with other large banks and wireless providers. Yodlee says it has raised more than $100m throughout its 10-year history, and mFoundry has reportedly raised about $25m.