Author: Brenon Daly

Trapeze swings to a deal

Brenon Daly

After nearly a year on the block, Trapeze Networks has been sold for about $150m, several sources have told us. An announcement is expected late next week. The buyer for the wireless LAN switch vendor isn’t immediately known – but it isn’t Juniper Networks. An OEM partner of Trapeze, Juniper also put money into Trapeze’s series D funding two years ago. One source indicated the two sides got very close to a deal last summer – at a price well north of the $150m Trapeze is expected to sell for now – but couldn’t agree on a final valuation.

We understand Trapeze looked to push the price higher, following the strong IPO of rival Aruba Networks. Aruba went public in late March 2007 at $11 per share and had doubled in price by July. At its peak, Aruba traded at a market capitalization of $1.9bn. However, Aruba has been stumbling recently, including reporting sales that were 20% lighter than Wall Street expected last quarter. The company now trades at just under a $500m market capitalization. Trapeze’s valuation also got caught in that downdraft. The rumored $150m price tag for Trapeze would value the company at roughly three times 2007 sales.

If indeed Trapeze is acquired, that would leave Meru Networks and Colubris Networks both looking for an exit. We understand that Meru, which is larger than Trapeze, is looking to hit the public markets when the IPO window opens again. In the past, we heard that Meru had talked with Foundry, although there was no indication of serious discussions. Meanwhile, Colubris would be a smaller acquisition, as it is running at about $30m in sales. Nortel Networks may be interested in Colubris. Whatever consolidation plays out in the WLAN switch market, most observers would agree that it’s overdue: It’s been more than three years since Cisco shook up the space with its $450m purchase of Airespace – a move that most expected to trigger a wave of deals. 

Rumored WLAN matchmaking

Company Rumored exit
Trapeze $150m sale to public company, to be announced next week
Meru Potential IPO, though reports of talks with Foundry
Colubris Rumors of talks with Nortel

Big Yellow’s purple elephant

Brenon Daly

Asked not too long ago to explain the slump in Symantec’s stock since acquiring Veritas three years ago, CEO John Thompson memorably called the combined company ‘a purple elephant.’ The allegorical description was a bit of a departure for the straight-laced, straight-talking ex-Big Blue executive, who went on to add that since Wall Street had never seen such a large security-storage company, it didn’t know how to value it. (Generally speaking, however, investors have known how to value it: lower. Since announcing the $13.5bn acquisition in December 2004, Symantec shares have shed about 22% of their value, compared to a 15% gain in the Nasdaq over that same time.)

The purple elephant has turned into a bit of a sacred cow, with Thompson defending the combination at every turn and forcefully knocking down any suggestion that Symantec should shed some of the Veritas assets. (Of course, Symantec already ditched Precise – an application performance management product that it inherited from Veritas – back in January.) Talk of possible divestitures surfaced last week following a research note from Cowen and Co analyst Walter Pritchard, who speculated that NetBackup and Data Center Foundation, a storage and server management product, may find their way onto the auction block. Not so, countered Thompson on Symantec’s first-quarter earnings call last Wednesday. The company has ‘no plans to divest anything – none.’ A senior corporate development guy at a company named as one of the possible buyers of the Foundation business told us recently that he hasn’t even been informally approached to gauge the company’s possible interest in Foundation, much less seen a book on the possible asset sale.

Of course, M&A is cyclical, to some degree tracking the overall economy. And we know this about dealmaking in a recession: When times get tight, ties get thin. We’ve already seen that most dramatically in the private equity world, whether it’s former buyout buddies taking each other to court or banks looking to get out of their lending agreements they’ve already signed. That same thinking (‘maybe we shouldn’t have done…’) is now hitting the C-suite. Consider the ongoing sell-a-thon at Time Warner, with the company planning to split off its cable services business, and, we speculate, finally putting AOL’s core US access business on the block. Or, there’s eBay entertaining the idea of jettisoning Skype Technologies, after writing down basically half of the $2.6bn purchase price. Or, if current reports are to be believed, Sprint Nextel may unwind the $39bn acquisition that has soured into a money-burning debacle. Although Thompson says Symantec isn’t a seller, this is clearly the climate in which companies are being pushed to reexamine their acquisitions. That could very well mean taking the knife to the purple elephant again.

Reversing deal flow

Company Assets Comment
Symantec NetBackup, Data Center Foundation, according to rumors Symantec says it’s not looking to sell.
Time Warner Cable services business, and (we speculate) AOL’s US access unit AOL has already shed ISP businesses overseas.
eBay Skype Technologies New CEO says next few quarters will determine if company keeps its overpriced acquisition.
Sprint Nextel Nextel WSJ reports this week that Sprint may unwind Nextel deal, and look to sell itself.
VeriSign Numerous units picked up in 20-company shopping spree VeriSign has already divested three businesses this year.

Wounded Bear

Brenon Daly

Given all the hardships (self-inflicted and otherwise) that have hit Bear Stearns over the past two months, we thought we found some good news for the investment bank earlier this week. Leafing through the paperwork around Borland’s sale of its CodeGear division to Embarcadero Technologies on Wednesday, we saw Bear listed as one of the advisers to CodeGear, along with boutique firm GTK Partners. (Embarcadero, owned by the sharp-penciled buyout guys at Thoma Cressey Bravo, didn’t use a banker.)

So does this mean Bear, whose rescue sale to JPMorgan is set to be voted on at the end of this month, stands to get a payday from the CodeGear engagement? Unfortunately not. Like so much happening at the bank these days, they’re in line for scraps. (For the record: Bear Stearns ranked 17th in our league tables last year, advising on nine deals collectively valued at $8bn.)

Bear Stearns had a long connection with Borland, particularly during the days of former CEO Dale Fuller, who was replaced in 2005 by current chief executive Tod Nielsen. (Bear banked Borland’s $185m acquisition of TogetherSoft and its $24m acquisition of Starbase, both in October 2002.) So it was natural for Borland to tap Bear when it decided two years ago to shed its CodeGear division as part of a step out of the developer tools business. To put it charitably, the Bear-led divestiture was fitful. A source familiar with the divestiture says the division was pulled out from under several possible acquirers, leaving the market a bit soured on the asset as the process dragged on for months.

Whatever the case, Borland pulled Bear off the deal last October and engaged boutique bank GTK Partners. (Why GTK? Managing director Ali Tabibian had previously worked with CodeGear CFO Cynthia Mignogna on the 1999 sale of Infoseek to Walt Disney. Mignogna also served as CFO there.) So GTK will be pocketing the majority of the advisory fee, with Bear getting a very small portion of that as part of a ‘tail.’ It’s just another sad event as the swan sings for Bear.

i2: The king watches an auction

Brenon Daly

Nearly three years after getting re-listed on the Nasdaq, i2 Technologies may well find itself taken off the exchange again. While accounting mistakes got the supply chain software vendor bumped the first time, a sale of i2 is likely to end its 12-year run as a public company sometime soon. Having shopped itself for a year now, i2 said last week there are ‘ongoing talks’ with two interested parties.

In our view, a far more important sign that the company is ready to sell is the fact that it knocked founder Sanjiv Sidhu from his spot as chairman of the company. Removing Sidhu is key to getting any deal done, in our view, because few software executives have dominated their companies to the degree that Sidhu has at i2. He had served as the company’s chairman for two decades since cofounding i2 in a Dallas apartment. He only gave up the CEO title three years ago. (Not even an SEC investigation into shady accounting – and a subsequent $10m fine paid by i2 – could dislodge Sidhu from his seat of power earlier this decade.)

Of course, any deal for i2 still has to flow through Sidhu. He owns 5.5 million, or 26%, of the company’s 21.4 million shares outstanding. And while he may be content to let the company’s ‘strategic review’ drag on, other large shareholders may not be as patient. Hedge funds BlackRock and SAC Capital Advisors both own about 1.9 million shares of i2 and are likely to push the company to get a deal done. (JPMorgan is advising i2 in the process.) Despite the tight credit market, we still think i2 will get snapped up by a private equity shop rather than a strategic acquirer.

Taleo shops with Vurv

Brenon Daly

After sitting out an earlier wave of consolidation of on-demand human capital management (HCM) vendors, Taleo will spend roughly $129m in cash and stock for rival Vurv. The deal would double the number of customers at Taleo. The acquisition values Vurv at roughly 2.8 times trailing revenue, a bit lower than other recent HCM transactions. In mid-2006, three comparable deals got done at roughly 3-5 times trailing revenue and Taleo itself trades at about 3.7 times trailing sales. Since the consolidation wave hit the HCM sector two years ago, we have heard that Vurv was being shopped several times.

However, we would note that Taleo and Vurv have a fair amount of overlapping technology, particularly in the offering around employee recruitment. A similar transaction by the one-time HCM market darling, Kenexa, caused a number of integration headaches, which landed it in the penalty box on Wall Street. Kenexa shares currently change hands about 25% lower than they did in October 2006, when it grabbed ahold of BrassRing for $115m.

Significant HCM deals

Announced Acquirer Target Deal value Target TTM sales
May 2008 Taleo Vurv $129m $45m*
Oct. 2006 Kenexa BrassRing $115m $36m*
Aug. 2006 ADP Employease $160m* $30m*
July 2006 Kronos Unicru $150m $40m*

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

Will Yahoo shareholders be Amp’ed?

Brenon Daly

Now that Yahoo has passed on Microsoft’s bid, it’s up to Jerry Yang to show the company’s testy shareholders that soldiering on makes more sense than selling out. That’s going to be a tough job. A handful of shareholders have already sued the Internet company over its decision not to talk with Microsoft, and the disenchantment is likely to spread if the stock returns to the level it was before the unsolicited bid came in. (A quick fact: From the time Yang retook control of Yahoo last June through the day before Microsoft unveiled its bid, Yahoo stock lost nearly one-third of its value on his watch.)

So how is Yahoo going to get its shareholders back above water? One key to the plan is the ‘buy and build’ initiative it has started with AMP. Yahoo’s new online advertising management platform is built on a pair of deals that cost the company nearly $1bn in 2007. A year ago, Yahoo spent $680m to pick up online ad exchange network Right Media Inc, and then followed that up last September with a $300m play for behavior-based marketing vendor BlueLithium.

AMP is slated to come out in the third quarter of this year, although a few publishers are currently test-driving it. The stakes for Yahoo are huge. By its own assessment, the US online ad market will hit $50bn in four years. Securing a chunk of that ad spending will go some distance in silencing shareholder grousing about Yang & Co’s decision to stiff-arm Microsoft. Of course, that’s only if AMP delivers and doesn’t become another Panama-style disappointment at Yahoo. If that turns out to be the case, Yang would be lucky to find a buyer for his company, even at a discount. 

Yahoo’s recent display ad networking deals

Announced Target Deal value
Sept. 4, 2007 BlueLithium $300m
April 30, 2007 Right Media $680m

Source: The 451 M&A KnowledgeBase

Crisis averted

Brenon Daly

After three months of nonsense, Ballmer’s folly is over. Microsoft’s CEO said over the weekend he will not pursue Yahoo, a move that shareholders applauded right from the opening bell on Monday. (Microsoft stock never traded below Friday’s close, while shares of Yahoo, which had been abandoned to trade on the company’s fundamentals, were slashed 15% in early Monday afternoon trading.) In our view, the ‘relief rally’ in Microsoft stock solidifies our view that the company was wrong-headed — both in decision and execution — to go after Yahoo.

We need only look back in Microsoft’s own M&A history to see how unlikely it was to get the kind of returns it was hoping from Yahoo. In early part of this decade, Microsoft inked a pair of deals for business software companies that was supposed to narrow the gap to the long-dominant vendors. In quick order, Microsoft shelled out a combined $2.4bn for Great Plains Software and Navision Software and set about knocking off SAP and Oracle. Executives talked about Microsoft’s division, which sold ERP and CRM software, growing into a $10bn business. That hasn’t happened – not even close. More than a half-decade later, it barely scratches out $1bn in annual sales and increasingly appears technologically and competitively irrelevant. The acquisitions did nothing to make up ground on SAP or Oracle, much less the new breed of rivals including Salesforce.com and SugarCRM. (We recently made the case that Microsoft should divest this unit, called Dynamics.)
Adding Yahoo to Microsoft’s online division would have simply repeated the mistakes of Dynamics. The protracted and messy acquisition of Yahoo would not have gotten Microsoft any closer to knocking off Google from its top spot in online search advertising. To their credit, the folks in Redmond, Wash. saw the past as prelude. And if the cautionary tale served up by Dynamics was a little too close to home, Ballmer could always pick up the phone and call Jerry Levin to ask how Time Warner’s ‘transformative’ $185bn purchase of AOL worked out. Of course, Ballmer tabling the Yahoo bid does leave one question unanswered: Which transaction destroys more shareholder value? Trying to graft a sprawling Internet property onto a media company or trying to graft a sprawling Internet property onto a software company? Even though Ballmer left the door open for a future bid for Yahoo, his shareholders have already indicated they don’t want to pay to find out the answer to that question.    

Short and sour

Date Event Yahoo stock price
Feb. 1, 2008 Microsoft unveils $31 per share unsolicited offer for Yahoo $28.38 (up 48%)
May 5, 2008 Microsoft pulls offer $24.24 in afternoon trading (down 16%)