Category: investment banking

Oracle steps back into M&A market

Brenon Daly

Contact: Brenon Daly

After taking the summer off from M&A, Oracle on Monday announced the acquisition of authentication management startup Passlogix. The purchase is the first one by the normally acquisitive Oracle since it announced a pair of asset pickups in late May. Sitting out the summer slowed Oracle’s pace from steady deal flow earlier this year as well as other years. The Passlogix buy is Oracle’s eighth deal in 2010.

The first seven purchases, however, came in the first five months of 2010. That was ahead of the M&A pace Oracle held from 2005-2008, when it inked an average of a deal a month in each of the years. Oracle announced just eight acquisitions in recession-wracked 2009, when overall M&A activity was muted.

As we noted in our report on Q3 M&A, Oracle was one of the highly visible companies that didn’t announce a single transaction in the July-September period. Similarly, both Microsoft and Symantec sat out the quarter, too. But their inactivity was more than made up for by fellow tech giants Hewlett-Packard and IBM. That duo went on an M&A safari in the third quarter, with an eye toward bagging big game. In the just-completed July-September period, IBM and HP combined to announce 11 deals with a total bill of more than $7.3bn.

Third-quarter M&A: Forget the headlines

Brenon Daly

Contact: Brenon Daly

To get an accurate read on M&A this summer, you have to look past the headlines. Undeniably, there were a few high-profile deals, including the sale of McAfee in the largest deal ever in the security industry, as well as a high-profile bidding war that pushed 3PAR’s valuation into the double digits. Beyond those transactions, however, deal flow in the third quarter, which wraps today, has been distinctly average. Spending is coming in at $46bn, only slightly above the average spending of $40bn in the eight quarters since the Credit Crisis erupted.

The $46bn also sits at the midway point of spending in the first two quarters of the year ($30bn in Q1 2010 and $62bn in Q2 2010). It also nearly splits the difference between the previous year’s quarter ($38bn in spending in Q3 2009) and the previous quarter this year ($62bn in spending in Q2 2010). We’ll look at why the value of deals announced in late summer dropped one-quarter from the record level in early summer in a special report tonight, but for now consider this: Of the five largest transactions so far in 2010, just one was announced in the third quarter. Again, we’ll have a full report on Q3 M&A in tonight’s Daily 451 and 451 TechDealmaker sendouts.

HCM deal flow nears high-water mark

Brenon Daly

Contact: Brenon Daly

Dealmaking in the human capital management (HCM) market has surged in recent months, pushing spending to near-record levels. So far this year, we’ve tallied 36 HCM transactions, with an aggregate value of $1.9bn. That basically matches the high-water mark of $2.1bn in the sector set during the first three quarters of 2007. (However, we should note that nearly all of the HCM spending three years ago came from the $1.8bn take-private of Kronos by Hellman & Friedman in March 2007.)

The number of HCM transactions so far this year (36) matches exactly the number during the same period in 2007. Another similarity between the two years is that strategic and financial buyers have both been active in the sector. Consider this: In the four deals announced so far this month, buyout shops have been behind two while corporate buyers have inked the other two. Valuations for this month’s transactions – and most other recent HCM deals, for that matter – have ranged from just below 2 times trailing sales to around 4x trailing sales.

However, in the sector’s latest acquisition, the valuation came in well north of that range. On Monday, private equity firm Madison Dearborn Partners (MDP) took a majority stake of Fieldglass in a transaction that valued the HCM vendor at more than $220m. (ArchPoint Partners advised Fieldglass in the deal between the two Chicago-based firms.) Fieldglass focuses on the so-called contingent market, which covers project-based contractors, offshore workers and so on. According to our understanding, Fieldglass generated nearly $30m in revenue and $5m in EBITDA in 2009 and was tracking to nearly $40m in sales and $10m in EBITDA for this year. That means MDP’s stake valued the company overall at about 6x trailing sales, according to our calculations.

PAETEC’s risky business

Ben Kolada

Contact: Ben Kolada

As the communications industry continues to consolidate and the pool of desirable targets dries up, the remaining buyers appear to be stretching a bit in their M&A moves. But even within that, PAETEC’s recent pickup of Cavalier Telephone looks to us like the riskiest telecom acquisition we’ve seen in the past year. The reason? Roughly three-quarters of Cavalier’s business is outside PAETEC’s focus.

To be fair, other telcos have also made challenging moves. Windstream Communications took big bites in the past 12 months, acquiring four companies that set the telecom provider back $2.7bn. (That figure includes the debt at the acquired companies that Windstream will be taking on.) The vendor’s spree boosts its top line by about 50%, a substantial increase that brings a not-insignificant amount of risk. Even Cablevision Systems, which is typically a stay-at-home company, inked a deal, reaching across the country to pick up Bresnan Communications for about $1.4bn.

However, the deals by Windstream and Cablevision made sense, if just because they expanded on each company’s existing strategy. Not so with PAETEC’s purchase of Cavalier. When we look at the transaction, we suspect that PAETEC was really only interested in Cavalier’s fiber assets. Understandably, the Richmond, Virginia-based competitive local exchange carrier wouldn’t have considered selling its fastest-growing division. Since it was unable to just get the part of Cavalier’s business that it probably wanted, PAETEC was forced to shell out $460m (including assumption of debt) for the whole company.

Cavalier had $390m in sales in the year leading up to the acquisition. However, the company’s fiber division itself generated only about $98m, or 25%, of total revenue. That means that a vast majority (75%) of Cavalier’s business appears to us to be an ungainly match to the business its buyer is in. PAETEC serves enterprises, which generate an average of $2,300 in monthly revenue. On the other hand, the majority of Cavalier’s revenue comes from consumer accounts and small businesses with monthly recurring revenue of only about $500.

Rather than spend to get this odd pairing, we think PAETEC would have been better off buying one of the number of fiber operators looking for a sale. A juicy target would have been Zayo Group. The company is on a $240m run rate for 2010. Based on recent valuations for Zayo’s competitors, we believe it could be had for roughly $500m – only slightly higher than Cavalier’s price tag, but without the unwanted baggage.

Valuations separated by more than the Atlantic

Brenon Daly

Contact: Brenon Daly

Comparing the valuations of US tech companies with their European counterparts, we can’t help but notice the fact that the recovery hasn’t been enjoyed equally on both sides of the Atlantic. We noted a few months ago that the strong US dollar had opened the way for some opportunistic shopping on the continent. Although most European currencies have inched back up since then, there are still discounts available because the valuations of the companies are still lagging their US peers and rivals.

Earlier this summer, we pointed out that discrepancy in Deltek Systems’ purchase of Maconomy, which valued the Danish ERP vendor at twice the level it started the year – but still below Deltek’s current valuation on the Nasdaq. Similarly, Adobe acquired Day Software at a price that was four times higher than the Swiss company’s own valuation last summer. However, Adobe’s own valuation is higher than the take-out valuation for Day, which included a 60% premium. (Adobe is still valued higher, even though it lost 20% of its value Wednesday after forecasting weaker-than-expected results.)

But those deals pale in comparison to the arbitrage that OpenTable did in its reach across the Atlantic for toptable.com. OpenTable values the British restaurant reservation service at basically 6 times trailing sales, while the San Francisco-based company trades at 19x trailing sales. (For those of you who haven’t looked lately, OpenTable trades in the mid-$60 range, commanding a market cap of some $1.5bn. Incidentally, various measures of OpenTable’s valuation – specifically, both trailing and forward price to earnings ratio – line up almost exactly with those of salesforce.com.)

OpenTable booking seats at negotiating table in Europe

Brenon Daly

Contact: Brenon Daly

Often when a company takes its business to a foreign country, something gets lost in translation. EBay found that as it looked to expand its online auctions internationally, and on a smaller scale, OpenTable ran into some of that as well. Roughly two years ago, the San Francisco-based online restaurant reservation service pulled out of both Spain and France. Even now, OpenTable’s international operation contributes only about 6% of total revenue as it burns money.

So, perhaps the thinking in its recent transatlantic move is: If you can’t beat them, buy them. In its first acquisition for geographic expansion, OpenTable said last week that it will pay $55m in cash for toptable.com, a UK reservation site. (Frankly, we have been expecting a move across the ocean by OpenTable since its IPO.) OpenTable has had its offering in the UK since 2004, but the company has acknowledged that the UK is its most competitive market.

While the acquisition should help bolster its presence there, we should note that OpenTable operates in a very different way than toptable.com. OpenTable looks to replace a restaurant’s existing reservation book, which is typically a pen and some paper, with the company’s proprietary electronic reservation book. On top of that one-time installation fee, OpenTable then charges a monthly subscription fee as well as making money each time a diner sits down at a restaurant table that was booked through the service. In contrast, toptable.com – along with other services that use the ‘allocation’ model – simply moves some of the available reservations online, with reservations there then recorded in whatever system the restaurant is currently using.

One advantage that toptable.com has, according to OpenTable, is that its approach is ‘lighter’ in that it doesn’t require an upfront hardware purchase. OpenTable is considering taking toptable.com and its allocation approach back into continental Europe, where toptable.com had started to move. If that organic expansion from its inorganic acquisition doesn’t take off, look for OpenTable to buy again. Germany, where OpenTable has had operations since 2007, looks like another market where OpenTable might want to reserve a few seats at the negotiating table.

IBM and HP bag big game on M&A safari

Brenon Daly

Contact: Brenon Daly

With the news today that Hewlett-Packard is closing its recent pickup of Fortify Software, we wanted to take the opportunity to point out that the deal almost belongs in the minority of M&A moves HP has made so far this year. What are we talking about? Basically, that the tech giant has been doing giant deals. Of the seven acquisitions HP has announced so far in 2010, fully three of them have been valued at more than $1bn.

We noted in mid-April, which is before it inked any of its three 10-digit acquisitions, that HP had telegraphed to the market that it was going to do fewer transactions, but they were going to be bigger deals. (And we should add that its purchase of application security vendor Fortify wasn’t just a pocket-change deal. We understand that it paid $275m or so for the company.)

What’s interesting to note is that in the five months since we indicated that HP would be big-game hunting, one other company has joined it on safari: IBM. Big Blue has inked a pair of deals valued at more than $1bn since April – the pickup of AT&T’s Sterling Commerce business as well as Monday’s purchase of Netezza. Along the way, it has also done a steady flow of transactions valued at $150m-500.

Altogether, we calculate the tab for Big Blue’s five-month shopping spree at roughly $4.8bn for its nine acquisitions. (Incidentally, the amount of cash it spent is basically the same amount its business generated over that same period.) Meanwhile, HP spent about $1bn more ($5.8bn in disclosed or estimated deal values) on its seven purchases since mid-April. Taken together, these two companies have averaged about $2bn of M&A spending in each of the past five months. And they were sniping at each other about ‘buying’ R&D? Really?

M&A activity since mid-April 2010

Company Number of acquisitions Total M&A spending
HP 7 $5.8bn*
IBM 9 $4.8bn*

Source: The 451 M&A KnowledgeBase *Includes disclosed and estimated deal values

A bit of Big Blue inconsistency

Brenon Daly

Contact: Brenon Daly

Perhaps Mark Hurd feels vindicated. No, we’re not referring to the former Hewlett-Packard chief executive settling a lawsuit with his old shop. Instead, we’re talking about IBM’s stunning flip-flop with regard to high-profile M&A by itself and rival HP. At the least, Big Blue’s recent comments now appear inconsistent; at the worst, they smack of hypocrisy.

The specifics: A week ago, Big Blue’s CEO was blasting HP for ‘overpaying’ for deals, and for relying on M&A rather than R&D. Ironically, Sam Palmisano made these comments just as his own company was putting the final touches on its acquisition of Netezza, a deal that values the data-warehousing vendor at nearly 7 times this year’s forecasted sales for the current fiscal year. That’s more than twice the median software valuation, and basically matches the valuation that HP is handing over for ArcSight.

Incidentally, both transactions valued the targets, which had only come public within the past three years, at their highest-ever valuations. But if we look at how the shares of ArcSight and Netezza have performed so far this year, it becomes very clear that IBM was the much more aggressive suitor. Excluding the pop ArcSight shares got when word of a deal leaked in late August, the security vendor’s stock had only ticked up about 10%. In contrast, Netezza stock had run 150% from January to the day before Big Blue announced its purchase.

A Big Blue move into the data warehousing market

Brenon Daly

Contact: Brenon Daly

A little more than three years after Netezza debuted on the NYSE, the data-warehousing vendor is being erased from the Big Board at basically twice its valuation at the time of its IPO. Under terms, IBM is handing over $27 in cash for each share of Netezza, which went public at $12 in July 2007. However, after the strong debut, which valued the company at around $1bn, gravity set in on Netezza shares. They spent most of 2008 and all of 2009 under the $12 offer price.

Earlier this summer, however, Netezza shares started running. The run was fueled by strong second-quarter results that saw total revenue surge 45%, as well as lingering M&A rumors. (We noted in early July that we had heard EMC was interested in Netezza before it opted for rival data-warehousing vendor Greenplum. IBM’s bid values Netezza at twice the level it was trading at the time.)

As Netezza shares continued climbing to new highs on the market, the move whittled away the premium Big Blue is offering. Compared to the previous day’s close, IBM is paying just a 10% premium for Netezza. But judged against where Netezza was trading a month ago, the premium is 80%. We would add that Netezza shares have traded above the $27 bid since the open Monday morning. UBS advised IBM, while Qatalyst Partners advised Netezza.

Based on the enterprise value of $1.7bn given by IBM, the offer values Netezza at 8.9 times sales in its fiscal year that ended in January. (As a trading comparison, Teradata currently garners a valuation that’s about one-third that level.) At the end of its second quarter, Netezza guided Wall Street to expect about $250m in sales for the current fiscal year, meaning IBM is paying 6.8x projected sales. While that is a relatively rich valuation, it’s much lower than rival EMC paid in its big data-warehousing purchase. We understand that it handed over $400m for Greenplum, which was running at about $30m in sales.

Any deals to be done in open source content management market?

Brenon Daly

Contact: Brenon Daly, Kathleen Reidy

Following a massive wave of consolidation that swept through the enterprise content management (ECM) market, the list of significant vendors has basically narrowed to a handful of tech giants. Essentially, it’s just one stand-alone ECM provider with other software companies offering ECM as part of their broader portfolio. All of them have done deals to expand their ECM business, with the collective bill for acquisitions across the sector topping more than $12bn since 2002.

However, all of that activity has been done by – and for – proprietary software firms. In a recent report, my colleague Kathleen Reidy analyzes how M&A might play out for open source content management startups. Granted, the market is still young, with many of the startups still bootstrapped. (Reidy looks at a dozen potential open source content management targets, including their funding and their focus.)

So which startup might be the first to go? We speculate that Alfresco Software could eventually find itself inside a larger company. However, it probably won’t be the company we initially thought it would be. Adobe and Alfresco have a tight relationship, with Adobe embedding an Alfresco repository in its LiveCycle for content services like workflow, indexing and version control. But with Adobe reaching across the Atlantic for Day Software, it probably has all the Web content management technology it needs.