Category: technology stocks

A PE rebound?

Brenon Daly

Contact: Brenon Daly

After the turmoil in the credit market essentially knocked PE shops out of tech M&A for much of the past two years, we’re hearing various indications that buyouts may be coming back. We recently noted the rumor in the market that in the coming weeks PE firm Francisco Partners will ink in the paperwork for a public offering for one of its portfolio companies, RedPrairie. And bankers indicate financial buyers are once again looking to add to their portfolios, rather than just support their existing investments.

Meanwhile, on the other end of the PE lifecycle, there’s also some bullishness for buyout funds from limited partners, at least according to one source. Marlin Equity Partners is said to have recently raised a $450m third fund – and even had commitments for up to $600m. Los Angeles-based Marlin, which last raised a $300m fund two years ago, didn’t return a call.

Of course, we have to look at any rebound in the overall LBO market in context. Certainly, we have seen some notable purchases this year by Symphony Technology Group, Vista Equity Partners and Thoma Bravo – as well as, of course, the pending carve-out of Skype, which is being led by Silver Lake Partners. But even with all of that, the value of tech LBOs announced so far in 2009 is only $12bn – just half the $23bn announced in the same period last year. And forget about the time when the buyout barons accounted for more that one-quarter of all tech M&A spending; so far this year, the share of PE firms of overall deal flow is just 11%.

Patient Smith Micro is big on M&A

-Contact: Thomas Rasmussen, Chris Hazelton

Up until the credit crisis knocked the economy into a recession, mobile software company Smith Micro Software had been a fairly active acquirer. The Aliso Viejo, California-based firm closed five deals worth $93m in 2007 alone. However, as the economy slid into a tailspin, Smith Micro pretty much stepped out of the market. Last year, it announced only a pair of tuck-in acquisitions, which we estimate cost just $3m total.

We suspect Smith Micro may be looking to return to a quicker M&A pace. Last month, it announced its second-largest deal, picking up Mountain View, California-based Core Mobility for $18.5m. (We understand the two sides discussed a deal back in 2007, but couldn’t get together on price.) Smith Micro will hand over $10m in cash and cover the rest of the Core Mobility purchase in stock, which will hardly limit its ability to do future deals. The debt-free company, with a market cap of $340m, claimed $44m in cash and short-term investments (at least before announcing the Core Mobility purchase). Moreover, it recently filed a shelf offering intended to fatten its treasury toward additional deals. At current prices, the four million-share offering will effectively double Smith Micro’s cash on hand. So where might it be looking to shop?

The Core Mobility acquisition reached into a new market segment. But we believe any significant future deal would see the company aiming to bolster its core mobile enterprise VPN offerings. That is where it shopped before putting the breaks on its M&A program in late 2007, when it picked up PCTEL’s mobility assets and Ecutel Systems. Potential targets include Norwegian Birdstep Technology, Swedish Columbitech, Seattle-based NetMotion Wireless and Canadian vendor ipUnplugged.

Although all four would make excellent tuck-in acquisitions, we view publicly traded Birdstep as a particularly good fit for Smith Micro. The Norwegian company has trailing revenue of about $18m, which would be a not-insignificant boost to Smith Micro’s revenue. But more importantly, acquiring cash-burning Birdstep would provide a much-needed foot in the door to the Nordic/European markets to help Smith Micro expand beyond the Americas, which currently accounts for more than 90% of revenue. Birdstep can likely be had at a discount too, as the company currently sports a market cap of about $30m, a mere one-fifth of its 2007 levels. Patience might be the operative word for Smith Micro’s M&A strategy, and it looks like it’s paying off.

Smith Micro’s historical M&A

Period Number of acquisitions Total deal value
2009 YTD 1 $18.5m
2008 2 $2-3m*
2007 5 $93m

Source: The 451 M&A KnowledgeBase * official 451 Group estimate

Does Wall Street run through the RedPrairie?

Brenon Daly

Contact: Brenon Daly

Along with the rising equity markets, there’s a new flow of companies that are planning to file their IPO paperwork in the next few weeks. For instance, we know of two venture-backed mobile vendors that have picked underwriters and plan to put in their prospectuses shortly. And we’re willing to bet that the expected strong offering from Fortinet, which initially filed in early August and is likely to debut before Thanksgiving, will catch the eye of quite a few VCs who have sizeable security providers in their portfolios.

Altogether, it looks like a decent IPO pipeline for VCs, as long as the equity markets hold. But what about their brethren at PE firms? We’ve seen the buyout barons file to flip a few non-tech holdings back onto the market, and the big offering from Avago Technologies (the carve-out of Hewlett-Packard’s semiconductor business by Kohlberg Kravis Roberts and Silver Lake Partners) has been above water since it hit the Nasdaq in early August. But there are still a lot of PE firms with pretty full portfolios that would like to post a realized gain – as opposed to ‘paper gains’ – before going out and raising a new fund.

So which PE-backed company is likely to hit the public market? Several sources have indicated that RedPrairie, an inventory management software vendor owned by Francisco Partners, has selected bankers and plans to ink an S-1 in the coming weeks. Francisco acquired RedPrairie in mid-2005, 30 years after the company was founded. Since the buyout, RedPrairie has rolled up six other companies. In 2008, the firm generated almost $300m in revenue. That puts RedPrairie’s revenue in the same neighborhood as rivals i2 and Manhattan Associates, but below the sales of JDA Software and Epicor Software.

Is Riverbed floating toward a deal?

Brenon Daly

Contact: Brenon Daly

Riverbed Technology is one of those companies that has seemingly been in play for as long as it’s been around. And that’s understandable enough, given that the company has an attractive profile as the fast-growing leader in a market that’s taking off. Add to that the fact that Riverbed plays in the networking space, which is dominated by deep-pocketed giants hungry for growth, and acquisition rumors are inevitable. The most-recent would-be buyer for Riverbed? Juniper Networks.

Of course, Juniper is just the latest in a long list of rumored suitors. Cisco Systems is said to have made at least two runs at Riverbed before the company went public in September 2006. More recently, we heard that EMC also looked very closely at Riverbed before its IPO. (We understand that while EMC was seriously interested in Riverbed, Cisco effectively killed the deal by telling its partner EMC that it wouldn’t look kindly on the information management giant stepping into the WAN traffic optimization (WTO) market.)

And last summer, we noted that Hewlett-Packard would make a logical buyer for Riverbed. The two companies have had a long relationship with HP reselling Riverbed boxes and integrating the Riverbed Optimization System into its ProCurve infrastructure. (Not to mention that HP could stick it to its new rival Cisco by picking up Riverbed.) And several sources have pointed to talks in the past between F5 and Riverbed. We suspect that would be a tricky combination because Riverbed’s current market capitalization ($1.7bn) is half that of F5’s market value ($3.5bn).

All of that leaves us with Juniper. However, we don’t think a deal between the two is likely. For starters, Juniper has already gone shopping once in the WTO market. It shelled out a princely $337m (most of it in stock) for Peribit Networks in April 2005. From Juniper’s perspective, the Peribit purchase gave the networking vendor a hot product to sell to its enterprise customers, many of which came via Juniper’s $4bn acquisition of NetScreen Technologies a year earlier. However, we wouldn’t hold out Peribit as a particularly successful transaction for Juniper. Certainly, it hasn’t generated the type of returns for Juniper that would make the company want to double down with a multibillion-dollar bid for Riverbed, we would think.

Out with the old and in with the new at Compuware

Brenon Daly

Contact: Brenon Daly

Deal flow at Compuware so far this year has been out with the old and in with the new. The 36-year-old company sold off its testing automation and software quality business to MicroFocus for $80m earlier this year, and then last week, it put some of those proceeds toward covering its $295m purchase of Gomez. (Interestingly, Updata Advisors worked both the divestiture and acquisition for Compuware.)

The purchase of Gomez significantly bolsters Compuware’s application performance management (APM) business. It also dramatically changes the face that Compuware shows to Wall Street. Most investors know Compuware – if they know it at all – as ‘a mainframe company.’ (Indeed, roughly two-thirds of the firm’s product revenue comes from its mainframe business.) Even in a robust IT spending environment, the mainframe business is a slow-growing one.

While only a small slice of overall revenue, Gomez brings a predictable base of subscription revenue that’s been growing at a pretty good clip recently. In the first two quarters of 2009, Gomez increased revenue 25%. Granted, Compuware paid for that growth, valuing Gomez roughly four times as richly as Wall Street currently values Compuware itself. But the fact that Compuware shares actually ticked higher when the vendor announced the acquisition indicates that the deal has some support. (In contrast to, say, Wall Street’s punishment of Xerox shares on that company’s plan to pick up ACS.)

And Compuware is essentially paying the prevailing market valuation (5.5x trailing sales) for an on-demand company in its reach for Gomez. Undeniably, the firm could have found any number of targets available at a sharp discount if it wanted to consolidate a bunch of mainframe software providers. After all, Compuware has some experience with M&A, having inked nearly 40 deals since it went public in 1992. However, we would argue that few of those transactions have been as forward-looking as the addition of Gomez.

Starent gets a bit more pop than most Cisco buys

Brenon Daly

Contact: Brenon Daly

Announcing its second multibillion-dollar acquisition in as many weeks, Cisco Systems said Tuesday that it will hand over $2.9bn in cash for Starent Networks. The pickup comes just after the networking giant’s reach across the Atlantic for Norwegian videoconferencing vendor Tandberg. Cisco is paying $3bn in cash for Tandberg. Both of the October purchases are expected to close in the first half of 2010.

As many echoes as there are between this pair of recent deals, there’s one significant difference: Cisco is paying a premium on Starent’s stock price that’s substantially higher than what it paid for Tandberg. In fact, Cisco is paying nearly twice the premium for Starent than it has paid in its other recent purchases of public companies. The bid of $35 for each Starent share represents a 42% premium over the closing price 30 days ago for shares of the wireless infrastructure provider. That compares to a 27% premium for Tandberg, a 21% premium for WebEx Communications and a 23% premium for Scientific-Atlanta. (All of those calculations are based on the closing prices of the shares of the target 30 days prior to the acquisition, which we feel is a more accurate snapshot of the company than the previous day’s closing price.)

And a final echo in today’s acquisition of previous Cisco deals: the advisers. Barclays Capital worked for Cisco, while Goldman Sachs Group banked Starent. That’s the same banks on the same sides as Cisco’s pickup of WebEx two-and-a-half years ago. Of course, that was before Barclays acquired Lehman Brothers, which actually got the print.

What’s next for billionaire Twitter?

-Contact Thomas Rasmussen

At a time when the social networking bubble is quickly deflating, micro-blogging startup Twitter seems to be living in an alternative universe. We are, of course, referring to the much-publicized $1bn valuation the San Francisco-based company received in a recent round of funding. The rich funding dwarfs even the kinds of valuations we saw during the height of the short-lived social networking bubble last year. And it’s pretty difficult to justify Twitter’s valuation based on its financial performance, since the money-burning startup has absolutely no revenue to speak of, nor a clear plan of how to change that. It seems the entire valuation is predicated on the impressive user growth it has experienced over the past year, as well as the charismatic founders’ wild dreams of ‘changing the way the world communicates.’ That’s pretty thin, particularly when compared to LinkedIn’s funding last year at a similar valuation. That round, which was done at a time when the social networking fad was near its peak, nonetheless had some financial results to support it. Reid Hoffman’s startup was profitable on what we understand was about $100m in revenue and a proven and lucrative business model.

The interesting development from this latest funding is that it makes a sale of Twitter less likely, we would argue. This may be fine with the founders, who have drawn in some $150m for the company and will (presumably) look to the public market to repay those investments at some point in the future. But without any revenue to speak of at this point, any offering from Twitter is a long way off. Also, an IPO by Twitter in the future hangs on successful offerings from Facebook and LinkedIn, which are far more likely to go public before Twitter. If both of those social media bellwethers enjoy strong offerings, and Twitter actually starts to make money off its fast-growing base of users, then a multibillion-dollar exit – in the form of an IPO – might not be farfetched. But we should add that there are a lot of ‘ifs’ included in that scenario.

An offering looks all the more likely for Twitter because the field of potential acquirers has gotten significantly slimmer, since not many would-be acquirers have deep-enough pockets to pay for a premium on the startups’ already premium valuation. As we know from Twitter’s own embarrassing leak of some internal documents, Microsoft, Yahoo, Google and Facebook have all shown an interest in the startup at one point or another. But we’re not sure any of those companies would really be ready to do a 10-digit deal for a firm that’s still promising – rather than posting – financial results. Moreover, we wonder if any of the four would-be buyers even need Twitter. Yahoo and Microsoft seem focused on other parts of their business. Meanwhile, Google is hard at work on Google Wave, and Facebook appears to have moved on already with its much-cheaper acquisition of Twitter competitor FriendFeed in August.

Recent high-profile social networking valuations (based on last known valuation event)

Date Company Valuation/exit value Revenue Revenue to value multiple
September 2009 Twitter $1bn $0* N/A
Summer 2009 Facebook $8bn $500m* 16x*
June 2008 LinkedIn $1bn $100m* 10x*
May 2008 Plaxo $150m* (acquisition by Comcast) $10m* 15x*
March 2008 Bebo $850m (acquisition by AOL) $20m* 42.5x*
July 2005 MySpace/Intermix $580m (acquisition by NewsCorp) $90m 6.5x
December 2005 FriendsReunited $208m (acquisition by ITV; divested to Brightsolid in $42m fire sale in August 2009) $20* 10x*

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

The dual-track is back

Brenon Daly

Contact: Brenon Daly

Derailed by the bear market for much of the past two years, the ‘dual-track’ is back. Witness Wednesday’s purchase of Gomez by Compuware. The application performance management vendor got snapped up for $295m after being on file to go public for some 17 months. But as this trade sale indicates, the dual-track is no longer necessarily a path to riches. In fact, Gomez sold for about half the multiple that other dual-track companies garnered in recent deals.

That’s by no means a knock on Gomez, which got a relatively handsome valuation of 5.5 times trailing revenue in its sale to Compuware. Instead, it’s simply a reflection of how much the equity markets have come down. Keep in mind that a buyer looking to take out a company that’s already filed for an IPO effectively has to outbid the public market. Obviously, the lower the indexes, the less an acquirer has to bid; the opposite is also true.

Back when the markets were buoyant, dual-tracking companies could pull off a double-digit multiple if they opted to sell. For instance, EqualLogic sold to Dell in November 2007 for 12x trailing sales, just three months after filing its IPO paperwork. (We would note that the timing of EqualLogic’s sale for $1.4bn in cash was impeccable. The Nasdaq promptly went on a nearly uninterrupted slide for the next 18 months that cut the index in half.) And even when the market was dropping, mobile software provider Danger Inc still got picked up by Microsoft for nearly 9x trailing sales. Danger filed its prospectus in mid-December 2007, just two months before Microsoft snagged the company.

Of course, both of those previous dual-track deals were inked when the Nasdaq was higher than it currently is. And if we compare the valuation that Gomez got with other publicly traded SaaS companies, 5.5x trailing sales for an unprofitable, relatively small on-demand company starts to look pretty enticing. Add to that instant liquidity in the form of cash, rather than locked-up shares, and that’s a bid that most backers would hit every time.

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.

Nuance adds to a shrinking business

Brenon Daly

Contact: Brenon Daly

The latest acquisition by serial shopper Nuance Communications is a bit of a blast from the past. On Monday, Nuance said it will hand over $54m in equity for eCopy in a move that bolsters its imaging business unit. (Revolution Partners banked eCopy while Needham & Co advised Nuance, as it did in the company’s purchase of SNAPin Software a year ago.) The pickup of eCopy, however, snaps a string of deals that Nuance has used to build out its mobile and healthcare business lines.

If you didn’t realize that Nuance had an imagining unit, you could be forgiven. Although the company has its roots in that technology, it has largely left that market behind. (The current Nuance is actually the product of a mid-2005 marriage of Nuance Communications and ScanSoft, the name of which should give you some idea of its business.) In fact, through the first three quarters of the current fiscal year, the imaging unit represents just 7% of Nuance’s total revenue.

And that slice is only getting smaller. So far this fiscal year, sales in the imaging unit shrank a staggering 20%, while the vendor’s other two divisions (mobile and healthcare) both grew and overall revenue rose 12%. Since the imaging business appears to be little more than an afterthought inside Nuance, we’re surprised to see the company double down on the unit with the eCopy acquisition. That’s actually a reversal of the direction of deal flow at the division that we would have suspected. We could certainly see a situation where Nuance divests its imaging business, ditching its past and focusing on mobile and healthcare for future growth.