Sizing up Secure Computing

In many ways, Secure Computing’s divestiture of its authentication business to Aladdin Knowledge Systems raises more questions than it answers. Secure’s rationale for the sale is pretty simple: pay down some debt and get out of a sideline business that’s dominated by RSA and has a solid number two in Vasco Data Security. (For the record, Vasco is about four times the size of Secure’s SafeWord business and runs at a highly respected 25% operating margin.)

So it’s pretty clear why Secure was a willing seller (in fact, we hear that Secure had been a willing seller of the business for more than a year). Less clear is why Aladdin was a willing buyer of the property – at a relatively rich price of 2x sales, no less. Aladdin investors chose not to stick around for the company’s explanation of why it was willing to shell out two-thirds of its cash holdings for a product line in a cutthroat market. They fled the stock, trimming 14% off the price and sending Vasco to its lowest level since January 2004.

Of course, Secure has had an even rougher run of it on the market recently, as the company has come up short of Wall Street estimates for the past two quarters. Shares of Secure currently change hands lower than they have at any point during the past half-decade. Since the beginning of the year, the stock has shed 60%, a decline that recently cost longtime CEO James McNulty his job.

The long, uninterrupted slide in Secure’s valuation raises an even larger question about the divestiture: Was the sale of SafeWord just a prelude to an outright sale of the company itself? The numbers certainly don’t work against a deal. In fact, Secure is currently valued at basically 1x sales – just half the level it got for the divested property. (Usually, it’s the reverse, with corporate cast-offs getting sold at less than half the overall company’s valuation.)

Any planned acquisition, however, would probably have to go through Warburg Pincus, which holds the equivalent of about 7% of Secure’s common stock, going back to a financing deal it struck to help Secure buy CipherTrust in July 2006 for $264m. Warburg invested $70m at a time when Secure stock was trading at about 3x higher than it is now. With Warburg that far underwater on its holding, we can only imagine the pointed questions the private equity firm will ask Secure.

Will Earthlink acquire AOL’s ISP business?

In April we speculated that AOL (TWC) might be close to shedding its legacy ISP access business. We pegged the most likely acquirer as Earthlink (ELNK). In an earnings conference call this week, Earthlink CEO Rolla Huff echoed that sentiment, stating that he was bullish about combining its business with the AOL division.

Of course, interest from one party does not a deal make. But, given AOL’s burning desire to shed this dinosaur and completely rid itself of its ancient and tumultuous past, it is safe to assume that if the two parties can agree on terms, a deal might just materialize. The real question is how struggling Earthlink can come up with the estimated $1.5bn-$2.5bn it would take to acquire the AOL unit and its roughly nine million subscribers. Since Earthlink is one of few companies able and willing to make that acquisition, AOL does not exactly hold a lot of bargaining power. We think Earthlink might just get this at a bargain basement valuation closer to $1.5bn, just two times AOL’s cash flow from its ISP division.

‘Cuil-ing’ off Google

In the lucrative world of search, not much has changed in recent years. Google is still running away with market share, handling an estimated two-thirds of all queries, followed – at a distance – by Yahoo and Microsoft. However, some changes may be coming, with a host of new search startups coming out of beta. The latest: Cuil. The highly touted and heavily funded startup created by some high-ranking former Google search employees hopes to dethrone Google. Do we believe it can accomplish that? Of course not; in fact, due to a less-than-stellar launch, it may have already lost.

Still, there is a small opening for Cuil and the other startups. Google has been mired in controversy for the past year over privacy concerns and regulatory hurdles, not to mention its ambitions to become a software application vendor. Those distractions at Google have encouraged venture capitalists, particular the more adventurous angels, to once again put money into search. Cuil has collected about $30m, while Blekko has received $6m. (The funding at Blekko comes despite the fact that the company, as it stands now, is nothing more than a promising idea from industry veterans and an empty webpage.)

Of course, the reason this new generation of search companies is getting VC attention is that there are natural acquirers for this technology. One example: Microsoft’s purchase of Powerset earlier this month for an estimated $100m. While that valuation may seem a bit low for Powerset, which was once as hotly hyped as Cuil, keep in mind that the price was essentially twice its post-money valuation in its latest round. Not great, but not bad in this market.

We suspect other search startups will ultimately sell for much the same reason that Powerset sold: scaling up these startups to deal with millions of users, and competing with multimillion-dollar R&D budgets of the ‘Big Search’ companies is not an easy or cheap task. With a proven willingness and desire of Yahoo, Microsoft and Google to make defensive or technology acquisitions in search, we believe the end game for Cuil, Mahalo, Blekko and the like will all be the same: acquisition. The bigger picture in the Cuil saga is that there is a batch of ex-Googlers up for grabs – Googlers who helped define the core technology of early Google search technology. Though Google is rumored to already be in engaged in talks with the company, how could Microsoft and Yahoo possibly resist swooping in for the coup?

Startup search engines

Company Year founded Funding
Cuil 2007 $30m
Mahalo 2007 $20m
Blekko 2006 $6m
ChaCha 2006 $16m
Hakia 2004 $21m

Source: Company reports

Netezza’s bogeyman

When Microsoft gets into a new market, the impact on the existing vendors tends to be in line with the software giant’s gargantuan size. After all, fears among startups over getting ‘Netscape-d’ have often been realized. That’s particularly true in the days before the convicted monopolist started putting on a softer face on its business. Gone are the days when Microsoft would threaten ‘to cut off the air supply’ of other companies, as it famously did to the Internet browser pioneer. Maybe it’s middle-aged softness at the 33-year-old company, but Microsoft’s bite often seems a little toothless these days. (Does anyone really think Microsoft – with or without spending $45bn on Yahoo – will be able to narrow the gap to Google in search advertising?)

Still, there was a moment last week when it appeared the Redmond, Wash.-based behemoth once again looked like it had the power to scare the bejesus out of a company (and its investors) by buying its way into a market. Last Thursday, as it was holding its annual meeting with Wall Street, Microsoft said it was purchasing Datallegro, a data-warehousing startup that we estimate was running at about $35m in sales. A market source indicated that rumors of the deal started percolating late Wednesday, a day before official word of the acquisition. Almost immediately, shares of data-warehousing vendor Netezza came under pressure. After hitting an intra-day high of $13.36 on Wednesday, Netezza stock slumped as much as 8% and closed basically at the low of the day. It opened even lower Thursday and sunk the entire day, finishing the session at $11.48. From its peak to its trough in those two sessions, Netezza lost 14%, with trading on Thursday about 50% busier than average.

However, as easy as it may be to point to Microsoft’s competitive move as the reason for Netezza’s decline, the two events are linked only by coincidence rather than causality. According to two market sources, Netezza actually distributed shares back to its VCs, meaning the stock’s slump can be attributed to the supply side, rather than demand side. (There have been no SEC filings about the move, and calls to the company to verify the information weren’t immediately returned.) Maybe Microsoft isn’t the big, bad company we all thought it was?

Sophos bags an elephant

In a twist on a private-public transaction, Sophos laid out on Monday a bold $340m plan to pick up Utimaco, an encryption vendor that trades on the Frankfurt Stock Exchange. Rather than rolling into the public company, Sophos plans to take Utimaco off the market. It plans to fund the acquisition by drawing on three sources. (My colleague, Nick Selby, has the details on the financing as well as the strategy.)

The financing is crucial because this deal is a whopper. If it goes through, it’ll be the largest IT security deal in seven months. More significantly, however, Sophos’ planned acquisition of Utimaco stands as the biggest purchase by a privately held security company. In fact, it’s nearly twice the size as the number two deal, Barracuda’s unsolicited run at Sourcefire. (And it’s not certain that deal will close at all. Sourcefire, which is slated to report second-quarter earnings on Thursday, has shot down the deal so far.)

Although Utimaco will be erased from the market, we view the disappearance as temporary. Once the two companies get through the integration, we expect Sophos to try to go public once again. (Recall that last fall, it announced plans to list on the London Stock Exchange but shelved them as the markets deteriorated.) Among the underwriters for the planned IPO was Deutsche Bank, which advised Sophos on the purchase of Utimaco. Indeed, it was the same DB banker on this deal that also co-advised on a very similar transaction last fall, McAfee’s $350m purchase of Dutch encryption vendor SafeBoot. (DB and UBS Investment Bank advised SafeBoot, while Morgan Stanley advised McAfee.)

A scratch-and-dent sale for Vignette?

With its shares currently bumping their lowest level in three years, Vignette has done little to help itself. In its second-quarter report Thursday, the dismaying decline in sales of its software continued. In the first half of 2008, Vignette has recorded just $20m in license sales, down from $30m in the first half of 2007. By way of understatement, CEO Mike Aviles acknowledged that Vignette’s software sales ‘are not where we want them’ but added additional marketing spending and recent changes in the company’s sales executives should help.

We’re not so sure those moves will help the struggling company. Vignette already spends one-third of its revenue on sales and marketing, and indicated that it may bump up that level for the rest of the year. (Not that the company has much insight into how business will run in the coming months. Consider its laughably broad guidance to Wall Street on its loss of the current quarter: It said it’ll lose something between 7 and 21 cents per share in the third quarter, representing a net loss in the period of $1.7-5m.)

One of the main reasons Vignette continues to struggle is that it’s going against some tough competition, including Oracle and IBM, as well as stand-alone content management players. For that reason, we could certainly see Vignette benefiting from being part of a larger company. And indeed, we’ve heard from two sources that the ongoing auction for Vignette has narrowed to two final parties. While we don’t know the specific names, we suspect Hewlett-Packard may well be one. (Don’t forget that the head of HP’s software division, Tom Hogan, knows Vignette intimately. Hogan served as CEO of the company from 2002-2006 before moving to HP.)

And the price for Vignette certainly isn’t prohibitive. With the stock having slid 40% over the past year, Vignette currently garners a market capitalization of just $280m. However, the debt-free company also has $90m in cash and equivalents in its bank account, lowering the net cost of Vignette to just $190m. That’s about the same level of sales it is likely to report this year. In the past, shoppers have paid 2.6 to 2.9 times enterprise value/revenue for their purchases of other publicly traded content management vendors. However, we doubt Vignette – with its slumping software sales and spendthrift marketing plans – will command that kind of multiple.

Selected significant content management deals

Date Acquirer Target Price EV/sales multiple
August 2006 IBM FileNet $1.6bn 2.6x
November 2006 Oracle Stellent $440m 2.9x

Source: The 451 M&A KnowledgeBase

Paid for potential

Expanding its operations into US markets, UK media giant Guardian News & Media – publisher of The Observer and The Guardian – picked up B2B blog network ContentNext Media earlier this month. Founded in 2002, ContentNext is the creation of ex-Silicon Alley Reporter managing editor and business journalist Rafat Ali. Its ad-supported online network includes the content-centric blog paidContent.org, mocoNews.net, ContentSutra.com and the UK version of paidContent.

We understand that ContentNext, which now employs 23 people, sold for around $30m, and we estimate the company was running at $4m in trailing revenue. For financial advice, ContentNext tapped Mark Patricof, managing director at MESA (Media & Entertainment Strategy Advisors), marking MESA’s third M&A advisory in online media this year. To date, ContentNext has kept its finances in the family. In 2006, the blog network raised its first and only round of financing, for less than $1m. Interestingly, its first and only investor also happens to be private equity patriarch Alan Patricof through his VC outfit Greycroft Partners.

Still, a 7.5x trailing revenue multiple had us scratching our heads at first, especially considering that the content network fetches only one million page views per month. But, looking closer, we see the deal being more about future potential and figure that an additional earnout is likely. In addition to a larger geographic reach for both publications (ContentNext will continue to operate independently), potential revenue from conferences also drove the deal. Further, ContentNext was not out shopping itself, but looking for a second round of funding, and we understand the deal was very ‘friends and family’ in nature. Judging from laudatory comments Rafat Ali and Simon Waldman, director of digital publishing, make about each other online, this certainly seems to be the case.

Transatlantic cold front in M&A

In terms of North American tech companies shopping in Europe, the past year has been a case of overlooking deals rather than being over there looking for deals. Eastbound M&A (or North American acquirers of EU-based companies) totaled just $12.5bn from July 2007 through June 2008. That’s down two-thirds from the $45.2bn worth of deals inked from mid-2006 to mid-2007. The primary reason: a 15% decline in the Nasdaq and the US dollar (relative to the euro) over the past year that has sapped buying power.

Of course, the slumping greenback offered European acquirers a bit of a ‘rebate’ on their purchases. And they took advantage of that, pushing westbound M&A (or EU-based acquirers of North American companies) to a new record. From July 2007 through June 2008, European acquirers spent $30.2bn picking up North American-based companies, a 38% increase from $21.9bn in the same period in the previous year.

But even that record amount of eastbound spending wasn’t nearly enough to offset the utter disappearance of their North American counterparts. Overall spending on transatlantic tech M&A fell by more than one-third, dropping to $42.7bn from $67.1bn in the same period of the previous year. We look at the numbers and the trends in a full report that’s available here.

Transatlantic deals

Period EU to North America North America to EU Total
July 2005-June 2006 $14.5bn $19.4bn $33.9bn
July 2006-June 2007 $21.9bn $45.2bn $67.1bn
July 2007-June 2008 $30.2bn $12.5bn $42.7bn

Source: The 451 M&A KnowledgeBase

Cisco’s M&A machine unplugged

While Brocade Communications has used its $3bn purchase of Foundry Networks to turn up the pressure on Cisco Systems, we would quickly add that Cisco itself has hardly used M&A at all this year. Typically one of the busiest corporate acquirers, Cisco has averaged about a deal per month in recent years. However, so far this year, the networking giant has acquired just one company, DiviTech. (In addition to last month’s purchase of the tiny Danish company, the only other announced move in 2008 was snapping up the 20% stake in its subsidiary Nuova Systems that it didn’t already own.)

Earlier this year, we noted that Cisco was rumored to be making a run at Citrix. Although that speculation initially helped boost Citrix shares, they have since sunk to a 52-week low. The decline over the past three months has shaved a half-billion dollars off Citrix’s market capitalization, representing a decent ‘rebate’ for any acquirer of the infrastructure software vendor. It currently sports a $5bn market capitalization. In the past, Cisco has shown itself ready to seal multibillion-dollar deals, including its $6.9bn purchase of Scientific-Atlanta in late 2005 and its $3.2bn acquisition of WebEx Communications in March 2007. Cisco is slated to report its fiscal 2008 results in two weeks.

 Cisco’s disappearing deals

Period Deal volume Deal value Notable acquisitions
Jan. 1 – July 21, 2005 7 $899m FineGround Networks, Airespace, Topspin Communications
Jan. 1 – July 21, 2006 4 $143m Meetinghouse Data Communications, SyPixx Networks
Jan. 1 – July 21, 2007 9 $4.2bn WebEx Communications, IronPort Systems, Neopath Networks
Jan. 1 – July 21, 2008 1 undisclosed DiviTech

Source: The 451 M&A KnowledgeBase