Analysis
Appraisal Arbitrage Dimmed By
Delaware Rulings
By
Chelsea Naso
Law360
(February 15, 2019, 4:07 PM EST) -- Appraisal arbitrage is falling out of
style as the reality of recent Delaware rulings sets in, with a new study
showing the number of mergers facing shareholder challenges over deal
price dropped meaningfully for the second year in a row.
A study from
Cornerstone Research released
Wednesday evaluates how appraisal litigation has evolved since a 2007
opinion in In re: Appraisal of Transkaryotic Therapies Inc. laid the
groundwork for an investment strategy known as appraisal arbitrage. The
strategy sees shareholders — largely hedge funds and private equity firms
— buy into target companies with the goal of gaining a higher deal price
for their shares through the court.
The study found that the number of mergers facing appraisal actions fell
to 22 in 2018, marking the second year of decline after peaking at 47 in
2016. That rapid slide coincided with a drop-off in the overall number of
appraisal petitions filed. There were 26 appraisal petitions filed in
2018, down from 60 in 2017 and 76 in 2016, according to the report.
Two
opinions from the Delaware Supreme Court weighing in on the private
equity-backed buyouts of payday lender DFC Global Corp. and technology
giant
Dell Inc. are viewed as somewhat of a
turning point for appraisal arbitrage because of the emphasis placed on
deal price as a strong gauge of fair value.
“From my view, it’s because of the significant development in appraisal
law in the last few years culminating in two Supreme Court cases, DFC and
Dell, which effectively made clear that deal price may well be the best
indicator of fair value in appropriate circumstances,” said Edward
Micheletti, head of
Skadden Arps Slate Meagher & Flom LLP’s
Wilmington, Delaware litigation practice.
In the DFC case, the Delaware Supreme Court in August 2017 overturned the
Chancery Court’s determination that the payday lender’s private equity
buyer had underpaid by about $100 million of the $1.3 billion acquisition.
The 87-page opinion penned by Chief Justice Leo E. Strine Jr. said that
best evidence of fair value in the DFC case was indeed deal price, but
declined to create a broad judicial rule that would apply deal price in an
appraisal of an arm’s length transaction.
The Delaware Supreme Court in December 2017 also reversed a Chancery Court
decision that had found that Dell’s $25 billion buyout was underpriced by
roughly $7 billion. In an 84-page decision penned by Justice Karen L.
Valihura, the justices remanded the case back to the Chancery Court,
directing Vice Chancellor Laster to either appraise the transaction at its
deal price with no further proceedings or choose “another route” based on
the Delaware Supreme Court’s findings and explain his reasoning. The
justices took particular issue with Vice Chancellor J. Travis Laster’s
decision to give no weight to the deal price.
“Dell and DFC basically said that where you have an appraisal case
following a competitive sales process, the transaction price should be
given strong weight, and it should be the factor that is weighed most
heavily in those cases,” said David Hennes, co-chair of
Ropes & Gray LLP’s corporate and
securities litigation practice.
There have also been a number of decisions in 2017 and 2018 that found the
fair value to be below deal price, shaking shareholders’ confidence that
they will be able to get more cash for their shares.
The rulings in appraisal cases of
Clearwire Corp.,
PetSmart Inc.,
SWS Group Inc.,
Solera Holdings Inc.,
AOL Inc. and Aruba Network Inc. all
drew rulings that pegged fair value below the deal price.
“The risk to petitioners is that now we are seeing results below the
transaction price and, if that occurs, petitioners are going to take a
loss on those investments,” Hennes said.
The structure of the sales process seems to be a key factor in the outcome
of appraisal cases, the Cornerstone Research study found. According to the
study, appraised transactions that included an auction process or a
go-shop period saw the average premium to deal price land at 1 percent
while appraised transactions without those factors where the acquirer was
a related party saw an average premium of 47 percent awarded to the
petitioners.
The study also found that of the 34 cases that went to trial between 2006
and 2018, 16 challenged transactions were appraised above the deal price
while the other 18 came in at or below the deal price.
The highest premium — 158 percent — in the time frame was secured in 2016
by the shareholders who challenges the acquisition of INS Software Corp.
And the biggest hit to premium — negative 57 percent — was seen in the
challenge to Sprint’s acquisition of Clearwire following a bidding war.
While some of these closely watched cases have placed an emphasis on
giving weight to deal price, that’s just one of a handful of methods that
the Delaware courts use when tasked with determining the fair value of a
company in an appraisal action.
In the 13 years covered by the Cornerstone Research study, the Delaware
courts relied on a discounted cash flow analysis — a method of determining
a company’s current value that incorporate future cash flows — 59 percent
of the time and relied on deal price 38 percent of the time. The courts
never based fair value on the value of comparable companies or precedent
transactions during the time frame. And in 2018, for the first time, the
Delaware Chancery Court in its
appraisal of Aruba tied fair value to the company’s unaffected market
price.
The
Aruba case saw Vice Chancellor J. Travis Laster — the same justice who
penned the Chancery Court’s Dell ruling — in February slash 30 percent
from Hewlett-Packard Co.’s $2.8 billion takeover of Aruba when he used the
target’s unaffected 30-day average market price to determine fair value.
In the 129-page opinion, Vice Chancellor Laster said that “forceful
discussions” in the Dell and DFC opinions about reliance on valuations
based on efficient capital markets justified giving market value
substantial weight.
Delaware’s Supreme Court has yet to weigh in on the case.
--Additional reporting by Jeff Montgomery. Editing by Alanna Weissman.
© 2019, Portfolio Media, Inc. |