April 2, 2013 4:09 pm
Dell: computing
the price
Investment bankers ignore
precedent transaction multiples
When buying a house, computing the sale price can be as simple as
discovering what other properties on the street fetched. What did someone
else actually spend? Likewise, when selling a public company, precedent
transaction multiples can be equally compelling. So it is surprising to see
that
JPMorgan and
Evercore Partners,
the financial advisers to
Dell’s
special committee, did not include any precedent multiples in their fairness
opinion memos.
These memos usually include several valuation methodologies. But precedent
transaction analysis can be crucial as it reflects buyers paying extra for a
control premium. Trading multiples and discounted cash flow are standalone
valuations and will not account for control.
The investment bankers could have judged that the relevant transactions (for
example, Hewlett-Packard/Compaq, Lenovo/IBM, Acer/Gateway, HP/Palm) are
inappropriate comparisons because those involved large strategic buyers who
could pay more due to synergies or that the target companies were in a
different strategic position than Dell is in currently. These are reasonable
points. However, the bankers were still able to include (and caveat)
comparable companies for trading multiples analysis and previous
transactions for historical premiums paid. (In fact, it seems that premiums
in most other transactions would not be for stocks in steady decline as is
the case for Dell.)
The bankers could have simply offered similar caveats when including
previous deals. Of course, the more cynical interpretation is that these
multiples would have been unhelpful in building the case for $13.65/share.
And with a 270-page proxy there are plenty of other things for shareholders
to chew on.
Email the Lex team in confidence at
lex@ft.com
© The Financial Times Ltd 2013 |
|