Mergers & Acquisitions

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Load more

Thank you for downloading this AMACOM eBook. Sign up for our newsletter, AMACOM BookAlert, and receive special offers, access to free samples, and info on the latest new releases from AMACOM, the book publishing division of American Management Association. To sign up, visit our website: www.amacombooks.org To learn more about the American Management Association visit: www.amanet.org The copyright information for this title may be found at the end of this eBook file. MERGERS AND ACQUISITIONS FROM A TO Z • FOURTH EDITION • MERGERS AND ACQUISITIONS FROM A TO Z • FOURTH EDITION • Andrew J. Sherman Contents Acknowledgments Introduction to the Fourth Edition 1. The Basics of Mergers and Acquisitions Understanding Key Terms Why Bad Deals Happen to Good People Why Do Buyers Buy, and Why Do Sellers Sell? 2. Preparing for the Dance: The Seller’s Perspective Conducting a Thorough EOTB Analysis Preparing for the Sale of the Company Common Preparation Mistakes Other Considerations for the Seller Getting Deal Terms and Structure That Fit the Seller’s Objectives, Personal Needs, and Post-closing Plans 3. Initiating the Deal: The Buyer’s Perspective Assembling the Team Developing an Acquisition Plan Applying the Criteria: How to Narrow the Field Approaching a Company That Is Not for Sale Dealing with the Seller’s Management Team Directory of M&A Resources for Prospective Buyers (and Sellers) 4. The Letter of Intent and Other Preliminary Matters Proposed Terms Binding Terms Common Reasons Why Deals Die at an Early Stage Preparation of the Work Schedule The Growing Debate About the Role and Usefulness of Fairness Opinions 5. Due Diligence Best Practices in Due Diligence in the Era of Accountability 2.0 Legal Due Diligence Business and Strategic Due Diligence Conclusion Appendix to Chapter 5: Post-Sarbanes-Oxley Due Diligence Checklist The Disclosure Requirements Checklist of Items Post-Sarbox 6. The Board’s Role in M&A Specific Board Responsibilities Legal Responsibilities 7. An Overview of Regulatory Considerations Introduction Environmental Laws Federal Securities Laws Federal Antitrust Laws Waiting Periods Labor and Employment Law 8. Structuring the Deal Stock vs. Asset Purchases Tax and Accounting Issues Affecting the Structure of the Transaction One-Step vs. Staged Transactions Method of Payment Nontraditional Structures and Strategies 9. Valuation and Pricing of the Seller’s Company The Future of EBITDA A Quick Introduction to Pricing Valuation Overview 10. Financing the Acquisition An Overview of Financing Sources Understanding the Lender’s Perspective Financing Deals in Times of Turmoil Steps in the Loan Process Equity Financing 11. The Purchase Agreement and Related Legal Documents Case Study: GCC Acquires TCI Sample Schedule of Documents to Be Exchanged at a Typical Closing 12. Keeping M&A Deals on Track: Managing the Deal Killers Communication and Leadership Diagnosing the Source of the Problem Understanding the Types of Deal Killers Curing the Transactional Patient Maintaining Order in the M&A Process: Simple Principles for Keeping Deals on Track Conclusion 13. Post-closing Challenges A Time of Transition Staffing Levels and Related Human Resources Challenges Customers Vendors Physical Facilities Problems Involving Attitudes and Corporate Culture Benefit and Compensation Plans Corporate Identity Legal Issues Minimizing Barriers to the Transition Post-merger Integration Key Lessons and Best Practices Common Areas of Post-closing Disputes and Litigation Conclusion 14. Special Challenges (and Opportunities) in Cross-Border Transactions 15. Alternatives to Mergers and Acquisitions Growth Strategy Alternative 1: Joint Ventures Growth Strategy Alternative 2: Franchising Growth Strategy Alternative 3: Technology and Merchandise Licensing Growth Strategy Alternative 4: Distributorships and Dealerships Index About the Author Free Sample from Leading at the Edge by Dennis N.T. Perkins with Margaret P. Holtman and Jillian B. Murphy About AMACOM Books Acknowledgments The author would like to thank Timothy Burgard and his team at AMACOM Books, for all of their hard work on the editing and organization of the manuscript. I would like to thank my partners at Seyfarth Shaw for their unconditional support including Chairman Pete Miller, Corporate Department Chair Paul Mattingly, M&A Practice Group Chair Susie Saxman and my colleagues Steve Meier, Andrew Lucano, Lisa Damon, Laura Maechtlen, John Shine, and Bob Bodansky as well as the entire corporate M&A team in the D.C. office. For general research support, I am very grateful for the efforts of Nick Rosenberg and Anjali Vohra, M&A associates at Seyfarth Shaw, and Eric Czubiak, my nephew and rising 3L at USC Law. As always, my assistant, Evelyn Capps was a key player in pulling everything together and helping to produce an organized and informative manuscript. And in perpetuity, I gratefully acknowledge my wife, Judy, my son, Matthew, and my daughter, Jennifer, for tolerating my commitment to writing over the years, when clearly we could have been doing something together a bit more fun. Introduction to the Fourth Edition “It was the best of times; it was the worst of times.” When Dickens first shared this quote with the world, he was not referring to the current state of the merger and acquisition (M&A) markets but he might as well have been. In the time between the publication of the third edition of this book in 2010 and today, the overall financial markets and the levels of M&A activity have experienced both polar opposites and everything in between. From the seemingly insatiable appetite for middle- market companies that private equity firms and other buyers had in 2006 and 2007, thereby driving valuations through the roof, to the fast ending to the party and the sobering effects of a virtual halt in 2008 to 2009, sending valuations on a downward spiral, to the tepid economic recovery and GDP growth from 2012 to 2016, this was not a good time if you prefer merry-go- rounds to roller-coaster rides at the amusement park. According to Mergermarket, there were 17,369 deals announced worldwide in 2016 and 4,951 deals in the United States, with a total value of $3.25 trillion. These figures represent a wide variety of industries driven by a wide range of strategic and financial buyers with the biggest deal of the year being AT&T’s proposed high-profile acquisition of Time Warner for over $100 billion, which at the time of publication had been challenged by the Department of Justice (late 2017). Merger and acquisition activity in the United States increased slightly in terms of the number of deals from the first quarter of 2017, the total deal value being 3,554 deals worth $678 billion, an 8.9 percent increase over Q1 of 2016. In January of 2017, the value of M&A deals worldwide for the month totaled $280 billion, the second largest January for M&A on record, but things began to cool as the reality of the challenges to implementing the economic and tax aspects pieces of the Trump agenda began to set in. By midyear 2017, global M&A deals were at $1.59 trillion, down well over 15 percent from 2016 deals at the half-year point. Mergers and acquisitions are a vital part of both healthy and weak economies and are often the primary way in which companies are able to provide returns to their owners and investors. Mergers and acquisitions play a critical role in both sides of this cycle, enabling strong companies to grow faster than their competition and providing entrepreneurs with rewards for their efforts, while ensuring that weaker companies are more quickly swallowed or, worse, made irrelevant through exclusion and ongoing share erosion. Mergers and acquisitions have played a variety of roles in corporate history, ranging from the “greed is good” corporate raiders buying companies in a hostile manner and breaking them apart in the 1980s to today’s trend of using mergers and acquisitions for strategic growth and to foster industry consolidation. During the 1980s, nearly half of all U.S. companies were restructured, more than 80,000 were acquired or merged, and over 700,000 sought bankruptcy protection in order to reorganize and continue operations. The 1980s featured swashbucklers and the use of aggressive tactics to gain control over targets. The 1990s were equally dynamic in terms of companies evolving through upsizing and growth, down-sizing, rollups, divestitures, and consolidation, but focused on operational synergies, scale efficiencies, increases in customer bases, strategic alliances, market share, and access to new technologies. This period, however, came to a crashing end with the bursting of the tech bubble and the global recession that followed. The wave of M&A activity seen from 2004 to 2007 was driven by the more general macroeconomic recovery and several key trends. First, many companies had exhausted cost cutting and operational efficiencies as a means of increasing profitability and were looking to top-line growth as a primary enabler of shareholder return. The increased pressure to grow turned the spotlight on the opportunity to achieve growth through acquisition. Second, the M&A market had been supported by the return of corporate profits and, with them, improved stock price valuation. The improved valuations enabled corporations to leverage their internal currencies to acquire target companies that were willing to swap their illiquid private stock for valuable public-company shares. Third, interest rates were hovering at historical lows, enabling firms to cost-effectively utilize debt to finance acquisition-based growth. From 2008 to late 2009, the wave of M&A activity was driven by weak economic conditions around the globe. The strong, cash-rich companies and firms began bargain shopping, picking off distressed and downtrodden competitors at a fraction of their market value compared to expectations just a short twelve to eighteen months earlier. Today, many large and midsize companies have begun to refocus on their core business lines, triggering divestitures and spin-offs of under-performing divisions or subsidiaries.
Recommended publications
  • Leadership Newsletter Winter 2020 / 2021

    Leadership Newsletter Winter 2020 / 2021

    T���������, M���� ��� T����������������� Leadership Newsletter Winter 2020 / 2021 GTCR Firm Update Since the firm’s inception in 1980, GTCR has Technology, Media and Tele- partnered with management teams in more communications than 200 investments to build and transform growth businesses. Over the last twenty years alone, GTCR has invested over $16 billion in approximately 100 platform acquisitions, 30+ 95+ PLATFORMS ADD-ONS including more than 65 companies that have been sold for aggregate enterprise value of over $ $50 billion and another 14 companies that have 25B+ been taken public with aggregate enterprise value PURCHASE of more than $34 billion. In November 2020, PRICE we closed GTCR Fund XIII, the firm’s largest fund to date, with $7.5 billion of limited partner capital commitments. This fund follows GTCR Fund Acquisition Activity Since 2000 XII, which we raised in 2017, with $5.25 billion As of January 15, 2021* of limited partner capital commitments. GTCR currently has 25 active portfolio companies; ten of these companies are within the Technology, Media and Telecommunications (“TMT”) industry. Page 1 / Continues on next page Technology, Media and Telecommunications Group Update Since 2000, GTCR has completed over 30 new platform investments and over 95 add-on acquisitions within the TMT industry, for a total of over 125 transactions with a combined purchase price of over $25 billion. During just the past year, we have realized several of these investments, selling three businesses and completing the partial sale of two additional companies, for a combined enterprise value of over $9 billion. Our TMT franchise includes ten active portfolio companies and one management start-up, which together have completed nearly 30 add-on acquisitions under our ownership, representing approximately $3 billion of GTCR invested capital.
  • Venture Capital, Private Equity and Real Estate on the Blockchain

    Venture Capital, Private Equity and Real Estate on the Blockchain

    VENTURE CAPITAL, PRIVATE EQUITY AND REAL ESTATE ON THE BLOCKCHAIN Whitepaper July 2018 Contents Preamble ..........................................................3 About Us ...........................................................4 Introduction ....................................................5 The Market .......................................................6 Private Equity ................................................................6 VC Market .......................................................................8 Real Estate – Europe ...................................................9 Real Estate – USA .........................................................10 The L7 Platform ...............................................11 L7 Global Holdings ......................................................11 Our Investment Criteria for Private Equity .............11 Our Investment Criteria for Venture Capital ..........11 L7 Real Estate ................................................................12 L7 Real Estate Europe ..................................................12 Benefits for Investors ...................................................14 Fixed Coupon Payout ...................................................14 Value Proposition ...........................................15 Investment Process ......................................................16 Crowdfunding .................................................17 Level 7 Crowdfunding Platform .................................19 Blockchain Technology ..................................20
  • US PE Breakdown Report 1Q 2019

    US PE Breakdown Report 1Q 2019

    US PE Breakdown Report 1Q 2019 April 2019 1 Introduction After 2018’s blistering pace of dealmaking, 2019 environment. 1Q 2019 saw just one PE-backed IPO has gotten off to a sluggish start. Poor as GPs instead opted to sell portfolio companies to performance in leveraged loan and high-yield other financial sponsors or strategic acquirers, markets during 4Q 2018 had an adverse impact on continuing recent trends. Market tranquility was the cost of deal financing, causing many GPs to sustained throughout the end of the quarter, so hold off on finalizing deals. These deals often take analysts expect the 1Q lull in exit activity to be months to close, and difficulty securing financing is short-lived. often evident in lower deal flow the following quarter. The deals that did close, however, were at Fundraising—unlike deals and exits—is on pace to elevated multiples similar to what we have match 2018’s annual total with over $40 billion witnessed in recent years. Pricing ought to remain raised in the first quarter. Fewer but larger funds competitive because GPs have record dry powder are closing, pushing median and average fund sizes waiting to be invested, pressuring PE firms to act. even higher. Strategies beyond the vanilla buyout continue to proliferate, with technology focused Exits experienced an even greater downturn than and growth equity funds witnessing massive closes. deals. Public equity price decreases in 4Q 2018 The recent figures also speak to a longer-term likely led to GPs marking down portfolio change whereby GPs headquartered in the Bay companies, though to a lesser extent than seen in Area and Chicago accounting for a swelling portion public indices.
  • Uva-F-1274 Methods of Valuation for Mergers And

    Uva-F-1274 Methods of Valuation for Mergers And

    Graduate School of Business Administration UVA-F-1274 University of Virginia METHODS OF VALUATION FOR MERGERS AND ACQUISITIONS This note addresses the methods used to value companies in a merger and acquisitions (M&A) setting. It provides a detailed description of the discounted cash flow (DCF) approach and reviews other methods of valuation, such as book value, liquidation value, replacement cost, market value, trading multiples of peer firms, and comparable transaction multiples. Discounted Cash Flow Method Overview The discounted cash flow approach in an M&A setting attempts to determine the value of the company (or ‘enterprise’) by computing the present value of cash flows over the life of the company.1 Since a corporation is assumed to have infinite life, the analysis is broken into two parts: a forecast period and a terminal value. In the forecast period, explicit forecasts of free cash flow must be developed that incorporate the economic benefits and costs of the transaction. Ideally, the forecast period should equate with the interval in which the firm enjoys a competitive advantage (i.e., the circumstances where expected returns exceed required returns.) For most circumstances a forecast period of five or ten years is used. The value of the company derived from free cash flows arising after the forecast period is captured by a terminal value. Terminal value is estimated in the last year of the forecast period and capitalizes the present value of all future cash flows beyond the forecast period. The terminal region cash flows are projected under a steady state assumption that the firm enjoys no opportunities for abnormal growth or that expected returns equal required returns in this interval.
  • Do Stock Mergers Create Value for Acquirers?

    Do Stock Mergers Create Value for Acquirers?

    University of Pennsylvania ScholarlyCommons Finance Papers Wharton Faculty Research 2009 Do Stock Mergers Create Value for Acquirers? Pavel Savor University of Pennsylvania Qi Lu Follow this and additional works at: https://repository.upenn.edu/fnce_papers Part of the Finance Commons, and the Finance and Financial Management Commons Recommended Citation Savor, P., & Lu, Q. (2009). Do Stock Mergers Create Value for Acquirers?. The Journal of Finance, 64 (3), 1061-1097. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6261.2009.01459.x This paper is posted at ScholarlyCommons. https://repository.upenn.edu/fnce_papers/304 For more information, please contact [email protected]. Do Stock Mergers Create Value for Acquirers? Abstract This paper finds support for the hypothesis that overvalued firms create value for long-term shareholders by using their equity as currency. Any approach centered on abnormal returns is complicated by the fact that the most overvalued firms have the greatest incentive to engage in stock acquisitions. We solve this endogeneity problem by creating a sample of mergers that fail for exogenous reasons. We find that unsuccessful stock bidders significantly underperform successful ones. Failure to consummate is costlier for richly priced firms, and the unrealized acquirer-target combination would have earned higher returns. None of these results hold for cash bids. Disciplines Finance | Finance and Financial Management This journal article is available at ScholarlyCommons: https://repository.upenn.edu/fnce_papers/304 Do Stock Mergers Create Value for Acquirers? PAVEL G. SAVOR and QI LU* ABSTRACT This paper …nds support for the hypothesis that overvalued …rms create value for long-term share- holders by using their equity as currency.
  • Smart Financing: the Value of Venture Debt Explained

    Smart Financing: the Value of Venture Debt Explained

    TRINITY CAPITAL INVESTMENT SMART FINANCING: THE VALUE OF VENTURE DEBT EXPLAINED Alex Erhart, David Erhart and Vibhor Garg ABSTRACT This paper conveys the value of venture debt to startup companies and their venture capital investors. Venture debt is shown to be a smart financing option that complements venture capital and provides significant value to both common and preferred shareholders in a startup company. The paper utilizes mathematical models based on industry benchmarks for the cash burn J-curve and milestone-based valuation to illustrate the financing needs of a startup company and the impact of equity dilution. The value of venture debt is further explained in three primary examples that demonstrate the ideal situations and timing for debt financing. The paper concludes with two examples that quantify the value of venture debt by calculating the percentage of ownership saved for both entrepreneurs and investors by combining venture debt with venture capital. INTRODUCTION TO VENTURE DEBT Venture debt, also known as venture 2. Accounts receivable financing Venture debt is a subset of the venture lending or venture leasing, is a allows revenue-generating startup capital industry and is utilized worldwide.[2] type of debt financing provided to companies to borrow against It is generally accepted that for every venture capital-backed companies. their accounts receivable items four to seven venture equity dollars Unlike traditional bank lending, venture (typically 80-85%). invested in a company, one dollar is (or debt is available to startup companies could be) financed in venture debt.[3, 4] without positive cash flow or significant 3. Equipment financing is typically Therefore, a startup company should be assets to use as collateral.[1] There are structured as a lease and is used able to access roughly 14%-25% of their three primary types of venture debt: for the purchase of equipment invested capital in venture debt.
  • SCORE Visa Financial Management Workbook

    SCORE Visa Financial Management Workbook

    Welcome to Financial Management for Small Business EVERY BUSINESS DECISION IS A FINANCIAL DECISION Do you wish that your business had booming sales, substantial customer demand and rapid growth? Be careful what you wish for. Many small business owners are unprepared for success. If you fail to forecast and prepare for growth, you may be unable to bridge the ever-widening financial gap between the money coming in and the money going out. In other words, by failing to manage your cash flow, good news often turns to bad. At the same time, your business may be suddenly pummeled by a change in the economic climate, or by a string of bad luck. If you’re not prepared with a “what if” financial plan for emergencies, even a temporary downturn can become a business-ending tailspin. YOU CAN DO IT! That’s why every decision you make in your business—whether it’s creating a website, investing in classified ads, or hiring an employee—has a financial impact. And each business decision affects your cash flow— the amount of money that comes in and goes out of your business. We’ll help you with your decision-making with this online primer. Throughout this guide, you’ll find case- studies, examples, and expert guidance on every aspect of small business finances. You’ll see that our goal is the same as yours—to make your business financially successful. FOUR KEYS TO SUCCESS Maximize your income and the speed with which you get paid. Throughout this site, we offer tips and checklists for dealing with maximizing income.
  • Update 1 to Mini-Code and Mini-Rule Annotations Subsequent to Publication of 2009 Editions

    Update 1 to Mini-Code and Mini-Rule Annotations Subsequent to Publication of 2009 Editions

    UPDATE 1 TO MINI-CODE AND MINI-RULE ANNOTATIONS SUBSEQUENT TO PUBLICATION OF 2009 EDITIONS TITLE 11 U. S. C. Sec. 101 2d Cir. Browning v. MCI, Inc. (In re Worldcom, Inc.), 546 F.3d 211 (2d Cir. 2008)(a "claim" exists if outside of bankruptcy claimant has a right to reach debtor's assets; this would include a claim for a continuing trespass under KS law). 5th Cir. Campbell v. Countrywide Home Loans, Inc., 545 F.3d 348 (5th Cir. 2008)(prepetition escrow defaults on a mortgage were "claims" for purposes of the automatic stay). 8th Cir. Milavetz, Gallop & Milavetz v. United States, 541 F.3d 785 (8th Cir. 2008)(attorneys who provide "bankruptcy assistance" to "assisted persons" are included in definition of "debt relief agency"). Sec. 105 1st Cir. Ameriquest Mortgage Co. v. Nosek (In re Nosek), 544 F.3d 34 (1st Cir. 2008)(sloppy accounting conduct by mortgage lender which did not violate a code provision or the terms of a chapter 13 plan would not support punitive and emotional damage award under 105). 9th Cir Rosson v. Fitzgerald (In re Rosson), 545 F.3d 764 (9th Cir. 2008)(bankruptcy court may convert a chapter 13 to a 7 on its own motion; unqualified rights of debtors may be limited by court's power to police bad faith or abuse of process). 10th Cir. Scrivner v. Mashburn (In re Scrivner), 535 F.3d 1258 (10th Cir. 2008)(court lacks equitable power to surcharge exempt assets to punish debtor misconduct). Sec. 302 2d Cir. Wornick v. Gaffney, 44 F.3d 486 (2d Cir.
  • Finding Goodwill in Mergers

    Finding Goodwill in Mergers

    treasury practice M&A: ACCOUNTING FINDING GOODWILL IN MERGERS TERRY HARDING OF KPMG EXPLAINS WHAT STEPS ACCOUNTING STANDARD SETTERS WORLDWIDE ARE TAKING TO TIGHTEN REGULATIONS SURROUNDING M&A ACTIVITY. he acquisitive business world has been grappling with the Goodwill itself is not amortised but is subject to regular and rigorous related issues of merger accounting and goodwill since impairment tests. consolidated accounts first appeared. For some, the debate is The proposals are helpful in that they remove the arbitrariness Tconceptual: if I pay more for a firm than its identifiable assets from the accounting for mergers and goodwill. Generally, the larger are worth, what have I paid for? Market position, a workforce or company will be the acquirer and goodwill will be recognised for the brands, perhaps? But are these assets in an accounting sense or value of the smaller company. Some would argue there are valid simply a ‘debit’ that should be lost in reserves? Does the value of mergers of equals and choosing an acquirer in such cases is itself goodwill decline over time, and should that decline be reflected in arbitrary. The standard setters’ response is that ‘fresh-start’ earnings? When two similar-sized firms merge, should the value of accounting would then be more appropriate. Goodwill should be goodwill of one or both merging companies be brought onto the recognised for both companies, but for now at least, that is not part balance sheet? Or is a merger truly different from an acquisition? of the proposals. The new rules will remove the opportunity – and For shareholders, analysts and financiers, the issues are no less therefore the cost – of structuring a deal in order to achieve an significant.
  • Energy Fundraising Saw a Significant Decline from the Previous Quarter, Falling to $450 Million

    Energy Fundraising Saw a Significant Decline from the Previous Quarter, Falling to $450 Million

    AMERICAN INVESTMENT COUNCIL 2018-Q2 Private Equity Industry Investment Report Table of Contents Page Executive Summary 3 Business Products & Services 5 Consumer Products & Services 7 Information Technology 9 Financial Services 11 Healthcare 13 Materials & Resources 15 Energy 17 PAGE 2 Executive Summary In the first half of 2018, Business Products and Services (B2B), Consumer Products and Services (B2C), and Information Technology (IT) sectors received more than half of all private equity investment. Fund managers invested $19B in B2C companies, while IT-related companies and B2B companies each received approximately $18 billion in investment during the same period. In addition, fund managers provided $14 billion to Energy companies while businesses in the Financial Services, Healthcare, and Materials and Resources sector secured investments of $11 billion, $11 billion and $7 billion, respectively. Overall, quarterly private equity investment declined to $41 billion from $58 billion in Q2. Only Consumer Products and Services and Healthcare saw increases in investment compared to the previous quarter. Investment rose from $9 billion to $10 billion and from $5 billion to $6 billion in Consumer Products and Services and Healthcare, respectively. Investment in the Information Technology sector experienced the steepest quarterly decline, falling $8 billion to $5 billion in Q2. While investment in Energy companies fell to $4 billion from $10 billion, other sectors—Business Products and Services, Financial Services, and Materials and Resources—saw
  • Financial Management (203)

    Financial Management (203)

    MBA (Business Economics) II Semester Paper- Financial Management (203) UNIT- II Topic- Over-Capitalisation and Under- Capitalisation Meaning of Over-Capitalisation Overcapitalization occurs when a company has issued more debt and equity than its assets are worth. The market value of the company is less than the total capitalized value of the company. An overcapitalized company might be paying more in interest and dividend payments than it has the ability to sustain long-term. The heavy debt burden and associated interest payments might be a strain on profits and reduce the amount of retained funds the company has to invest in research and development or other projects. To escape the situation, the company may need to reduce its debt load or buy back shares to reduce the company's dividend payments. Restructuring the company's capital is a solution to this problem. The phrase ‘over-capitalisation’ has been misunderstood with abundance of capital. In actual practice, overcapitalized concerns have been found short of funds. Truly speaking, over- capitalisation is a relative term used to denote that the firm in question is not earning reasonable income on its funds. According to Bonneville, Dewey and Kelly, “When a business is unable to earn a fair rate of return on its outstanding securities, it is over-capitalized.” Likewise, Gerstenberg opines that “a corporation is over-capitalized when its earnings are not large enough to yield a fair return on the amount of stocks and bonds that have been issued.” Thus, over-capitalisation refers to that state of affairs where earnings of the corporation do not justify the amount of capital invested in the business.
  • PEI June2020 PEI300.Pdf

    PEI June2020 PEI300.Pdf

    Cover story 20 Private Equity International • June 2020 Cover story Better capitalised than ever Page 22 The Top 10 over the decade Page 24 A decade that changed PE Page 27 LPs share dealmaking burden Page 28 Testing the value creation story Page 30 Investing responsibly Page 32 The state of private credit Page 34 Industry sweet spots Page 36 A liquid asset class Page 38 The PEI 300 by the numbers Page 40 June 2020 • Private Equity International 21 Cover story An industry better capitalised than ever With almost $2trn raised between them in the last five years, this year’s PEI 300 are armed and ready for the post-coronavirus rebuild, writes Isobel Markham nnual fundraising mega-funds ahead of the competition. crisis it’s better to be backed by a pri- figures go some way And Blackstone isn’t the only firm to vate equity firm, particularly and to towards painting a up the ante. The top 10 is around $30 the extent that it is able and prepared picture of just how billion larger than last year’s, the top to support these companies, which of much capital is in the 50 has broken the $1 trillion mark for course we are,” he says. hands of private equi- the first time, and the entire PEI 300 “The businesses that we own at Aty managers, but the ebbs and flows of has amassed $1.988 trillion. That’s the Blackstone that are directly affected the fundraising cycle often leave that same as Italy’s GDP. Firms now need by the pandemic, [such as] Merlin, picture incomplete.