What can M&A really achieve for a company?
Successful M&A is a process, and like all processes skipping steps is not an option
June 19, 2023 at 10:58 AM
6 minute read
M&A markets continue to reflect the impact of a volatile world in 2023, with value levels and volume falling steadily since Q4 2021. PitchBook projects this trend to continue over Q1 2023, with estimated volume for global deals in Q1 2023 coming in 21% below Q4 2022, and 36% lower than the market's height in Q4 2021. Simply, it is even more difficult in 2023 to execute an M&A strategy in terms of financing, data, regulations (including growing antitrust sentiment), shifts in global trade, talent strategy, taxes, real estate, etc. And this is to say nothing of the quality of assets available. But while more difficult and contentious, the client need for a nimble portfolio or asset strategy has not gone away. If anything, the strategic imperative for active business model management is even more important in a difficult year, and adversity also presents certain opportunities. Again according to PitchBook, while the frothy markets of the pandemic are likely over deals are still happening on par (volume, value) with pre-pandemic levels in 2019. The reality is that M&A is an important business tool.
That's not the same as saying that M&A is done well, however. Stats vary, but most agree that still, in 2023, most deals fail to achieve their value objectives. Data analytics, advanced technology, and a more structured, integrated approach to target sourcing and due diligence have had a noticeable impact, and much work has been done to improve the implementation of deal theses, but still – by most measures, more deals fail than succeed. Some providers have responded by extending their relationship with the client, helping them continuously reevaluate and tweak deal thesis models, months or even years after Day One. This, too, has proven helpful and some providers have developed elaborate post-deal engagement strategies like managed services and as-a-service offerings. These target key functional areas across the client corporate-scape, helping either with function and capacity or, increasingly, serve as longer-term interim services that help the client build up internal capabilities.
But what if the problem lies in the deal theses? Much of the technology and improved process management that are moving the needle on deal outcomes are also helping craft more precise, data-grounded deal theses, often generated through detailed scenario planning. Still, more deals fail than not, even in this environment. So are there unreal expectations about what M&A can achieve? So much energy in M&A and transaction practices has focused on improving the tactical aspects of executing deals, but are providers (consulting firms, multiservice firms, law firms, investment banks, etc.) presenting a realistic picture for clients of what is possible through M&A? Can market share, innovation, new technical competence, or entrepreneurship really be bought?
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllA Look Back at High-Profile Hires in Big Law From Federal Government
4 minute read'Appropriate Relief'?: Google Offers Remedy Concessions in DOJ Antitrust Fight
4 minute readLife, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Customers: Developments on ‘Conquesting’ from the Ninth Circuit
8 minute readLegal Departments Gripe About Outside Counsel but Rarely Talk to Them
4 minute readTrending Stories
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250