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
© 2025 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 AllFrom Laggards to Tech Founders: Law Firm Innovation Is Flourishing
Inside Track: Cooley's Modest Proposal to Make Executives Safer
Law School Applications are Up Across the Country. Law Deans Aren't Sure Why
6 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Judge Rules Georgia Railroad Can Seize Land as Landowners Vow to Fight
- 2On the Move and After Hours: Einhorn Barbarito; Gibbons; Greenbaum Rowe; Pro Bono Partnership
- 3On The Move: Squire Patton Boggs, Akerman Among Four Firms Adding Atlanta Partners
- 4Is the Collateral Order Doctrine About to Have a 'Brat Summer'?
- 5Trump Administration Faces Lawsuit Over USAID Stop-Work Orders
Who Got The Work
J. Brugh Lower of Gibbons has entered an appearance for industrial equipment supplier Devco Corporation in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The suit, accusing the defendant of selling knock-off Graco products, was filed Dec. 18 in New Jersey District Court by Rivkin Radler on behalf of Graco Inc. and Graco Minnesota. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi, is 3:24-cv-11294, Graco Inc. et al v. Devco Corporation.
Who Got The Work
Rebecca Maller-Stein and Kent A. Yalowitz of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer have entered their appearances for Hanaco Venture Capital and its executives, Lior Prosor and David Frankel, in a pending securities lawsuit. The action, filed on Dec. 24 in New York Southern District Court by Zell, Aron & Co. on behalf of Goldeneye Advisors, accuses the defendants of negligently and fraudulently managing the plaintiff's $1 million investment. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Vernon S. Broderick, is 1:24-cv-09918, Goldeneye Advisors, LLC v. Hanaco Venture Capital, Ltd. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from A&O Shearman has stepped in as defense counsel for Toronto-Dominion Bank and other defendants in a pending securities class action. The suit, filed Dec. 11 in New York Southern District Court by Bleichmar Fonti & Auld, accuses the defendants of concealing the bank's 'pervasive' deficiencies in regards to its compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and the quality of its anti-money laundering controls. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, is 1:24-cv-09445, Gonzalez v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank et al.
Who Got The Work
Crown Castle International, a Pennsylvania company providing shared communications infrastructure, has turned to Luke D. Wolf of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani to fend off a pending breach-of-contract lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 25 in Michigan Eastern District Court by Hooper Hathaway PC on behalf of The Town Residences LLC, accuses Crown Castle of failing to transfer approximately $30,000 in utility payments from T-Mobile in breach of a roof-top lease and assignment agreement. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Susan K. Declercq, is 2:24-cv-13131, The Town Residences LLC v. T-Mobile US, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Wilfred P. Coronato and Daniel M. Schwartz of McCarter & English have stepped in as defense counsel to Electrolux Home Products Inc. in a pending product liability lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 26 in New York Eastern District Court by Poulos Lopiccolo PC and Nagel Rice LLP on behalf of David Stern, alleges that the defendant's refrigerators’ drawers and shelving repeatedly break and fall apart within months after purchase. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Joan M. Azrack, is 2:24-cv-08204, Stern v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc.
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