Lumber company A has had a devil of a time negotiating with the Lumberjack Union, but it buys company B so that they can go from five million acres to eight million acres of forest to kill, digest, and turn into scratchpads.
With a highly unionized labor force, both lumberjack companies had only 10% margins, and few resources to invest in technology. Combined, however, with their enormous new scale, it makes financial sense to replace two-thirds of their lumberjacks with robots, a.k.a., the Tree Slayers.
The would-be acquired lumberjack company B knows the math, because they've taken a couple of awesome finance courses on Shmoop, and while as a stand-alone company they might be worth 14x earnings, as they key to unlock the Tree Slayer and a new era of high-margin tree cutting, lumberjack company B will be smart enough to demand a big acquisition premium.
That is, instead of their steady state 14x earnings valuation, they'll ask for and probably get something closer to 20x earnings or more, as the acquisition premium here is warranted in the creation of this new behemoth tree cutting company, which everyone is happy about.
Except the trees. And the squirrels who lived in them. And the birds. And the atmosphere...
Related or Semi-related Video
Finance: What are accretive v dilutive v...18 Views
Finance allah shmoop what are at creative dilutive and neutral
acquisitions All right people Well it's all about the multiples
you work for boring co dot com You make stationery
roller coasters for the faint of heart And you grow
revenues at about ten percent a year All right well
your stock trades at about twelve times earnings and you
really want to buy your would be competitors Let's bounce
dot com which makes concrete bounce houses Yeah they're made
in russia What do you expect Unfortunately let's bounce has
been growing revenues at about fifteen percent but because they
make such a much more exciting than you do product
people are really into inflicting pain on themselves these days
Well they trade at thirty times earnings thirty years Fifteen
they're thirty they're willing to be bought but they'll want
thirty six times earnings for the privilege That is a
twenty percent premium toe where they trade today And they
only want stock no cash you know because the primary
shareholders would all suffer a huge tax bill if they
took cash so they'll only take stock Yours All right
So this is a conundrum You traded a low multiple
Twelve times your shareholders own you because you are a
quote value story unquote meaning that your cheap but you
are a low risk company Now if you try to
buy a growth company and pay a high multiple for
it well you risk alienating your shareholder base and that's
bad like they'll sue you in elected Different forces will
do different things but if you do buy let's bounce
while the combination would be really powerful birthday parties everywhere
would be a thrill a minute or something like that
Well the problem is that a twelve times earnings company
paying thirty six times earnings to acquire a competitors is
dilutive to that twelve times earnings company That is the
combined company If each piece were equal and they just
merged as equals a mow their m o ya that's
what they're called Well they would not have one Half
of the combined company is being valued at twelve times
earnings when it was a standalone company and then another
piece valued at thirty times as a stand alone but
combined at a price of thirty six times that's twelve
plus thirty six or forty eighth and divided by two
Companies combining here so the new company should the stock
price is all remain flat at the proposed acquisition or
merger Price set would be trading at twenty four times
earnings and we're talking really slow so you could follow
the map All right well the combination of born cohen
let's bounce would have been diluted to boring co because
it's multiple of twelve would've been diluted down via the
high multiple paid for let's bounds and the combination would
have been act creative too Let's bounce because now they're
stock will traded around twenty four times earnings instead of
thirty times earnings Right obviously had both companies traded the
same multiple of earnings when they combined Well there'd be
no dilution or at creation for either side and the
merger would simply be called neutral sort of like someone's
reaction to a roller coaster that neither rolls nor coasts
Yeah it's sort of like doing these videos are just
just keeping it real enough No we love doing good 00:03:14.905 --> [endTime] bye
Up Next
What is Control Value? When one investor or group owns a sufficiently large block of shares to constitute the ability to influence board voting or...
In a merger, the boards and shareholders of both companies must both vote in favor of the action, and the post merger acquiring company will often...
What does it mean to "roll up"? Roll Up refers to when a larger entity gobbles up its smaller competitors via acquisition. A good example is JP Mor...
The Williams Act is federal legislation enacted to make acquisitions and/or takeovers fair. Nothing to do with tennis...sorry about that, tennis fans.