Why Price Isn't Everything When Selling Your Company


Why Price Isn't Everything When Selling Your Company

Why Price Isn't Everything When Selling Your Company in a Merger or Acquisition

Although it is tempting to sell your company for the highest purchase price, price isn't everything when selling your company in a merger or acquisition. True, a $25 million offer looks sweeter than a $20 million offer. However, here are three important issues other than price to consider when selling your company.

1. Type of consideration

Is the buyer paying you in stock, "boot" (e.g., cash), or some combination? An all cash purchase provides a clean exit for you and your shareholders and shifts all of the post-closing risk to the acquirer. An all stock purchase ties you to the future performance of the acquirer, and the post-closing risk is shared by you and the buyer. Stock purchases send a signal to the market that the acquirer believes its stock is undervalued. However, the acquirer's stock usually decreases in value upon the announcement of the deal in all stock transactions.

When the consideration consists of stock and cash, the IRS places limits on how much of the consideration can be "boot" for the transaction to be treated as tax-free.

2. Earnout

An earnout is a portion of the purchase price that is carved out for the seller to earn over time post-closing. Earnouts are used in about 25% of mergers and acquisitions and often used to bridge differences in valuation between the seller and the buyer. The earnout is tied to financial or operational metrics that you must meet in order to receive some portion of the purchase price. Common earnout metrics are EBIDTA, sales, and revenue goals.

The amount of the earnout is how much of the purchase price is at risk for the seller. For example, in a $25 million transaction, an earnout of $5 million means that the consideration that changes hands at closing is $20 million. You may or may not ever receive the remaining $5 million. The deciding factor is performance after the deal is consummated. Earnouts typically last 24 to 36 months, sometimes longer. The longer the earnout period, the higher the risk that you will not see the entire earnout amount.

The key to successful earnouts is to negotiate metrics that you have a high deegree control over achieving. As the seller, factors like achieving cost or revenue synergies in the combined entity are difficult to influence and should be strenuously avoided as earnout criteria. In order to maximize your chances of reaching earnout goals, you want to maintain control and continuity over your operations. To minimize conflict, make sure that the conditions governing the payment of an earnout are clearly defined.

3. Escrow

Escrow is an amount set aside from the purchase price to deal with liabilities that may arise after the deal has closed. Usually 10% to 15% of the purchase price is placed in escrow for 12 to 36 months to mitigate the buyer's risk of:

  • Post-closing changes to net working capital and the balance sheet, and
  • Liabilities arising from breach of the representations and warranties in the purchase agreement. Such breach could include claims against the seller for intellectual property infringement; litigation or fines arising from violations of securities law, employment law, or environmental law; breach of contract; and delinquent taxes.

You must carefully negotiate the terms of escrow because post-closing disputes over escrow arise in about 40% of all mergers and acquisitions. Terms such as the amount of escrow, the duration, deductibles, and how claims are paid deserve close attention. The relationship between escrow and indemnifications should also be considered.

Conclusion

Your board of directors has a fiduciary duty to take reasonable steps to obtain the highest possible purchase price for the shareholders to consider. However, that does not mean that you have to accept the highest price. Get advice from an experienced investment banker or mergers and acquisitions advisor, and your M&A attorney working on the deal, to help you negotiate these terms.

There are definitely more than three factors that demonstrate why price isn't everything when selling your company. What other factors would you cite?

Douglas Y. Park

Twitter: @DougYPark

If you enjoyed this post, please subscribe to the blog by RSS feed or email. You can find the subscription option on the sidebar to the immediate right. Also, share this post and +1 it on Google+.

  • antonio j espinosa

    nice analysis doug....

  • http://www.dypadvisors.com Douglas Y. Park

    Thanks, Antonio, for your comment.

    Doug

  • http://TrustEnablement.com TrustEnabler

    Depending on where the firm is incorporated, there may be other mandatory considerations, such as the impact on other stakeholders like creditors (which is the case in Canada).  Beyond any legal technicalities, the overriding, universal directors' fiduciary duty to the corporation expects boards to use good business judgement to assess the value-creating versus value-eroding effect of the merger or acquisition (in the best interests of the corporation).  Simplistic assessments rely solely on share value, but more enlightened approaches would consider broader value considerations, such as the value to innovation, customers, and generally its business ecosystems (consider too-big-to-fail).  In other words, it would be undesirable to sell the shares at a healthy premium over market only to cannibalize the corporation's human, intellectual, and social capital in order to inflate short-term value.

  • http://twitter.com/DougYPark Douglas Y. Park

    Hi Antonio,

    Thanks for reading and hope you will come back.

    Best,
    Doug

  • http://twitter.com/DougYPark Douglas Y. Park

    Hi Alex,

    Thanks for your comments. For better or worse, in the United States, the prevailing standard is that boards must seek to get the best possible offer for shareholders in the sale of a company. That may not be the best way to sell a company. However, if the board does not follow this fiduciary duty, they can expect a lawsuit. For example, shareholders of Varian recently sued the board for only considering one offer from Applied Materials. The number of M&A related lawsuits increased from 190 in 2009 to over 340 in 2010.

    I agree that value creation and value destruction to various constituents should be considered. Usually those issues are considered more by the acquirer's board than the seller's board.

    Doug