Spin 'Em Out, Buy 'Em Up, Repeat
from the deals,-deals,-deals,-deals dept
Sometimes it's amazing to watch what the Wall Street deal makers get away with. They have big companies buy up other companies (consolidation) talking up all these wonderful "synergies" and then they break up those very same companies, spinning them out and talking about "unlocking shareholder value." Funny, we thought that the shareholder value was supposed to come from the synergies -- or at least that's what they told us during the consolidation phase. Of course, the bankers make money at both ends of the transaction -- and, often, that's the only real rationale for certain deals. For example, we never quite understood why AT&T broke itself apart (after building itself up through consolidation). Years ago, it had all the makings of a dominant "quadruple play" player, which is something that everyone is so damn excited about these days. Yet, what did they do? They sold their cable division (which had both TV and cable broadband) off to Comcast, spun out the wireless division (something they quickly regretted) into a stand alone company only to watch it swallowed up by Cingular -- and then was left out in the cold as the rest of the telco world zipped right by, allowing SBC to snap up the leftovers on the way out the door. Whatever happened to all that synergy and shareholder value? It seems a lot of it went into the expensive suits you see on Wall Street. So, consider us skeptical that the next round of corporate breakups makes much sense. Of course, the "good news" is that it appears at least some folks agree. The article notes that a number of big spinoff deals aren't looking so hot, and have only made more people realize that it's all about reshuffling the deck chairs on the titanic (which giving some extra cash to Wall Street) for many of these deals.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
Integration...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
AT&T
In 1982 AT&T and the DOJ signed a consent decree settling the DOJ's anti-trust case by divesting AT&T of its local telephone companies. Judge Green issues the Modified Final Judgment).
Then, in 1984 The AT&T Divestiture created seven regional regional Bell operating companies which ended the Bell System.
This one was not a Wall Street creation.
Jerry
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: A and/or T and/or T
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: A and/or T and/or T
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: AT&T
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
ATT
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: ATT
I agree the basic strategy was a good one, and one you see verizon and sbc trying to implement today. I also agree that ATT’s books were probably the only close to honest ones coming out of the industry at the time. I just think Armstrong’s timing and execution were piss poor.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: ATT
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Your blaming Wall Street for management weakness
[ link to this | view in chronology ]