Upload
others
View
0
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
M & A 2015 I N D I A N A P O L I S ▼ J U N E 1 1 CONFERENCE
1
2 0 1 5 M & A C O N F E R E N C E
2 0 1 5 M & A C O N F E R E N C E
2
Welcome!
Jim Birge Partner, Faegre Baker Daniels
2 0 1 5 M & A C O N F E R E N C E Email Questions to [email protected]
Questions
Please submit your questions in one of two ways:
►Question Card (on your table)
►Email: [email protected]
4
M & A 2015 I N D I A N A P O L I S ▼ J U N E 1 1 CONFERENCE
2 0 1 5 M & A C O N F E R E N C E
2 0 1 5 M & A C O N F E R E N C E
6
Marketing Update: Current Deal Activity, Valuations and Outlook
2 0 1 5 M & A C O N F E R E N C E Email Questions to [email protected]
Panelists
Moderator: Jim Birge, Partner, Faegre Baker Daniels
Devin Anderson, President / CEO, E&A Companies LLC
Brian Baker, Executive Vice President Corporate Finance, City Securities Corporation
Chris Caniff, Senior Managing Director, Periculum Capital Corporation
Steve Cobb, Managing Partner, CID Capital
Scott Lutzke, Founding Partner, Centerfield Capital Partners
7
2 0 1 5 M & A C O N F E R E N C E Email Questions to [email protected]
Middle-Market M&A Valuations
8
Source: GF Data, M&A Report May 2015 *Note: middle market is $10 -$250mm
► The chart illustrates valuation multiples of private equity-sponsored, middle-market* M&A transactions by transaction size since 2011. ► Transaction multiples are at their highest levels since 2011, with the $100-250mm transaction size range leading the way at 8.3x.
5.3x
5.7x 5.9x
5.4x
5.9x
6.0x 6.1x
6.9x
6.3x
7.7x
7.2x
6.8x 6.7x
7.5x
7.9x 7.5x 7.4x
7.1x
7.6x
8.3x
5.0x
5.5x
6.0x
6.5x
7.0x
7.5x
8.0x
8.5x
2011 2012 2013 2014 1Q 2015
TEV/
EBIT
DA
Valuation Multiples by Transaction Size
$10-25mm $25-50mm $50-100mm $100-250mm
2 0 1 5 M & A C O N F E R E N C E Email Questions to [email protected]
Middle-Market M&A Valuations by Industry
9
4.0x
6.0x
8.0x
10.0x
12.0x
2011 2012 2013 2014/1Q 2015
TEV/
EBIT
DA
Manufacturing
$10-25mm $25-50mm $50-100mm $100-250mm
4.0x
6.0x
8.0x
10.0x
12.0x
2011 2012 2013 2014/1Q 2015
TEV/
EBIT
DA
Business Services
$10-25mm $25-50mm $50-100mm $100-250mm
4.0
6.0
8.0
10.0
12.0
2011 2012 2013 2014/1Q 2015
TEV/
EBIT
DA
Healthcare Services
$10-25mm $25-50mm $50-100mm $100-250mm
4.0
6.0
8.0
10.0
12.0
2011 2012 2013 2014/1Q 2015
TEV/
EBIT
DA
Distribution
$10-25mm $25-50mm $50-100mm $100-250mm
► The charts below illustrate valuation multiples of private equity-sponsored, middle-market* M&A transactions by industry and transaction size since 2011.
Source: GF Data, M&A Report May 2015 *Note: middle market is $10 -$250mm
2 0 1 5 M & A C O N F E R E N C E Email Questions to [email protected]
M&A Drivers
10
Source: Pitch Book & Renaissance Capital *YTD 2015
Private Equity U.S. Fundraising by Quarter
Private Equity U.S. Investments-to-Exits Ratio
$34
$32
$25
$21
$33
$37
$26
$32
$36
$78
$31 $7
8
$43
$52
$41
$61
$38
0
20
40
60
80
100
$0
$25
$50
$75
$100
1Q 2Q 3Q 4Q 1Q 2Q 3Q 4Q 1Q 2Q 3Q 4Q 1Q 2Q 3Q 4Q 1Q
2011 2012 2013 2014 2015Capital Raised ($B) # of Funds Closed
3.2x
3.1x
3.6x
3.7x
2.6x
2.3x
1.9x
2.1x
1.9x
1.6x
0.0x
1.0x
2.0x
3.0x
4.0x
0
500
1,000
1,500
2,000
2,500
2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015*
Investments/Exits # of Investments (excl. add-ons) # of Exits
► Private equity capital raised has increased from a total of $112B in 2011 to $223B and $197B in 2013 and 2014, respectively.
2 0 1 5 M & A C O N F E R E N C E Email Questions to [email protected]
Current Trends in Senior Debt Structure
11
Pre 2008 2008 - 2009 2015
Hold Levels $50 million $25 million max $50 million +
Stretch Pieces Aggressive Nonexistent Yes
Term Loan Amortization Little or none Nearly a prerequisite Little or back-end loaded
Covenants Limited to 1 or 2 and loose Full package, much tighter 1 to 2 covenants; looser
Advance Rates Aggressive (ABL-Lite) Conservative (ABL-Heavy) Aggressive (ABL-Lite)
Rate Floors Rare Standard Rare
Rate Protection Language Minimal Robust and complex Robust and complex
Prepayment Penalties Rare Standard Rare
Bank Commitment Fully underwritten Best efforts Best efforts
Market Flex Language Limited, if any Required Required
Bank Group Syndications Relationship driven "Club Deals" Syndications
2 0 1 5 M & A C O N F E R E N C E Email Questions to [email protected]
Senior and Subordinated Debt Leverage ► The chart below shows senior and subordinated debt multiples on private equity-sponsored, middle-market* M&A
transactions since 2011. ► Total average leverage has increased from 3.4x EBITDA in 2011 to 4.0x in 1Q 2015, with sub debt as a % of average capital
structure declining over that period.
12
2.4x 2.4x 2.5x 2.6x
3.4x
1.0x 1.0x 0.9x 1.0x
0.6x
0.0x
1.0x
2.0x
3.0x
4.0x
5.0x
2011 2012 2013 2014 1Q 2015
Debt
/EBI
TDA
Senior Debt/EBITDA Subordinated Debt/EBITDA
Source: GF Data, Leverage Report May 2015 *Note: middle market is $10 -$250mm
2 0 1 5 M & A C O N F E R E N C E Email Questions to [email protected]
Recent Loan Pricing
13
Source: GF Data, Leverage Report May 2015
4.5% 4.6% 5.0% 4.8% 5.0%
12.1% 12.0% 11.6% 11.5% 11.3%
0.0%
2.0%
4.0%
6.0%
8.0%
10.0%
12.0%
14.0%
1Q 2014 2Q 2014 3Q 2014 4Q 2014 1Q 2015
Inte
rest
Rat
e
Senior Debt Pricing/EBITDA - Splits by Period Subordinated Debt - Average Coupon & Spreads
90-Day LIBOR 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.3% 0.3%
Senior Spread vs. LIBOR 4.3% 4.4% 4.8% 4.5% 4.8%
Sub Debt Spread vs. LIBOR 11.8% 11.7% 11.4% 11.2% 11.0%
► Senior debt spreads increased about 50 basis points to L+4.8% over the past year, while subordinated debt spreads declined about 80 basis point to L+11%.
2 0 1 5 M & A C O N F E R E N C E Email Questions to [email protected]
S&P 500 Cash Balances ► The chart illustrates U.S. cash holdings for the non-financial members of the S&P 500. ► There is a significant amount of available capital to support strategic acquisitions, as the non-financial members of the S&P 500
had aggregate cash holdings of ~$1.4 trillion at year-end 2014.
14
Source: Capital IQ Note: Cash includes short-term investments.
450
600
750
900
1,050
1,200
1,350
1,500
2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014
Cash
Hol
ding
s ($
in b
illio
ns)
M & A 2015 I N D I A N A P O L I S ▼ J U N E 1 1 CONFERENCE
16
2 0 1 5 M & A C O N F E R E N C E
2 0 1 5 M & A C O N F E R E N C E
17
What Makes Private Equity M&A Different?
2 0 1 5 M & A C O N F E R E N C E Email Questions to [email protected]
Panelists
Jeff Brown, Partner, Faegre Baker Daniels John Ackerman, Principal, Cardinal Equity Partners Gary Laitner, Partner, Faegre Baker Daniels Scot Swenberg, Managing Director, CID Capital Bob Welch, Managing Director, David A. Noyes & Company
18
2 0 1 5 M & A C O N F E R E N C E Email Questions to [email protected]
Topics to Cover
►Deal Metrics
►Primer – Buying with Leverage
►Valuation Drivers
►Owner/Management Perspective
►Deal Process
19
2 0 1 5 M & A C O N F E R E N C E Email Questions to [email protected]
Strategic v. Financial Buyers
Strategic Financial
Cost of Equity Lower Higher Cost of Debt Lower Higher Required IRR Lower Higher Tax Advantages More Less Time Horizon Longer Shorter Need for Accretion Higher Lower So: Who can justify a higher Enterprise Value?
But: Financial buyers are better at using leverage, which helps level the playing field.
20
2 0 1 5 M & A C O N F E R E N C E Email Questions to [email protected]
Primer - Buying with Leverage
►Buying with leverage magnifies both gains and losses.
Example: ►Buy Acme for $5 million, using 40% equity:
► Debt = $3 million; Equity = $2 million. ► Debt/Capital ratio = 60%. ► Debt/Equity ratio = 1.5x. ► Leverage ratio = 2.5x. ► Assume cost of debt is 6% per annum.
21
2 0 1 5 M & A C O N F E R E N C E Email Questions to [email protected]
Buying with Leverage
►Sell Acme at end of year 5 for $10 million, repay $3.9 million in debt (including accrued interest), and distribute remaining $6.1 million to equity holders: ► Cash on cash return = 6.1/2 = 3x return. ► IRR = 25%.
► In reality, the result would be better because the buyer would use the target's cash flow to pay down some debt over the 5 years.
►What if the deal is financed with 100% equity? ► Cash on cash return = 10/5 = 2x return. ► IRR = 14.9%.
22
2 0 1 5 M & A C O N F E R E N C E Email Questions to [email protected]
Deal Metrics
►Strategic M&A dwarfs PE acquisition activity:
►Both number of deals: 106 PE deals of 998 total deals announced in March 2015
►And dollar volume: $20.6 billion (PE equity base) of $194 billion total deal value announced in March 2015
23
2 0 1 5 M & A C O N F E R E N C E Email Questions to [email protected]
Valuation Drivers
►Strategic Buyers – Synergies ► Economies of scale, overhead consolidation, complementary business
lines, access to new markets, etc. ► Earnings accretion
►PE Buyers – Cash Flow
► Steady revenue and free cash flow, quality earnings, no substantial capex requirements, etc.
► Cost of debt ► Management equity rollover – approx. 20%
24
2 0 1 5 M & A C O N F E R E N C E Email Questions to [email protected]
Owner/Management Perspective
►Strategic sale is likely to be a complete exit: ► 100% sale ► Management may or may not stay on ► Business typically absorbed into buyer’s business
►PE sale is more like a partnership:
► 80% sale and 20% equity roll ► Management more likely to stay on ► Business remains more entrepreneurial ► PE firm supplies advice, board guidance, maybe growth capital ► The business will be sold again – the 2nd payday could be the larger
25
2 0 1 5 M & A C O N F E R E N C E Email Questions to [email protected]
Deal Process
►Hard to generalize: ► PE firms are in the M&A business ► Strategic buyer may or may not have a dedicated M&A team / experience
►Factors to consider that could be very different:
► Diligence process ► Legal risk allocation – indemnities and rep / warranty insurance ► Financing condition/lender meetings – closing risk ► Time to closing
26
2 0 1 5 M & A C O N F E R E N C E
2 0 1 5 M & A C O N F E R E N C E
27
What Goes Wrong After the Deal: Post-Closing Claims
2 0 1 5 M & A C O N F E R E N C E Email Questions to [email protected]
Panelists
28
David Becker President/CEO, First Internet Bank CEO, DyKnow, RICS
Scott Hebbeler Director Lincoln International
Karen DeHaan-Fullerton Assistant General Counsel Zimmer, Inc.
David Barrett Partner Faegre Baker Daniels
2 0 1 5 M & A C O N F E R E N C E Email Questions to [email protected]
Main Categories of Disputes
►Breaches of representations and warranties
►Purchase Price adjustment disputes (with primary one being working capital)
►Earn Out Disputes
►Breaches of Covenants (such as non-competes)
►Fraud
29
2 0 1 5 M & A C O N F E R E N C E Email Questions to [email protected]
Some Facts About Claims1
► Indemnity claims took an average of 8 months to resolve.
► 4% of deals with claims went to litigation or arbitration.
► 18% of deals in SRS study had at least one claim in final week of escrow period.
► Final escrow release delayed in 30% of deals. _________________________________ 1 Most of the information from this and slides 6 – 9 comes from Practical Law Company and the Shareholder Representative Services 2013 study about claims.
30
2 0 1 5 M & A C O N F E R E N C E Email Questions to [email protected]
Types of Claims
Undisclosed Liabilities 18%
Net Working Capital 17%
Appraisal Rights 5%
Breach of Fiduciary Duty 2% Fraud
1% Fees & Costs
3%
Capitalization 14%
Customer Contract 7%
Financial Statements 12%
Intellectual Property 6%
Other 1%
Regulatory 5%
Tax 9%
Cross-Section of All Claim Types
31
2 0 1 5 M & A C O N F E R E N C E Email Questions to [email protected]
Average Claim Size as Percentage of Escrow
7% 17%
9% 72%
30% 32%
20% 18%
3% 1%
100% 3%
Undisclosed LiabilitiesTax
RegulatoryOther
Intellectual PropertyFinancial Statements
EmployeeCustomer Contract
CapitalizationFees & Costs
FraudAppraisal Rights
Average Indemnification Claim Size as a Percentage of Escrow
32
2 0 1 5 M & A C O N F E R E N C E Email Questions to [email protected]
Types of Claims Against Escrow Accounts
16% 16%
12% 5%
9% 16%
12% 14%
9% 5% 5% 5%
Undisclosed LiabilitiesTax
RegulatoryOther
Intellectual PropertyFinancial Statements
EmployeeCustomer Contract
CapitalizationFees & Costs
FraudAppraisal Rights
Percentage of Deals with Expired Escrows Receiving Each Indemnification Claim Type
33
2 0 1 5 M & A C O N F E R E N C E Email Questions to [email protected]
Average Number of Claims per Basket Type
No Basket - 0 Combination - 1.33
Deductible - 0.57 First Dollar - 1.21
Average Number of Indemnification Claims Per Deal with Basket Type
34
Combination - 50% Deductible - 22%
First Dollar - 14%
Average Size of Indemnification Claims as a Percentage of Escrow in Deals with Basket Type
2 0 1 5 M & A C O N F E R E N C E Email Questions to [email protected]
Additional Overview Topics
►Are claims generally avoidable? ►Importance of pre-closing due diligence ►Process for bringing claims
35
2 0 1 5 M & A C O N F E R E N C E Email Questions to [email protected]
Purchase Price Adjustments
►GAAP issues
►Drafting Tips
►Accounting Referee
►Other specific examples
36
2 0 1 5 M & A C O N F E R E N C E Email Questions to [email protected]
Earn Outs: Some Statistics
►Health care, technology most popular for earn outs ►Typical driver from buyer’s perspective is uncertainty around
future earnings (or disagreement with seller as to what earnings look like).
►20-25% of Scott's deals have earn outs. ► 10% in Industrials ► 30-40% in Health Care
►According to 2013 ABA study, earn out hurdles were split nearly evenly in being set to (1) revenue, (2) earnings / EBITDA, and (3) other milestones.
37
2 0 1 5 M & A C O N F E R E N C E Email Questions to [email protected]
Earn Outs: Specific Issues
► Earn outs sound great in theory.
► Often very difficult to administer
► Sellers who see their idea changed often have a very difficult time.
► Consulting agreements as alternatives
► “All or nothing” / Milestones
38
2 0 1 5 M & A C O N F E R E N C E Email Questions to [email protected]
Breaches of Covenants
► Non-competes most common
► There are others, such as assisting with vendors, customers, etc.
► Balancing Act ► Even for sellers who plan to walk away, not caring about non-compete
is bad idea. ► On buy side, you don’t want your seller using your capital to compete
with you (massive red flag). ► Let's talk about what you are working on.
39
2 0 1 5 M & A C O N F E R E N C E Email Questions to [email protected]
Breaches of Reps and Warranties
►Material adverse change
►Tax issues
►Financial statement claims
►Undisclosed liability claims
►Capitalization claims
40
2 0 1 5 M & A C O N F E R E N C E Email Questions to [email protected]
Fraud
►Definition of fraud
►Grant Hill Equity Partners v. SIG Growth Equity Fund
41
2 0 1 5 M & A C O N F E R E N C E Email Questions to [email protected]
Other Topics
► Public company deals
► Relationship between post-closing integration and post-closing claims
► Preference of litigation vs. arbitration options
42
M & A 2015 I N D I A N A P O L I S ▼ J U N E 1 1 CONFERENCE
43
2 0 1 5 M & A C O N F E R E N C E
2 0 1 5 M & A C O N F E R E N C E
44
Acquiring a Public Company: What’s Different?
2 0 1 5 M & A C O N F E R E N C E Email Questions to [email protected]
Panelists
Christine Long, Partner, Faegre Baker Daniels Dan Corsaro, Partner, Transaction Advisory Services, Ernst & Young LLP Brian Edelman, CFO and Treasurer, Purdue Research Foundation Beau Garverick, Vice President of Corporate and Business Development, Anthem, Inc. Randy Paine, President, KeyBanc Capital Markets
45
2 0 1 5 M & A C O N F E R E N C E Email Questions to [email protected]
What is Public Company M&A?
►Acquisition of a company that is registered with the SEC ►Traded on an exchange or over-the-counter
►Requires compliance with disclosure obligations and
enhanced focus on director fiduciary duties
46
2 0 1 5 M & A C O N F E R E N C E Email Questions to [email protected]
Additional Concerns of a Public Company Target
►Knowing and approaching a public company target ► What are additional concerns of the target company’s Board?
►Activist Shareholders ►Fiduciary Duties – Heightened Scrutiny
► Best price rule once Board determines company is for sale (Revlon duties) ► Boards have burden of establishing they were adequately informed and acted
reasonably ► As a result, more likely to have pre-signing auctions designed to encourage
alternative proposals ► After signing, “fiduciary out” and / or “go-shop” provisions
►Litigation far more likely
47
2 0 1 5 M & A C O N F E R E N C E Email Questions to [email protected]
Negotiating with a Public Company
Confidentiality and Standstill Agreements ►Target company will demand confidentiality agreement with standstill as
condition to due diligence, access to confidential information. ►Even confidentiality agreement without standstill is restrictive.
► Will preclude disclosing discussions, proposals ► Can’t trade on inside information, including discussions.
►Standstill Agreements - Typical term of one to two years ► Limitations on trading, stock acquisitions and making and publicizing
acquisition proposals ► Prohibition on tender offers and proxy contests ► Will effectively preclude going hostile
48
2 0 1 5 M & A C O N F E R E N C E Email Questions to [email protected]
Negotiating with a Public Company (cont’d)
Due Diligence ►Significant information publicly available ►But increased importance of due diligence since no post-closing
recourse ► Need to educate those on buy-side of importance of diligence, in all areas
49
2 0 1 5 M & A C O N F E R E N C E Email Questions to [email protected]
Negotiating with a Public Company (cont’d)
Greater Risk of Premature Disclosure ► Ideal generally is not to disclose until definitive agreement is signed. ► Public disclosure is inevitable and likely sooner than might be desired.
► Consider developing plan for premature disclosure. ► Premature disclosure can adversely affect employees, customers, supplier
relationships; create yo-yo effect on stock price; and invite third-party suitors without deal protections.
Compressed Pre-signing Timeframe ► To reduce risk of premature disclosure and/or topping bids ► Want to know what other options seller has ► Puts pressure on getting sufficient diligence done in that timeframe
50
2 0 1 5 M & A C O N F E R E N C E Email Questions to [email protected]
Differences in Certain Agreement Terms
►Terms will be made public ► Indemnification virtually impossible ►Consideration almost always paid in its entirety at closing and escrows
very rare ►Conditions to closing may be more limited and are likely to be MAE
qualified ►“Fiduciary outs” - agreements usually permit termination for superior
proposal ►“Go-shop” provisions, which allow solicitation of alternative proposals
post-signing, are heavily negotiated
51
2 0 1 5 M & A C O N F E R E N C E Email Questions to [email protected]
Differences in Certain Agreement Terms (cont’d)
►Termination fees heavily negotiated ► Typically 2-4%; could include expense reimbursement
►Hart-Scott-Rodino (HSR) process ►Consideration may be partial or all stock of the Buyer
► Cash is king. ► Stock consideration leads to:
► Reverse diligence – on Buyer ► Need to value the stock ► Additional reps from Buyer and restrictions on its conduct before closing ► Possible Buyer shareholder vote ► Additional disclosure obligations for Buyer, including prospectus ► Complex tax considerations
52
2 0 1 5 M & A C O N F E R E N C E Email Questions to [email protected]
Less Deal Certainty
►Safer place is post-signing, but is by no means a guarantee of closing. ► Public disclosure of all agreement terms increases chance of competing offers ► Target company’s Board’s obligation to consider competing offers ► Increased time between public announcement and closing increases likelihood
that deal will not close
►Time between signing and closing likely to be substantially greater, depending on industry ► Regulatory approvals can be very time consuming ► HSR process and any required divestitures can extend time period ► Any required stockholder approval lengthens the time period ► Time to closing can be extended if SEC review occurs
53
2 0 1 5 M & A C O N F E R E N C E Email Questions to [email protected]
Role of Investment Bankers
►Engaging a financial advisor, typically an investment bank, has become standard practice in connection with public company acquisitions.
►The Board of Directors of target company obtains a fairness opinion from the financial advisor that concludes that the terms of the transition are fair to the target company’s shareholders from a financial standpoint. ► Provides the Board with information that may affect their evaluation of a
transaction – the fairness of the consideration to be paid ► Serves as evidence that the Board fulfilled its duty of care in approving a
transaction ►Buyer often also engages an investment banker. ►Will need to avoid (or disclose) any material relationships or potential
conflicts of the financial advisor
54
2 0 1 5 M & A C O N F E R E N C E Email Questions to [email protected]
Role of Accountants
►Conduct due diligence to help identify and understand the impact of accounting and tax issues in the transaction ► Accounting diligence (including internal controls) ► Tax diligence ► Business and operational diligence
►Provide advice regarding provisions in the acquisition agreement and/or financing agreements
►Assist with and review SEC disclosures, including pro forma financial statements
►Provide comfort letters
55
2 0 1 5 M & A C O N F E R E N C E Email Questions to [email protected]
Litigation Far More Likely
►Lawsuits routine ► 90-95% of public transactions have shareholder litigation, with average of
four to five lawsuits per transaction ► Can model in cost of litigation to the cost of the deal ► Need to prepare Boards of both companies that litigation is almost
inevitable ►Public announcement and filings give plaintiffs’ bar roadmap to possible
litigation. ► In particular, background of merger, reasons for the merger and fairness
opinion sections. ►Arbitrage “investors”
► Will do about anything to try to figure out when deal will close
56
2 0 1 5 M & A C O N F E R E N C E Email Questions to [email protected]
Integration Planning
►Planning is key.
►Antitrust considerations
57
2 0 1 5 M & A C O N F E R E N C E
2 0 1 5 M & A C O N F E R E N C E
58
The Auction Process: Tips and Tactics
2 0 1 5 M & A C O N F E R E N C E Email Questions to [email protected]
Panelists
Trevor Belden, Partner, Faegre Baker Daniels Joe Lavely, Managing Director, Greene Holcomb Fisher Rich Mitchell, President, A&R Logistics, Inc. Patrick Jensen, Managing Director, Prairie Capital
59
2 0 1 5 M & A C O N F E R E N C E Email Questions to [email protected]
Auction Defined
A structured process in which a business owner seeking to sell a business works with investment banking advisors to market the business for sale, to solicit bids from multiple potential purchasers, to assess bids and to negotiate and complete the transaction.
61
2 0 1 5 M & A C O N F E R E N C E Email Questions to [email protected]
Why an Auction Process?
►Why would a seller want to conduct an auction to sell the business?
►Under what circumstances does an auction not make sense?
►How can a buyer avoid an auction process?
62
2 0 1 5 M & A C O N F E R E N C E Email Questions to [email protected]
Deal Timeline
63
- Conduct due diligence - Finalize financial projections - Refine marketing strategy and buyer list - Prepare Confidential Memorandum
4 Weeks
SELECT BUYER
- Evaluate final offers - Further negotiate terms - Select preferred buyer(s)
NEGOTIATION & CLOSE
- Negotiate and execute definitive agreement - Buyer conducts final due diligence
6 Weeks
PHASE II - MARKETING
- Establish ground rules for Phase II - Develop management presentations - Conduct company visits - Support potential buyer due diligence - Distribute draft of purchase agreement (optional) - Solicit final offers
6 Weeks
PHASE I - MARKETING
- Contact full list of pre-approved potential buyers - Distribute Confidential Memorandum subject to signed CA - Solicit indications of interest - Select Phase II buyers
6 Weeks
0
Weeks 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24
LENDER MEETINGS AND TERM SHEETS
- Prepare and finalize lender presentations - Finalize lender list prepared by GHF - Initiate contact with potential lenders - Schedule and host lender discussions - Request and review initial term sheets
4 Weeks
2 Weeks
DEVELOP MARKETING STRATEGY & MATERIALS
2 0 1 5 M & A C O N F E R E N C E
2 0 1 5 M & A C O N F E R E N C E
64
Closing Remarks
Jim Birge Partner, Faegre Baker Daniels
M & A 2015 I N D I A N A P O L I S ▼ J U N E 1 1 CONFERENCE
65