Recent Blog Posts
-
The Times' Rorshach Geithner Story
Apr 27 20099:26 am EDT -
Sinking Animal Spirits
Apr 27 20098:45 am EDT -
Counter-cyclical Urban Policy
Apr 26 200910:00 am EDT -
Be Your Own Counterfeiter
Apr 26 20099:36 am EDT -
Being Tim Geithner
Apr 25 200912:37 pm EDT -
Notes From a Press Conference Naif
Apr 25 20099:41 am EDT -
What Good is the News?
Apr 25 20098:32 am EDT -
Stressful Enough
Apr 24 20092:29 pm EDT -
Not Regretting the Pound
Apr 24 20091:09 pm EDT -
Introducing the New Ford Squeeze
Apr 24 20099:47 am EDT
Links
- Felix Salmon

- DealBreaker

- Ryan Avent: The Bellows

- The Epicurean Dealmaker

- Chris Anderson

- Ultimi Barbarorum

- MarketBeat

- Michelle Leder

- John Quiggin

- The Panelist

- Andrew Leonard

- Streetsblog

- Brad Setser

- Michael Mandel

- Financial Crookery

- Kash Mansori

- Dean Baker

- Calculated Risk

- Free Exchange

- Curbed

- Lance Knobel

- Econospeak

- Carbon Tax Center

- Overcoming Bias

- Mark Thoma

- Naked Capitalism

- Alphaville

- Barry Ritholtz

- Alexander Campbell

- The Bayesian Heresy

- Brad DeLong

- DealBook

- Greg Mankiw

- Deal Journal

- FP Passport

- Carl Bialik

- Marginal Revolution

- A Fistful of Euros

- Dan Gross

Where is Citi's M&A Expertise?
Bill Ackman made an interesting point at the Value Investing Congress today: Citi announced its deal with Wachovia on Monday September 29, at which point both boards had signed off on it. Given that all the specifics were in place, how come there was no signed deal agreement come Friday October 3, when Wells Fargo came galloping in to ride off into the sunset with all of Wachovia? A good lawyer, said Ackman, can put that kind of an agreement together overnight: it certainly shouldn't take a full week.
If an agreement had been signed, then Citi would be in a much stronger position right now. Rather than desperately litigating exclusivity agreements, it could demand very specific breakup fees and the like. Instead, it's desperately trying to pay Wachovia more money for fewer assets.
Did Citi simply take its eye off the ball, in not forcing a Wachovia exec to sign a deal immediately after it was approved? Were they played by Wachovia's Robert Steel, who never really wanted the Citi deal but who knew that he needed something so that he could survive the week and come out the other side in the arms of someone more attractive? No one knows for sure, but it certainly looks that way.
Citigroup is in massive M&A mode these days: it's not only bidding for distressed assets; it's also trying to sell off non-core assets like the German retail bank, which went to France's Credit Mutuel. Right now, it needs nothing so much as world-beating M&A expertise. If it can be caught as flat-footed as it looks right now, that bodes ill for any future deals.
Incidentally, trading in Wachovia was suspended for about 12 minutes shortly after noon today. No one seems to know why. But given that Wells Fargo is willing to pay $7 a share, and that there seems to be some kind of bidding war going on, it's peculiar that Wachovia's only trading at $5.75: I would have expected it to be trading over $7 a share, not under, even after accounting for the fact that Well's Fargo's offer is an all-stock deal and Wells shares are down 5% today.
Comments
If you are commenting using a Facebook account, your profile information may be displayed with your comment depending on your privacy settings. By leaving the 'Post to Facebook' box selected, your comment will be published to your Facebook profile in addition to the space below.





