谷歌可以跟雅虎學(xué)并購(gòu)
|
????谷歌（Google Inc.）并購(gòu)負(fù)責(zé)人唐?哈里森周二表示,，谷歌可能很快會(huì)與私募股權(quán)公司合伙收購(gòu)其他公司。 ????但有沒(méi)有更好的選擇呢,？比方說(shuō),，在谷歌內(nèi)部的企業(yè)開(kāi)拓團(tuán)隊(duì)中增加一些私募股權(quán)資深人士，就像雅虎（Yahoo）那樣,？ ????《彭博商業(yè)周刊》（Bloomberg Businessweek）對(duì)哈里森給出的解釋做了一番解讀,，具體如下: ????收購(gòu)公司可以協(xié)助買(mǎi)方，提供所需的融資,，或者就收購(gòu)?fù)瓿珊笕绾沃亟M或分割收購(gòu)目標(biāo)提供建議,。雖然谷歌也許只是將現(xiàn)金進(jìn)行投資以獲取一些回報(bào)，但它也可能會(huì)參與交易收購(gòu)資產(chǎn),。 ????首先,，很難理解為什么谷歌需要“融資”幫助。這家搜索引擎巨頭在一季度末擁有超過(guò)150億美元的現(xiàn)金,，如果將“短期投資”計(jì)算在內(nèi),，這個(gè)數(shù)值會(huì)進(jìn)一步增至500億美元。這家公司的股票也是相當(dāng)有價(jià)值的硬通貨,，周三的開(kāi)盤(pán)價(jià)達(dá)到了901.30美元,。 ????因此，只剩下獲取“建議”這部分的幫助,。如果谷歌需要一些懂得如何管理復(fù)雜交易或?qū)⒈皇召?gòu)公司的非核心資產(chǎn)價(jià)值最大化的人才,，為什么不直接聘用這些人呢？這樣,，谷歌不僅能夠獲得需要的專業(yè)技能,，也能對(duì)更傳統(tǒng)的交易有不一樣的認(rèn)識(shí)。 ????基本上雅虎（Yahoo）就是在這么干,。 ????去年9月,，雅虎聘請(qǐng)杰奎琳?雷瑟斯擔(dān)任首席發(fā)展官，她的職責(zé)之一就是負(fù)責(zé)并購(gòu),。雷瑟斯過(guò)去在私募股權(quán)公司Apax Partners工作過(guò)十年,，曾擔(dān)任該公司美國(guó)媒體業(yè)務(wù)部負(fù)責(zé)人。 ????而且雷瑟斯也不是單槍匹馬,。今年,，她從私募股權(quán)界招了兩名副總裁：T.R.?紐考布【前泛大西洋資本集團(tuán)（General Atlantic）雇員】和伊安?維因加頓【曾效力于私募公司戈?duì)査辜瘓F(tuán)（Gores Group）和私人股本投資機(jī)構(gòu)阿波羅管理公司（Apollo Management）】,。她還借力雅虎董事哈利?威爾森；威爾森目前經(jīng)營(yíng)著一家小型重組公司,，過(guò)去曾是信用投資公司銀點(diǎn)資本（Silver Point Capital）的合伙人,。 ????但在谷歌這一邊，看起來(lái)沒(méi)有一位企業(yè)發(fā)展高管擁有豐富的私募股權(quán)經(jīng)驗(yàn)（有幾位曾在職業(yè)生涯初期擔(dān)任職位較低的分析師）,。 ????需要澄清的一點(diǎn)是,，我并不認(rèn)為谷歌需要私募股權(quán)資深人士來(lái)促成好的交易。我也不是說(shuō),，對(duì)于收購(gòu)一家現(xiàn)金流不高（如Tumblr）的公司,，私募股權(quán)經(jīng)驗(yàn)有多么重要。 ????事實(shí)上,，我只是想指出,，如果谷歌認(rèn)為，具備私募股權(quán)專長(zhǎng)與眼光能讓它獲益,，它無(wú)需通過(guò)與其他私募股權(quán)公司合作來(lái)分?jǐn)傦L(fēng)險(xiǎn)與回報(bào),。直接與私募股權(quán)公司的（前）合伙人合伙就可以了。（財(cái)富中文網(wǎng)） |
????Google Inc. may soon partner with private equity firms to acquire other companies, according to comments made yesterday by Google mergers and acquisitions chief Don Harrison. ????But isn't there a better option? Like adding private equity veterans to Google's (GOOG) in-house corporate development team, like Yahoo (YHOO) has done? ????Here was Harrison's explanation, as paraphrased by Bloomberg Businessweek: ????Buyout firms can assist an acquirer by providing needed financing or advice on how a target could be restructured or carved up after a deal closes. While Google may invest cash to get a return on the investment, it may also take part in a deal to acquire an asset. ????For starters, it's hard to understand why Google would ever be in need of "financing" assistance. The search giant had more than $15 billion of cash on hand at the end of Q1, which expands to $50 billion once "short-term investments" are taken into account. It also has a pretty valuable currency in its own stock, which opened trading today at $901.30 per share. ????So that leaves the "advice" piece. If Google just wants people who know how to manage complicated transactions, or maximize value from non-core assets of acquired companies, why not just hire them? Not only would Google get the desired expertise, but it also could get a different perspective on more traditional deals. ????This is basically what's happened over at Yahoo. ????Last September the company hired Jacqueline Reses as chief development officer, where her responsibilities include overseeing M&A. Reses previously spent ten years with private equity firm Apax Partners, including as head of its U.S. media group. ????And Reses hasn't been going it alone. Already this year she has hired two new vice presidents from the private equity world: T.R. Newcomb (ex-General Atlantic) and Ian Weingarten (ex-Gores Group/Apollo Management). She also leverages Yahoo board member Harry Wilson, who currently runs a turnaround and restructuring boutique and used to be a partner with credit-oriented investment firm Silver Point Capital. ????Google, on the other hand, does not appear to have any corp dev executives with significant private equity experience (a few spent time as lower-level analysts early in their careers). ????No be clear, I'm not arguing that Google needs private equity veterans in order to do good deals. Nor am I saying that private equity experience matters too much when acquiring a company that has insignificant cash flow (i.e., Tumblr). ????Instead, just pointing out that if Google believes there are opportunities out there that could benefit from private equity acumen, it needn't dilute its risk/reward by partnering with private equity firms. Just partner with their (former) partners. |
最新文章