weak persons, each one

trying to find solace and strength in the other. Unfortunately, both will eventually discover the true character and incompatibility of the other. Given the high failure rate of mergers, the merger of two weak companies therefore spells the beginning of a bigger set of troubles. You cannot fix a bad computer with another bad one. The viruses residing in each of the partner will spread to one another causing both to be ruined. However, when a weak company merges with a stronger one, the former can tap the benefits of stronger management support, access to financing and a larger customer base. Such a merger has a better chance to succeed as the weaker company benefits from operational efficiencies, marke

Mergers are the equivalent of society weddings in the business world. But the honeymoon is usually over sooner than expected. Between one half and three quarters of all mergers do not work – they destroy rather than create value. Takeovers destroy almost a third of the acquirer’s pre-acquisition value, according to studies from the ESRC Centre for Business Research. According to most traditional assessment method, which is to simply compare the pre-bid profitability of the acquirer before and after acquisition, acquisitions result in significant improvement in profitability. However after taking into account the cost of acquisition, the cost of capital and subsequent earnings, then acquisition is starkly found to destroy 30% of the acquirer’s pre-acquisition value.

The success rate of mergers and acquisitions is dismal. Research (Gaplin and Hendron) has shown that during the mergers and acquisitions, 70% do not realise their projected synergies, only 30% of the companies acquired their return on the cost of capital and about 50% of executives leave in the first year. The CFO Magazine reported: “75% of Mergers and Acquisitions are disappointing or outright failures. 50% experience a decline in productivity in the first four to eight months. 47% of senior executives in acquired firms leave in the first year, 75% in the first 3 years.

The Economist (1999) reported: “Study after study of past merger waves has shown that two of every three deals have not worked…Look behind any disastrous deal and the same word keeps popping up – culture. Culture permeates a company and differences can poison any collaboration.”

A survey conducted by Grant Thornton Business Owners Council across 750 business owners and senior executives in the USA found that some of the major contributing factors for the failure of mergers and acquisitions include a poor integration strategy, a loss of key personnel, the lack of a compelling strategic rationale and inadequate communication.

Yet, mergers happen all the time – more often in bull markets where euphoria propels share prices to giddy heights. In bear markets and hard times, troubled businesses can look like a bargain or teaming up with another anaemic company to escape the doldrums or trouble seems the logical way to go. Managers find turnaround and organic growth to be extremely laborious, boring, slow and difficult. In contrast, a merger is exciting, glamorous and generates publicity and recognition in the media. It offers a quick way to grow in size though not necessary in profits. Weak companies merge to divert the attention away from their domestic problems. Many deals are the result of the merchant bankers’ good persuasion.

Another common argument offered in favour of mergers is that a positive synergistic linkup can be achieved. The synergistic sword cuts both ways. When a troubled company merges with another weak one, tantamount to a marriage of two weak persons, each one

trying to find solace and strength in the other. Unfortunately, both will eventually discover the true character and incompatibility of the other. Given the high failure rate of mergers, the merger of two weak companies therefore spells the beginning of a bigger set of troubles. You cannot fix a bad computer with another bad one. The viruses residing in each of the partner will spread to one another causing both to be ruined. However, when a weak company merges with a stronger one, the former can tap the benefits of stronger management support, access to financing and a larger customer base. Such a merger has a better chance to succeed as the weaker company benefits from operational efficiencies, market

e acquirer’s pre-acquisition value.

The success rate of mergers and acquisitions is dismal. Research (Gaplin and Hendron) has shown that during the mergers and acquisitions, 70% do not realise their projected synergies, only 30% of the companies acquired their return on the cost of capital and about 50% of executives leave in the first year. The CFO Magazine reported: “75% of Mergers and Acquisitions are disappointing or outright failures. 50% experience a decline in productivity in the first four to eight months. 47% of senior executives in acquired firms leave in the first year, 75% in the first 3 years.

The Economist (1999) reported: “Study after study of past merger waves has shown that two of every three deals have not worked…Look behind any disastrous deal and the same word keeps popping up – culture. Culture permeates a company and differences can poison any collaboration.”

A survey conducted by Grant Thornton Business Owners Council across 750 business owners and senior executives in the USA found that some of the major contributing factors for the failure of mergers and acquisitions include a poor integration strategy, a loss of key personnel, the lack of a compelling strategic rationale and inadequate communication.

Yet, mergers happen all the time – more often in bull markets where euphoria propels share prices to giddy heights. In bear markets and hard times, troubled businesses can look like a bargain or teaming up with another anaemic company to escape the doldrums or trouble seems the logical way to go. Managers find turnaround and organic growth to be extremely laborious, boring, slow and difficult. In contrast, a merger is exciting, glamorous and generates publicity and recognition in the media. It offers a quick way to grow in size though not necessary in profits. Weak companies merge to divert the attention away from their domestic problems. Many deals are the result of the merchant bankers’ good persuasion.

Another common argument offered in favour of mergers is that a positive synergistic linkup can be achieved. The synergistic sword cuts both ways. When a troubled company merges with another weak one, tantamount to a marriage of two weak persons, each one

trying to find solace and strength in the other. Unfortunately, both will eventually discover the true character and incompatibility of the other. Given the high failure rate of mergers, the merger of two weak companies therefore spells the beginning of a bigger set of troubles. You cannot fix a bad computer with another bad one. The viruses residing in each of the partner will spread to one another causing both to be ruined. However, when a weak company merges with a stronger one, the former can tap the benefits of stronger management support, access to financing and a larger customer base. Such a merger has a better chance to succeed as the weaker company benefits from operational efficiencies, marke

not worked…Look behind any disastrous deal and the same word keeps popping up – culture. Culture permeates a company and differences can poison any collaboration.”

A survey conducted by Grant Thornton Business Owners Council across 750 business owners and senior executives in the USA found that some of the major contributing factors for the failure of mergers and acquisitions include a poor integration strategy, a loss of key personnel, the lack of a compelling strategic rationale and inadequate communication.

Yet, mergers happen all the time – more often in bull markets where euphoria propels share prices to giddy heights. In bear markets and hard times, troubled businesses can look like a bargain or teaming up with another anaemic company to escape the doldrums or trouble seems the logical way to go. Managers find turnaround and organic growth to be extremely laborious, boring, slow and difficult. In contrast, a merger is exciting, glamorous and generates publicity and recognition in the media. It offers a quick way to grow in size though not necessary in profits. Weak companies merge to divert the attention away from their domestic problems. Many deals are the result of the merchant bankers’ good persuasion.

Another common argument offered in favour of mergers is that a positive synergistic linkup can be achieved. The synergistic sword cuts both ways. When a troubled company merges with another weak one, tantamount to a marriage of two weak persons, each one

trying to find solace and strength in the other. Unfortunately, both will eventually discover the true character and incompatibility of the other. Given the high failure rate of mergers, the merger of two weak companies therefore spells the beginning of a bigger set of troubles. You cannot fix a bad computer with another bad one. The viruses residing in each of the partner will spread to one another causing both to be ruined. However, when a weak company merges with a stronger one, the former can tap the benefits of stronger management support, access to financing and a larger customer base. Such a merger has a better chance to succeed as the weaker company benefits from operational efficiencies, marke

other anaemic company to escape the doldrums or trouble seems the logical way to go. Managers find turnaround and organic growth to be extremely laborious, boring, slow and difficult. In contrast, a merger is exciting, glamorous and generates publicity and recognition in the media. It offers a quick way to grow in size though not necessary in profits. Weak companies merge to divert the attention away from their domestic problems. Many deals are the result of the merchant bankers’ good persuasion.

Another common argument offered in favour of mergers is that a positive synergistic linkup can be achieved. The synergistic sword cuts both ways. When a troubled company merges with another weak one, tantamount to a marriage of two weak persons, each one

trying to find solace and strength in the other. Unfortunately, both will eventually discover the true character and incompatibility of the other. Given the high failure rate of mergers, the merger of two weak companies therefore spells the beginning of a bigger set of troubles. You cannot fix a bad computer with another bad one. The viruses residing in each of the partner will spread to one another causing both to be ruined. However, when a weak company merges with a stronger one, the former can tap the benefits of stronger management support, access to financing and a larger customer base. Such a merger has a better chance to succeed as the weaker company benefits from operational efficiencies, marke

weak persons, each one

trying to find solace and strength in the other. Unfortunately, both will eventually discover the true character and incompatibility of the other. Given the high failure rate of mergers, the merger of two weak companies therefore spells the beginning of a bigger set of troubles. You cannot fix a bad computer with another bad one. The viruses residing in each of the partner will spread to one another causing both to be ruined. However, when a weak company merges with a stronger one, the former can tap the benefits of stronger management support, access to financing and a larger customer base. Such a merger has a better chance to succeed as the weaker company benefits from operational efficiencies, marketing and financial advantages.

This is why Henry Ford said: ‘Coming together is the beginning, keeping together is progress, working together is success.” The yen to merge, acquire or partner is part of the company’s natural ambition for growth or to get out of trouble. However, it is the company that can consistently manage the marriage well that will outperform the peers. Two good companies coming together do not make a great organisation. Two mediocre companies merging do not ensure a good organisation. Two weak companies merging do not solve the problems. You cannot merge yourselves out of trouble.