I have been reading a lot about the merger and acquisition (M&A) division of many financial firms and the more aggressive sounding name for a similar part of a company, Leveraged Buy-Outs (LBO). I am all about world peace, multiculturalism, and equality of opportunity, etc. But when it comes to business, companies are not charities. I want to know more about how to create a successful LBO of another company; because, it is my opinion that Starbucks (SBUX) and Noah’s Bagels (BAGL) should become one company, exploiting the best aspects of each company to bring a better service to customers.
I worked for Starbucks a few years ago and was not really impressed with the corporate culture that it had developed for itself, so I quit. Recently Starbucks began to sell food they can heat up for customers in a really big convection oven. I have not tasted any of it, fortunately for me all the selections are non-vegetarian so I haven’t even been tempted, but I can tell it is all crap. Moreover, walking into the store used to be somewhat pleasant because I like coffee; now, it smells so bad inside that I want to sick up from the food being sold.
On the other hand, the bagels at Noah’s are really great. There is a good selection of smears (cheese creams) and there is a big selection of bagels made fresh with all sorts of good other toppings and combinations for making the bagel experience even more tasty. Yet the coffee brewed at Noah’s not only leaves something to be desired, but makes me question my affection for coffee altogether. This is where being a consumer becomes a challenge, and I don’t want to be challenged when I am gladly giving away what little money I have.
The problem with a LBO with these two companies is that Noah’s is in the red this year and has owners who would see positive cash flows only if Starbucks bought the bagel company. At this point, we would be looking at a merger and/or acquisition of Noah’s by Starbucks. This product-extension merger for Starbucks is what was supposed to happen when the breakfast food was introduced, but failed miserably, I avoid Starbucks completely because of the terrible smell that is a bad mixture of coffee, cardboard and reheated egg.
To make a sound merge decision, a key figure is a Price Earnings Ratio, Noah’s has a P/E of 2.76, meaning that investors are willing to pay less than $3 for each $1 in earnings. A very low number when compared other companies in the industry. Krispy Kreme (KKD), for example, has a P/E ratio of 80, Starbucks’ is 26, Panera Bread Company (PNRA) has a P/E of almost 30. There are other figures to consider, but just looking at the balance sheet for each company will reveal Starbucks has over 25 times the dollar amount of assets of Noah’s. Just to be clear for the mathematically challenged: Noah’s total assets are $200,000 while the total assets for Starbucks is $5.5 million.
While I am interested in finance, I can still think in terms of business and economies of scale. It would not be efficient, nor very practical to make the bagels inside the Starbucks coffee stores. There would need to be just a few adjustments to the business of each company to make everything run well enough to provide the customers with exceptional goods and services. Some may question my irritation of having to go to one store for decent coffee and another for a decent bite to eat; well, I am paying to make my life easier, so make my life easier.
First, Starbucks would do away with the mediocre selection of pastries and other products, selling the superior selection of current Noah’s Bagels stock, delivered fresh each morning from the location of the nearest current Noah’s. Next, Noah’s would install an espresso machine and employ a barista to make and serve coffee and coffee drinks in addition to the sumptuous selection of bagels and bagels sandwiches. Finally, Starbucks would begin to open new stores that better accommodate the paring of delicious bagels and finely picked and roasted coffee. Thus, a beautiful symbiosis of breakfast and sales is created.
Sunday, October 24, 2010
Sunday, October 17, 2010
Midterms All Week
I will be back next week, after this wave of midterms passes. Wish me luck. Until then, I hope this keeps you smiling.
Sunday, October 10, 2010
Money Never Sleeps
What should a business do when confronted with an increase in the supply of labor from a low ability group that has a high productivity of output? What if this group is a non-native group that carries a racial stigma yet provides the lowest wage cost in the market? The decisions made by a manager will be tied with increasing the profits for the company, producing the best results with the available inputs.
The argument for immigrant labor as a complement to the native labor force follows that an increase in low-skilled work will push the high-skilled native workers into better jobs, more requisite of their skills. Often this movement up the labor ladder coincides with a physical relocation of the worker as better employment is found in other parts of the country.
Two American economists, George Borjas and David Card , have dissenting opinions from one another on the actual impact of immigration in the labor markets. Each have many papers that have been published, some as independent papers and others as responses to one another, filled with all kinds of data, tables, graphs, and math. The most recent housing bubble that wrote the demise of the banking system has, in my opinion, given opportunity for new papers to be written on the future of immigration impacts to the labor market.
An example of the problem has been written in The Economist as recently as the beginning of September. It reads: “Many owe more on mortgages than their homes are worth. Households often opt to stay put rather than default, leaving them trapped in places with high unemployment and unable to move to where jobs are plentiful.” In terms of unemployment, this is structural, requiring government action that is contrary to what has been explored with looser monetary policy.
It will be in the best interest of the immigrants to remain in their current jobs and with their current, lower wages. That is the rational behavior expected of an individual who maximizes well-being. If, however, the native workers become substitutes to the immigrant workers, where both compete for the same jobs in a lousy job market, I can predict a magnification of the racial stigma many immigrant workers already face. Love thy neighbor; because, he is you.
The argument for immigrant labor as a complement to the native labor force follows that an increase in low-skilled work will push the high-skilled native workers into better jobs, more requisite of their skills. Often this movement up the labor ladder coincides with a physical relocation of the worker as better employment is found in other parts of the country.
Two American economists, George Borjas and David Card , have dissenting opinions from one another on the actual impact of immigration in the labor markets. Each have many papers that have been published, some as independent papers and others as responses to one another, filled with all kinds of data, tables, graphs, and math. The most recent housing bubble that wrote the demise of the banking system has, in my opinion, given opportunity for new papers to be written on the future of immigration impacts to the labor market.
An example of the problem has been written in The Economist as recently as the beginning of September. It reads: “Many owe more on mortgages than their homes are worth. Households often opt to stay put rather than default, leaving them trapped in places with high unemployment and unable to move to where jobs are plentiful.” In terms of unemployment, this is structural, requiring government action that is contrary to what has been explored with looser monetary policy.
It will be in the best interest of the immigrants to remain in their current jobs and with their current, lower wages. That is the rational behavior expected of an individual who maximizes well-being. If, however, the native workers become substitutes to the immigrant workers, where both compete for the same jobs in a lousy job market, I can predict a magnification of the racial stigma many immigrant workers already face. Love thy neighbor; because, he is you.
Sunday, October 3, 2010
A Cure for the Hurd
A few weeks ago the Department of Justice ordered a few of the big software companies, Apple, Adobe, Google, et al, to remove each other from a no-call list, preventing employees from being taken from one firm to another. This was an attempt by the government to halt the possibility of collusive activity between these software giants, implying the importance of competition within an industry.
Flash forward to the present and enter into the drama of Hewlett-Packard and Oracle. Oracle boss, Larry Ellison, is in a rage about the hiring of Leo Apotheker by Hewlett-Packard as a replacement for Mark Hurd, who was hired by Oracle after he was let go from Hewlett-Packard, creating tension between the once complementary companies.
Quickly, Hurd left H-P over allegations of sexual harassment and went to Oracle. Oracle develops software and H-P primarily develops hardware, such as printers and the netbook I am using now. When Hurd was taken in by Oracle, H-P was freaking out because they thought Hurd had access to privileged information and would use that information against H-P.
In the computer industry, software and hardware are perfect complements; and, H-P and Oracle had a successful relationship, sharing 14,000 customers. H-P chose to hang Hurd out to dry when he was presented with some problems, despite the immeasurable success that he brought to the company “on the back of fierce fiscal discipline,” according to the New York Times, “focused on fostering growth in three areas: operating and managing next-generation data centers, mobile technology, and printing in its broadest applications.” In fact, when I looked at H-P share value, the stock doubled while Hurd was at the helm from $20 in 2005 to $40 in 2010.
It is obvious he was important to H-P, first a lawsuit was filed against him, and then they hired Mr Apotheker. If H-P were a man, (We’ll call him Tony) he is morally adverse to the actions of Mr Hurd but still has a need for his innate qualities as a leader. Tony has an anger problem and is acting in his well-being, yet filled with anger; nothing good can come from that. The next step for Tony, apparently, is making a bitter decision to “get back” at Hurd and his new family (we’ll call them the Osterholms).
H-P needs to forget about Hurd and let him live his new life with his family, stop pestering him and, ultimately, Tony needs to get his own life. Whether it was truly a strategic management decision to hire a former software CEO in Mr Apotheker, or a bitter hiring decision directed at Hurd and Oracle, one hopes that H-P is able to survive on the island it has built for itself, depending on no one else to seamlessly transition from hardware to its weak spot, software. Can anyone say “Apple?”
Flash forward to the present and enter into the drama of Hewlett-Packard and Oracle. Oracle boss, Larry Ellison, is in a rage about the hiring of Leo Apotheker by Hewlett-Packard as a replacement for Mark Hurd, who was hired by Oracle after he was let go from Hewlett-Packard, creating tension between the once complementary companies.
Quickly, Hurd left H-P over allegations of sexual harassment and went to Oracle. Oracle develops software and H-P primarily develops hardware, such as printers and the netbook I am using now. When Hurd was taken in by Oracle, H-P was freaking out because they thought Hurd had access to privileged information and would use that information against H-P.
In the computer industry, software and hardware are perfect complements; and, H-P and Oracle had a successful relationship, sharing 14,000 customers. H-P chose to hang Hurd out to dry when he was presented with some problems, despite the immeasurable success that he brought to the company “on the back of fierce fiscal discipline,” according to the New York Times, “focused on fostering growth in three areas: operating and managing next-generation data centers, mobile technology, and printing in its broadest applications.” In fact, when I looked at H-P share value, the stock doubled while Hurd was at the helm from $20 in 2005 to $40 in 2010.
It is obvious he was important to H-P, first a lawsuit was filed against him, and then they hired Mr Apotheker. If H-P were a man, (We’ll call him Tony) he is morally adverse to the actions of Mr Hurd but still has a need for his innate qualities as a leader. Tony has an anger problem and is acting in his well-being, yet filled with anger; nothing good can come from that. The next step for Tony, apparently, is making a bitter decision to “get back” at Hurd and his new family (we’ll call them the Osterholms).
H-P needs to forget about Hurd and let him live his new life with his family, stop pestering him and, ultimately, Tony needs to get his own life. Whether it was truly a strategic management decision to hire a former software CEO in Mr Apotheker, or a bitter hiring decision directed at Hurd and Oracle, one hopes that H-P is able to survive on the island it has built for itself, depending on no one else to seamlessly transition from hardware to its weak spot, software. Can anyone say “Apple?”
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)