3 ms·

In making such massively outlandish claims, data is required.

• apsec112 18y ago
  "The survey found that 82% of respondents believed the major deal they had been involved in had been a success. However, this was a subjective estimation of their success in achieving the deal objectives (see figure 2, on page 8), and less than half had carried out a formal review process. When we measured each one against our independent benchmark, based on comparative share performance one year after deal completion, the result was almost a mirror opposite. We found that only 17% of deals had added value to the combined company, 30% produced no discernible difference, and as many as 53% actually destroyed value. In other words, 83% of mergers were unsuccessful in producing any business benefit as regards shareholder value." - http://www.imaa-institute.org/docs/m&a/kpmg_01_Unlocking%20Shareholder%20Value%20-%20The%20Keys%20to%20Success.pdf http://www.imaa-institute.org/docs/m&a/kpmg_01_Unlocking...
  • byrneseyeview 18y ago
    Lose money != destroy value. If you bought something that earned $1 million/year, and the next year it earned $900K, your acquisition may have destroyed $100K in value -- but it's still making nine times that.
    • apsec112 18y ago
      I said that the acquisition loses money, not the company itself. In your example, the acquisition loses $100K, even though the company still makes $900K.