Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Archive for the ‘Gerbsman Partners’ Category

By – McHugh & Co. and  member of Gerbsman Partners Board of Intellectual Capital

A while back I was retained to help develop a new strategic plan for the management team and the Board of Directors of an angel-backed technology company.

Soon after I started the project, the CEO told me that a significant angel investor/board member (Moneyman) called either she or the CFO every day at 4:45 for an update on the company. Every day, not kidding…

Was Moneyman, “Just checkin’ in…?”

Was he simply showing enthusiasm, expressing interest, acting curious, proffering sage advice, coaching the senior team and being ‘hands on’?

He wasn’t calling to coach or offer operating advice. Moneyman was meddling.

The constant, meddling actions of the controlling, outside investors in the day-to-day affairs of the organization have a direct, negative impact on the organization’s performance.

Meddling can cause a company to be Stuck in a Ditch.

The Board of Director’s Bell Curve

I think a ‘bell curve’ (normal distribution) can be used to understand the participation level of a Director. Here is my interpretation:

Over time, I’ll be writing blog posts about the broad topic of private company boards and governance.  I’ve been a member of nine boards (private equity backed, vc/angel backed or family owned). I’ve also been directly involved with many other company boards through my consulting work.

These blog posts are not going to cover what I would call the ‘board/governance basics’ (i.e. ideal member, term, compensation, etc.). That sort of content is plentiful.

I will examine the different Board personalities and styles of governance I’ve experienced over the last 20 years with a hope that these shared experiences and stories can make your Board more cohesive, and improve the interactions between management and individual board members.

How did Moneyman become a Meddler?

I’ve already said Moneyman is a #5.  I think this table sums it up.

Moneyman:

  • was impatient, increasingly frustrated and dissatisfied with the company’s overall performance…his performance expectations were not being met
  • had put a lot of personal money into the company – he had the courage to commit his money to a new venture
  • did not have a good understanding of market size and customer acceptance of the products; he thought the market was HUGE – it wasn’t
  • questioned the skills of the management team
  • had no meaningful experience in this company’s business or industry; his personal financial success came from a completely different business experience
  • had a very intense personality

All of these factors together produced a combustive mix and created a difficult relationship with the management team and some other Board members.  If he was not one of the ‘lead angel investors’, he should not have been on the Board.

What happened?

Management and the Board came together around a revised strategy, a new operating plan and a realistic set of expectations about customer acceptance and addressable market size.  Revenues increased, the company became cash flow positive and the financial pressures subsided. Moneyman became less fearful that the value of his investment was heading toward zero. He had renewed hope and the meddling diminished and became less intense.

Have you experienced the Meddler? Do you have suggestions on how to work with this type of Director?

Read Full Post »

Article from GigaOm.

“I meet a lot of owners of midmarket IT services companies who almost immediately ask me, “What is my company worth?” Even those who don’t ask want to know often ask.

It’s a fair question, with a complicated answer. I can do a back of the envelope calculation and determine the enterprise value of a company today based on 12 months trailing revenue or perhaps a multiple of EBITDA (earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation and amortization). But the real value of a company is based less on its past performance than on its potential worth to a future owner. What the buyer can bring to the party and how well its management believes it can execute the acquisition and business strategy going forward is where a company’s true value resides and where the domain expertise or strategy comes into play.

Case in point: In 1996, IBM bought Tivoli Systems for $743 million, paying about 10 times trailing revenue. Many analysts concluded at the time of the sale that IBM grossly overpaid for the asset. Within a year, IBM was able to leverage Tivoli into almost a billion dollars in revenue. Just like beauty, value is in the eye of the beholder. Tivoli had more value to IBM than Tivoli had to itself at the time. So did IBM pay 10 times revenue or less than one times revenue for Tivoli?

Unfortunately, I don’t have a crystal ball. So I don’t know what potential buyers can do to leverage a company’s value. And a calculation on the back of an envelope almost always fails to satisfy.

Here is something else the owners I talk with really don’t want to hear: Chances are they have taken actions that over time have eroded — or even destroyed — the value of their company without even realizing it. In my last post for GigaOM, I wrote about “5 things that destroy a company’s value.” In this post and in future posts, I’m going to examine these value killers one at a time in greater detail.

Today, my topic is opportunistic acquisitions. And to be clear, my message is for owners of midmarket companies who are interested in making acquisitions designed to increase their own value. In doing so, they hope to become attractive acquisition candidates to buyers in the future.

Acquisitions fail 70 to 90 percent of the time

If you search for the phrase “acquisition failure rates,” you’ll be treated to study after study that peg failure rates at somewhere between 70 percent and 90 percent. Dig a little deeper, and you’ll find articles enumerating the many reasons most acquisitions don’t work.

Nearly all of these reasons can be boiled down to two:

  1. The acquisition was a bad match between what the seller had and what the buyer could do to create value. The bad match often occurs because the buyer was fooled, misled, or overlooked key points of the deal, or the buyer simply suffered from hubris.
  2.  The buyer did a poor job of integrating the acquisition and executing on the business strategy designed for its new asset.

In both situations, acquisitions fail because the buyer doesn’t really know what or why it’s buying — let alone what to do with the acquisition.

Think about when HP bought Compaq or when Time Warner bought AOL.

Of course there are companies that are successful with acquisitions. Cisco has acquired 150 companies since its first acquisition in 1993. In fact, acquisitions are a core competency of Cisco — few companies are better at it.

Cisco’s purchases are fueled by the desire to speed up the rate at which the company can offer new technologies in a market that is hyper-competitive and evolving rapidly.

Not all of Cisco’s acquisitions are hits. Remember the Flip video camera that Cisco shut down in 2011? But many were successful, especially in the early days. At the peak of its acquisition activity in 2001, Cisco’s purchases were widely credited with laying the foundation for about half of its business at the time.

The secret to Cisco’s fruitful acquisitions is its ability to successfully onboard companies. Cisco employs a full-time staff solely focused on integrating new companies into the fold — instead of haphazardly assembling part-time transition teams whose members are all busy with their regular jobs.

In terms of strategy and execution, Oracle is even better at acquisitions. The company has spent billions on about 90 companies since its acquisition of PeopleSoft closed in 2005. Oracle’s chief skills are identifying companies that fit well into its longterm business strategy at the front end of the process, and its ability to integrate and act on these strategies at the back end. In 2011, readers of The Deal Magazine recognized Oracle’s track record with an award for most admired corporate dealmaker in information technology for deals completed from 2008 to 2010.

Until late in 2011, Oracle’s acquisition drive was to create the broadest portfolio of traditional enterprise software applications in the industry. With the company’s $1.5 billion acquisition of SaaS CRM applications provider RightNow Technologies (announced in September 2011 and completed in January 2012), Oracle now hopes to work its magic in the SaaS market. Oracle paid more than seven times trailing revenue for RightNow. I bet that in the next year or two, Oracle will make that multiple look like a bargain — just like when IBM bought Tivoli.

Still, Cisco, Oracle and other exceptions to the rule underscore the difficulty of making acquisitions work. It’s even harder when an acquisition happens because a buyer is presented with an unexpected “opportunity” and management decides it’s just “too good to pass up.” These so-called “opportunistic” acquisitions often lead to disappointment or disaster.

The reasons for failure are obvious. Acquirers lured by such a passive approach often have no clearly defined goals, have not thought through the attributes of ideal acquisition candidates, have done little or no pre-acquisition planning, and suffer from a lack of choice.

It reminds me of people who go to Las Vegas for the weekend and end up married. Getting married in Nevada is quick, easy and relatively inexpensive. All you need is a marriage license — no blood tests and no waiting period. And there is a wedding chapel on every corner.

Of course, when you wake up the next morning, there may be hell to pay.

I know. I’ve been there. Not in Las Vegas on the morning after, but at an organization that for many years only bought companies that showed up on its doorstep. We had no strategy and no process for integrating acquisitions into the mothership. I’m convinced that if the owner of the neighborhood car wash had offered us a “good” deal, we’d have taken it.

So here’s my advice for owners of companies seeking to enhance their value through opportunistic acquisitions. Acquisitions can do a lot of good. They can add to your growth and earnings, speed your entry into new markets, allow you to acquire human capital or intellectual property more quickly, and lower your costs through economies of scale. All of these things have the potential to increase the value of your company to a prospective buyer.

But just like marriage, acquisitions should never be decided on a whim. And you should never buy a company just because it’s for sale. Frankly, companies that are not for sale offer juicier profits and are likely a better strategic fit. Better to take some of that money and go have fun with it in Las Vegas.

And if you go there, don’t get married.”

Read more here.

 

Read Full Post »

Article from TechCrunch.

Your Powerpoint pitchdeck is so boring. So. Freaking. Boring. Although tech bloggers aren’t sent startup’s actual pitchdecks as often as investors are (thankfully), we’re still walked through them on dreadful, “let me read to you from my Powerpoint” phone calls more often than should be socially acceptable. That’s why when image aggregator Piccsy, which is simultaneously a competitor to Pinterest as well as a top 20 content source for the site,  pinged us to take a look at its pitch deck, we were pleasantly surprised. A pitchdeck that’s actually fun to read? Can such a thing exist?

Piccsy.com/investors hosts the company’s public pitchdeck, and it’s a striking, visual representation of the data that would be typically found in bullet-pointed slideshows. The format leads you to wander through content and explore, much like Piccsy itself does. CEO Daniel Eckler admits that he doesn’t even know how to use Powerpoint. “I’ve only ever opened the program once or twice in my life,” he says. But it wasn’t just lack of know-how that led the company to ditch the idea of the traditional deck. As outsiders from Toronto, they wanted to stand out, Eckler says.

“We began with a problem (how to get investors to see our deck) and came up with a solution (create something unique, beautiful, informative, and easy to share), as opposed to going with the status quo,” Eckler explains. “This is conceivably the first thing investors are going to relate to when they see a company. Lots of companies that are innovative in other areas are sticking to an old model with their deck, even though they have the resources (dev/design) to do something special.”

Plus, he adds, a generic, Powerpoint-style deck wouldn’t be right for a site that’s all about discovering beautiful imagery.

For what it’s worth, the novel deck has been working. 50,000 pageviews and 15 inbound investor requests came in over the weekend, and the site got linked on Hacker News (where discussion delved into criticisms over content, however, but not the style.) Said one commenter, “it’s a beautiful presentation. I’m jealous….I’d absolutely pay to get a site like that.”

Say, Piccsy – if that whole image aggregation thing doesn’t work out…

The screenshot above is just a snippet. The full site is here.

Read more on Piccsy at www.piccsy.com.

Read the original article here.

Read Full Post »

San Francisco, May, 2012
The Perfect Storm Revisited 2012
by Robert Tillman, Member of Gerbsman Partners Board of Intellectual Capital

The term Perfect Storm refers to a rare combination of circumstances that aggravate a situation drastically. I believe that a number of situations may well come to a head simultaneously by the beginning of 2013.

  1. The fall of the Euro. Given the recent elections in France, Germany and Greece, the dissolution of the Euro zone is looking far more likely. European voters are consistently rejecting austerity and turning left, but European governments are running out of money to pay what those voters demand. The result is a mess. Read more here.
  2. A war in the Middle East. The recent formation in Israeli of a strong coalition government under Netanyahu has cleared the way for an attack on Iran. The various Sunni governments, and even Hamas, have signaled their approval of such an attack. It must happen soon or it will be too late. With it will come a major spike in oil prices.
  3. A slow down in growth and a bursting of the economic bubble in China. This past month China showed a decline in imports. The downfall of Bo Xilai shows the rottenness in the Chinese system. Given the corruption in their system and the opaqueness of their accounting, the Chinese do not themselves understand the financial reality of their situation. See more here.
  4. The end of the Bush tax cuts beginning 2013, resulting in a large tax increase in the United States. The result will be substantial downward pressure on stock prices. Who would not consider selling stocks when Federal capital gains rates will increase from 15% to 25% and Federal dividend tax rates will increase from 15% to 39.6%. See more they will hurt greatly in the short term.
  5. The necessary decrease in both the Federal and State budgets. California is in particularly bad shape with a estimated $16 billion shortfall that is almost certainly understated. While such spending reductions are absolutely necessary in the long term, they will hurt greatly in the short term.
  6. After the November election, the largely liberal press will no longer have an incentive to tell us that the economy is getting better, when the opposite is true. If Obama is elected, they will need to start telling the truth so as to preserve the shreds of their credibility. If Romney is elected, they will have a great incentive to portray the economy as even worse than it is.

Each of these events will be hastened by the others and will also cause major unforeseen consequences. We are living in an incredibly interconnected and interdependent world. We are also living in a world in which governments have no reserves and in which they have already used up the tools that that have to influence events. There will be no TARP III or a larger European Bailout Fund. We are about to enter a very bad period and we are tapped out.

Hold on. It will be a rough ride.

About Gerbsman Partners

Gerbsman Partners focuses on maximizing enterprise value for stakeholders and shareholders in under-performing, under-capitalized and under-valued companies and their Intellectual Property. Since 2001, Gerbsman Partners has been involved in maximizing value for 70 Technology, Life Science and Medical Device companies and their Intellectual Property and has restructured/terminated over $805 million of real estate executory contracts and equipment lease/sub-debt obligations. Since inception, Gerbsman Partners has been involved in over $2.3 billion of financings, restructurings and M&A transactions.

Gerbsman Partners has offices and strategic alliances in Boston, New York, Washington, DC, Alexandria, VA, San Francisco, Orange County, Europe and Israel. For additional information please visit http://gerbsmanpartners.com or Gerbsman Partners blog.

Read Full Post »

The March Hare CEO

By    Member Gerbsman Partners Board of Intellectual Capital

Have you attended a “Mad Tea Party” Board of Directors or management meeting and listened to the CEO’s unrealistic expectations about future performance?  Did you leave the meeting scratching your head about what you heard?

Lewis Carroll introduced us to the strange Mad Hatter and the March Hare in his 1865 book Alice’s Adventures in Wonderland.  The Mad Hatter hosted the Mad Tea Party; during this raucous event there was one revealing exchange with Alice:

‘Have some wine,’ the March Hare said in an encouraging tone.

Alice looked all around the table, but there was nothing on it but tea.

‘I don’t see any wine,’ she remarked.

‘There isn’t any,’ said the March Hare.

How many times has a corporate leader told you there was plenty of wine about, but in fact, there was only tea at best?  Your gut is screaming… “There is no way this company can hit those targets”.  But your hope and the March Hare CEO’s enthusiasm get the better of you.  I have seen this scenario repeated many times at stuck companies; there can be over optimism and not enough effort focused on analyzing the brutal facts and confronting reality.

What’s wrong with being optimistic and aiming high?

Nothing, as long as the predictions are believable and achievable.  In the July 2003 issue of the Harvard Business Review there is an article entitled ‘Delusions of Success: How Optimism Undermines Executives’ Decisions’.   The authors (Lovallo and Kahneman) warn of the negative consequences of ‘flawed decision-making’ based upon over optimism.  They state ‘…when pessimistic opinions are suppressed, while optimistic ones are rewarded, an organization’s ability to think critically is undermined.’  Recognizing that people like to rally behind optimism, they say there ‘…needs to be a balance between realism and optimism.’

Jim Collins, in his acclaimed best-seller Good to Great, devoted an entire chapter (‘Confront the Brutal Facts, Yet Never Lose Faith’) about dealing with reality.  Collins’ research proved that great companies were continually objective about their performance, their competitive position and their customers’ needs.  He said “…breakthrough results come about by a series of good decisions, diligently executed and accumulated one on top of another.”  That is, breakthrough results don’t happen by simply rallying the troops with a lot of hot air.

Collins also discussed the potential negative impact a persuasive leader can have on an organization.  “Indeed, for those of you with a strong, charismatic personality, it is worthwhile to consider the idea that charisma can be as much a liability as an asset.  Your strength of personality can sow the seeds of problems, when people filter the brutal facts from you.  You can overcome the liabilities of charisma, but it does require conscious attention.”

How can you spot The March Hare CEO?

During one consulting engagement, I ran into a classic March Hare CEO who was functioning as a part-time Chairman/CEO for a struggling company with revenues around $120 million (let’s call it “SportsCo”).  SportsCo was in a restructuring phase and had the following issues:

  1. a huge debt burden, a history of covenant violations, and an impatient senior lender
  2. tight cash flow and some seasonality
  3. strong vendors that dictated purchasing practices
  4. a high overhead cost structure
  5. significant product line and business unit complexity
  6. old and bloated inventories
  7. mediocre information systems
  8. insufficient and untimely financial reporting
  9. low morale
  10. a thin management team
  11. an unfocused strategic direction

SportCo’s CEO had a long history of working for and running large corporations (note the word large) with ample resources and staff.  He was accustomed to the perks that accompanied corporate power and prestige.  The CEO was an extrovert… a gregarious and affable guy who had accomplished many good things in his early tenure with SportsCo.

SportsCo’s difficult circumstances meant there was still A LOT of hard work needed to fix the business and radically change its direction.  Despite all the significant challenges ahead, the March Hare CEO told his investors and management team that: 1) expenses had been ‘cut to the bone’; 2) revenue would increase 50%; and 3) EBITDA would triple in three years. Fifty percent revenue growth and EBITDA tripling!?

March Hare CEO made those broad, sweeping pronouncements without any reasonable action plans on how to back up the targetsHe was offering up expensive wine to the investors when there was only lukewarm tea available.  Fifty percent revenue growth was equal to about $60 million dollars additional annual revenue by year three.  Where was this growth going to come from when…

  • The industry was experiencing modest, but not spectacular growth rates
  • SportsCo was closing some of its weaker operating units
  • There would be no additional capital for acquisitions from the investors
  • The bank was not going to expand the credit line to accommodate growth; in fact, they were on a path to reduce the credit line
  • Funding for capital expenditures would have to come from cash generated by operations
  • In some product lines, margins had started to decline from increased competition

Getting to the $180 million level was not going to happen under those circumstances.

Following the company meeting where the grandiose and unachievable plans were presented, I told the investors the CEO had gone from ‘being a leader to a cheerleader’.  After challenging me on why I thought a cheerleader attitude was NOT beneficial to the business at that point in time, they ultimately decreased his influence throughout the change process. SportsCo was restructured based upon the theme of ‘less is more’: the business was downsized to the strongest, core operating units; corporate expenses were dramatically reduced; liquidity and cash flow significantly improved; and a new, clear strategic focus rallied the troops.

What are some ways to deal with a March Hare CEO?

If you think too much ‘wine’ is being offered up on an increasingly regular basis by the management team, go back to some basics:

  1. Trust your own instincts and your gut.
  2. Challenge all the assumptions behind the strategic and annual plans.
  3. Understand the industry forces – think external, not just internal – data, data, data.  Are customers and/or competitors consolidating? Is substitution occurring in your product lines?
  4. Understand in detail your competition across customer segments.  Does the company have strong niche positions or is it just an “also ran” in each segment?
  5. Assess the strength of the R&D and product development efforts – where’s the future growth going to come from?
  6. Talk to some of the key customers – get their unfiltered opinions on the company.
  7. Determine the nature of external relationships with lenders, vendors, and/or customers that are or will be impediments to future success.
  8. Look for specifics on the details of execution – are there monthly and annual operating plans that articulate priorities and assign who is accountable and in what time frame?
  9. Follow up on the company’s performance on a very regular basis using the details of the operating plan as the discussion structure.  Measure management on a regular basis.

‘There is no worse mistake in public leadership than to hold out false hopes soon to be swept away.’ – Winston Churchill

Read Full Post »

« Newer Posts - Older Posts »