This is great…..the perfect thing for a summer news story…
So, Icahn send the following letter the Yahoo (YHOO) shareholders after the letter below was sent by Yahoo’s Roy Bostock.
Dear Fellow Yahoo! Shareholders:
Over the years I have attempted to make changes at many companies but I have yet to see a company distort, omit and twist events and facts in the manner that Yahoo! has done in their press release issued Saturday night, July 12th.
During the last week, Goldman Sachs called me a number of times asking me to relate to them any transaction that Microsoft (MSFT) might be interested in transactingwith Yahoo!
I discussed with them the possibility of doing a “Search only” deal wherein Microsoft would purchase “Search” from Yahoo! and pay Yahoo! for any searches that would originate from a Yahoo! content page. Yahoo! felt that a deal of this nature would be very interesting, but only if Microsoft would
guarantee the revenue that Yahoo! now received. This would obviously be a great deal for Yahoo! because Yahoo! would, for five years, receive a minimum of the $2.3 billion they are currently receiving as long as they continued to supply the page views and affiliate traffic they now had. Heretofore, Microsoft had been unwilling to even come close to making this guarantee. However, after I negotiated with Steve Ballmer for the better part of a week, he agreed to the guarantee. He also agreed to commit $7.7 billion dollars to the transaction (consisting of a $1 billion payment for “Search”, a $2.8 billion loan and a $3.9 billion tender offer to Yahoo! shareholders). Under the transaction, Yahoo! shareholders would receive $16.25 per share in distributions (consisting of cash
and securities) and be left with a content company which would have a minimum guarantee of $2.3 billion per year of “Search” revenue from Microsoft and cost saving synergies from exiting the “Search” business that Yahoo! has publicly stated would be $750 million per year (excluding the benefits from reduction of stock compensation and other non-cash items). However, Microsoft believes the synergies from Yahoo! exiting “Search” would be far superior and that Yahoo!’s 2009 GAAP operating income would exceed $2 billion. Microsoft would be making a substantial equity investment in the remaining company at a valuation of $19.50 per share. Furthermore, Yahoo! would be spared the great expense of maintaining “Search” as well as having to spend billions in developing new technology to compete with Google and Microsoft – which it is highly doubtful they would be
able to do successfully. Additionally, Yahoo! would be able to avoid the great risk of seeing “Search” continue to lose market share and eventually melt away.
I spoke to Goldman Sachs and Roy Bostock on Thursday concerning the breakthrough with Microsoft. A call to discuss the details of the transaction was then set up among Microsoft, Yahoo! and me on Friday afternoon, July 11th. However to my surprise and consternation, on the Friday call Yahoo!, instead of being interested in the Microsoft offer, seemed to me to be focused on who would be
running Yahoo!. Finally, Steve Ballmer suggested that we not spend the rest of Friday afternoon on corporate governance. “First tell us if you like the deal,” he said.
THE YAHOO! PRESS RELEASE
a. Yahoo! in their Saturday night press release makes much of the fact that they were only given 24 hours to decide on the Microsoft offer because of the time constraints relating to the proxy fight, but neglects to mention that they were offered more time if they would be willing to postpone the
annual meeting for a short period.
b. Yahoo! conveniently neglects in its press release to tell you about the extremely important above mentioned guarantees that Microsoft was willing to make;
c. Yahoo! tells you in their press release that a condition of the deal was the immediate replacement of the current board and removal of top management. Yahoo! neglected to mention we were willing to discuss keeping a number of the current board members and Jerry Yang as Chief Yahoo!
d. Yahoo tells you the Microsoft proposal precludes the potential sale of all Yahoo! however, they neglect to tell you that that train has left the station in that Microsoft is no longer willing to buy all of Yahoo! with the current board overseeing the company.
e. Yahoo!’s press release states that “this odd and opportunistic alliance of Microsoft and Mr. Icahn has anything but the interest of Yahoo stockholders in mind”, raising the innuendo that I am on Microsoft’s side in this manner. That is patently ridiculous. Since Yahoo! failed to consummate a
transaction with Microsoft this year, I have spent hours and hours attempting to get the parties together because I believe that it is beneficial to Yahoo! shareholders to have a deal with Microsoft and I have worked hard trying to make it happen. It is important to note that my funds and affiliates own 70 million shares of Yahoo and own no shares of Microsoft or Google while the current board outside of Jerry Yang owns only the shares they have received from Yahoo for being directors. My interests
are aligned with yours and not Microsoft and I think it is in our interest to have this transaction consummated so that we can get value much in excess of the recent and current market for Yahoo! shares.
In June, Microsoft apparently made a $33 per share offer for all of Yahoo! which was met with Yahoo countering at $37, thereby rejecting the $33 offer. Amazingly, before Microsoft decided that it would not buy all of Yahoo! with this board in place, it offered $33 and was turned down. The Yahoo! press release indicates that Yahoo!, in rejecting the current Microsoft proposal, stated that it would do a deal in which the entire company was sold to Microsoft for $33 per share. It is hard to understand why it turned down $33 and is now willing to accept it. It is the same obfuscation that is so prevalent in the rest of the press release. DON’T BE FOOLED.
I believe that, just like the $33 per share offer that was refused by Yahoo! in early June, refusing the Microsoft offer for the Yahoo! search business is also another grave mistake that will be deeply regretted. Our company is on a precipice and our Board seems ready to take the risk of seeing it topple – ARE YOU, THE REAL OWNERS OF YAHOO!, WILLING TO TAKE THE SAME RISK?
Read full letter including deal details here:
Roy Bostock had responded to Icahn latest offer withwith the following:
Dear Fellow Stockholder:
We have written to you before to explain why we believe your Board of Directors has the knowledge, experience, independence and commitment to best represent the interests of all Yahoo! stockholders. We have also told you why we believe the slate of directors advanced by Carl Icahn is not the right answer for Yahoo!.
When Mr. Icahn began his proxy contest he had no articulated plan for Yahoo! other than a sale of the Company to Microsoft. Today he still lacks a plan that makes sense for Yahoo! stockholders. On Monday, July 7, Mr. Icahn announced that he and Microsoft had engaged in conversations he claimed could lead to a transaction between Yahoo! and Microsoft if his slate is elected. In what was clearly a coordinated approach, Microsoft promptly followed Mr. Icahn’s announcement with its own press release, stating that if – but only if – a new Board of Directors is elected, it might be interested in discuss
ing either a transaction involving only Yahoo!’s valuable search assets or an acquisition of the entire Company (something Microsoft had refused to discuss with your Board for months).
The fact that Microsoft and Icahn had indeed teamed up to serve their own ends became entirely clear the evening of Friday, July 11, when Microsoft and Mr. Icahn jointly proposed a new complex restructuring of Yahoo! that would include the acquisition of Yahoo!’s search business by Microsoft. Your Board of Directors was given less than 24 hours to accept the proposal, the fundamental terms of which Microsoft and Mr. Icahn made clear they were unwilling to negotiate. After reviewing the proposal with our legal and financial advisors, your Board of Directors determined that accepting the proposal is not in the best interests of our stockholders.
The Board’s rejection of the new proposal was based on a number of factors, including the following:
1. Yahoo!’s existing business plus its recently signed commercial agreement with Google has superior financial value and less complexity and risk than the Microsoft/Icahn proposal.
2. The Microsoft/Icahn proposal would preclude a potential sale of all of Yahoo! for a full and fair price, including a control premium.
3. The major component of the overall value per share asserted by Microsoft/Icahn would be in Yahoo!’s remaining non-search businesses which would be overseen by Mr. Icahn’s slate of directors, which has virtually no working knowledge of Yahoo!’s businesses.
4. The Microsoft/Icahn proposal would require the immediate replacement of the current Board and removal of the top management team at Yahoo!. Your Board believes these moves would destabilize Yahoo! for the up to one year it would take to gain regulatory approval for this deal.
Am I the only one who thinks Bostock kind of makes points for Icahn? Let’s go with the basic premise that the business of Yahoo is deteriorating and has been for some time. I think that is undeniable. If that is true, then, why is keeping current management and the Board there something shareholders would want? Ought that be an enticement for them to vote for Icahn?
Shareholders also must think and realize that Icahn, who has 5% of the stock really does have “shareholder interests” in mind vs the Board’s and management’s interest in “their jobs”. It will matter when they make their proxy votes.
Bostock keeps mentioning a “fair price”. The $33 a share offer is 45 times the last twelve months earnings at the company of 76 cents a share. That 76 cents while up from FY 2007’s 46 cents is down from 2005’s $1.12. In other words, earnings really have not gone anywhere in 3.5 years now and Icahn if offering 45 times them. Bostock can’t even really make the argument “thing are getting better” at Yahoo. The reality is they are just trading water, like the stock price.
The true irony here is had Bostock and Yang not held their breath and stomped their feet when Icahn came knocking, they may have been able to avoid in the end what they will end up seeing happening, their resume’s being polished up.
Disclosure (“none” means no position):None
↑ Grab this Headline Animator
Visit the ValuePlays Bookstore for Great Investing Books