UFOinsiderConsortiums are formed to spread risk around
This applies more to loan syndication, when the lead bookrunner doesn't want to hold all the paper. In this case, the boutiques were brought in for advisory and anti-trust expertise. I doubt they will be holding any of the associated paper.
UFOinsiderConsortiums are formed to spread risk around
This applies more to loan syndication, when the lead bookrunner doesn't want to hold all the paper. In this case, the boutiques were brought in for advisory and anti-trust expertise. I doubt they will be holding any of the associated paper.
Companies will hire multiple advisors to give banks advisory credit. In return, banks will lower financing charges as acqusition financing tends to be very profitable. Its an incentive saying "hey we will charge you less for financing if you give us advisory credit so we can market around how we advised this deal". Most of the time, its usually one advisor that really helped with the strategy of the acqusition and the other banks can provide value in specific issues ie fairness opinions, etc.
agreed. additionally, it "keeps the other banks" honest. There's usually one bank that leads but it's helpful to get some other opinions, as workerbee mentioned. Additionally, big corps usually have relationships with multiple banks so it's helpful to spread the fees around.
Unless committed financing is involved, one investment bank can do 100% of the work (even with multiple bookrunners / advisors, the lead bank will always do most of the real work). Assuming the situation doesn't involve committed financing (and thus no need to spread risk), having multiple bookrunners / advisors serves two main functions from the company's perspective.
1) Market signaling - by having reputable banks associated with your deal (whether M&A or financing), you are telling the market that your numbers and analysis have been vetted by impartial third parties (not truly impartial, but I think you get my meaning)
2) Mouth feeding - Even though most deals only require one firm to execute, it is in a company's interest to retain multiple advisors / bookrunners in order to maximize the number of people thinking up M&A and financing ideas for you. By repeatedly selecting only one advisor or bookrunner, you are telling the market that you aren't interested in their ideas.
Porro voluptatem qui architecto sint ipsam. Ipsum sapiente facere ea sunt et tempora maxime ad. Repellat animi et placeat. Praesentium eaque suscipit enim aut et eum rerum consequatur.
Rerum voluptas voluptatem officia iste. Optio quibusdam vero laboriosam facilis officiis. Et fugit eum tenetur consequatur dolor sit libero. Illum et iusto ipsa ut. Sit non maxime voluptatem expedita inventore omnis. Aut dolorem unde tenetur ducimus autem ex rerum.
See All Comments - 100% Free
WSO depends on everyone being able to pitch in when they know something. Unlock with your email and get bonus: 6 financial modeling lessons free ($199 value)
Sorry, you need to login or sign up in order to vote. As a new user, you get over 200 WSO Credits free,
so you can reward or punish any content you deem worthy right away. See you on the other side!
Monkeys willing to work 100-week until this massive deal gets completed...?
Consortiums are formed to spread risk around
This applies more to loan syndication, when the lead bookrunner doesn't want to hold all the paper. In this case, the boutiques were brought in for advisory and anti-trust expertise. I doubt they will be holding any of the associated paper.
Companies will hire multiple advisors to give banks advisory credit. In return, banks will lower financing charges as acqusition financing tends to be very profitable. Its an incentive saying "hey we will charge you less for financing if you give us advisory credit so we can market around how we advised this deal". Most of the time, its usually one advisor that really helped with the strategy of the acqusition and the other banks can provide value in specific issues ie fairness opinions, etc.
Workerbee is spot on. It's industry politics.
agreed. additionally, it "keeps the other banks" honest. There's usually one bank that leads but it's helpful to get some other opinions, as workerbee mentioned. Additionally, big corps usually have relationships with multiple banks so it's helpful to spread the fees around.
Unless committed financing is involved, one investment bank can do 100% of the work (even with multiple bookrunners / advisors, the lead bank will always do most of the real work). Assuming the situation doesn't involve committed financing (and thus no need to spread risk), having multiple bookrunners / advisors serves two main functions from the company's perspective.
1) Market signaling - by having reputable banks associated with your deal (whether M&A or financing), you are telling the market that your numbers and analysis have been vetted by impartial third parties (not truly impartial, but I think you get my meaning)
2) Mouth feeding - Even though most deals only require one firm to execute, it is in a company's interest to retain multiple advisors / bookrunners in order to maximize the number of people thinking up M&A and financing ideas for you. By repeatedly selecting only one advisor or bookrunner, you are telling the market that you aren't interested in their ideas.
Porro voluptatem qui architecto sint ipsam. Ipsum sapiente facere ea sunt et tempora maxime ad. Repellat animi et placeat. Praesentium eaque suscipit enim aut et eum rerum consequatur.
Rerum voluptas voluptatem officia iste. Optio quibusdam vero laboriosam facilis officiis. Et fugit eum tenetur consequatur dolor sit libero. Illum et iusto ipsa ut. Sit non maxime voluptatem expedita inventore omnis. Aut dolorem unde tenetur ducimus autem ex rerum.
See All Comments - 100% Free
WSO depends on everyone being able to pitch in when they know something. Unlock with your email and get bonus: 6 financial modeling lessons free ($199 value)
or Unlock with your social account...