15 Comments
 

Uh, good question. The two companies will be able to share stores and run joint marketing campaigns. But Circuit City doesn't have much else on offer. And neither does Blockbuster for that matter.

Both companies will probably be sent in for a make over, then their owners will extract as much as possible out of them, and eventually run them into the ground...

 

The investment thesis is predicated on expectations of convergence between the movie-rental business and consumer electronics. I think the end game would be that Circuit City stores start offering rentals, while smaller Blockbuster stores would add portable consumer electronics to their product offering. The aim is to cut out massive redundant costs and sell off overlapping assets between the two companies (both at the store and corporate-level).

Seems like a move of desperation to me. Tying together two sinking ships doesn't create a single, seaworthy one.

 
smuguy97The investment thesis is predicated on expectations of convergence between the movie-rental business and consumer electronics. I think the end game would be that Circuit City stores start offering rentals, while smaller Blockbuster stores would add portable consumer electronics to their product offering. The aim is to cut out massive redundant costs and sell off overlapping assets between the two companies (both at the store and corporate-level).

Seems like a move of desperation to me. Tying together two sinking ships doesn't create a single, seaworthy one.

Haha, that reminds me of something I heard yesterday. I heard from someone that they're probably doing it because they think that "tying these two rocks together will make them float".

 

I think deal breaker explained it the best:

Statement:

"We are also willing to pursue alternative structures which would enable Circuit City shareholders to receive stock and participate in what we believe would be an exciting future for the combined enterprise," Blockbuster on their Circuit City offer."

English: "Now that the bottom has totally fallen out of our business, if we don't trade our stock for something before investors put it together that we are essentially doomed, we will have nothing left. Since we can't find a business model to claim any kind of synergies with, we picked one that sells DVD players. We know lots about DVDs. Makes perfect sense, really."

 

The only way this makes any sense is monetizing some of the redundant real estate this deal would create.

I agree that I don't see a whole lot of further synergies but hey both Blockbuster and CC are screwed as stand alone entities.

Do people still rent movies? Movie distribution will be the sole domain of cable (maybe phone/satellite) companies w/in a decade.

On an aside, I'm not going to bet against Icahn.

 

He is pretty damn good though. Still, I don't really see the logic of this deal either... consolidating dying industries? Great.

People are saying that Netflix will be the ultimate winner here, but haven't they been struggling lately?

Putting aside all logic of how the deal actually makes sense, all I can figure is that (as others have speculated), it must be a real estate play, especially with Icahn's involvement.

If I were the Analyst working on this deal I would be laughing right now (well, after recovering from multiple all-nighters just before the announcement).

 

Sequi et cupiditate minima repellat repellendus vero voluptas ab. Dolor velit rem autem hic occaecati. Et in ullam consequuntur suscipit rerum aliquam corporis distinctio.

Voluptas omnis error totam rem. Nam earum fugit molestiae aut. Culpa distinctio aut sunt laborum. Harum et sunt suscipit et reiciendis ullam. Laudantium rem dicta saepe animi culpa et dolores. Tempora fugiat quaerat perferendis ut.

Eum illum enim id quia alias tenetur. Amet voluptatem autem vero consequatur sapiente eius autem ullam. Recusandae eveniet sit dolores a amet. Sunt velit illo et error reiciendis. Voluptas quod in aspernatur delectus aliquam ea quasi rem.

Iusto praesentium praesentium voluptas quidem ad velit excepturi. Ducimus ad minus ea nihil eos voluptatem quasi. Porro ex facilis consequatur ducimus porro aut. Qui quo possimus accusantium aut expedita. Aperiam adipisci harum sed a consequuntur voluptatem nemo excepturi. Quis qui dolor eius non. Autem aut iste explicabo odit minus.

Career Advancement Opportunities

June 2026 Investment Banking

  • Evercore 01 99.4%
  • Moelis & Company 01 98.8%
  • JPMorgan 01 98.2%
  • Guggenheim Partners 01 97.7%
  • Morgan Stanley 07 97.1%

Overall Employee Satisfaction

June 2026 Investment Banking

  • Moelis & Company No 99.4%
  • Morgan Stanley 01 98.8%
  • Evercore 01 98.2%
  • BMO Capital Markets 12 97.6%
  • Banco Santander 01 97.1%

Professional Growth Opportunities

June 2026 Investment Banking

  • Moelis & Company No 99.4%
  • Evercore No 98.8%
  • Morgan Stanley 05 98.2%
  • JPMorgan No 97.7%
  • BMO Capital Markets 12 97.1%

Total Avg Compensation

June 2026 Investment Banking

  • Vice President (14) $434
  • Associates (43) $259
  • 3rd+ Year Analyst (8) $210
  • 2nd Year Analyst (22) $179
  • Intern/Summer Associate (13) $156
  • 1st Year Analyst (75) $151
  • Intern/Summer Analyst (65) $101
notes
16 IB Interviews Notes

“... there’s no excuse to not take advantage of the resources out there available to you. Best value for your $ are the...”

Leaderboard

1
redever's picture
redever
99.2
2
BankonBanking's picture
BankonBanking
99.0
3
Secyh62's picture
Secyh62
99.0
4
kanon's picture
kanon
99.0
5
dosk17's picture
dosk17
98.9
6
GameTheory's picture
GameTheory
98.9
7
CompBanker's picture
CompBanker
98.9
8
Betsy Massar's picture
Betsy Massar
98.9
9
DrApeman's picture
DrApeman
98.9
10
numi's picture
numi
98.8
success
From 10 rejections to 1 dream investment banking internship

“... I believe it was the single biggest reason why I ended up with an offer...”