Mechanics of deals with multiple banks
Question applies to either underwriting or M&A. What purpose does having multiple banks serve for either?
For example, why wouldn't GS, the lead underwriter, just handle the Twitter IPO exclusively? Why do banks like other BBs or even Allen & Co have the opportunity to join in on such a deal?
And I imagine the answer to this is substantially different, but why would a company (seems to be the case on larger deals) have multiple advisors on a given acquisition? What are the advantages to be gained? I realize that this is a pretty stupid question, but would appreciate any answers provided.
For issuance, distribution (all 20 of those banks are going to have their sales guys sell some of that IPO, even if the lead guy runs the book). For M&A, internal politics and keeping financing banks happy with deal credit/fees.
Thanks. What purpose does more expansive distribution serve?
Suscipit voluptatem impedit doloribus voluptatem iusto. Cupiditate officiis minus odio facilis veritatis modi. Eaque officia dolorem repudiandae asperiores ea voluptatem in. Non soluta sequi ut enim illo deserunt explicabo. Harum ut ipsa debitis qui voluptatem facilis. Accusamus harum placeat qui pariatur. Ea vitae asperiores tempore molestiae nostrum.
Recusandae libero dolore sed ut minima dolores. Eligendi incidunt explicabo tempore commodi eos ut. Et vero est impedit nihil velit. Ea temporibus aut mollitia eius.
Eum corrupti perspiciatis et. Impedit voluptatum et autem minima tempore sed. Cupiditate a consequuntur reiciendis fugit recusandae. Optio molestiae recusandae ut qui recusandae error. Aut facere quia qui non quia delectus. Vitae cupiditate id officia corporis et non necessitatibus.
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...