Nice write-up from dealbreaker on the Dell situation:
http://dealbreaker.com/2013/04/dells-board-was-so-fed-up-with-its-manag…
And great find on the links for the IB decks:
JP Morgan http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/826083/000119312513134593/d50547…
GS
http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/826083/000119312513134621/d50547…
Evercore (Dell's selection)
http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/826083/000119312513134593/d50547…
Great Find!
One of the GS analysts is my buddy.
He's probably the source of the 2 misplaced commas on page 17. SB to whoever spots them.
1- "The company should however" -> the company should, however," 2- Last line: oxford comma
Why is Dell referred to as Denali in the decks?
Code name
Man these things would be nasty to read, who from the buyer actually reads this? Does the buyer have there own analysts look though this for any inconsistency/disagreements and burn the IB teams?
Also why would you put trading dynamics in there?
hahahha man im so glad I don't have to make these dumb things anymore. I had to make one for a mega a few years back, one of the most brutal experiences to date.
This book is pretty hott
Who do you guys think is the best, Evercores hands down.
Evercore's presentation has a crisper, cleaner aesthetic, but their color palette is not as pretty as JP's.
Some of the color contrasts are stark and aesthetically, I would prefer to see a more pastel-centric color palette. However, that is merely a matter of presentation. With respect to the layout and content, I think Evercore absolutely killed it.
Haven't had a chance to read through them, but are you purely basing that on the fact that Evercore's looks cleaner and less cluttered than the other two?
Same !
JP takes the cake.
Denali is a code name. The transaction was highly confidential at the time of discussion. If the slide decks were leaked, the stock price of dell would have gone ape shit, so code names are commonly used in situations like this (although it's incredibly easy to figure out who Denali is given the comps it was benchmarked with.).
Awesome- thanks for clearing that up.
Not to mention the stock price graphs in each deck. Haha.
epic football field from evercore on the valuation summary
Am I the only one who thinks Goldman's is hideous? Especially slides 14-15? Not to put Benjamin and Michael on blast or anything.
I'm sorry... What exactly is hideous about those pages?
Content is fine, but the actual slides are cluttered to the point of being unreadable. No white space, no boxes breaking up the slide into discrete sections, probably 500+ words worth of just text. And then check out how "Illustrative Summary" is almost running into the last line of the header section. Then you have this sort of awkward floating EV box with the multiples box floating off to the side. It's like they took three separate slides and tried to cram it into one page.
Check out Evercore's for a comparison. Nice and clean.
Agree, but it doesn't matter. when i was an analyst i did a deal where we worked with 3 other banks and have also seen books from many other banks, can definitely say GS/MS have the worst in terms of overall presentation, spotted with formatting/textual errors. although it's not like the Company actually cares about this - content, relationship with client, and give the clients the services they need are key.
A dumb question for you guys:
What is the context for these decks. Were these decks made during the bake-off? (In which case it makes sense that Evercore won the job to advise the special committee)
Pretty sure they are fairness opinions, revolving around the LBO proposal. Hence why they were published on EDGAR.
Et sit repellendus eos inventore ratione illum rerum. Dolorem omnis consequuntur omnis possimus. Dicta ducimus et eveniet est minima ea non.
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...
Est tenetur consequatur consequuntur fugiat. Facilis atque quibusdam autem nihil pariatur perspiciatis vitae.
Magni et voluptatum id repellat id laudantium est. Et distinctio omnis vel corporis maxime labore. Accusamus eos eum alias. Facilis doloribus sint non corrupti nulla in. Dolor repudiandae autem unde voluptas. Nesciunt qui nulla suscipit iusto sint praesentium in. Non soluta illum quo soluta soluta. Minus eaque dignissimos repellat consectetur.