21 janvier 2020 | International, Aérospatial

The New Trend In Acquisitions: Mergers Of Equal But Different

Michael Bruno

Woodward, Hexcel, United Technologies, Raytheon, L3 Technologies and Harris at first glance have relatively little in common, except they are mostly midsize suppliers and specialists primarily serving the aerospace and defense (A&D) market.

Increasingly, that is exactly why they are pairing up—and if other recent deals are an indication, it could be one of the leading trends this year in A&D mergers and acquisitions (M&A).

On Jan. 12, aircraft motion-control specialist Woodward and composites leader Hexcel proposed stock merger to create one of the largest independent A&D suppliers, with capabilities running from wing and engine parts to advanced materials used to make aircraft construction lighter. The companies have minimal sales overlap, which could help ease approval by antitrust regulators.

The combined company, Woodward Hexcel, would hold key supplier positions on most major A&D programs, including: the Airbus A220, A320neo, A330neo and A350; the Boeing 737 MAX, 777X, 787 and Apache helicopter; Bombardier Global 7500; Embraer E-Jets E2; Gulfstream G500/600; and Lockheed Martin F-35 and CH-53.

Perhaps more important for shareholders, the “merger of equals” between Woodward and Hexcel could become a lucrative stake. According to the companies, their combined revenue of $5.3 billion would place the new Woodward Hexcel sixth among major A&D suppliers (see graph). What is more, the combined company, which will be based in Fort Collins, Colorado, should generate about $1 billion in free cash flow—the proceeds used to fuel shareholder returns—in its first year. In turn, around $1.5 billion is expected to be sent to shareholders within 18 months of the deal's completion. The deal is expected to close in the third quarter of 2020.

Initially, financial analysts who cover publicly traded A&D companies were surprised by the proposed combination. But tie-ups that see midsize specialists combining to provide greater portions of A&D systems and parts are likely to become more commonplace. Last summer, L3 Technologies and Harris paired to form L3Harris Technologies. By the summer of 2020, United Technologies and Raytheon are expected to close their own “merger of equals” to become Raytheon Technologies.

“I think this deal is very similar to several other aerospace deals that we've seen the last 3-4 years,” Credit Suisse analyst Rob Spingarn says of Woodward Hexcel. “Right off the bat, it looks a lot like Harris and L3. If you line up the PowerPoint presentations from the two deals, they are almost mirror images of each other.”

To that end, all of these companies have talked about increasing the amount of dollars spent on research and development (R&D). However, the so-called synergies from the combination of Raytheon Technologies are years off—assuming they occur at all—while rewards for shareholders will be almost immediate.

The CEOs of Woodward and Hexcel assert that they will spend $250 million on R&D in the first full year after the deal closes, which according to analysts, is roughly in line with what they were going to spend separately. At the same time, the combined company expects to cut at least $125 million worth of recurring and redundant costs.

Of course, each deal has its own criteria for justification: United Technologies looked to gain heft to fight off Airbus and Boeing supply-chain squeezes; Raytheon needed deeper pockets to fund defense technology plays; and L3 and Harris each wanted to become defense primes. Last but not least, Woodward and Hexcel CEOs say they see genuine opportunities to help commercial aviation become more sustainable through the lighter, more efficient design of aircraft and engines.

A&D M&A consultants are preparing to release their year-end summaries for 2019, but dealmakers already are telling Aviation Week they expect a robust environment for M&A deals in 2020, albeit not universally across the industry.

For instance, sub-tier commercial aviation suppliers like “mom and pop shops” will continue to be gobbled up, especially by private equity investors directly or through holding companies as they seek to form new middleweight suppliers. Defense technology specialists also remain hot targets, as evidenced by the mid-December announcement that government services heavyweight Leidos is buying boutique aircraft and defense systems provider Dynetics for $1.65 billion. But consolidation in space may take top billing amongst the bevy of startups funded by a venture capital surge in recent years, with major assets such as Maxar Technologies' MDA subsidiary being sold to private equity investors at the end of December.

Space-sector combinations could be another major trend for 2020, according to Matt O'Connell, managing partner at Seraphim Capital—the firm that funded the buildup of GeoEye, now a core part of Maxar after MDA. “I think there are a lot of deals out there waiting to be done,” he says.

https://aviationweek.com/air-transport/new-trend-acquisitions-mergers-equal-different?

Sur le même sujet

  • Nouvelle étape franchie pour le programme MGCS

    8 juin 2020 | International, Terrestre

    Nouvelle étape franchie pour le programme MGCS

    Les trois partenaires du programme MGCS (Main Ground Combat System), les groupes allemands Rheinmetall et Krauss-Maffei Wegmann (KMW) et le groupe français Nexter, ont signé fin mai le premier contrat d'études avec le BAAINBw (l'office fédéral allemand de l'Equipement, des Technologies de l'information et du Soutien en service de la Bundeswehr), établissant le partage de la charge de travail industriel, rapporte l'Usine Nouvelle. L'Usine Nouvelle du 8 juin

  • Opinion: Is Pressuring Allies To Pay More For Defense Worth The Cost?

    9 décembre 2019 | International, Autre défense

    Opinion: Is Pressuring Allies To Pay More For Defense Worth The Cost?

    President Donald Trump appears to be getting his wish that U.S. allies pay more for their own defense, which begs the question: Is the victory worth the cost? Pushing allies to spend at least 2% of their GDP on defense is not a new concept. Trump's predecessors George W. Bush and Barack Obama both argued for greater burden sharing, and Russia's 2014 invasion of Ukraine's Crimea region had allies starting to move toward that benchmark. Arguably, Trump's “America First” drumbeat is getting NATO allies to pay a bigger share of the cost of their defense three decades after the end of the Cold War. Military spending by European NATO nations and Canada has risen 4.6% this year, and the majority of allies have plans to spend at least 2% of their GDP on defense by 2024, according to NATO General Secretary Jens Stoltenberg. Meanwhile, the U.S. is on a path to dial back its contribution from 22% of NATO's total funding to 16%. “This is a direct result of President Trump making clear our expectations that these Europeans would step up to help secure their own people,” says U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo. Unfortunately, Trump has not stopped there, openly expressing disdain for an organization established to guard against the kind of territorial expansion undertaken by the former Soviet Union. He has hurled sophomoric barbs at steadfast allies such as the UK, Germany and Canada, while refusing to criticize Russian strongman Vladimir Putin, the architect of both the Crimea invasion and Moscow's campaign to interfere in U.S. elections. For the first phase of the Trump presidency, his cabinet tried to temper those go-it-alone impulses. Then-Defense Secretary James Mattis sought to reassure allies of U.S. support for their security. But more recent White House appointees have been less willing to cross their boss. Even more damaging was Trump's abrupt decision to withdraw most U.S. forces from Syria, disgracefully abandoning America's Kurdish allies to the benefit of Turkey, Russia and Iran and leaving Europe more exposed to attacks from Islamic extremists. “What we are currently experiencing is the brain death of NATO,” French President Emmanuel Macron told The Economist. Trump sees NATO in a transactional way, “as a project in which the United States acts as a sort of geopolitical umbrella, but the trade-off is that there has to be commercial exclusivity,” he added. “It's an arrangement for buying American.” While Macron is calling for a reconsideration of what NATO means in light of reduced American commitment, European nations are not waiting. They are building up their own defense industrial base. In 2017, the EU created the Permanent Structured Cooperation initiative, which is pursuing research toward new missiles, aircraft, missile defense and electronic attack capabilities. U.S. efforts to have its companies included in the work have so far been brushed off. Trump's hardball approach also is being applied to key allies in Asia that have long served as a bulwark against a rising China. The U.S. alliance with South Korea is now reviewed annually, instead of every four years. And after signing a deal in February that calls for South Korea to pay nearly $1 billion to maintain the U.S. military presence there, Washington is now demanding that Seoul pay $4.7 billion annually. Before an agreement was reached, the U.S. walked out of the talks. The Trump administration also is looking for more cash from Japan, calling for more than triple Tokyo's $1.7 billion contribution toward hosting U.S. troops in its country. These requests are straining longstanding alliances. South Korea is edging closer to China, while Japan, which has a strong industrial base, might partner with the UK on its Tempest fighter program. To be sure, U.S. defense exports remain near an all-time high. The Defense Security Cooperation Agency announced $55.4 billion in potential Foreign Military Sales in fiscal 2019, about the same as the prior year. But there are indications that Trump's pay-up-now methods may lead to an erosion in future sales. Asking allies to contribute more for their own defense certainly has merit, but the wider risks to U.S. global interests cannot be ignored. Can 70-year-old alliances survive if the leading partner vocally questions their value? And if the alliances crack, what would that mean for the U.S. military industrial base? “The more our alliances fray,” says Eric Edelman, a former U.S. undersecretary of defense, “the less interest people have in buying U.S. defense goods and services.” https://aviationweek.com/defense/opinion-pressuring-allies-pay-more-defense-worth-cost

  • The Countries Where F-35 Sales Are Taking Off

    26 juin 2018 | International, Aérospatial

    The Countries Where F-35 Sales Are Taking Off

    Since the first F-35 rolled off Lockheed Martin's production line in 2006, the fifth-generation multirole stealth fighter has taken the world by storm. U.S. F-35s deployed to Europe and the Pacific in 2017, and Israel has reportedly already used its jets in combat in the Middle East. Soon, the Arab world might get its first F-35 — the United Arab Emirates is in talks with the United States about buying the aircraft. To date, the program's reach has expanded to 12 nations around the globe, and all signs point to the F-35 continuing to dominate the Western fighter market for decades to come. But tensions between historically close NATO allies could threaten the fate of one partner nation's F-35 fleet: Turkey. Here's the breakdown of the global F-35 fleet. https://foreignpolicy.com/2018/06/22/the-countries-where-f-35-sales-are-taking-off/

Toutes les nouvelles