This site uses cookies to improve your experience. To help us insure we adhere to various privacy regulations, please select your country/region of residence. If you do not select a country, we will assume you are from the United States. Select your Cookie Settings or view our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.
Cookie Settings
Cookies and similar technologies are used on this website for proper function of the website, for tracking performance analytics and for marketing purposes. We and some of our third-party providers may use cookie data for various purposes. Please review the cookie settings below and choose your preference.
Used for the proper function of the website
Used for monitoring website traffic and interactions
Cookie Settings
Cookies and similar technologies are used on this website for proper function of the website, for tracking performance analytics and for marketing purposes. We and some of our third-party providers may use cookie data for various purposes. Please review the cookie settings below and choose your preference.
Strictly Necessary: Used for the proper function of the website
Performance/Analytics: Used for monitoring website traffic and interactions
For most business owners, their company is their most valuable single asset. So why is it that we tend to know the value of our stock portfolios, our homes and even our cars but don’t have a clear realistic understanding about the value of our business? Doesn’t it make sense to know the value of something that makes up such a large portion of a business owner’s financial portfolio?
A South African trial court has found that an investor who owned shares of a parent company which sold off its operating subsidiary is entitled to appraisal rights. The case concerns the appraisal rights of an activist investor in the company KWV, which had an operating subsidiary that owned liquor assets. According to a press account, the original merger was structured as a purchase of the KWV operating subsidiary, leaving the holding company with some property, art and cash.
Cooley M&A partner Michal Berkner comments in Acquisition Daily on the active year in M&A dealflow. “Conditions continue to be ripe for high levels of cross border M&A activity in the months ahead – cash rich corporates, Private Equity and funds with unprecedented levels of dry power and ticking investment clocks, financing available on favourable terms, CEOs eager to grow their businesses faster than would be possible organically and a general acceptance that the uncertain reg
DATES: July 17th through the 19th. . Please let us know if you are in the Chicago area or will be attending AM&AA and would like to discuss how Burch & Company’s services can fit into your practice. We will be meeting with M&A Advisors and Intermediaries as well as Private Equity groups while attending this conference. Our goal is to get a better understanding of the regional third party compliance needs and to expand our network of contacts.
Speaker: Susan Spencer, Principal of Spencer Communications
Intent signal data can go a long way toward shortening sales cycles and closing more deals. The challenge is deciding which is the best type of intent data to help your company meet its sales and marketing goals. In this webinar, Susan Spencer, fractional CMO and principal of Spencer Communications, will unpack the differences between contact-level and company-level intent signals.
In Delaware, appraisal is a creature of statute. It is a statutory claim, born from 8 Del. Code Section 262; it is a claim in its own right, but it also carries with it statutory requirements. Appraisal requires that the right kind of demand be sent at the right time by the right entity. Quasi-appraisal is a creature of the common law and, as lawyers from Blank Rome observe in a growing concern for deal lawyers.
In the wake of the Dr Pepper decision that a reverse triangular merger does not carry appraisal rights and considering corporate counsel’s growing concern over appraisal petitions, one might wonder whether we will see a rush of reverse triangular mergers in order to try and thwart investor’s appraisal rights. Lawyers from Fried Frank say no in this Law360 piece [$$$].
A new piece by Skadden focuses on some old, and some new factors regarding prepayment. Since the 2016 appraisal amendments, respondents in an appraisal proceeding have had the right to ‘prepay’ some or all of the merger consideration. The mechanics of this are basic, but deserve a moment of explanation. In appraisal proceedings, unlike in many other lawsuits, the petitioner/plaintiff already owns something of value (stock) at the start of the proceeding – the Court’s job is to determine how mu
A new piece by Skadden focuses on some old, and some new factors regarding prepayment. Since the 2016 appraisal amendments, respondents in an appraisal proceeding have had the right to ‘prepay’ some or all of the merger consideration. The mechanics of this are basic, but deserve a moment of explanation. In appraisal proceedings, unlike in many other lawsuits, the petitioner/plaintiff already owns something of value (stock) at the start of the proceeding – the Court’s job is to determine how mu
In April 2018, shareholders of Dr. Pepper filed a lawsuit challenging a merger with Keurig – a deal they called convoluted and which was allegedly designed to deny them appraisal rights. One particular branch of that challenge, that the deal itself actually should have carried appraisal rights, was decided in June 2018 against the shareholders. Dr.
We organize all of the trending information in your field so you don't have to. Join 8,000+ users and stay up to date on the latest articles your peers are reading.
You know about us, now we want to get to know you!
Let's personalize your content
Let's get even more personalized
We recognize your account from another site in our network, please click 'Send Email' below to continue with verifying your account and setting a password.
Let's personalize your content