In re Tesla Motors Stockholder Litig.
At issue was a 2016 acquisition of Solar City Corp. by Tesla. Some Tesla shareholders claimed that Musk caused Tesla to overpay for Solar through his alleged domination and control of Tesla’s board. The primary focus of the shareholders was that Solar was insolvent at the time of the acquisition. The court applied the “entire fairness” standard. The Court of Chancery found the acquisition to be “entirely fair.” The Delaware Supreme Court affirmed the Court of Chancery decision.
Delaware Supreme Court Upholds ‘Entire Fairness’ of a Tesla Acquisition
At issue was a 2016 acquisition of Solar City Corp. by Tesla. Some Tesla shareholders claimed that Musk caused Tesla to overpay for Solar through his alleged domination and control of Tesla’s board. The primary focus of the shareholders was that Solar was insolvent at the time of the acquisition. The court applied the “entire fairness” standard. The Court of Chancery found the acquisition to be “entirely fair.” The Delaware Supreme Court affirmed the Court of Chancery decision.
Delaware Chancery Court Cites Differences in Cash-Flow Assumptions as Cause for Large Discrepancy in Value
In this appraisal action to determine fair value, petitioner Ramcell Inc. exercised its appraisal rights in asking for a statutory appraisal of the value of its 155 shares of Jackson Cellular Telephone Co. Inc. The respondent, Alltel Corp. (dba Verizon Wireless), had converted the 155 shares at a value of $2,963 per share. “Respondent’s expert opines that Jackson’s per-share value was $5,690.92 at the time of the merger. Petitioner’s expert has offered two appraisal ranges, opining that, at the high end, Jackson’s per-share value was $36,016 on the merger date.” Both parties agreed that the DCF method should be the sole method for determining the value. The Delaware Chancery Court, using that method, determined the fair value of each share at $11,464.57. The court noted that the disparity in the parties’ valuations was due to disagreements as to the inputs to the DCF model and how they should be calculated.
Ramcell, Inc. v. Alltel Corp.
In this appraisal action to determine fair value, petitioner Ramcell Inc. exercised its appraisal rights in asking for a statutory appraisal of the value of its 155 shares of Jackson Cellular Telephone Co. Inc. The respondent, Alltel Corp. (dba Verizon Wireless), had converted the 155 shares at a value of $2,963 per share. “Respondent’s expert opines that Jackson’s per-share value was $5,690.92 at the time of the merger. Petitioner’s expert has offered two appraisal ranges, opining that, at the high end, Jackson’s per-share value was $36,016 on the merger date.” Both parties agreed that the DCF method should be the sole method for determining the value. The Delaware Chancery Court, using that method, determined the fair value of each share at $11,464.57. The court noted that the disparity in the parties’ valuations was due to disagreements as to the inputs to the DCF model and how they should be calculated.
Global BV News: Takeover premiums in Canada increased in the first half of 2022
The median takeover premium of Canadian public companies in the first half of 2022 was 40%, a 7% increase from the prior year, according to “Canadian M&A Insights” (Summer 2022) from Kroll.
In re GGP, Inc. Stockholder Litig.
Brookfield Property Partners Inc. acquired GGP Inc. in a merger transaction. During negotiations, Brookfield Property Partners LP expressed concern over the number of GGP stockholders who might see appraisal under Delaware law. Brookfield Property Partners suggested inserting an appraisal rights closing condition that allowed it to terminate the agreement if a specified number of GGP shares demanded appraisal. Brookfield Property Partners objected, and the condition was nixed. At the urging of Brookfield Property Partners, the merger was structured so that Brookfield paid a sizable preclosing dividend followed by a small residual payment called a “per share merger consideration.” GGP stockholders were told they could exercise their appraisal rights solely in connection with the merger, set at $23.50 per share, in relation to the per-share merger consideration valued at $0.312 per share. Plaintiff stockholders claimed they were led to believe that a fair value determination would be limited to the value of the post-dividend of GGP. The Supreme Court agreed with the Chancery Court that the defendants did not unlawfully eliminate appraisal rights but disagreed that the proxy disclosures were sufficient.
The Delaware Chancery Court Erred in Dismissing Claims Regarding Appraisal Rights Disclosures in a Merger—Supreme Court Remands
Brookfield Property Partners Inc. acquired GGP Inc. in a merger transaction. During negotiations, Brookfield Property Partners LP expressed concern over the number of GGP stockholders who might see appraisal under Delaware law. Brookfield Property Partners suggested inserting an appraisal rights closing condition that allowed it to terminate the agreement if a specified number of GGP shares demanded appraisal. Brookfield Property Partners objected, and the condition was nixed. At the urging of Brookfield Property Partners, the merger was structured so that Brookfield funded a sizable preclosing dividend which was paid by GGP to eligible shareholders, followed by a small residual payment called a “per share merger consideration.” GGP stockholders were told they could exercise their appraisal rights solely in connection with the merger, set at $23.50 per share, in relation to the per-share merger consideration valued at $0.312 per share. Plaintiff stockholders claimed they were led to believe that a fair value determination would be limited to the value of the post-dividend of GGP. The Supreme Court agreed with the Chancery Court that the defendants did not unlawfully eliminate appraisal rights but disagreed that the proxy disclosures were sufficient.
BV News and Trends May 2022
A monthly roundup of key developments of interest to business valuation experts.
Highlights from the NYSSCPA BV conference
BVWire attended the New York State Society of CPAs’ Business Valuation and Litigation Services Conference, and—as always—it was an excellent event.
Preorders being taken for the 2022 FactSet Mergerstat Review
The 2022 edition of the FactSet Mergerstat Review delivers comprehensive rosters and statistics on mergers and acquisitions between US, UK, and global privately held, listed, and cross-border enterprises.
2022 FactSet Mergerstat Review available for preorder
The 2022 edition of the FactSet Mergerstat Review delivers comprehensive rosters and statistics on mergers and acquisitions between US, UK, and global privately held, listed, and cross-border enterprises.
COVID-19 Just a Speed Bump in Hot M&A Market, Say Speakers at Transaction Advisors Forum
Coverage and key takeaways on valuation from the April 30 M&A Strategy Forum that included sessions conducted by corporate development leaders, in-house M&A counsel, board members, and private equity investors.
How to Use New Data on Invested Capital Premiums
To estimate acquisition premiums the use of invested capital premiums is highly encouraged in certain situations. This article presents a case study and step-by-step guide to using these data that are now included in the Factset Mergerstat/BVR Control Premium Study.
BV News and Trends May 2021
A monthly roundup of key developments of interest to business valuation experts.
Court of Chancery adopts deal price, adjusting for synergies and tax savings
In a statutory appraisal action, the Delaware Court of Chancery recently adopted the deal price minus synergies as the best indicator of fair value.
In re Appraisal of Regal Entertainment Group
In a merger action involving a publicly traded company, dissenting shareholders sued for a higher value than the deal consideration. Under the applicable appraisal jurisprudence, the court calculates fair value using the deal price minus synergies and adjusting for the change in value of the target between the signing and closing of the transaction.
In Appraisal Action, Court Determines Fair Value Using Deal Price Minus Synergies and Adjusting for Increase in Value From Signing to Closing of Merger
In a merger action involving a publicly traded company, dissenting shareholders sued for a higher value than the deal consideration. Under the applicable appraisal jurisprudence, the court calculates fair value using the deal price minus synergies and adjusting for the change in value of the target between the signing and closing of the transaction.
SPAC transactions included in 2021 Mergerstat Review
The special purpose acquisition company (SPAC) flourished during 2020, and SPAC transactions are included in the 2021 edition of the Mergerstat Review.
In tax refund case, expert identifies only viable method to value stock in ‘severely distressed’ private company
The taxpayer sued the federal government for a refund, arguing she had overpaid income taxes on stock she had received as part of settling a lawsuit against her former employer.
Global BVU News and Trends October 2020
Business valuation news from a global perspective.
Court of Chancery sanctions use of asset approach in complex appraisal case
A low-profile appraisal case in front of the Delaware Court of Chancery raised important valuation questions, including how the court should determine the fair value of a nonoperating entity and how it should deal with the value of claims both parties brought on behalf of the company prior to the contested merger.
Lucero v. United States
In tax case, court approves refund, finding value of unlisted stock in distressed closely held company that taxpayer received as part of a settlement was less than stated in settlement agreement; taxpayer’s expert showed market value approach was only suitable method to calculate fair market value.
Court Adopts Taxpayer Expert’s Method to Value Unlisted Stock of ‘Severely Distressed’ Company
In tax case, court approves refund, finding value of unlisted stock in distressed closely held company that taxpayer received as part of a settlement was less than stated in settlement agreement; taxpayer’s expert showed market value approach was only suitable method to calculate fair market value.
Precision Kidd Acquisition, LLC v. Pass
In merger-related damages case, court upholds damages based on profits lost from key client’s termination of supply agreement with seller company; trial court properly rejected buyer expert’s DCF-based loss analysis which, among other flaws, overstated value of lost contract to seller company.
Proper Damages Measure Is Lost Profits Calculation, Not DCF-Based Loss Analysis
In merger-related damages case, court upholds damages based on profits lost from key client’s termination of supply agreement with seller company; trial court properly rejected buyer expert’s DCF-based loss analysis which, among other flaws, overstated value of lost contract to seller company.