????表面上看,，雅虎會作何選擇顯而易見。董事會往往都會接受更高的出價,。但這次情況沒那么簡單,。
????貝恩資本/百仕通愿意支付更高溢價的一大原因是他們并不尋求出售亞洲資產。這樣的交易會給雅虎帶來幾十億美元的巨額稅單——相比低成本基數(shù)（阿里巴巴是10億美元,，雅虎日本為零）,。有傳言稱，雅虎將采用“現(xiàn)金充裕剝離”（cash-rich-split-off）方式避免巨額稅單,，但這樣做必須得到阿里巴巴和軟銀的配合,。如果這兩家公司正在參與收購多數(shù)股股權，它們有什么理由要讓收購少數(shù)股股權的交易成功,？
????當然,，反對者會說貝恩資本和百仕通不能給雅虎帶來運營“附加值”，因為它們都不是精明的科技投資公司（至少相比銀湖資本或TPG是這樣）,。合理的考量可能是使用杠桿比率,。跟我聊過的人都相信雅虎的主要問題是沒有重點，也就是說它需要停止大量無謂的努力,，重新回到基于內容和電子商務的廣告核心業(yè)務,。
????有時，因為大刀闊斧的業(yè)務重組而鬧得沸沸揚揚并不是什么好事,，但有時這就是醫(yī)囑,。雅虎可能屬于后一類。內部人士認為如果楊致遠繼續(xù)持有10%股權和保留董事會席位,，這些事情就無法展開,，至少不會有效地推進。而且,，感覺雅虎如果退市,，可能運營起來會比作為上市公司更好，至少在不遠的未來公司試圖重組的過程中是這樣,。
????談到董事會,，我在上周四的文章中已提到過另一個問題：董事會必須全部走人,。消息走漏得非常快,，這幫人根本不可信,。但是只有收購多數(shù)股股權才能做到這一點，少數(shù)股股權則不能,。
????貝恩資本,、百仕通和其亞洲合作伙伴也很有可能不會出價。畢竟,，我們聽到阿里巴巴要競購可有段時間了,，但從未成真。不過,，如果他們真的出價競購,，我看不出雅虎董事會除了保住在這家日漸衰落的上市公司的董事位置這點私心，還有什么理由拒絕,。 |
|
|
????On the face of it, this should be an obvious choice. Boards should usually take the higher price. But this particular situation goes deeper.
????One big reason why Bain/Blackstone can pay a higher premium is because they are not looking to sell the Asia assets. Such deals would result in a massive tax bill for Yahoo – multiple billions of dollars – given its puny cost basis ($1 billion for Alibaba, nothing for Yahoo Japan). There has been some talk of Yahoo doing a "cash-rich-split-off" to avoid such taxes, but such a maneuver can only be done in concert with Alibaba and Softbank. If those two companies are working on a majority bid, why would they enable the minority bid to succeed?
????The counter-argument, of course, is that Bain and Blackstone would offer Yahoo little operational "value-add," as neither is known as a particularly tech-savvy investment firm (at least compared to Silver Lake or TPG). Legit concerns, as would be the likely use of leverage. But everyone I speak with believes that Yahoo's primary problem is a lack of focus. In other words, it needs to stop lots of extraneous efforts and refocus on its core of advertising via content and commerce.
????Sometimes being known for slashing and burning is a bad thing, but sometimes it's just what the doctor ordered. Yahoo is probably in the latter category, and insiders don't see it happening -- at least not as effectively -- if Yang remains a 10% equity holder and board member. Moreover, there is a sense that Yahoo could operate much better as a private company than a public one, at least in the immediate future as it tries to restructure.
????Speaking of the board, that's another issue I discussed yesterday in a blog post: The entire thing has to go. It leaks like the Titanic, making it reliably unreliable. A majority takeover accomplishes this objective. The minority deals do not.
????It remains quite possible that Bain, Blackstone and its Asian partners won't make a bid. After all, we've been hearing about an Alibaba bid for eons and it hasn't yet materialized. But if it does arrive, I really don't see how Yahoo's board can turn it down for any reason other than self-preservation as directors of a fading public company. | ????. |
