In the cut and thrust of today’s business world it seems that mergers and acquisitions are the order of the day. The latest big names to be mentioned as a possible merger are Channels Four and Five. The merger is being looked at as an alternative to bailing out the ailing CH4 with money from the BBC.
The story does however raise an interesting point about mergers and acquisitions and that is that they often take place for the right reasons, not just as some people believe, purely to get rid of competition and monopolise a particular market.
Mergers and acquisitions have a colourful past to say the least. By the man in the street they are seen as either the big boys of the business world bullying their way to becoming bigger than everyone else or just, plain and simple, the pursuit of excessive wealth. Sony’s merger with Columbia and Tri-Star Pictures is one such incident that gives the process a bad name. Eventually Sony wrote off $2.7m to sort out all the legal problems.
But for every case where it appears vast sums of money have been wasted or lost there is a case where an acquisition actually works. The partnership between BMW and Rolls Royce was beneficial to both parties and AOL’s acquisition of Time Warner has mean that in the long term Time Warner was able to weather some particularly bad storms without disappearing completely.
So what does it all mean? What is involved?
There are subtle differences in mergers and acquisitions. An acquisition, which is also known as a takeover, takes place when one company is bought by another company. There are two types of acquisition and it is the confusion between the two that often results in the bad press that the process is often given.
A hostile takeover takes place when a company does not want to be taken over. It’s this type of merger that people seem to remember as it’s often the type of story that makes the papers and receives the most coverage in the media. Hostile takeovers occur for various reasons but money and competition are usually at the heart of the decision. A larger company may feel threatened by the potential of a smaller company to take a share of a particular market. In such a case the larger company would be seen as using its power to intimidate and unfairly control the market.
A friendly takeover involves more of a process of negotiations and most of the time is beneficial to both parties. A smaller company might be struggling but have valuable resources and talent that could be utilized elsewhere. In such a case a large company can help out by buying the smaller company. The process is often also started by the smaller company. Very often they have reached a point where they can go no further with the tools at their disposal and need help to expand and move forward. Sometimes the only way to get this help is through the process of being acquired by a bigger entity in the same field of business.
A merger differs slightly to an acquisition in that it is the combination of two or more companies to form a completely new company. With an acquisition the companies involved either keep their names or disappear. In a merger the parties involved emerge under a new banner with a new identity and name. Although mergers have a better reputation than acquisitions there is still room for abuse and they are looked at closely by the authorities to determine what impact they will have on a market.
So on the face of it the CH4 and FIVE merger would appear to be an interesting proposition; one helping out the other in light of difficult times for TV companies. However I’m sure it’ll be closely looked at before any decision is made. Only time will tell.
About the Author
Dominic Donaldson is an expert in the business industry.
Find out more about mergers and acquisitions.

