Even more notable is the reaction of the rest of the market. Rather than being dismissed as a couple of impulsive purchases, these deals are taken as a rock-solid rationale for even more impulsive buying.
These acquisitions are being defended in terms that I haven't heard spoken with a straight face since the dot-com bubble: The high valuations are justified because they'll be a value in four or five years; the "synergies" of the combined companies are worth more than the targeted company alone, etc. Both of these are classic speculative rationalizations. Take the "synergy" argument: aQuantive could take root and flower beautifully inside Microsoft -- as DoubleClick could in Google. But many a merger has been poisoned by the devil-in-the-details of integration. Both could just as easily suffocate in a bureaucratic or disorganized culture of its parent. We've returned to a market where big deals are happening less because they make financial sense than because there is more than enough money to make them. That was a bad sign in the late 1990s -- it's just as clear a warning today, if anyone cares to listen.- Loading Comments...
- Loading Comments...
Recent Comments
Featured Photo Galleries
| Dow Jones | S&P 500 | NASDAQ | 10-Year Note | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 10,438.70 | 1,109.67 | 2,206.54 | 35.99 |
Oil *
73.55
|
|
DOWN
13.30
|
UP
1.74
|
UP
5.49
|
DOWN
0.04
|
10 Yr
3.60%
SPDR Gold
110.84
|
|
-0.13%
|
+0.16%
|
+0.25%
|
-0.11%
|
Data delayed 20 minutes |














