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...
Featured Photo Galleries
| Dow Jones | S&P 500 | NASDAQ | 10-Year Note | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 10,175.85 | 1,087.06 | 2,144.90 | 34.78 |
Oil *
78.06
|
|
UP
152.43
|
UP
17.76
|
UP
32.46
|
DOWN
0.25
|
10 Yr
3.48%
SPDR Gold
108.10
|
|
+1.52%
|
+1.66%
|
+1.54%
|
-0.71%
|
Data delayed 20 minutes |














