This account is pending registration confirmation. Please click on the link within the confirmation email previously sent you to complete registration. Need a new registration confirmation email? Click here
NEW YORK (
TheStreet) -- Struggling PC-maker
Dell(DELL) still has the ability to turn itself around in the mold of
IBM(IBM) under Lou Gerstner or
Apple(AAPL - Get Report) when Steve Jobs re-took the helm of the iPhone maker. The company also could go the way of bankrupt
Nokia(NOK - Get Report), according to billionaire activist investor Carl Icahn and
Southeastern Asset Management.
Icahn and Southeastern, in a presentation to Institutional Shareholder Services, continued to outline why they see a
$14-a-share tender offer for up to 72% of Dell's shares as superior to a
$24.4 billion takeover being orchestrated by private-equity giant
Silver Lake Partners and founder Michael Dell.
While Dell has definitively supported the financial terms of the Silver Lake deal and recommended it to shareholders, Icahn may very well have a better turnaround plan. In fact, the legendary activist may be presenting a strategy for Dell that could be
useful for scores of struggling hardware, networking and software companies.
Icahn argued Dell should increase its pace in a race-to-the-bottom of PC-market margins, while using the terminal cash flow from the declining unit to fund a push into higher margin and more sustainable enterprise software, services and IT security businesses. To tide Wall Street over, the activist advocates Dell release its billions in its overseas cash to shareholders, in a move that adds leverage to the company and consequently its prospective equity returns.
Already, Dell's patient shareholders have done much of the heavy lifting, Icahn argued, given $10.3 billion in cash the company has used over five years to acquire higher margin businesses. Those acquisitions now count for $9.3 billion in new Dell revenue and are growing at about a 90% annual compound rate, according to Icahn and Southeastern's presentation to ISS.
A takeover, Icahn argued, leaves Dell shareholders in the shift if the company can execute on the turnaround they've funded. Meanwhile, it adds more debt to the company without any new strategic focus.
Are Dell's shareholders to blame for the company's plight, or is it current management, which
has wasted billions on share buybacks, hoarded the company's cash abroad and done amazingly little to move into the high-growth mobile market?
Why should Dell shareholders fund CEO Michael Dell's mismanagement since he re-took the reins of the company in 2007, only to see him construct a deal that could generate a significant profit by
simply ending the company's value destroying ways, Icahn asked.
The activist's evocation of the turnarounds at Apple, IBM and even
Xerox(XRX - Get Report) and
Hewlett-Packard(HPQ - Get Report) are compelling.
While IBM sold off its PC business, Icahn argued Dell simply run it into the ground, squeezing out the unit's cash flow to support a shift in focus. He further argued acquisitions such as Xerox's 2009 deal for business process outsourcing giant
ACS are crucial to a turnaround, while a focus on the long-term over the short-term recently instituted at HP under CEO Meg Whitman will serve Dell.
Not known for his humility, Icahn would also have done well to point out his work in the breakup, sale and realignment of
Motorola, which stands out as one of the more impressive tech turnarounds in recent years.
Icahn generally amazes Wall Street with his scorched-earth brand of investing and his cavalier approach to the oftentimes polite and insular world of finance. In the instance of Dell, however, the billionaire activist is the optimist and Dell's current management is the pessimist.
Nowhere in Michael Dell and Silver Lake's plan presented to current shareholders do they outline how they expect to revitalize Dell. Instead, they simply outline the risks Dell currently faces as the PC-market withers and the company increases its debt burden.
Given Dell's full support of the Silver Lake-led deal after an independent review, maybe the takeover consortium doesn't have to present a case for the future and, instead, only an argument why shareholders should be fearful of the present.