陶氏杜邦折腾式合并的利益链

美国化工巨头陶氏化学与杜邦公司日前正就合并深入谈判。据报道，合并后的陶氏化学与杜邦将分拆为三部分，现任陶氏化学的首席执行官安德鲁•利伟诚（Andrew Liveris）有望担任新公司的执行董事长，同时，杜邦首席执行官爱德华•布林（Edward Breen）则在新公司继续保持原有头衔。合并后的新公司将会是联合年销售额近一千亿美元的新化工巨头。

要是在以前，这个消息可能会让人感到意外，但华尔街眼下的氛围意味着，除了合并，两家公司别无选择。

其中原因，必然和经济长期增长缓慢，以及市场看重短期表现有关。激进投资者已经成功地“传染”了其他市场参与者，让他们变得和自己一样急不可耐。这就是这种市场风气的原因。

一年来，来自对冲基金的激进投资者一直紧咬着陶氏和杜邦。杜邦和华尔街赫赫有名的激进投资者纳尔逊•佩尔茨(NelsonPeltz)大干了一场，而且似乎已经获胜。但杜邦前CEO柯爱伦今年9月份辞了职，而之前他一直备受佩尔茨旗下另类投资公司Trian Partners的抨击。现在，杜邦正在推进的合并看来恰好符合佩尔茨的思路。

问题在于回报。增长缓慢的世界经济以及表现强劲的美元，正在拖累陶氏和杜邦的全球化工与农业业务，但市场并不在乎，而且也不打算等待。

柯爱伦曾指出，研发预算对杜邦的未来而言很关键。佩尔茨则说，眼下很难看到杜邦的投资会带来回报。过去几年中，杜邦的平均业务投资为21亿美元。今年，它的现金流预计将同比下降5亿美元左右。

陶氏的情况好于杜邦。陶氏预测，今年的资本支出为39亿美元，经营性现金流则有望增加4亿美元，对应的税后权益回报率略高于6.5%。

即使这样的业绩也不足以让陶氏躲过激进投资者丹•罗伯（Dan Loeb）的攻击。一年前，罗伯旗下对冲基金公司Third Point，在获得了两个董事席位后同意和陶氏停战，但最近一个月，Third Point再次让双方的争斗升级。它希望陶氏剥离石化业务。

和杜邦一样，陶氏也认为自身的规模带来了更大的协同研发效应。对此，罗伯并不买账，他说剥离后市场会赋予该项业务更高的价值。今年，在市场表现平平的情况下，陶氏的股价上涨了11%，但这并未改变罗伯的想法，他仍认为应该促使陶氏做得更好。

本次的方案是将两家公司合并，然后拆分为三家较小的公司。在此期间可能会大幅压缩成本并大量裁员。也可能意味着陶氏和杜邦的研发支出都将减少。这当然会改善短期业绩，特别是对杜邦来说。

但和两家公司独立运作相比，合并后的长期回报率会更高吗？谁知道呢？最近的研究表明，激进投资者在长期回报率方面表现不一。

另一方面可以确定的是，市场再也不会静待答案揭晓了。（财富中文网）

译者：Charlie

校对：詹妮

A deal to merge Dow Chemical and DuPontmay have been a surprise. The two companies are reportedly in advance talks to combine. But the chemistry of Wall Street these days means there wasn’t any way around a deal.

The reason has to do with the long-term slow pace of the economy and the market’s short-term focus, fueled by the success of activist investors in getting the rest of the market on their stop-watch.

For the past year, both companies have been hounded by activist hedge fund investors. DuPont fought a pitched battle with Nelson Peltz, which it appeared to have won. But in September DuPont’s Ellen Kullman, whom Peltz’sTrian Partners had heavily criticized, exited the company. Now DuPont looks to be doing a deal that was along the lines of what Peltz was thinking.

The problem was returns. Never mind that the global chemical and agricultural businesses of Dow and DuPont are being dragged down by a slow world economy, and a strong dollar. The market wasn’t prepared to wait.

Kullman had argued DuPont’s research and development budget was essential to the company’s future. Peltz said it was hard to see a current return on DuPont’s investment. DuPont has invested an average of $2.1 billion in its businesses over the past few years. Yet its cash flow this year is expected to drop about $500 million from last year.

Dow has done better. This year Dow predicted it will invest $3.9 billion in capital expenditures, yet its cash flow from operations this year is on track to rise by just $400 million. After taxes that’s an ROE of just over 6.5%.

Even that number wasn’t enough to get Dow out of the cross-hairs of activist investor Dan Loeb. Loeb’s Third Point, which had agreed to a truce with Dow a year ago after being granted two board seats, has been re-escalating its battle with the chemical giant for the past month or so. Third Point wants the company to spin off its petrochemicals business. Like DuPont, Dow has argued that its size creates better research synergies. Loeb hasn’t bought that, saying the market would value the petrochemical business higher on its own. The fact that Dow’s stock is up 11% this year, when the market is essentially flat, hasn’t deterred Loeb that Dow should be pushed to do better.

The plan is to merge the two companies, and then break up the combined chemical giant into three smaller companies. Along the way there will probably be plenty of cost cutting and layoffs. It will also likely mean a reduction in research spending for both companies. That’s sure to produce better short-term returns, especially for DuPont.

But will it produce a company that has better long-term returns than the two companies would have on their own. Who knows? (Recent studies show that activist investors tend to have mixed results when it comes to long-term returns.) But what we do know is the market no longer will wait around to find out.