• Home
  • News
  • Fortune 500
  • Tech
  • Finance
  • Leadership
  • Lifestyle
  • Rankings
  • Multimedia
Finance

Don’t look now, but M&A is back

By
Stanley Bing
Stanley Bing
Down Arrow Button Icon
By
Stanley Bing
Stanley Bing
Down Arrow Button Icon
February 28, 2013, 11:05 AM ET
Illustration: Jason Schneider

Like a boil reemerging after years in remission, like a pestilence of locusts descending from a clear blue sky, like a bad odor coming up from the waste treatment plant across the river now that winter is fading, mergers and acquisitions are back. Perhaps I’m being a trifle negative. M&A fulfills important functions in the business cosmos, much the way arachnids keep the world safe from overpopulation by mosquitoes. Certainly, some people must benefit from the mindless, heedless, often doomed merging of two entities.

Is it you and me? By that, I mean the people in the corporation who come every day from our pleasant, relatively modest abodes to work for our living, earn adequate but not lavish compensation, fly commercial, worry about making our numbers, have no pension. You know — us. Do we benefit from being merged? No. We don’t. Not unless you count pure survival as a lovely benefit.

What about an acquisition, when our leaders acquire something for their toy chest? Not necessarily. Decades ago my corporation of feisty Visigoths marched into Rome, in one of the major acquisitions of that time. What happened? As Ishmael reports at the end of Moby-Dick, “And I only am escaped alone to tell thee.” That’s right. Everybody … died. Except me. All the Romans, by the way, are fine.

How about all the tradesmen, support staff, mailroom guys, and vendors, the rude mechanicals who keep the great beast in working order? Nope. They’re screwed. After a merger, the company enters a period of euphemism in which it “manages efficiencies,” “rationalizes expenses,” and “finds redundancies.” This is the way the system justifies the merger, by making one plus one equal one. If you’re one of the ones in the one, you’re done.

But come on! Business isn’t stupid. It doesn’t engage in fruitless activity! Money is being made — oh, excuse me, value is being created — for somebody, right?

Well, first and foremost, bankers are very happy. Bankers don’t even have to accomplish anything tangible. Meetings are taken. Fees are levied. They don’t even have to invent a nutty investment vehicle to make a killing. The insanity is at the company level. Bankers just help.

Lawyers, of course, are necessary. They’re value-free on this kind of thing. It’s not their job to ask, “Why should we try to graft this hedgehog onto this warthog?” Theirs is to say, “Here’s how we do it.” And they like to be busy, particularly the out-of-house ones, who bill by the hour.

Management consultants are necessary after a merger, to help senior management feel as though it’s handling the organizational issues. Often they are instrumental in transferring the money that would have been made by other people, now let go in a reorganization, to themselves.

Ultra-senior management of both firms in a merger tend to do well. Sometimes a few of them lose their position, which is hard. But that’s why God created parachutes of silk, gold, and platinum. Pretty things. Hope you get one one day.

Oh, and the business media practically soil themselves over an uptick in M&A. After all, reporting on everyday business is like being a war correspondent in peacetime. The prospect of covering takeovers, invasions, and bloodbaths in corner offices makes them feverish.

Finally, there’s one group that adores the whole high-end casino zeitgeist of the M&A biosphere, fueled with action and the rarefied air of all-night dealmaking. And that’s Wall Street. Which fighter are you going to lay your money on as they grapple to the death? Which horse do you think may cross the finish line first? Which stock should kick up nicely if this merger comes to pass? Come on now, shareholders. Game on. You can’t win if you don’t play.

This story is from the March 18, 2013 issue of Fortune.

Follow Stanley Bing at stanleybing.com and on Twitter at @thebingblog.

About the Author
By Stanley Bing
See full bioRight Arrow Button Icon

Latest in Finance

CryptoBinance
Binance has been proudly nomadic for years. A new announcement suggests it’s finally chosen a headquarters
By Ben WeissDecember 7, 2025
3 hours ago
Big TechOpenAI
OpenAI goes from stock market savior to burden as AI risks mount
By Ryan Vlastelica and BloombergDecember 7, 2025
7 hours ago
InvestingStock
What bubble? Asset managers in risk-on mode stick with stocks
By Julien Ponthus, Natalia Kniazhevich, Abhishek Vishnoi and BloombergDecember 7, 2025
8 hours ago
EconomyTariffs and trade
Macron warns EU may hit China with tariffs over trade surplus
By James Regan and BloombergDecember 7, 2025
8 hours ago
EconomyTariffs and trade
U.S. trade chief says China has complied with terms of trade deals
By Hadriana Lowenkron and BloombergDecember 7, 2025
8 hours ago
PoliticsCongress
Leaders in Congress outperform rank-and-file lawmakers on stock trades by up to 47% a year, researchers say
By Jason MaDecember 7, 2025
8 hours ago

Most Popular

placeholder alt text
Real Estate
The 'Great Housing Reset' is coming: Income growth will outpace home-price growth in 2026, Redfin forecasts
By Nino PaoliDecember 6, 2025
2 days ago
placeholder alt text
AI
Nvidia CEO says data centers take about 3 years to construct in the U.S., while in China 'they can build a hospital in a weekend'
By Nino PaoliDecember 6, 2025
2 days ago
placeholder alt text
Economy
The most likely solution to the U.S. debt crisis is severe austerity triggered by a fiscal calamity, former White House economic adviser says
By Jason MaDecember 6, 2025
1 day ago
placeholder alt text
Economy
JPMorgan CEO Jamie Dimon says Europe has a 'real problem’
By Katherine Chiglinsky and BloombergDecember 6, 2025
1 day ago
placeholder alt text
Big Tech
Mark Zuckerberg rebranded Facebook for the metaverse. Four years and $70 billion in losses later, he’s moving on
By Eva RoytburgDecember 5, 2025
3 days ago
placeholder alt text
Politics
Supreme Court to reconsider a 90-year-old unanimous ruling that limits presidential power on removing heads of independent agencies
By Mark Sherman and The Associated PressDecember 7, 2025
16 hours ago
Rankings
  • 100 Best Companies
  • Fortune 500
  • Global 500
  • Fortune 500 Europe
  • Most Powerful Women
  • Future 50
  • World’s Most Admired Companies
  • See All Rankings
Sections
  • Finance
  • Leadership
  • Success
  • Tech
  • Asia
  • Europe
  • Environment
  • Fortune Crypto
  • Health
  • Retail
  • Lifestyle
  • Politics
  • Newsletters
  • Magazine
  • Features
  • Commentary
  • Mpw
  • CEO Initiative
  • Conferences
  • Personal Finance
  • Education
Customer Support
  • Frequently Asked Questions
  • Customer Service Portal
  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms Of Use
  • Single Issues For Purchase
  • International Print
Commercial Services
  • Advertising
  • Fortune Brand Studio
  • Fortune Analytics
  • Fortune Conferences
  • Business Development
About Us
  • About Us
  • Editorial Calendar
  • Press Center
  • Work At Fortune
  • Diversity And Inclusion
  • Terms And Conditions
  • Site Map

© 2025 Fortune Media IP Limited. All Rights Reserved. Use of this site constitutes acceptance of our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy | CA Notice at Collection and Privacy Notice | Do Not Sell/Share My Personal Information
FORTUNE is a trademark of Fortune Media IP Limited, registered in the U.S. and other countries. FORTUNE may receive compensation for some links to products and services on this website. Offers may be subject to change without notice.