In January 2008 RiskMetrics (Nasdaq:RISK) went public, selling 14 million shares at $17.50. The IPO valued the entire business at $1.05 billion. Just over two years later, index creator MSCI (Nasdaq:MXB) is buying the risk analytics company for $16.35 a share in cash plus 0.1802 MSCI shares, which values the deal at $1.55 billion, a 48% increase in just 24 months. Winners and losers, there are few. Read on and I'll sort out the details.

IN PICTURES: Top 7 Social Security Myths: Exposed

MSCI and RiskMetrics put out an 18-page document to help explain the key points of the deal. According to the two companies, professional investors of all stripes will benefit from the complimentary products and services it will be able to provide clients. With annual revenues of $746 million and adjusted EBITDA of $314 million, it will have the scale to compete profitably anywhere in the world. It is expected to be immediately accretive with annual cost savings of $50 million a year by 2012. If you include these savings, its compound annual growth rate for adjusted EBITDA would have been 27.2% in the last three years. It's no wonder McGraw-Hill (NYSE:MHP) and Thomson Reuters (NYSE:TRI) were also interested in RiskMetrics.

CEO Moving On
Don't feel sorry for outgoing RiskMetrics CEO Ethan Berman. He stands to receive as much as $162 million for his shares. He'll stay on until the integration of the two companies is complete. As for Spectrum Equity Investors, General Atlantic Partners and Technology Crossover Ventures, the private equity consortium that contributed $122 million to RiskMetrics recapitalization in 2004, they stand to do even better. Right out of the gate, Spectrum Equity Investors sold $40.9 million in RiskMetric stock in the IPO for which they paid $9.4 million. That's a 335% profit. As a group, it stands to receive as much as $658 million for its 50% stake. Add it all up and the three lead investors made approximately $577 million over five-and-a-half years from its original investment, an annualized rate of return of 37%. We know that the S&P 500 didn't do that.
Ambulance Chasers Appear
Like everything in America, when you're not happy with an outcome in life, you hire a lawyer. Why should this be any different? I've counted no less than six law firms making headlines for commencing investigations into the acquisition. The lawyers contend RiskMetric's board of directors breached its fiduciary duty by not seeking out better offers. Does this imply the deal is a bad one? Not on your life. RiskMetric's 2007 revenues were $240 million. Given the $1.05 billion IPO valuation mentioned earlier, its shares sold for 4.4 time's sales. Its 2009 revenues were $303 million. That's 5.1 times sales based on the $1.55 billion deal value. I can't imagine either McGraw Hill or Thomson Reuters paying more just because they can. Looking at it another way, if you value the offer from MSCI at $21.75 a share and you bought IPO shares in 2008 for $17.50, your return is 24.3%. In the same two-year period, the S&P 500 lost 17.5%. I'm not a lawyer but this appears to be nothing but pure greed by a small group of disgruntled investors. Take the offer and move on. You're not going to find a better deal.

Bottom Line
It appears to me that the big losers in this deal are retail investors, but not for the reason you think. I see no problem with the offer by MSCI. Instead, I wonder if average investors are ever going to get an opportunity to make the kind of returns RiskMetric's three lead investors did. The wealthy who provided the equity for those funds will always have access to above-average returns while the rest of us get to invest in mediocre propositions like Fortress Investment Group (NYSE:FIG) and American Capital Strategies (Nasdaq:ACAS). If lawyers want to investigate something, they might start with the SEC-accredited investor rules, which clearly favor the wealthy. But that's a subject for another day. (Weighted average cost of capital is hard to calculate as it is affected by potential and ongoing lawsuits. To learn more about the calculation, see Investors Need A Good WACC.)

Use the Investopedia Stock Simulator to trade the stocks mentioned in this stock analysis, risk free!

Related Articles
  1. Options & Futures

    Cyclical Versus Non-Cyclical Stocks

    Investing during an economic downturn simply means changing your focus. Discover the benefits of defensive stocks.
  2. Investing Basics

    How to Deduct Your Stock Losses

    Held onto a stock for too long? Selling at a loss is never ideal, but it is possible to minimize the damage. Here's how.
  3. Economics

    Is Wall Street Living in Denial?

    Will remaining calm and staying long present significant risks to your investment health?
  4. Stock Analysis

    When Will Dick's Sporting Goods Bounce Back? (DKS)

    Is DKS a bargain here?
  5. Investing News

    How AT&T Evolved into a Mobile Phone Giant

    A third of Americans use an AT&T mobile phone. How did it evolve from a state-sponsored monopoly, though antitrust and a technological revolution?
  6. Stock Analysis

    Home Depot: Can its Shares Continue Climbing?

    Home Depot has outperformed the market by a wide margin in the last 12 months. Is this sustainable?
  7. Stock Analysis

    Yelp: Can it Regain its Losses in 2016? (YELP)

    Yelp investors have had reason to be happy recently. Will the good spirits last?
  8. Stock Analysis

    Is Walmart's Rally Sustainable? (WMT)

    Walmart is enjoying a short-term rally. Is it sustainable? Is Amazon still a better bet?
  9. Stock Analysis

    GoPro's Stock: Can it Fall Much Further? (GPRO)

    As a company that primarily sells discretionary products, GoPro and its potential falls right in line with consumer trends. Is that good or bad?
  10. Stock Analysis

    Are the Brands Millennials Love a Good Buy?

    Millennials make up a very big — and thus important —c onsumer generation. So if they love a brand, its stock is likely to outperform, right?
  1. How do dividends affect retained earnings?

    When a company issues a cash dividend to its shareholders, the retained earnings listed on the balance sheet are reduced ... Read Full Answer >>
  2. What is the difference between called-up share capital and paid-up share capital?

    The difference between called-up share capital and paid-up share capital is investors have already paid in full for paid-up ... Read Full Answer >>
  3. Why would a corporation issue convertible bonds?

    A convertible bond represents a hybrid security that has bond and equity features; this type of bond allows the conversion ... Read Full Answer >>
  4. How does additional paid in capital affect retained earnings?

    Both additional paid-in capital and retained earnings are entries under the shareholders' equity section of a company's balance ... Read Full Answer >>
  5. What types of capital are not considered share capital?

    The money a business uses to fund operations or growth is called capital, and there are a number of capital sources available. ... Read Full Answer >>
  6. What is the difference between issued share capital and subscribed share capital?

    The difference between subscribed share capital and issued share capital is the former relates to the amount of stock for ... Read Full Answer >>

You May Also Like

Trading Center