Avast, ye takeover lawyers! Norton LifeLock to acquire security rival
- Reference: 1628658912
- News link: https://www.theregister.co.uk/2021/08/11/nortonlifelock_to_acquire_avast/
- Source link:
While the deal has been styled as a merger, it will see NortonLifelock acquire all Avast shares and result in the combined companies listing on NASDAQ, rather than Avast's current London Stock Exchange home.
The companies' canned statement says their respective boards "believe that the merger has compelling strategic and financial rationale and represents an attractive opportunity to create a new, industry-leading consumer Cyber Safety business".
[2]
Investors have been advised the merger will "enhance the financial profile of the combined company through increased scale, long-term growth, cost synergies with reinvestment capacity and strong cash flow generation supported by a resilient balance sheet". Double-digit earnings per share accretion has been forecast for the first full year following completion of the merger, as has "double-digit revenue growth in the long-term".
[3]
[4]
All of which may or may not come to pass. A shorter-term incentive, as described in Avast's [5]information for investors [PDF] is that the deal represents a 20.7 per cent premium over its share price.
[6]Norton dodges UK courts after telling Brit watchdog it will be nicer to consumers
[7]FireEye sold to McAfee's new owners for $1.2bn as Mandiant split into standalone firm again
[8]ESET rushes to defend rival Malwarebytes in legal war sparked by vendor upset at 'unwanted program' labeling
Avast's CEO Ondřej Vlček is expected to join Norton LifeLock as President and join its board. Pavel Baudiš, a co-founder and current director of Avast, is expected to become an independent director of Norton LifeLock.
The combined companies will have quarterly revenue of around $900 million, based on each outfit's most recent reporting.
The consumer and small business security market is complicated by the presence of Windows Defender in every copy of Windows, at no extra cost, as it obviates the need for dedicated security software. NortonLifeLock and Avast are the top and second-placed players respectively, and will emerge with around 25 per cent of the market.
[9]
Investors appear to like that idea: NortonLifeLock shares jumped almost five per cent after NASDAQ closed. ®
Get our [10]Tech Resources
[1] https://www.theregister.com/2021/07/15/nortonlifelock_and_avast_confirm_merger_negotiations/
[2] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_security/front&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=2&c=2YROf4-r5uDxoUdGZJPbdcQAAAEI&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D2%26raptor%3Dcondor%26pos%3Dtop%26test%3D0
[3] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_security/front&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=4&c=44YROf4-r5uDxoUdGZJPbdcQAAAEI&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D4%26raptor%3Dfalcon%26pos%3Dmid%26test%3D0
[4] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_security/front&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=3&c=33YROf4-r5uDxoUdGZJPbdcQAAAEI&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D3%26raptor%3Deagle%26pos%3Dmid%26test%3D0
[5] https://investors.avast.com/media/1438/rule-27-announcement-final.pdf
[6] https://www.theregister.com/2021/06/14/norton_cma/
[7] https://www.theregister.com/2021/06/03/fireeye_sold_stg_1_2bn_dollars_mandiant/
[8] https://www.theregister.com/2020/06/15/eset_malwarebytes_enigma_supreme_court/
[9] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_security/front&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=4&c=44YROf4-r5uDxoUdGZJPbdcQAAAEI&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D4%26raptor%3Dfalcon%26pos%3Dmid%26test%3D0
[10] https://whitepapers.theregister.com/
Snake oil
Yes many good people say that. Eight billions worth of folks differ. Who is right?
If Norton et al could stop ransomware attacks then we wouldn't have any since any corporation would mandate them - if not then their insurers would. Or are El Reg's stories about incursions via Windows boxes fake?
And if they can get in to plant ransomware they can get in to do other stuff.
The issues with Norton et al is that not only do they slug performance but more dangerously give a false sense of security to the user. And we know from elsewhere what risk compensation can lead to. Defender is good and Norton et al need to be a whole lot better to overcome that.
Let's see independent objective evidence. I'm looking for double-blind studies to justify these mouth watering figures.
Trust?
The consumer and small business security market is complicated by the presence of Windows Defender in every copy of Windows,
But who would you rather trust?
Will this be allowed through?
Or will the monopolies gangs decide this would give them too large a market share in snake-oil peddling security software?