ロックウェル・オートメーションの取締役会はエマソン社からの買収提案を満場一致で否決

取締役会決議案が企業とその株主にとって最善の利益とは限らない
ロックウェル・オートメーションの優れた価値を提供し続ける戦略計画と管理陣の能力への信頼を改めて表明

ロックウェル・オートメーションは、本日、取締役会が11月16に受取ったエマソンからのロックウェル・オートメーションを取得するとの買収提案を満場一致で否決したことを発表しました。

ロックウェル・オートメーションの取締役会はエマソン社からの買収提案を満場一致で否決

ロックウェル・オートメーションの取締役会はエマソン社からの買収提案を満場一致で否決

ロックウェル・オートメーションの取締役会は、財務および法律顧問と相談して、エマソン社の2017年11月16日の提案を徹底的に検討し、ロックウェル・オートメーションとその株主にとって最善の利益ではないと満場一致で決定しました。エマソン社の提案は、ロックウェル・オートメーションとその継続的な成長と価値創造への展望を過小評価し、ロックウェル・オートメーションの株主に長期的なリスクをもたらし、進化する市場で成功を収めようとする立場にない企業を生み出すことになります。取締役会は、当社の株主のために特別利益を生み出しているロックウェル・オートメーションの成功戦略を継続して実行することは、エマソン社の提案を追求するより長期的な価値を生み出すことになると信じています。

ロックウェル・オートメーションの社長兼最高経営責任者(CEO)であるブレイク・D・モレットは次のように述べています。「ロックウェル・オートメーションの取締役会および経営陣は、特に、両組織を統合した結果もたらされる脆弱なポジションと相乗効果が得られないこと、エマソン社の株式ベースの通貨に関連するリスクを踏まえて、当社および当社の戦略的な方向性、ならびにエマソン社の提案を上回る優れた株主還元および価値創造を引き続き提供する能力があることを確信しています。」

「成長と価値創造を推進する上で、必ずしも大きくなることがよいとは限りません。エマソン社は成長と収益の可能性を高め、産業オートメーションと情報市場でその能力を拡大するために必要であると、この提案された買収を見ているかもしれませんが、ロックウェルはそうとはとらえていません。私たちは、お客様の期待を超え、ロックウェル・オートメーションの株主のために優れた価値を創造し、水準を引き上げるために必要な才能、技術、文化、リソースを持っています。」

以下に、2017年11月22日にエマソン社の会長兼最高経営責任者(CEO)であるDavid N. Farr氏に送付した手紙の全文を掲載します。

November 22, 2017

Mr. David N. Farr
Chairman and Chief Executive Officer
Emerson Electric Co.
8000 W. Florissant Avenue
St. Louis, MO 63136

Dear Mr. Farr:

I am writing to you on behalf of the Board of Directors of Rockwell Automation in response to Emerson’s revised unsolicited proposal set forth in your public letter and presentation dated November 16, 2017. The value of your proposal is $218.481 per Rockwell Automation share based on Emerson’s closing share price on November 17, 2017. This represents only a 16.8% premium to the undisturbed Rockwell Automation stock price on October 30, 2017, the last trading day before the public disclosure of your prior proposals. The value of your current offer represents an increase of 1.6% over the headline value of your previous proposal dated October 10, 2017.

Our Board of Directors, in consultation with its financial and legal advisors, has thoroughly considered your November 16, 2017 proposal and has unanimously determined that it is not in the best interests of Rockwell Automation and its shareowners. Emerson’s proposal undervalues Rockwell Automation and its prospects for continued growth and value creation, presents significant long-term risk for Rockwell Automation’s shareowners, and would create a company that is not well-positioned to compete successfully in the evolving market.

We believe that continuing to execute Rockwell Automation’s successful strategy, which is generating extraordinary returns for the Company’s shareowners, will create greater long-term value than pursuing your proposal.

Rockwell Automation’s Connected Enterprise strategy is working.

Rockwell Automation is experiencing great success as the world’s largest company dedicated to industrial automation and information. By bringing The Connected Enterprise to life, we are helping industrial companies and their people be more productive, harnessing the Industrial Internet of Things. Rockwell Automation is a pure play, integrated business, which provides substantial efficiencies for our Company and our customers as compared to a diversified manufacturer of commercial, residential, and industrial products. The Rockwell Automation Board and management team are very confident in Rockwell Automation’s prospects and believe that Rockwell Automation is uniquely positioned to create additional value for Rockwell Automation’s shareowners. While Emerson may see this proposed acquisition as necessary to enhance its growth and earnings potential and expand its capabilities in the industrial automation and information market, Rockwell Automation does not. When we talked in June, 2017 it was apparent that our companies were on very different paths.

Rockwell Automation’s focused strategy has generated strong financial returns, including over 6% organic sales growth and 14% Adjusted Earnings Per Share growth in fiscal year 2017. Over the last ten years, return on invested capital averaged almost 30%.

Emerson’s proposed combination would destroy shareowner value and result in a less-competitive combined organization.

Your proposed combination would dampen, not enhance, the ability to grow in the evolving industrial automation and information market. Unlike Emerson, Rockwell Automation is singularly focused on making investments in one platform to deliver value to customers. Rockwell Automation provides solutions across all industries, including process, hybrid, and discrete applications, on a single platform and in one software environment. This approach enables the simplification our customers tell us they need. The proposed company would also have fundamental channel and partner conflicts, resulting in damage to Rockwell Automation’s unique limited distribution model. In short, given different technology platforms and market access models, a combination would destroy value for shareowners and customers rather than create it.

The company resulting from your proposed combination would also be highly leveraged. Moody’s Investors Service recently released its analysis of the proposed transaction, indicating that it would initially result in a combined company with close to $25 billion in debt and a pro forma ratio of debt to EBITDA approaching five times. This weakened financial position would impair the proposed company’s ability to make critical investments needed to support competitive differentiation and drive global growth. We believe that investments in information solutions and connected services, analytics, and geographic expansion are critical to long-term growth and value creation. Your proposed combined entity would have limited ability to make such investments without compromising a policy of substantial return of capital to shareowners through dividends and share repurchases, which Rockwell Automation shareowners have benefitted from for years and have said are important to them.

The mere fact that the combined entity would be larger does not mitigate these risks. Bigger is not always better for driving growth and value creation. Although your proposal appears to be based on a contrary view, Emerson’s decision to divest its drives and motors business, capabilities critical to process applications, demonstrates this awareness. While the proposed combined company would have a broader range of products and services, we believe it would be unable to match Rockwell Automation’s track record of delivering value to customers and shareowners.

Emerson’s stated synergy values are unrealistic and the proposed combination would face dis-synergies.
In attempting to justify your proposal, you have assumed there would be $400 million of run-rate synergies. A full one-third of these synergies are assumed to be revenue synergies, whichare notoriously difficult to achieve. Moreover, the cost and revenue synergies are uncertain at best.

To achieve your synergy target, the proposed combined company would need to choose cost cuts instead of investments required to support, evolve, and integrate multiple control platforms. Even if Emerson were to choose to invest in maintaining multiple platforms, this decision would be significantly more expensive than Rockwell Automation’s strategy of continuing to add functionality to a single platform.

We believe the attempt to achieve the projected synergies would also result in a substantial loss of talent. Rockwell Automation’s success is largely attributable to our culture and the focus on attracting, developing, and retaining great employees and empowering them to do their best work. The cost synergies assumed in your proposal would result in significant job cuts and would undermine the ability to attract and motivate employees who can execute a long-term strategy that is designed to deliver results for customers and value for shareowners.

Even if the combined entity could achieve the cost synergies projected in your most recent letter, our analysis shows that the combination would be highly dilutive to the combined-entity’s GAAP earnings per share, which would reduce the value of your proposal to Rockwell Automation shareowners. Your statement in your November 16 presentation that the transaction would be “accretive to adjusted EPS . . . in year one” appears to have been based on a significant number of adjustments and assumptions, including giving effect to both cost and highly speculative revenue synergies, and excluding transaction-related amortization and fees, repatriation taxes, and costs to achieve synergies.

Emerson common stock is not an attractive acquisition currency and creates risk for our shareowners.

Your proposal contemplates that approximately 40% of the consideration to Rockwell Automation shareowners would be in the form of Emerson common stock. The performance of Emerson’s common stock, however, demonstrates that holding Emerson common stock would entail significant long-term risk for Rockwell Automation’s shareowners. Emerson substantially lags Rockwell Automation’s strong performance, and has consistently underperformed the S&P 500:

          Total Shareholder Return Through October 30, 20172
                                         1-Year         3-Year        5-Year         10-Year
Rockwell Automation         60.7%          81.9%          201.7%          252.5%
Emerson                          38.9%          17.8%          65.0%            79.9%
S&P 500                            23.5%          37.4%         102.6%          108.7%

The approximate 10% decline in Emerson's market price in the three weeks since you disclosed your prior unsolicited proposals further emphasizes the risks to Rockwell Automation shareowners of exchanging their Rockwell Automation shares for Emerson common stock, and the market’s skepticism as to the purported benefits of the proposed combination.

Issuing approximately $11 billion of Emerson stock would also require Emerson shareowner approval, creating significant deal uncertainty in addition to financial risk. This deal risk is heightened by the adverse reaction that many of Emerson’s shareowners and analysts have had to your proposals.

Finally, the value of the Emerson stock that you propose to issue to Rockwell Automation shareowners would be subject to additional market risks beyond the immediate dilution to Emerson’s earnings. The market may question the fundamental assumptions of the transaction—as we do, for the reasons described above. We also lack confidence in Emerson’s ability to execute on an acquisition that is almost ten times larger than any prior Emerson acquisition, especially in light of Emerson’s M&A track record, which includes substantial write-offs from prior acquisitions, and an uncertain leadership succession plan. Your last hostile pursuit— Chloride plc in 2010— is a case in point, as Emerson subsequently wrote down that acquisition by $508 million, approximately one-third of the purchase price,3 and sold it for a substantial loss.

For these reasons, our Board does not believe Emerson stock is an attractive acquisition currency for Rockwell Automation shareowners.

* * * * *

Blake D. Moret
President and Chief Executive Officer

Goldman, Sachs & Co.がロックウェル・オートメーションの財務顧問を、Wachtell, Lipton, Rosen & Katzがロックウェル・オートメーションの法律顧問を務めています。

将来の見通しに関する記述

本ニュースリリースには、1995年私的証券訴訟改革法に定めるところの「将来の見通しについての記述」が含まれます。「考える」、「計画する」、「期待する」、「予想する」、「するだろう」、「意図する」などの言葉や類似する表現によって、将来見通しについての記述を特定できることがあります。当社が制御不能な多数の一定のリスクや不確実性により、当社の計画が変更されたり、関係が大きく異なったりする場合があります。そうしたリスクや不確実性には、本リリースで説明されているような取り決めを完了させて実行する際に伴う課題や不確実性、マクロ経済的な要因、そして当社が連邦証券取引委員会に随時提出している文書に詳述しているリスクや不確実性などがありますが、それらに限定されるわけではありません。これらの将来の見通しについての記述は、本リリース発表時点での当社の見解を反映しています。当社は新たな情報、将来の事象、その他の事由に基づいて、将来の見通しについての記述を更新・修正する義務を一切負いません。

  1. Implied offer price reflects Emerson’s offer of $135 per share in cash and of $90 per share in stock based on Emerson’s 30-Day VWAP of $64.55 as of October 30, 2017, which was valued at $83.48 per share based on Emerson’s closing price of $59.85 on November 17, 2017.
    (暗黙の提示価格は、エマソン社の2017年10月30日現在のエマソン社の30日VWAPの64.55ドルに基づいて、現金で1株当たり135ドル、株式1株当たり90ドルを反映しています。2017年11月17日のエマソン社の終値に基づくと1株当たり83.48ドルとなりました。)
  2. Total Shareholder Return calculated based on stock price appreciation for the one-, three-, five- and ten-year periods ended on October 30, 2017, the last trading day prior to the initial disclosure of your unsolicited proposal, assuming that all dividends paid during such period were reinvested in the applicable securities by the holders. Taking into account the market’s reaction to Emerson’s unsolicited proposals, Emerson’s one-year Total Shareholder Return is only 13.0% through November 17, 2017, compared to 20.3% for the S&P 500.
    (総株主利益は、2017年10月30日に終了した1年、3年、5年および10年の期間の株価上昇に基づいて計算され、未払募金の最初の開示日より前の取引日であり、その期間中に保有者が適用証券に再投資しました。エマソン社の一方的な買収提案に対する市場の反応を考慮すると、エマソン社の1年間の総株主利益率は、2017年11月17日までにわずか13.0%であり、それに対してS&P500は20.3%でした。)
  3. Represents write off on Network Power divestiture, which included the acquired Chloride business.
    (買収した塩化物事業を含む、Network Powerの売却償却を表します。)

会社概要

ロックウェル・オートメーション(NYSE:ROK)は、専業としては世界最大の産業用オートメーションと情報ソリューション企業で、お客様の生産性を高め、地球に優しい技術を提供します。ロックウェル・オートメーションは米国ウィスコンシン州ミルウォーキーに本社を置き、約22,000名の従業員が、世界80カ国以上の営業拠点でお客様をサポートしています。

問い合わせ先

Tom Spencer

お問い合わせ

ロックウェル・オートメーションならびに当社パートナの仕事は優れた知識を通じて、自動化の設計と導入をお手伝いしその投資がいかされるようサポートすることです。

最新ニュース

ロックウェル・オートメーションにご登録いただければ、最新のニュースと情報を電子メールにて直接お届けします。