I’ve worn a groove in my head from scratching it on last week’s Amazon-Kiva Systems deal. After reading all the press stating what a crafty move it is and after the huge uptick in Amazon’s (NASDAQ: AMZN) stock price, The Merger Verger feels like the odd man out on this one. [Original posting here]
I still disagree with all the fawning Wall Street analysts and tech-media commentators but I think I have homed in on an explanation. Let me offer up some facts and then some observations.
- Jeff Bezos built a spaceship to go to Zebulon or some place. (You can look it up.) The guy clearly has a “boys with toys” problem. Robots – even ones that look like giant orange throat lozenges skating around a warehouse floor – count as objects of desire. (Earth to Jeff.)
- Kiva (founded in 2003) creates leading-edge material handling systems used by an impressive list of customers, including units of Amazon (but not Amazon itself). It’s privately held but recent revenues were reportedly north of $100 million, making the purchase price of $775 million a bracing 7X multiple of sales. (Yikes.)
- Amazon has a long history of successful acquisitions, but all of them of the horizontal type. They have vertical partnerships but their experience in integrating a company whose business fundamentals are entirely different to theirs is basically nil. (Uh-oh.)
- The company’s press release about the Kiva acquisition says a big nothing about the rationale behind it and offers only one minor tidbit about the plans for its integration: Kiva’s HQ will remain in Massachusetts. (Whoopee.)
- Equity analysts have settled on the rationale that Kiva robots will bring significant efficiencies to Amazon’s order fulfillment process, which they should. (At an NPV of minus how much?)
- Other analysts have pointed out that the move could be a competitive one, designed to prevent others from having the cost/efficiency advantage associated with the Kiva system, thus enabling Amazon to defend an important advantage. (Come on guys.)
- One or two analysts have floated the idea that all those reasons apply but are small beer; the real reason is that Kiva unlocks a door to the next transformational step for Amazon. (Now, ladies and gentlemen, we may be getting somewhere.)
Here’s The Merger Verger’s take on all that:
- The absence of any Amazon commentary on the deal’s strategic rationale could be a case of intentional competitive silence but it sure smells like the lack of any meaningful strategy to describe.
- On the efficiency explanation, to suggest that the best way to capture the benefit of a key component of your operational infrastructure is to own it outright is just hubris. By that line of thinking, Amazon should buy a corrugated box manufacturer, UPS should buy a truck maker and Apple should buy, well, China. Metaphorically speaking, there must be some compelling reason to own when you can rent.
- As a corollary, one does not pay 7X sales to obtain operational efficiencies; that’s just stupid. One pays that kind of multiple to launch a sales rocket.
- Similarly, to buy a technology company merely to prevent competitors from gaining access to it is a flaccid strategy at best. Even acknowledging Kiva’s technological superiority, squirreling it away for Amazon’s exclusive internal use merely invites robotics wannabes to fill that void.
- Again, one does not pay 7X sales for a company that one intends to prevent others from patronizing. For Amazon to gain an economic return, Kiva must be able to sell its products widely.
- So what one DOES pay 7X sales for? One only pays that kind of money to unlock a transformed future.
Amazon is already a world-leading provider of retail fulfillment services, both internally and as a third-party provider for others. It has the expertise and infrastructure to keep growing this “pick and pack” business. But Kiva – owning it, not just renting it – could provide the last essential component of the next generation of competitive dominance in the space. By this thesis, the facilities and operational expertise that already exist at Amazon get combined with a future-pathway technology to create a logistics service that is domain leading and defensible. That makes sense to me.
Ironically, if my analysis is right (not just boys-with-toys, not just hubris, not merely operational efficiency, not competitive paranoia) Amazon has some gigantic integration challenges ahead of it. But I wouldn’t bet against them.
Click here for the company’s website and here for a series of videos showing the system in action. Click here for an amusing robotic interpretation of the Nutcracker Suite entitled “The Dance of the Bots.”