The Merger And Acquisition Of The Quaker Oats Company

The merger I choose to research was the acquisition of Pixar by Disney. The merger between Disney and Pixar was a very successful one. They worked together in the past and their contract was running out after the release of Cars. This was the perfect opportunity and sensible move for these two companies to merge. The merger would allow the companies to work together conveniently. This merger was very

On April 1, 1997, the merger with Atlantic Dairy Cooperatives was effective (Wilmes). It was a single discrete event. The merger was good news for the Land O’Lakes Inc. because the company became bigger which led to strong growth and expansion. Land O’Lakes Inc. celebrated this news and the Chief Executive Officer, Jack Gherty discussed about his bright vision for the future because “the merger will allow the company to provide greater long-term value and returns” to customers (Wilmes).

Companies do not have the freedom to merge and acquire as they please do. All have to meet the requirements and essentially be approved by regulatory bodies. In the context of regulations, antitrust laws and security laws are commonly referred to by regulator to determine whether a merger or acquisition should be allowed or rejected. Antitrust laws prohibit mergers and acquisitions that impede competition. The point is very simple where antitrust is referred to as competition. The goal is to increase competition because more competition in economics means that consumers get more at a fairer or lower price. Anytime a regulator believes that a merger or acquisition will make an industry or market less competitive, the business transaction might

While the FTC does pass most mergers that are brought forth, some deals do not go through. One of the deals that did not go through was when in 2013, SYSCO Corporation put in an offer to purchase rival U.S. Foods for what was to be worth around $8.2 Billion (F). If this deal would have went through, then the combined company would have created a powerhouse that would have made up 75 percent of the food distribution market in the United States (F). After over a year of trying to make the merger happen, a Washington U.S. District Judge put forth a preliminary injunction that stated the acquisition was being blocked over objections that said the larger company would hurt competition (G). This decision came after a lawsuit was filed by the FTC

So far numerous studies shows that between 50 to 85 percent of merger failed, and a study by Baker & McKenzie (2014) opined that majority of the merger did not improve shareholder value or did not returned enough return on investment by stakeholder.

Whole Foods Market was involved in merger with Wild Oats in 2007 and has started to expand by purchasing small natural food chains, including North Carolina’s Wellspring Grocery, Bread & Circus out of New England, and Mrs. Gooch’s in California. The Federal Trade Commission tried to block WFM’s acquisition of Wild Oats, and the difficult process led WFM to lean more heavily on opening more stores instead of buying existing ones (Whole Foods takes over America).

In September of 1996 superstores Staples and Office Depot, had developed a proposal to merge, in the following month the companies had gone and met with the FTC to let the agency know that both companies had an intention to merge into one company. Both Staples and Office Depot are both office-supply stores, and had decided to merge in order to keep the costs low as well as keeping their consumers happy. The FTC, however, didn't like the companies' idea of merging so the staff decided to launch an investigation of the proposed merger in order to determine if the companies would violate the anti-trust laws. This, however wasn't approved by the FTC, and a lawsuit was soon followed, questioning the companies, which resulted with both Office Depot and Staples challenging the FTC's decision vigorously. This case was set before both an administrative judge and a federal judge. However, the federal judge was considering whether or not to issue an injunction during this time.

General Mills, Inc (GMI). produces and markets branded consumer foods globally. They also supply branded and unbranded food products to the foodservice and commercial banking industries. It offers ready-to-eat cereals, refrigerated yogurt, ready-to-serve soups, dry dinners, shelf stable and frozen vegetables, refrigerated and frozen dough products, dessert and baking mixes, frozen pizza and pizza snacks, grains, and fruit and savory snacks; a range of organic products, including soups, granola bars, and cereals; and ice cream and frozen desserts, and grain snacks. According to General Mills Inc. the company retails its products through direct sales personnel, as well as through broker, distribution to

According to the financial report given, General Mills is an insolvent business. This is because even after making sum purchases and general expenses; it is still able to settle for them through its everyday operation. The various sources of money are also evidenced from the financial report.

The roots of Snapple Corporation date back to 1972 in Brooklyn. In 1980s Snapple introduced ready-to-drink fruit juices and iced teas. Snapple was the first company to sell its drinks in single serving wide-mouthed glass bottles rather than aluminum cans. By 1991 Snapple emerged as a nationally recognized brand.

Abernethy and Chapman are desirable because they have a steady clientele and continue to generate revenues leaving them with a net income that is favorable. Often companies will merge with another company in an effort to avoid bankruptcy, consolidate services, or expand. Over the years, we’ve seen many big-name firms merge with others. Acquisitions and mergers are becoming a trend due to the number of partner retirements and the lack of succession plans. (Sinkin and Putney, 2013) Firms such as Abernethy and Chapman might agree to an acquisition because it is often the most cost-effective way for them to increase cash flow and continue to be successful. Mergers can either be a success or a failure. When you merge organizations, you are also merging personalities which can often lead to conflict; however, merging the different levels of expertise could be beneficial to a firm. Ultimately, I believe that merging firms will create

Merger proves to be beneficial for both the companies as Heinz 61% sales from outside North America and on the other hand Kraft Foods sales is covered by 98% from North America for the revenues in the fiscal year 2014. This gives a big boost for the Kraft Food to enter and tap the international emerging markets for its strong growth also. As

Chocolate was not the only sweet food Nestlé became interested in however. Ice cream represented a profitable opportunity and the company jumped at the chance through the merger with US ice cream business Dreyer’s (2002) and the acquisition of Mövenpick Ice Cream (2003), further improving the position as a market leader in the super premium category. Nestlé also decided to take a chance with two niche markets in the food industry: pet food and frozen food. In 2001, Nestlé merged with Ralston Purina and they formed a new pet food company, Nestlé Purina PetCare Company. As for the frozen food, Nestlé acquired Chef America Inc. (2002) and Kraft Foods’ frozen pizza business (2010). Beyond horizontal integration, Nestlé diversified outside its core business, thus becoming one of the major shareholders of L’Oréal, as well as acquiring Alcon Laboratories in 1977, an American company specialized in products for eye

This key acquisition is one of Starbucks’s main strategic goals for diversifing its brand by

The success the Snapple Beverage Company had achieved by the early 1990s drew the attention of the Quaker Oats Company which bought it in 1994 for $1.7 billion, and planned on maximizing the professedly unequivocal synergies between the “funky” iced tea brand and their established Gatorade brand. Despite Quaker’s efforts and ambition, which some might classify as hubris, the company’s decision to acquire Snapple is often regarded as a clamorous example of a merger and acquisition disaster. This paper analyzes Quaker’s failures using the 4 P’s framework, and proposes an action plan for Triarc’s turn-around of the Snapple brand, tailoring it to a modern market setting.