AstraZeneca fight rumbles on

published 15 May 2014

The £63bn takeover offer for Anglo-Swedish pharmaceutical group AstraZeneca by its US rival Pfizer is shaping up to be one of the most controversial takeover battles to involve a UK-based company.

British politicians fear that the enlarged Pfizer would cut research spending in the UK, endangering jobs and damaging Britain's science base. On the other side of the Atlantic, there has been considerable criticism of Pfizer's proposal to domicile the combined group in the UK for tax purposes.

In the past week, Pfizer's chief executive appeared before MPs in an attempt to reassure them about his firm's plans for investment and employment. Meanwhile, the firm is reported to be planning an increased hostile bid if it's unable to win the support of AstraZeneca's board.

Subscribe to MoneyWeek

Subscribe to MoneyWeek today and get your first six magazine issues absolutely FREE

Get 6 issues free

https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/flexiimages/mw70aro6gl1676370748.jpg

Sign up to Money Morning

Don't miss the latest investment and personal finances news, market analysis, plus money-saving tips with our free twice-daily newsletter

What the commentators said

Normally in these situations, the takeover will go ahead as seen in Kraft's acquisition of Cadbury in 2010. Dangle the prospect of "jam today" in front of shareholders and they will bite, regardless of whether it represents a good long-term outcome.

This reflects the "dysfunctional nature of the relationship" between company management, fund managers, the investors in the funds they run and the rest of society, agreed John Plender in the FT.

Executives are incentivised to boost short-term earnings through takeovers and cost-cutting, while fund managers are judged on short-term performance and leap at the chance to make a profit.

Yet there is ample evidence that takeovers are "a highly effective mechanism for uncreative destruction" rather than a boon to either investors or the economy: take Pfizer itself, which has spent $240bn on three big takeovers in 15 years, yet has a market cap today of just $185bn. "The only consistent winners are the investment bankers and other advisers."

That may be true in general, but this particular deal "is a poor test case for almost any question about big corporate acquisitions", said Edward Hadas on Breakingviews.com.

"The would-be US acquirer, the British target, the UK government and the whole pharmaceutical industry are all tainted. They are guilty, respectively, of a tax fixation, cutting research, empty words and inadequate drug discovery. So there is really no one with the moral authority to say whether this is a good deal."

The best outcome would be for the UK and US to tackle the weakest part of the bid: Pfizer's attempt to game the tax system. If the firm is still interested after that, it can come back with a fresh bid.

Explore More

Cris Sholto Heaton is an investment analyst and writer who has been contributing to MoneyWeek since 2006 and was managing editor of the magazine between 2016 and 2018. He is especially interested in international investing, believing many investors still focus too much on their home markets and that it pays to take advantage of all the opportunities the world offers. He often writes about Asian equities, international income and global asset allocation.

Cris began his career in financial services consultancy at PwC and Lane Clark & Peacock, before an abrupt change of direction into oil, gas and energy at Petroleum Economist and Platts and subsequently into investment research and writing. In addition to his articles for MoneyWeek, he also works with a number of asset managers, consultancies and financial information providers.

He holds the Chartered Financial Analyst designation and the Investment Management Certificate, as well as degrees in finance and mathematics. He has also studied acting, film-making and photography, and strongly suspects that an awareness of what makes a compelling story is just as important for understanding markets as any amount of qualifications.