Houston Chronicle

Schlumberg­er able to shrug off many rejections by Cameron

A complicate­d courtship was shadowed by the slump in crude oil prices, according to documents filed recently with SEC

- By Rhiannon Meyers

For months, Houston oil tool maker Cameron Internatio­nal turned down Schlumberg­er’s bids to take over the company, rejecting the offers as too low.

But as the dramatic collapse in oil prices and wild swings in the stock market darkened the outlook for the oil field services industry, the two companies edged closer to an agreement.

Schlumberg­er, the Paris- and Houston-based oil field services giant, was persistent, and Cameron began to doubt whether it would be able to meet its revenue and spending targets amid the tough business climate, according to federal filings detailing the conversati­ons that led to the Aug. 26 merger announceme­nt.

Schlumberg­er first expressed interest in Cameron in November 2014. The company indi- cated then that it was willing to make a “strategic equity investment” in Cameron not long after the two had teamed up on a joint venture called OneSubsea to develop technologi­es for boosting oil production from deep-water reservoirs, according to documents recently filed with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission.

Cameron’s board said it wasn’t interested, and Schlumberg­er dropped its pursuit.

In April, with both companies feeling the pinch of a collapse in oil prices and pressure from customers to offer deeper discounts, Schlumberg­er’s management again approached Cameron with an offer, arguing that Cameron could benefit from combining with its OneSubsea partner.

With the board’s approval, Schlumberg­er CEO Paal Kibsgaard sat down with Cameron’s then-CEO, Jack Moore, after a OneSubsea committee meeting and made his arguments for fusing the two companies. He didn’t say how much Schlumberg­er was willing to pay, but told Moore he’d be sending a letter soon outlining a formal offer. That proposal called

for acquiring Cameron for $68 per share in a 50-50 cash and stock split worth 24 percent more than Cameron’s market capitaliza­tion. Cameron’s board agreed that while it made sense to join forces with a larger, more diversifie­d oil field services company amid a gloomy time in the industry, Schlumberg­er’s bid was too low to warrant pursuing the deal further.

Moore broke the news to Kibsgaard, who said Schlumberg­er would consider upping its offer if it could take a more thorough look at Cameron’s business.

Cameron’s board met again in May, and reasoned that no other company with Schlumberg­er’s financial heft and determinat­ion to buy could beat its offer. But the board still wanted to press for a higher price.

The desire for a better deal came at a tough time. The fresh plunge in oil prices over the summer made it difficult for Schlumberg­er to justify putting additional money on the table, Kibsgaard told Moore. He asked Moore to give him an idea of a value Cameron considered reasonable, but Moore declined.

Schlumberg­er sent another formal letter in August with the same offer, arguing that because of changes in both companies’ stock prices, the original proposal represente­d a higher premium than when the company made its initial bid in April.

Cameron’s board rejected the offer again. Schlumberg­er responded quickly, tweaking its proposal to increase the stock component from 50 percent to 80 percent per share, but Cameron said no.

Undeterred, Kibsgaard sent Moore a letter saying Schlumberg­er was still interested. The two CEOs met, and Moore suggested Cameron would be more amenable to a deal if Schlumberg­er raised its bid above $72 per share of Cameron common stock.

A day later, Schlumberg­er sent a new proposal that called for the company to pay 52 percent more for Cameron than its market capitaliza­tion. Under the revised bid, Cameron shareholde­rs would own 10 percent of Schlumberg­er, an arrangemen­t giving them greater say over the company’s operations.

Cameron’s board gathered to consider the deal on Aug. 19 and instructed management to move forward with the merger. It was a Wednesday. They planned to announce the deal publicly on Monday.

But one day after Cameron agreed to the proposal it had worked months to get, the U.S. stock markets took a nosedive, pulling down shares of both companies.

Schlumberg­er’s chief financial officer, Simon Ayat, met with his counterpar­t at Cameron, Charles Sledge, to tell him that the recent volatility had caused the company to rethink its terms.

Instead of offering to give Cameron shareholde­rs $ 72.20 per share of Cameron common stock in a deal that was 20 percent cash and 80 percent shares, Schlumberg­er would be willing to fix the cash portion at $14.44 and set the stock portion at an exchange ratio based on its original offer. That worked out to 0.716 shares of Schlumberg­er common stock.

While the revised bid meant Schlumberg­er was still agreeing to buy Cameron at a significan­t premium, under the new terms, fluctuatio­ns in the stock market between the time the deal was announced and the time it closed could change the acquisitio­n’s value for Cameron and its shareholde­rs.

Cameron’s Sledge again met with Ayat to negotiate, but Ayat wouldn’t budge. This was Schlumberg­er’s best and final offer, he told Sledge.

By then, domestic benchmark crude had fallen below $40 a barrel for the first time in six years.

Facing an energy slump that showed no signs of abating, Moore told the board he was concerned that Cameron would have a tougher time meeting its financial forecasts than he originally thought.

By joining Schlumberg­er, Cameron would have a stronger financial profile than it would as a standalone company.

Cameron’s board agreed. The $ 12.7 billion deal, worth 56 percent more than Cameron’s value on paper, seemed fair for shareholde­rs.

The companies finalized a deal and announced the acquisitio­n early Aug. 26.

Federal regulators this week cleared the proposed merger without any conditions, putting the companies on track to close the deal early next year.

Cameron shareholde­rs are slated to vote on the arrangemen­t next month. Moore stepped down as CEO in October under a succession plan announced in May.

The chief operating officer, Scott Rowe, succeeded Moore.

 ?? Gary Coronado / Houston Chronicle file ?? Houston oil tool maker Cameron Internatio­nal displayed this MN-DS Wellhead with a F-T90 Horizontal Frac Tree system earlier this year at the Offshore Technology Conference. Schlumberg­er, an oil field services giant, is merging with Cameron.
Gary Coronado / Houston Chronicle file Houston oil tool maker Cameron Internatio­nal displayed this MN-DS Wellhead with a F-T90 Horizontal Frac Tree system earlier this year at the Offshore Technology Conference. Schlumberg­er, an oil field services giant, is merging with Cameron.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United States