[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Candover and Cinven & springer

Nothing really new, the article in the Sunday Times dates from Jan 19;
according to a message in chminf-l it begins

Bertelsmann in �650m sale

A JOINT bid by Cinven and Candover has emerged as a frontrunner in the
auction to buy Bertelsmann's �650m scientific-publishing business.

The decision by potential trade buyers such as Reed Elsevier not to join
the auction for Bertelsmann Springer has moved the two private-equity
houses to the front of the queue of bidders. A sale is expected to be
arranged by March."


Earlier that week (Tuesday, Jan 14) Siegfried Luther, CFO and Deputy
Chairman of the Executive Board, and Arnold Bahlmann, CEO,
BertelsmannSpringer, had told the German FAZ, that sale documents had been
sent to 40 interested parties, most of them venture capital firms and
investors. At first there had been much more but these mostly wanted to
buy only part of the scientific-publishing business. Luther told the
newspaper he thought it unlikely that one of the big competitors like Reed
Elsevier, Wolters Kluwer, or Thomsom would succeed. Besides anti-trust
law, he named these companies orientation, strategic positioning and
ownership structure as reasons. The CEOs did not comment on sale targets.

The latest news story came up on Fri, Jan 24, on Reuters,
BertelsmannSpringer bids seen 800 mln-1.0 bln euro 

which mentions all the candidates currently on discussion. The deadline
for bids was on Jan 27.

Best regards,
Bernd-Christoph Kaemper, Stuttgart University Library

Bernd-Christoph Kaemper, Dipl.-Physiker, Bibl.-Rat
Fachreferent f�r Physik und Koordination elektronischer Ressourcen
Universit�tsbibliothek Stuttgart, Postfach 104941, 70043 Stuttgart
Tel +49 711 685-4780, Fax +49 711 685-3502, kaemper@ub.uni-stuttgart.de

Ann Okerson wrote:
> Further to Chuck Hamaker's message below, the London Times article should
> be at:
> <http://www.timesonline.co.uk/newspaper/0,,176-547172,00.html>
> But the Times seems to have recently introduced a charging feature that
> nobody's caught up with yet, at least not our library (which has the Times
> backfiles online).  If anyone out in liblicense-l land knows what the
> article says, please do report to the rest of us.
> __