SPAC IS THE NEW BLACK: SPACs (Special Purpose Acquisition Companies) are all the rage these days. In this thread, I want to say a few things about SPACs that I learned in my research of the market. 1/15

What was once an esoteric (and somewhat tawdry) financing vehicle has now come into the main in terms of quantity ($83 billion in IPOs in 2020) and quality (A-player names pursuing SPACs from name brand PE and VC funds to leading investors and advisors and even celebrities.) 2/15
Early and serial SPAC sponsors like Harry Sloan and Jeff Sagansky (Flying Eagle), Michael Klein (Churchill) and Chamath Palihapitiya (Hedosophia) have helped propel the SPAC phenomenon to new heights, not to mention tech gurus, former politicians and even famous athletes. 3/15
LUMA has created a SPAC LUMAscape that maps over 250 SPACs by stage across 8 verticals. This is the evergreen post that we will endeavor to keep updated (and welcome your feedback): https://t.co/aboAAemu53 4/15
A SPAC is a blank check company where investors back a sponsor group to find a suitable target to merge with (the de-SPACing) which is often accompanied by a PIPE (private investment into public equity) to further finance the target company. 5/15
The attractiveness of SPACs is clear: For the target, it is a vehicle for an accelerated IPO. For the SPAC sponsor, they receive 20% of the equity in the SPAC. Note that equity is a zero sum game so the 20% sponsor promote dilutes the target company shareholders. 6/15
This is why SPACs “lever up” their combinations so that the sponsor promote dilution is minimized. For example, a $200 million SPAC may merge with a $800 million target (the SPAC would own 25%) so that the sponsor promote dilution would be reduced to 5% (20% x 25%). 7/15
Sponsors “earn” their promote by funding listing expenses (UW fees and legal), completing the IPO and having the knowledge and connections necessary to find a suitable target (within 18-24 months). They also invest their own money in the SPAC to have “skin in the game”. 8/15
REMEMBER: SPACs are only suitable as an IPO hack for public-ready companies. SPACs are NOT appropriate for companies that otherwise should not be publicly listed (sub scale, volatile revenues, customer concentration, unsustainable margins, etc.). 9/15
SPAC investors have their units held in trust until the target is identified and then vote on the merger. If approved, their units are swapped for equity in the target. If they redeem, the SPAC will likely have to fill the financing shortfall with an additional PIPE. 10/15
Most SPAC investors are sophisticated and specialized institutions that "play" each SPAC to maximize their returns from listing to the merger. They are not necessarily long term investors. This is what makes the vote / redemption / PIPE process tricky and hard to predict. 11/15
The 2020 class of SPACs has over $65 billion of cash chasing $250+ billion of targets which suggests we may be headed for a market imbalance (Demand > Supply). It is likely that such scale will help commoditize the SPAC market which will reduce the upside for many sponsors. 12/15
REMEMBER: SPACs don’t compete for targets on price (since the deal will not be approved if the valuation is too high). Rather, they compete based on the amount of sponsor promote they are willing to share with the target. Also, the sponsor value-add is a key differentiator. 13/15
Sponsors who can truly add value with proprietary deal flow and strategic advice will be able to differentiate and preserve their promote. This is similar to how brands differentiate and sell for a premium over generic (money in this case). SPAC sponsors should market more! 14/15
I will continue to follow this space closely and investigate ways for LUMA to participate by leveraging our deep sector knowledge, strong network of private companies, M&A deal-making leadership, banking prowess and marketing chops. Stay tuned. 15/15

More from Business

Should we go into the details of these 125 years?


SA is built on the exploitation of labour. That labour has functioned on alcohol unfortunately. Very few people consume liquor purely for enjoyment unfortunately. When SAB opened its doors 1895 workers were paid in alcohol- the dop/tot system. 2 years into SAB's establishment

The Prohibition Act is introduced. This means black people are barred from buying your wines, beer etc. So SAB's products are exclusively for white people. But during this period beer brewing by Black women is the norm. Ayinxilisi ncam ke this type of beer. Apparently it had some

Nutritious elements to it. Now some of the context around drinking culture during this time is migrant labour to the mines, further land dispossession, the Anglo-Boer Wars, Rhodes corruption (our first state capture commission if you will) which leads to his resignation.

This context plays a role in how our cities and small towns are constructed, how they lead to the confinement and surveillance yabantu. Traditional beer brewing is identified as a threat because buy now mining bosses have identified that there's money to be made here.
My top 10 tweets of the year

A thread 👇

https://t.co/xj4js6shhy


https://t.co/b81zoW6u1d


https://t.co/1147it02zs


https://t.co/A7XCU5fC2m

You May Also Like