Exit from ePayment – Why?

Yesterday, Iuliana didn’t let me post stories about ePayment on the blog. She said that if we announced the exit yesterday, we should sit quietly until today and only answer journalist’s questions. Fair. So I postponed writing for today. I come to work, I turn on my computer and I try to write – no idea comes to my mind. I want to say so many things that I can’t manage to organize the ideas in my head for a coherent blog post. So I’ll start at random, with whatever comes to mind and we’ll settle everything as we go along:

The first question that emerges is “to whom?” And I would simply reply – to www.naspers.com. If I look at the companies this giant owns, I would probably say that it’s the second player in the world in eCommerce after Google. Only that Naspers doesn’t do this through a single brand, but through a series of investments.

The second question is “why?”. The answer is a little bit more complex here: I think this transaction means a step forward for all those interested: for Allegro, for the company (ePayment) itself, for the employees, for clients and, with your permission, – for the shareholders. All in all, perhaps even for Romania in general.

First of all, Allegro and ePayment have the same development vision: regional coverage of CEE with eCommerce services, with added value. Right now, apart from Poland and Romania, the rest of the countries in the region don’t have such services, so here is a perfect potential market. On the other hand, the two companies have complementary resources: Allegro has a multinational approach; they have their offices and companies and they have clients in all the countries in the region; while ePayment has a technology that can be replicated and regionally developed with one click (you remember that regional development was always ePayment’s plan).

So, in short:

• for Allegro it was a good thing because they acquired a technology with which they can implement those services in the region in a very short time;
• for ePayment it’s a good thing because it can move to the next level in its company life, it can grow beyond a market share it already has in Romania and which could have potentially stifled innovation and growth;
• for employees it’s a good thing because they have new perspectives for professional development, international visibility, participation in multicultural projects etc.;
• for clients (both online stores and buyers) it’s a good thing because they will have access to a greater range of services, possibly even a new level of corporate governance;
• for shareholders – from time to time, a healthy exit works wonders for the skin 🙂

Those who read my blog know from previous posts my opinions about the stages in a company’s life; about the way funding is attracted; about an exit opportunity; so I won’t insist on that. I would tell you though a few details that have to do with logistics: I worked with CMS Cameron McKenna as lawyers and with PWC for the financial part. As M&A consultant, I chose to work (once again!) with Diwaker Singh, in my opinion the best moderator in a negotiation. In fact, he is also Board Manager at ePayment and at Avangate. A special thought goes to BRD – a serious long-term partner.

I have no idea what to say more; I will gladly answer your questions. I will also try to write a post with a romanticized history of the deal.

(English version by Teodora Popescu)