-Caveat Lector- www.ctrl.org DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER ========== CTRL is a discussion & informational exchange list. Proselytizing propagandic screeds are unwelcomed. Substance—not soap-boxing—please! These are sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory'—with its many half-truths, mis- directions and outright frauds—is used politically by different groups with major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said, CTRLgives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply.

Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector. ======================================================================== Archives Available at:

http://www.mail-archive.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]/ <A HREF="">ctrl</A> ======================================================================== To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Om

--- Begin Message ---
-Caveat Lector-

Defense Firms Consolidate As War Goes High-Tech 


By Renae Merle
Washington Post Staff Writer
Tuesday, May 27, 2003; Page A01 


The nation's leading defense contractors are gobbling up small 
technology firms in a consolidation binge driven by the Pentagon's 
demand that future military conflicts be dominated by high-tech 
warfare.

The buying spree is contributing to a fundamental change in the 
structure of the defense industry as the top players move away from 
their roles as mere weapons makers and increasingly cast themselves 
as "systems integrators" that produce high-tech networks for the 
battlefield. In the past three years, contractors have swept up about 
180 small tech firms, mostly in Northern Virginia, a 25 percent 
increase from the previous three-year span.

In one recent high-profile case, General Dynamics Corp., which makes 
M1 tanks, bought Herndon-based Creative Technology Inc., which 
designs computer networks that transmit classified information. 

The Pentagon has pushed in recent years for a more intensive role for 
war technology, but the pace has accelerated with the proven high-
tech successes in Afghanistan and Iraq and the demands of fighting 
terrorism. The rush to grab the premier small companies is sparking 
bidding wars and redesigning the landscape of the local tech 
industry -- a cornerstone of the region's business community that 
blossomed in the shadow of the dot-com revolution. 

Underlying the consolidation is the sharp competition among the big 
defense companies to secure a lucrative role in the transformation of 
the military envisioned by Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld and 
backed by a growing Pentagon budget. Some industry observers worry, 
however, that the absorption of the small tech firms into the giant 
contractors could crimp innovation in a field that thrives on swift 
advances.

The companies attracting attention often work quietly behind the 
scenes, producing the technology essential to the new ways of war. 
Among the firms recently acquired are Alexandria-based Adroit Systems 
Inc., which writes software that instructs hovering drones to 
transmit surveillance photos to fighter jets, ships and ground 
stations; Chantilly-based Integrated Data Systems Corp., which 
develops software that allows the Pentagon to share classified 
information with other agencies on a secure network; Premier 
Technology Group Inc., a Fairfax firm that analyzes and disseminates 
intelligence for the Army; and Conquest Inc. of Annapolis Junction, 
Md., which specializes in managing information networks for the 
intelligence community. 

"Just 20 or 30 years ago, the airplane was the thing or the ship was 
the thing," said Stuart McCutchan, publisher of Defense Mergers & 
Acquisitions, an industry newsletter. "Now those things are just 
nodes in the network, and the network is the thing." 

The deals are more numerous but smaller in value than those of the 
last great merger wave, after the end of the Cold War. Contractors 
signed 65 deals last year valued at about $4 billion, according to 
the investment bank Houlihan Lokey Howard & Zukin. The industry is on 
track to beat that figure, with 31 deals signed in only the first 
four months of this year. Twenty-one were signed in the same period 
of 2002.

In the early 1990s, defense contractors joined forces in several mega-
deals that reduced the number of the industry's aircraft makers to 
three from eight; tactical-missile manufacturers declined to four 
from 13. In a typical year a decade ago, the total value of the deals 
was more than $10 billion. 

The most attractive companies today -- those in the secretive 
intelligence field or staffed by employees with top-secret security 
clearances -- are drawing bids far in excess of their earning power. 
But they might still sell for less than $100 million each. 

"Two years ago you could not get any of the big top 10 companies to 
look at anything under $1 billion. You couldn't get any of the big 
investment banks to look at anything under $1 billion. Now everybody 
is going after" these tech companies, no matter how small, said an 
executive at a leading defense firm.

General Dynamics started its push into the information technology 
business in the late 1990s. At the urging of the Pentagon, the Falls 
Church-based company had begun outfitting its tanks, submarines and 
warships with the latest technology. The Army stopped ordering new 
tanks but spent millions upgrading its existing arsenal with digital 
capabilities, said Kenneth C. Dahlberg, executive vice president of 
the information systems and technology unit. "The new focus was on 
digitalizing the battle space," he said.

As a result, General Dynamics decreased its reliance on technology 
subcontractors and started to buy small tech firms. In 1997 it paid 
$200 million for a unit of Lockheed Martin Corp. that specialized in 
defense technology. The same year it made two other deals. In 1998, 
General Dynamics set up an IT unit -- a novel concept in the industry 
at the time. The unit, established almost solely through 
acquisitions, is now a nearly $4 billion business and one of the 
company's fastest-growing sectors.

Bethesda-based Lockheed Martin expanded its presence in the defense 
IT field in 2001 with the acquisition of OAO Corp., a Greenbelt-based 
firm. This month it acquired Orincon Corporation International. 
Lockheed, the maker of the F-16 fighter jet, also established an IT 
business council that includes the presidents of four of its business 
units to help it pursue contracts in the growing market.

"This is an evolving market because the technology is very dynamic," 
said Jeffrey Maclauchlan, Lockheed Martin's vice president of 
financial strategies. "It is definitely a focus area for us as we 
execute our growth strategy." 

Raytheon Co., maker of the Patriot missile, is working on ways to 
further expand its IT business, a spokesman said. Last Monday, a 
spokesman said, the company grouped all of its information technology 
businesses into a single unit with more than $650 million in annual 
revenue. 

The competition for the small tech firms is so ferocious that the 
average price paid for a defense industry IT company in 2000 was six 
to seven times its earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation and 
amortization, or EBITDA, according to Houlihan Lokey. In recent 
deals, companies have demanded nine times EBITDA or more.

It is not just the top-tier defense firms that are pursuing 
consolidation. The trend is playing out among the mid-level players 
that have less than $1 billion in revenue. ManTech International 
Corp., a Fairfax company with annual revenue of $500 million, bought 
Integrated Data Systems in February. Integrated, a high-end IT 
company that works almost exclusively on classified programs, sold 
for about $67 million, 13 times its EBITDA, according to the 
investment bank Aronson Capital Partners LLC.

"Current valuations are generally up" 10 percent to 30 percent from 
levels in the late 1990s, said Robert Kipps, director of Houlihan 
Lokey's McLean-based aerospace and defense group. They are up "nearly 
100 percent" from the post-Cold War period of the early 1990s, he 
said. "Military successes in Afghanistan and Iraq . . . have 
validated the criticality of technology to our military strategy and 
has buoyed the attractiveness of high-end defense IT providers."

Some industry experts have begun to worry that if lumbering giants 
absorb too many small niche players, innovation could suffer. They 
are concerned that consolidation will wring out competition -- and 
without competition the fire for technological advance may be doused. 

"Will IT, like the rest of the defense industry, become solely the 
domain of the [giant firms] because all of the small contractors have 
been absorbed?" said Christopher Hellman, a senior research analyst 
with the Center for Defense Information. 

But many within the industry discount such concerns. Despite the 
accelerated rate of consolidation, there is little danger that all of 
the thousands of firms that make up the defense-related IT sector 
will be consumed, industry officials said. Many companies still 
refuse to sell, hoping that their future growth will bring a higher 
price later, they said. Others are headed by young entrepreneurs who 
are not ready to give up the helm. 

"There are frankly too many $50 million companies still out there," 
said Jon B. Kutler, chairman and chief executive of the investment 
bank Quarterdeck Investment Partners LLC. "They are large enough for 
their heads to pop up, but not large enough to have the efficiencies, 
balance sheets to be successful in capturing larger and more complex 
contracts."

Consolidation could spur innovation if the deals create a capital-
infusion used to fund new ventures, said Suzanne D. Patrick, deputy 
undersecretary of defense for industrial policy. "I am hopeful that 
the companies that can sell their ideas to the larger companies at a 
considerable premium will use that capital as start-up for the next 
company that they will found or the next idea that they will 
develop," she said.

The Pentagon has another reason to support consolidation: It saves 
the government money. A recent Defense Department report found that 
10 acquisitions completed since 1994 saved the agency $4.7 billion. 
Every contract includes the cost of a company's overhead, which can 
be squeezed if providers join forces, agency officials said.

Still, the Pentagon recognizes the dangers of too much consolidation, 
Patrick said. "We also as a government have become very conscious of 
the fact that some of the most valuable pieces of innovation we have 
in the industrial base are embedded in these emerging defense 
suppliers," she said.

When Raytheon bought Solipsys Corp. for $170 million this year, the 
Pentagon stepped in. Solipsys had developed technology coveted by the 
Navy that linked ship radar systems. In an effort to breed 
innovation, the Defense Department urged Raytheon to share the 
technology with its competitors for three years, and Raytheon agreed. 

Government intervention on mergers is typical in multibillion-dollar 
combinations but not for small deals, industry officials said. "It's 
unusual, but I think agreements like that might be more commonplace 
going forward as these companies attract the interest of large 
companies," Patrick said. "We know innovation typically comes not 
from the primes but from the second- and third-tier suppliers." 



© 2003 The Washington Post Company 

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A42090-2003May26.html


------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~-->
<FONT COLOR="#000099">Get A Free Psychic Reading! Your Online Answer To Life's 
Important Questions.
</FONT><A HREF="http://us.click.yahoo.com/Lj3uPC/Me7FAA/CNxFAA/vseplB/TM";><B>Click 
Here!</B></A>
---------------------------------------------------------------------~->

Please let us stay on topic and be civil.
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
-Home Page- www.cia-drugs.org 
OM
 

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ 



www.ctrl.org
DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER
==========
CTRL is a discussion & informational exchange list. Proselytizing propagandic
screeds are unwelcomed. Substance—not soap-boxing—please!   These are
sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory'—with its many half-truths, mis-
directions and outright frauds—is used politically by different groups with
major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought.
That being said, CTRLgives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and
always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no
credence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply.

Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector.
========================================================================
Archives Available at:

http://www.mail-archive.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]/
<A HREF="http://www.mail-archive.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]/">ctrl</A>
========================================================================
To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Om

--- End Message ---

Reply via email to