IBJNews

Salesforce.com wraps up $2.5B acquisition of ExactTarget

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

San Francisco-based cloud computing giant Salesforce.com has completed its $2.5 billion acquisition of Indianapolis-based ExactTarget Inc., the companies announced Friday.

Salesforce.com, the largest maker of online sales software, paid $33.75 per share in cash to acquire ExactTarget, a digital marketing company that was founded in Greenfield in 2000 and went public in 2012.

The price was roughly 6.5 times ExactTarget’s projected revenue for 2013, analysts said.

"By combining ExactTarget's leading digital marketing capabilities with Salesforce.com's leading sales, service and social marketing solutions, Salesforce.com will create a world-class marketing platform across email, social, mobile and the Web," the companies said in a prepared statement.

The acquisition, announced in early June, is the biggest in Salesforce.com’s history and the eighth for the company in the past year.

Despite their rapid growth, neither company has been profitable in recent years. ExactTarget ExactTarget hasn’t reported a profit since 2008 and was expected to post losses this year and next. Salesforce.com is on a run of eight straight money-losing quarters.

ExactTarget employs about 1,800 people, with about 1,000 of those in the Indianapolis area. CEO and founder Scott Dorsey said the ExactTarget is expected to remain an independent unit of Salesforce.com and stay in Indianapolis. Analysts said Salesforce.com is likely to cut some of ExactTarget's administrative personnel as part of the merger.

Dorsey stood to realize $28 million in stock option gains from the sale. Five other ExactTarget execs were in line to receive anywhere from $6.7 million to $26.5 million in option gains.

Several of the execs, including Dorsey, were expected to receive lucrative stock bonuses for remaining with the company.

Shares of Salesforce.com rose 2.2 percent Friday morning, to $42.45 each.




 
 

ADVERTISEMENT

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in IBJ editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ on Facebook:
Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ's Tweets on these topics:
 
Subscribe to IBJ
  1. Liberals do not understand that marriage is not about a law or a right ... it is a rite of religous faith. Liberals want "legal" recognition of their homosexual relationship ... which is OK by me ... but it will never be classified as a marriage because marriage is a relationship between a man and a woman. You can gain / obtain legal recognition / status ... but most people will not acknowledge that 2 people of the same sex are married. It's not really possible as long as marriage is defined as one man and one woman.

  2. That second phrase, "...nor make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunitites of citizens..." is the one. If you can't understand that you lack a fundamental understanding of the Constitution and I can't help you. You're blind with prejudice.

  3. Why do you conservatives always go to the marrying father/daughter, man/animal thing? And why should I keep my sexuality to myself? I see straights kissy facing in public all the time.

  4. I just read the XIV Amendment ... I read where no State shall deprive any person of life, liberty, or property ... nor make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunitites of citizens ... I didn't see anything in it regarding the re-definition of marriage.

  5. I worked for Community Health Network and the reason that senior leadership left is because they were not in agreement with the way the hospital was being ran, how employees were being treated, and most of all how the focus on patient care was nothing more than a poster to stand behind. Hiring these analyst to come out and tell people who have done the job for years that it is all being done wrong now...hint, hint, get rid of employees by calling it "restructuring" is a cheap and easy way out of taking ownership. Indiana is an "at-will" state, so there doesn't have to be a "reason" for dismissal of employment. I have seen former employees that went through this process lose their homes, cars, faith...it is very disturbing. The patient's as well have seen less than disireable care. It all comes full circle.

ADVERTISEMENT