Comments

  • Craig EliasonCraig Eliason Posts: 915
    Interesting!
  • Cory MaylettCory Maylett Posts: 158
    Wow! Whether this is good or bad, I don't know. Could be either (or both).

  • George ThomasGeorge Thomas Posts: 508
    I'm glad I bailed out of Monotype last July. When beancounter companies take over I get a bad feeling for those they acquire.
  • JoyceKettererJoyceKetterer Posts: 285
    edited July 27
    The outgoing majority shareholder is also private equity, I think.
  • Paul MillerPaul Miller Posts: 210
    Private Equity firms are bad news for any company they take over, look at what happened to Maplin!
    They are normally more interested in making as much money as possible out of their aquisition than what is in the best interests of the company.  This can lead to asset stripping as it did with Maplin.
  • Ray LarabieRay Larabie Posts: 916
    edited July 28
    Olapic and Swyft are both in growing markets while fonts are, perhaps not shrinking but significantly shifting to Adobe. I wonder how HGGC will see it. I really expected to see significant product/application integration with the font side of Monotype. Maybe that's happening but I haven't noticed it.
    HGGC looks to invest in companies involved in updating end markets that are still steeped in outdated technology, including grocery stores, car dealerships, marketing agencies and insurance providers.
    Wikipedia

    Perhaps traditional font sales are the outdated technology that they're interested in. Olapic and Swyft don't fit the description.
  • James PuckettJames Puckett Posts: 1,657
    Perhaps traditional font sales are the outdated technology that they're interested in. Olapic and Swyft don't fit the description.
    Maybe they see potential to try another subscription service. They could probably pull it off if they could bring in most of the designers selling on MyFonts instead of just Monotype’s outdated library.
  • Jens KutilekJens Kutilek Posts: 232
    The outgoing majority shareholder is also private equity, I think.
    Until now, anybody could buy Monotype shares. As I understand it, when a PE buys all shares at cash value, all current shareholders will get the agreed-upon amount of cash per share once the deal is effective, and their shares "disappear". Nobody will be able to buy MT shares at the stock market afterwards.

    $19.85 per share is more than what the shares were worth right before the acquisition announcement, but a lot less than a couple of years ago.
  • Vasil StanevVasil Stanev Posts: 428
    edited July 28
    Does anybody here own TYPE stocks? What were they traded for before?
  • George ThomasGeorge Thomas Posts: 508
    On the 26th, day after the announcement, it was at $16.16.
  • John SavardJohn Savard Posts: 461
    I'm amazed the acquisition took place for less than a billion dollars. Since typefaces are used a great deal in web design, and many companies are willing to spend quite a bit to license the typeface that will be right for their image, I would not have thought that typography was currently a dying business, where an entire company can sell for less than a few hours' profits from one of the current Internet titans.
  • JoyceKettererJoyceKetterer Posts: 285
    edited July 28
    @Jens Kutilek The fact that they think monotype was under valued is a whole other baffling nugget.  And, did you notice that the press release bio for monotype still identifies it mostly as a branding company?  
  • George ThomasGeorge Thomas Posts: 508
    this might feel like a fire sale price
    Or money laundering.
  • Vasil StanevVasil Stanev Posts: 428
    I get the peculiar feeling that one day I will be able to watch a YouTube video titled something along the lines of "Shrowds of mystery: the rise and fall of Monotype". Everybody speculates about the MyFonts backlog and the acquisition, few actually know what's going on.

    Investing in stocks seemed a reasonable strategy until I looked deeper into it.
  • Ray LarabieRay Larabie Posts: 916
    edited July 29
    Here's a Google Trends comparison that should be used entertainment purposes only.
    NO WAGERING!
  • Craig EliasonCraig Eliason Posts: 915
    Here's a Google Trends comparison that should be used entertainment purposes only.
    NO WAGERING!
    And that includes searches for "Taylor Swyft"!
  • Vasil StanevVasil Stanev Posts: 428
    I can imagine there will be a migration from MyFonts to other font vendors/retailers.
  • Thomas PhinneyThomas Phinney Posts: 1,649
    I think MyFonts biggest functional competitor is Adobe Fonts, and will remain so.

    One-stop shopping is really convenient. Having a single destination and interface to pick up fonts from is that much less to think about for the customer.

    This doesn’t mean that small foundries can’t make a go of it. But I think the market will tend to support a big aggregator.
  • JoyceKettererJoyceKetterer Posts: 285
    edited July 30
    @Thomas Phinney I don't think we're disagreeing.
  • John HudsonJohn Hudson Posts: 1,657
    But I think the market will tend to support a big aggregator.

    Yes, Walmart Fonts is bound to succeed in some definition of the term.
  • Thomas PhinneyThomas Phinney Posts: 1,649
    @Thomas Phinney I don't think we're disagreeing.
    No disagreement here! I was responding to Vasil’s comment about a migration away from MyFonts. I think that a substantial chunk of customers want one-stop shopping in a jumbo marketplace, and will be happy to go to somebody like MyFonts or Adobe Fonts.

    John Hudson’s comment about “Walmart Fonts” is interesting. All the retail font players have some degree of quality bar, and it is just a question of how high that is. It is possible to be a jumbo aggregator with a significant quality bar. Both MyFonts and Adobe Fonts have raised theirs over time.

    But I will also be the first to say that the goals of “jumbo aggregator” and “having a high quality bar” have an inherent tension between them, and you can’t maximize both at the same time.
Sign In or Register to comment.