|Bid||0.00 x 1000|
|Ask||0.00 x 800|
|Day's Range||64.61 - 66.73|
|52 Week Range||17.84 - 85.50|
|Beta (5Y Monthly)||1.03|
|PE Ratio (TTM)||61.54|
|Earnings Date||Jan 29, 2020 - Feb 3, 2020|
|Forward Dividend & Yield||1.20 (1.81%)|
|1y Target Est||81.00|
Under terms of the agreement, DuPont shareholders will own 55.4% of the shares of the new company and existing IFF shareholders will own 44.6%, IFF said in a statement. Industrial materials maker DuPont will also receive a one-time cash payment of $7.3 billion upon closing of the deal, IFF added. IFF Chief Executive Officer Andreas Fibig will run the combined company and will also continue to be chairman of the board.
International Flavors and Fragrances is merging with DuPont’s Nutrition and Biosciences unit in a $26.2 billion deal that would form a new company.
International Flavors & Fragrances agreed on Sunday to buy DuPont’s nutrition and biosciences business for $26.2bn, the latest acquisition by the New York company as it seeks to become a major supplier to the consumer goods industry. The deal will create a giant in the flavourings and nutrients industry, providing ingredients for products from vegan burgers to salad dressing to laundry detergent. The combined company will have an enterprise value, which includes debt, of $45.4bn, with annual revenues of about $11bn.
The buyout reinforces DuPont's (DD) portfolio with a compelling offering to further minimize the lifecycle cost of water purification and reuse.
DuPont (NYSE: DD) today announced it has signed an agreement to acquire Desalitech Ltd., a closed circuit reverse osmosis (CCRO) company. The transaction is expected to close in January 2020, subject to customary closing conditions and regulatory approvals. Financial terms of the agreement were not disclosed.
(Bloomberg) -- International Flavors & Fragrances Inc. has emerged as a strong contender to purchase DuPont Inc.’s nutrition division, challenging Ireland’s Kerry Group for the $25 billion asset, according to people with knowledge of the matter.IFF and Kerry are both negotiating with DuPont and the winner could reach a deal by year-end, the people said, asking not to be identified as the discussions are private. The transaction will create a new company comprised of the bidder’s assets and DuPont’s nutrition business that will be spun off to existing investors, the people said.DuPont shareholders will emerge from the so-called Reverse Morris Trust with a significant stake in the business, the people said. The new company aims to have an investment-grade credit rating and its board will include directors from DuPont and the bidder, the people said. The transaction is likely to take at least a year to close, they said.Representatives for DuPont, IFF and Kerry declined to comment. Discussions between the companies could still fall apart or Dupont could opt for a spinoff instead, the people said.IFF presents DuPont Chairman Ed Breen and Chief Executive Officer Marc Doyle with a distinct alternative to Kerry. While an RMT is easier between two U.S. companies, IFF’s $7.1 billion purchase of Frutarom Industries Ltd. last year is still absorbing management time and has increased leverage. In Kerry, they have an Irish company with deep roots in the dairy industry that’s keen to expand in food ingredients. Kerry trades at a higher earnings multiple than IFF, offering a potentially bigger valuation uplift to DuPont shareholders.Shares of IFF dropped as much as 3.6% to $136.89 in New York. Kerry declined 0.1% to 116.40 euros in Dublin. Dupont gained as much as 2%. The purchase would make “strategic sense, allowing IFF to offer a more complete product suite to a broader customer base,” according to Mark Astrachan, an analyst at Stifel, who said it would make it the largest global specialty ingredients company. It would put IFF at a “strategic advantage versus peers, while not acquiring the asset would similarly disadvantage the company.” DuPont opted for the most tax-efficient option to reward shareholders after the value of its nutrition business had wallowed below industry levels as part of a diversified company.The deal would be the biggest ever for IFF, which makes flavors and fragrances for food, beverages, personal care and household products. The company’s last big acquisition was in the food-flavoring industry last year, when it bought Israel’s Frutarom Industries Ltd. for $7.1 billion including debt.Kerry has long wanted to expand in healthy bacteria strains, ingredients found in dietary supplements, cheese and bakery products, and nutritional products that claim to have some sort of role in assisting in disease treatment or prevention. Kerry’s heritage lies in milk, cheese and other dairy products, and the company collects a billion liters of milk a year from small family farms in the southwest of Ireland.(Updates with share prices in sixth paragraph.)\--With assistance from Andrew Noël and Kiel Porter.To contact the reporters on this story: Nabila Ahmed in New York at email@example.com;Dinesh Nair in London at firstname.lastname@example.org;Ed Hammond in New York at email@example.comTo contact the editors responsible for this story: Anthony Palazzo at firstname.lastname@example.org, Kevin MillerFor more articles like this, please visit us at bloomberg.com©2019 Bloomberg L.P.
International Flavors & Fragrances is battling it out with Ireland's Kerry Group for the chance to be part of a $25 billion spinout by DuPont of its nutrition unit.
2019 was already a horrible, no-good, very bad year for the industrial conglomerate (MMM) Citigroup analyst Andrew Kaplowitz added a bit more unfavorable news, downgrading the stock to Hold from the equivalent of Buy because of uncertainty over 3M’s environmental liabilities. 3M (ticker: MMM) is setting aside money to clean up sites that produced a group of chemicals—referred to as PFAS—that can now be found in drinking water around the places where the chemicals were manufactured. “We simply see little in the way of near-term catalysts that could drive [3M] back to its historical [valuation] premium until more certainty relative to [the company’s] PFAS-related liability emerges,” wrote Kaplowitz in a Monday research report.
"Since 2006, value stocks (IVE vs IVW) have underperformed 11 of the 13 calendar years and when they beat growth, it wasn't by much. Cumulatively, through this week, it has been a 122% differential (up 52% for value vs up 174% for growth). This appears to be the longest and most severe drought for value […]
(Bloomberg Opinion) -- A new movie, “Dark Waters,” shines a bright light on a group of dangerous chemicals that are likely in your bloodstream right now. It tells the true story of a polluter that manipulated research and kept evidence hidden from the public – and shows just how crucial it is that scientific evidence be produced by researchers free of conflicts of interest.The chemicals that drive the film’s drama, known as PFAS, are remarkably effective at repelling water and oil. They’re used to make familiar products such as Teflon, Scotchgard and Gore-Tex, and are found in the coating of pizza boxes and microwave-popcorn bags. Unfortunately, in recent years, they’ve also gained attention for their links to cancer, liver and thyroid disease, increased cholesterol, and depressed fertility. They’ve been found in the blood of almost every American ever tested, and they contaminate the water in communities across the U.S.“Dark Waters” focuses on how the chemical company DuPont manufactured Teflon in a West Virginia town, and in the process fouled the local drinking water with a PFAS compound. Over the course of the drama, viewers learn that DuPont hid much of what it knew about its effects. In 1981, for example, DuPont was informed by 3M (from which DuPont purchased much of its C8) that the chemical caused birth defects in rats; DuPont then learned of two apparent birth defects among children of its Teflon division employees. Both the PFAS-exposed babies and the rats were born with eye defects, making the link particularly alarming. But the firm never reported this in the scientific literature or revealed it to the public.When the first public concerns abound the compound emerged, DuPont did what too many corporations do: They took a page from Big Tobacco’s playbook and hired a firm to sow doubt about the scientific evidence. ChemRisk, whose top staff had consulted for cigarette manufacturers, produced a risk assessment with exactly the conclusion DuPont wanted: exposures around the plant were thousands of times lower than levels that cause illness.The film captures how a courageous attorney working virtually on his own was able to document DuPont’s coverup. Armed with those documents, the Environmental Protection Agency eventually issued its then largest-ever fine, and required DuPont to clean up the local water supply.Significantly, DuPont also agreed to fund a series of studies on C8’s effects on the plant’s workers and local residents. To ensure the research would be truly independent and credible, the two sides together selected scientists to direct the studies. The results were startling: C8 exposure increased the risk of testicular and kidney cancer, ulcerative colitis, thyroid disease, pregnancy-induced hypertension and elevated cholesterol. DuPont has since paid more than $600 million in compensation to thousands of people sickened with these conditions.As more studies document the wide range of toxic properties of PFAS compounds, manufacturers are rapidly eliminating the chemicals from their products, and lawmakers are eyeing legislation to clean up contaminated water systems. After hiring two product-defense consulting firms, Exponent and Gradient, to dispute the C8 studies, 3M settled a PFAS pollution claim made by the state of Minnesota for $850 million. But as the PFAS debacle has painfully made clear, the system through which scientific evidence is produced also needs to be cleaned up.First, corporations shouldn’t be allowed to sequester important scientific findings about the harms of their products. Stiff penalties could be applied when case reports of disease or the results of health-effects studies are not made public. The few corporations that get caught hiding data, like DuPont and 3M did, eventually pay large amounts to settle claims. But this is too late for people made sick or whose environment was damaged.Second, the public shouldn’t believe the results of studies done by product-defense consulting firms. After all, their business model is to provide clients with the ammunition to sway public opinion, slow regulation and defeat court claims. If they did otherwise, they would never be hired again.And finally, the model of scientific investigation highlighted in “Dark Waters” should be rule rather than the exception. To some extent, this is the model of the Health Effects Institute, a research organization that commissions research into the health effects of air pollution, set up and funded jointly by the Environmental Protection Agency and motor vehicle manufacturers. But for the most part, corporations have been reluctant to fund research over which they have no control.We badly need a new model for production of the evidence necessary to protect the public. When government agencies consider potentially harmful exposures and activities, from vaping to opioids to glyphosate to payday loans, they should insist the regulated industries provide data produced by unconflicted scientists. In this paradigm, the firms responsible for the potential harm would be required to pay for the research, but the studies would be conducted by scientists without conflicts of interest, under provisions that ensure their complete independence. Only then will we have confidence in the integrity of the results.To contact the author of this story: David Michaels atTo contact the editor responsible for this story: Tracy Walsh at email@example.comThis column does not necessarily reflect the opinion of the editorial board or Bloomberg LP and its owners.David Michaels is a professor at the Milken Institute School of Public Health at George Washington University. He served as assistant secretary of labor for the Occupational Safety and Health Administration from 2009 to 2017, and is the author of the forthcoming book "The Triumph of Doubt: Dark Money and the Science of Deception."For more articles like this, please visit us at bloomberg.com/opinion©2019 Bloomberg L.P.
Some investors rely on dividends for growing their wealth, and if you're one of those dividend sleuths, you might be...
WILMINGTON, Del., Nov. 21, 2019 /PRNewswire/ -- DuPont (DD) today announced that it has been notified of an unsolicited "mini-tender" offer by TRC Capital Investment Corporation to purchase up to 2 million shares, or approximately 0.27 percent of outstanding shares, of DuPont's common stock at $64.75 per share, which was approximately 4.27 percent below the closing share price of DuPont's common stock on Nov. 15, 2019 ($67.64), the last trading day prior to the date of TRC Capital's mini-tender offer, and approximately 0.46 percent below the closing share price of DuPont common stock on Nov. 20, 2019 ($65.05), the day prior to this release.
The materials sector includes companies engaged in the discovery, development, and processing of raw materials, which are used across many other sectors and industries. Materials stocks include manufacturers of products as varied as plastic, fertilizer, paper, concrete, metals, and more. Some prominent names in the materials sector include Dupont de Nemours Inc. (DD), Ecolab Inc. (ECL), and Dow Inc. (DOW).