It seems that EK3’s CEO is not being entirely honest with his employees.
Word reached us yesterday that in a conference call with employees he VEHEMENTLY denied our story of 16th June ‘EK3 Up For Sale [1]‘ and according to sources close to the company was quite upset that it had even been mentioned.
Those EK3 employees who doubted what we wrote was correct have been emailing in and requesting to see the information memorandum for themselves (if you want to see it then just drop us an email).
There’s always an absolute foolishness in being dishonest, even if it is with the best intentions. Since our initial post half a dozen digital signage software companies have asked for more details on the ‘acquisition / investment’ and three other large US companies have expressed an interest and been briefed by us.
EK3 is a good company, a nice little business with a good reputation even though it has kept itself under the radar screens of much of the industry – the Walmart Canada deal and the ShopCast initiative may have been their undoing however.
Indeed some might say that EK3 as it exists today might NOT be that attractive an acquisition due to the WalMart fiasco but an asset purchase (Tim Horton and Atlantic Lottery contracts for example plus the company’s staff and IP) could be a good deal for someone.
We don’t think they will be able to sell though (should they wish to sell and not just receive additional investment) with the ShopCast boat anchor attached!!!!
10 Comments To "Sticky: EK3 CEO Vehemently Denies For Sale Sign"
#1 Comment By Diego On 18 June 2009 @ 16:59 @749
If you are have the information – would you be able to tell interested parties how much is it selling for?
thank you,
Diego
#2 Comment By Adrian J Cotterill On 18 June 2009 @ 17:04 @752
Absolutely NOT. First off it is not our place to do that and secondly we do not have that information as the ‘deal amount’ is not detailed in the very brief Information Memorandum that was put together by the Software Equity Group
#3 Comment By Puzzled On 18 June 2009 @ 17:20 @764
Adrian,
I’m curious. Can you explain to everyone what you think is gained by publishing this kind of information? EK3 is a PRIVATE company. I could understand publishing the information if a company is PUBLIC, because their are investors whom should be informed. So what’s the rationale (if any) to putting out information of this sort for a private company? In my opinion, I think your causing needless angst for all the parties involved and to what end? Are you running an industry information site, or a gossip rag? Gossip and rumor benefit no one and hurt the industry.
I hope you will rethink your practices.
#4 Comment By industry Watcher On 18 June 2009 @ 21:17 @928
Puzzled,
This information is very valuable. Being a private company does not keep them immune from disclosure, I for one know they may be negotiating with large companies that may want to know of their perils before getting into a deal. NO company wants to be lead into a deal blind as to try to be a savior for past mistakes.
Adrian, great reporting, keep up the good work.
#5 Comment By luis On 18 June 2009 @ 21:58 @957
I hope they sell it and make a ton of money….
For anyone interested, We are for sale anytime, how much? just enough to retire in the Caribbean. I´ll throw in my car as a bonus.
Adrian, feel free to be our middle man, I´ll cut you on the deal 10% if I and my engineers can retire from the sale.
🙂
#6 Comment By JohnnyGermany On 19 June 2009 @ 03:50 @201
I read this blog regularly, and I stumbled on to this story, and wow… this is just not post-worthy. Why would you say something like this???
I think you’re speaking to that which you do not know. You’ve given no sources, you’ve assumed on information that you aren’t privy to, and by the looks of it, you’ve upset an entire company and the staff, likely good people trying to make ends meet and caused uncertainty to their future and comitted nothing but (e-)libel (if only it wasn’t the internet) without the benefit of the full story. Who told you this? Where do you get off doing this without publishing a source or any concrete facts? We’re in an economic crisis and you’re publishing rumors and one-sided arguments that’s upset what appears to be a good company that’s made some good decisions from what I can see. Why would their owner lie like that and tarnish what seems like a good reputation? Why wouldn’t he just either tell the truth or not say anything at all and at the very least not damage his/her own reputation?
Did you phone and ask for a quote from EK3? They’re not hard to find… a simple google search revealed [2] – phone them and ask for their opinion. Did you get EK3’s side of the story? No…. Did you quote a source? No…. If you’re so willing to give out this magical memorandum, why not put it up on the site?? You’ve done none of these.
And as far as I can see, you’re the Perez Hilton of Digital Merchandising. All rumors, few facts.
I took journalism, and no Industry Watcher, this is *bad*, one sided, slanderous, fruitless, damaging, lousy reporting, the very lowest form of journalism. Shame on you, Adrian.
You’re starting a soap opera, not reporting. If you have any dignity or decency, you should retract all of this OR reveal your sources and lend credibility to your stories.
#7 Comment By Adrian J Cotterill On 19 June 2009 @ 12:31 @563
Well as EK3 allegedly denied the FOR SALE sign to their staff, their customers and partners it’s unlikely they would have said anything different to us but NO we did not ring and ask them.
With regard sources, when you are sitting in front of an information memorandum what more do you need?
Take a look at someone else (luckily someone believable and credible) that has seen the document – [3]
We are reporting fact and I think the employees will sleep easier knowing the truth rather than living in the dark.
If you had given us your real name and a real email address we could send you the facts – shame huh?
#8 Comment By Ken Goldberg On 19 June 2009 @ 13:11 @591
Has it occurred to anyone that the investment bank in question could not have gotten better distribution of the EK3 IM than it has by ensuring that it made its way into the hands of DailyDOOH? You can bet they will be far more discreet and selective in handing out the actual offering memorandum, since that is where the actionable information resides. From here it looks like brilliant use of social media from a business sector that generally shies away from same.
#9 Comment By New York Nik On 20 June 2009 @ 20:13 @884
Ken, they only problem with this is it makes the company look weak and vulnerable. This “use of social media” is good for marketing a product but not a distressed company. This will undoubted rock their customer base, future customers and their talent pool. I hear there has already been a mass flood of EK3 resumes to competing companies. These two items will only weaken the value not create a bidding war.
#10 Comment By Agog On 21 June 2009 @ 13:49 @617
I agree with New York Ken.
Talk about biting the hand that feeds!