Skip to main content

The context you need, when you need it

When news breaks, you need to understand what actually matters — and what to do about it. At Vox, our mission to help you make sense of the world has never been more vital. But we can’t do it on our own.

We rely on readers like you to fund our journalism. Will you support our work and become a Vox Member today?

Join now

Microsoft didn’t have the highest bid for LinkedIn, but its $26 billion in cash won out

Another bidder, likely Salesforce, was offering a few million dollars more, but its offer was made up of both stock and cash.

Microsoft

Not only did Microsoft fight an intense bidding war to get its hands on LinkedIn, but its $26.2 billion bid was actually slightly less than a rival (a.k.a. Salesforce) was prepared to offer, according to documents filed on Friday with the Securities and Exchange Commission.

Microsoft’s winning bid of $196 per share followed a months-long process involving as many as four other companies. (The filing lists them only as Party A, Party B, Party C and Party D, though Party A is likely Salesforce.)

From March through June, LinkedIn met with all four companies, but it became increasingly clear over that time that only Party A and Microsoft were seeking a full-on acquisition.

In the end, it was Salesforce that had the highest bid, after offering $200 per share, based on its own stock price.

However, LinkedIn says its board considered several factors in going with the Microsoft offer, including the fact that a Salesforce bid would have required approval of that company’s shareholders, as well as the fact that Microsoft was offering cold, hard cash.

Speaking of cash, LinkedIn could be on the hook for a $725 million breakup fee if they back out of the deal with Microsoft.

For those who want to see what a big company bidding war looks like, there’s a lot more detail in the regulatory filing.

This article originally appeared on Recode.net.

More in Technology

Podcasts
Are humanoid robots all hype?Are humanoid robots all hype?
Podcast
Podcasts

AI is making them better — but they’re not going to be doing your chores anytime soon.

By Avishay Artsy and Sean Rameswaram
Future Perfect
The old tech that could help stop the next airborne pandemicThe old tech that could help stop the next airborne pandemic
Future Perfect

Glycol vapors, explained.

By Shayna Korol
Future Perfect
Elon Musk could lose his case against OpenAI — and still get what he wantsElon Musk could lose his case against OpenAI — and still get what he wants
Future Perfect

It’s not about who wins. It’s about the dirty laundry you air along the way.

By Sara Herschander
Life
Why banning kids from AI isn’t the answerWhy banning kids from AI isn’t the answer
Life

What kids really need in the age of artificial intelligence.

By Anna North
Culture
Anthropic owes authors $1.5B for pirating work — but the claims process is a Kafkaesque messAnthropic owes authors $1.5B for pirating work — but the claims process is a Kafkaesque mess
Culture

“Your AI monster ate all our work. Now you’re trying to pay us off with this piece of garbage that doesn’t work.”

By Constance Grady
Future Perfect
Some deaf children are hearing again because of a new gene therapySome deaf children are hearing again because of a new gene therapy
Future Perfect

A medical field that almost died is quietly fixing one disease at a time.

By Bryan Walsh