<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Business Mutualism</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.tomspencer.com.au/2009/06/18/business-mutualism/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.tomspencer.com.au/2009/06/18/business-mutualism/</link>
	<description>An evolving perspective on management consulting, business strategy and investing</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 30 Jul 2010 13:28:59 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Consult Avalon</title>
		<link>http://www.tomspencer.com.au/2009/06/18/business-mutualism/comment-page-1/#comment-4277</link>
		<dc:creator>Consult Avalon</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 17 Aug 2009 09:52:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.tomspencer.com.au/?p=1823#comment-4277</guid>
		<description>Yes I agree, in the recent times this is the perfect example, IT &amp; design industries
combine to improve &amp; benefit each other.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Yes I agree, in the recent times this is the perfect example, IT &amp; design industries<br />
combine to improve &amp; benefit each other.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: James Cox</title>
		<link>http://www.tomspencer.com.au/2009/06/18/business-mutualism/comment-page-1/#comment-3058</link>
		<dc:creator>James Cox</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 19 Jun 2009 07:00:54 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.tomspencer.com.au/?p=1823#comment-3058</guid>
		<description>Nice post mate, fairly thought provoking. 

Reminds me of the most commonly raised reason for M&amp;A activity - business &#039;synergies&#039; - a gain to a merged business greater than the sum of the profits of each alone. 

However, it practice it often involves one business stepping outside of its field of competence and paying huge takeover premiums for the possibility that synergies may arise due to the takeover. Good in theory, not so good in practice - especially when you paid 25 times pre-recession earnings for the possibility synergies may arise.

Rant over.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Nice post mate, fairly thought provoking. </p>
<p>Reminds me of the most commonly raised reason for M&amp;A activity &#8211; business &#8216;synergies&#8217; &#8211; a gain to a merged business greater than the sum of the profits of each alone. </p>
<p>However, it practice it often involves one business stepping outside of its field of competence and paying huge takeover premiums for the possibility that synergies may arise due to the takeover. Good in theory, not so good in practice &#8211; especially when you paid 25 times pre-recession earnings for the possibility synergies may arise.</p>
<p>Rant over.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
