Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Aircrew Forums > Rotorheads
Reload this Page >

Sikorsky spinoff?

Wikiposts
Search
Rotorheads A haven for helicopter professionals to discuss the things that affect them

Sikorsky spinoff?

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 27th Jan 2014, 21:27
  #1 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Poplar Grove, IL, USA
Posts: 1,094
Received 78 Likes on 56 Posts
Sikorsky spinoff?

Interesting article:
UTC Weighs Sikorsky's Future | Defense News | defensenews.com
Bryan
IFMU is offline  
Old 28th Jan 2014, 14:17
  #2 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Earth
Posts: 698
Received 14 Likes on 9 Posts
What a difference a few years makes; back in 2007 UTC was (rumored to be) on the verge of buying Bell when the tables were essentially reversed.
SansAnhedral is offline  
Old 12th Mar 2015, 13:34
  #3 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: 1 Dunghill Mansions, Putney
Posts: 1,797
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
United Technologies to explore strategic alternatives for its Sikorsky Aircraft business
United Technologies Corp. has authorized a review of strategic alternatives for Sikorsky, including a potential tax-free spinoff.

"As part of the portfolio review announced last December, we are exploring strategic options for Sikorsky to determine the best way to enhance its long-term success and create improved long-term value for UTC's customers and shareholders," said UTC President & CEO Gregory Hayes.

"We are evaluating whether Sikorsky's unique business as a rotorcraft OEM with a predominately military customer base is best positioned as a stand-alone company, and whether a separation would allow United Technologies to better focus on providing high-technology systems and services to the aerospace and building industries."

UTC expects to conclude its strategic review before the end of the year. However, no specific timetable has been set, and there can be no assurance that a spinoff or any other transaction will take place.
I/C
Ian Corrigible is offline  
Old 12th Mar 2015, 15:51
  #4 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Texas
Age: 64
Posts: 7,228
Received 416 Likes on 259 Posts
The long rumored "consolidation of the rotary wing industry" seems to have grown fresh legs.
Lonewolf_50 is offline  
Old 13th Mar 2015, 20:42
  #5 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Arlington, Tx. US
Posts: 696
Likes: 0
Received 11 Likes on 7 Posts
Interesting. I guess all of those Canadian S-92 Cyclone development cost overruns and penalty payments did hurt.

The Sutlan
The Sultan is offline  
Old 13th Mar 2015, 21:27
  #6 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Poplar Grove, IL, USA
Posts: 1,094
Received 78 Likes on 56 Posts
That probably hurt, but a precedent was a series of presidents that came from other companies. Something changed!
IFMU is offline  
Old 14th Mar 2015, 21:25
  #7 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: USA
Posts: 601
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Sikorsky is currently profitable with EBITDA margins around 6%, but this is well below other divisions of UTC. Approximately 72% of Sikorsky's current revenues come from defense/government sales. Defense spending will likely continue its downward trend for the foreseeable future, which will make it hard for Sikorsky to remain profitable.

It appears UTC management sees this situation the same way. So UTC is looking to "spin off" (ie. dump) Sikorsky while they can get max value from it. I suspect UTC will probably saddle Sikorsky with some new debt before the "spin off" so they can pull cash out of the company.
riff_raff is offline  
Old 14th Mar 2015, 21:46
  #8 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 915
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Riff Raff is absolutely right but what changed was the departure of UTC President Louis Cheveneut,who refused to countenance a sell off. His replacement is not so nostalgic.
heli1 is offline  
Old 16th Mar 2015, 08:23
  #9 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Europe
Posts: 59
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
UTC's Sikorsky Spinoff: Good For UTC, Good For Sikorsky...Two Out Of Three Ain't Bad - Forbes

A very informative article. No cross Atlantic mergers and the only 'natural' merger in the States (Boeing & Sikorsky) would be blocked, most probably by Governments on both sides of the Atlantic.
espresso drinker is offline  
Old 26th Mar 2015, 01:55
  #10 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: USA
Age: 55
Posts: 466
Received 43 Likes on 29 Posts
So it's confirmed. UT is divorcing Sikorsky. Once the smoke clears, I think things will turn out ok!
Sir Korsky is offline  
Old 16th Jun 2015, 00:40
  #11 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Somewhere Warm
Age: 71
Posts: 60
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Sikorsky Future

News today that Sikorsky will be sold or spun off from United Technologies in the near future.

United Technologies to separate Sikorsky via sale or spinoff - MarketWatch
TrakBall is offline  
Old 16th Jun 2015, 07:14
  #12 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Europe
Posts: 59
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Dear Mr Moderator, you might want to merge this thread with the thread entitled "Sikorsky Spinoff". Interesting to see Bell named as the likely buyer.
espresso drinker is offline  
Old 16th Jun 2015, 10:17
  #13 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: UK
Posts: 2,960
Received 24 Likes on 14 Posts
Originally Posted by espresso drinker
Interesting to see Bell named as the likely buyer.
I couldn't find any reference to Bell in that article. Only Boeing, Airbus and Lockheed Martin!
Bravo73 is online now  
Old 16th Jun 2015, 14:44
  #14 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Arlington, Tx. US
Posts: 696
Likes: 0
Received 11 Likes on 7 Posts
All articles reference Textron. Bell is part of Textron.

The Sultan
The Sultan is offline  
Old 16th Jun 2015, 17:17
  #15 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: UK
Posts: 2,960
Received 24 Likes on 14 Posts
Originally Posted by The Sultan
All articles reference Textron. Bell is part of Textron.

The Sultan
Not the article in question:

Originally Posted by TrakBall
News today that Sikorsky will be sold or spun off from United Technologies in the near future.

United Technologies to separate Sikorsky via sale or spinoff - MarketWatch
Bravo73 is online now  
Old 16th Jun 2015, 21:41
  #16 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Poplar Grove, IL, USA
Posts: 1,094
Received 78 Likes on 56 Posts
Will be interesting to see if Textron is the buyer- do Bell and Sikorsky stay separate, does Bell take over Sikorsky, or Sikorsky take over Bell?
IFMU is offline  
Old 17th Jun 2015, 22:15
  #17 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: USA
Posts: 601
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Sikorsky seems to be in good shape financially for the near future, so they should do nicely on their own. But since much of their revenues are from military sales, they would also make a nice acquisition for a large defense business. Of the US companies mentioned LM might be a possibility. I doubt Textron(Bell) or Boeing would work out, primarily because the US DoD has been making a big push to expand the domestic rotorcraft industrial base, and not consolidate it. Maybe L-3 or Raytheon might have an interest.

I still don't accept UTC's (claimed) reason for selling off a fairly profitable division like Sikorsky. Less than a decade ago their Pratt & Whitney division was in far worse shape. P&W had few new orders for commercial engines and much of their revenues came from selling replacement parts. Then P&W decided to take a bold leap and bring their geared turbofan engine to market. Now P&W has orders for over 6,000 GTF engines. Sikorsky appeared to be doing the same thing with their internally funded X2 & S-97 programs. And if the Army continues with FVL, I think Sikorsky/LM have the best odds of winning the first contract.
riff_raff is offline  
Old 18th Jun 2015, 01:53
  #18 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: North America
Posts: 107
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I still don't accept UTC's (claimed) reason for selling off a fairly profitable division like Sikorsky.
I don't buy it either. UTC CEO Gregory Hayes said the "separation of Sikorsky from the portfolio will allow both United Technologies and Sikorsky to better focus on their core businesses." United Technologies Corporation used to be United Aircraft Corporation. Sikorsky Aircraft sounds like a core business to me...much more so than an elevator company or an air conditioner company.
HeliTester is offline  
Old 18th Jun 2015, 13:09
  #19 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Durham, NC USA
Posts: 373
Likes: 0
Received 4 Likes on 3 Posts
UT was the Sum of it's Brands

It wasn't that many years ago that few new who or what United Technologies was but they did know who Hamilton Standard, Pratt and Whitney, Otis, Carrier and Sikorsky were.
Jack Carson is offline  
Old 20th Jul 2015, 00:46
  #20 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Arlington, Tx. US
Posts: 696
Likes: 0
Received 11 Likes on 7 Posts
Lockheed to Buy Sikorsky

Looks like a done deal:

Exclusive: Lockheed to buy United Tech's Sikorsky for over $8 billion | Reuters

At $8B plus it is does not look like a good deal (UTC surprised anyone would offer that as they wanted to get rid of it at any cost). As Lockheed aviation is exclusively military this does not bode well for Sikorsky's commercial customers. Maybe Tilton will accept them and lead to the shining experience the MD homeys enjoy.

The Sultan
The Sultan is offline  


Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.