Thread regarding 3M layoffs

How will 3M make up the lost revenue with so many divestitures?????

3M has been divesting her assets (not even counting rooftops they have sold) in the last 4 years . Divestitures accelerated after Monish came onboard. What is the company doing with all the cash it acquired??? More importantly, how will 3M make up the loss revenue?

2025

  • PFAS exit ($1.3B hit to revenue)

2023

  • assets associated with the dental local anesthetic business to Pierrel ($70M, impact to revenue guesstimated at $25M)
  • HC spin ($30+B, but looses $8+B in revenue)

2022

  • Neoplast™ and Neobun™ brands and related assets to Selic (price & impact to revenue unknown)

+ Leantec technology acquisition (appears to have no products/revenue associated with acquisition)

  • Food Safety to Neogen ($5.3B, loss revenue approx $500M)
  • floor products business in Western Europe ( Dinac) to Gerflor (loss revenuw ~$30M)

2020

  • advanced-ballistic protection business to Avon Rubber (sold for $91M, guessing revenue was about $40M)

2019

  • Dr-g Delivery Division to Altaris ($650M, loss revenue $380M)

+ Acelity ($6.7B, gains $1.5B in revenue)

  • gas and flame detection business to Teledyne Technologies (sale price $230M, lost $120M revenue)

+ M*Modal ($1B, gains $200M revenue)

by
| 1551 views | | 5 replies (last May 3, 2023) | Reply
Post ID: @OP+1mrtTXEn

5 replies (most recent on top)

They will cut Dividends, and what's left of pension plans will go away, look for reduced roof tops, MR didn't say it but in short if your not a Hub, your marking time. Just my Crystal Ball.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @bln+1mrtTXEn

Just check what happened to GE in the past decade. Same will happen to 3M. They will split up business. Sell Assets. They will get lean. Natural phenomenon in a new world order for Conglomerates.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @gka+1mrtTXEn

Wall Street and the cabal of activist investors (Peltz, etc.) Have hated conglomerates for years. Somehow, 3M avoided these activists while they went for breakups of other companies unless the BS line "unlock shareholder value"

What worked well for years at 3M got off track earlier this century, but the impact took a combination of years of dwindling innovation and horrifically lousy management. Innovation took a huge hit when Mcnerney grounded a bunch of the PhD Chemists and engineers with MBB "diplomas" rather than kept on inventing the next thinsulate and sticky notes. Buckley tried to reverse the trend but the board wouldn't ante up the funding. Inge simply marked time and borrowed billions to goose the shares to 259, which kept away activists. Now the M&M boys can ride out the plunge over the falls because of the litigation concerns.

Varys is right about that technology plus a slew of others that were sold to raise money to offset lousy organic growth.

3M is definitely going to be broken into at least 5 or more pieces, with stranded costs (10k plus more later employees) slashed and slashed.

The real question for many of us: how will the pensions be managed. Stick them into an entity that can't pay the bills and make be sacrificed to the trial lawyers?

You can high five your "favorite" GE reject for bringing this innovative way of thinking to once was a towering giant.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @cgj+1mrtTXEn

You have to realize at this point that there is no plan at all to make up for lost revenue.

The plan has been to cut out 3M into various pieces and divest it. Food Safety and HC spinoff is just the start. Next will be CBG, followed by others.

In the next 5 to 10 years, maybe even sooner, there will be no old school diversified industrial conglomerate 3M. Only spinoffs, diverstutes, and other such entities that will supposedly unlock shareholder value.

That is the high level plan, lads and lasses whether you like it or not.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @xpo+1mrtTXEn

Short answer: 3M won't make it up for a long time, if ever.

Longer answer:

Some of those business spins were really, really d-mb.

The ceramic armor and gas detection businesses in particular were particularly stupid. Those were both profitable, high-spec businesses in growing markets where customers would pay a lot extra money for better technology and both technically intermeshed well with other parts of 3M. They were practically the definition of the 3M ideal business.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @xol+1mrtTXEn

Post a reply

: