????本周一，汽車租賃業(yè)巨頭赫茲（Hertz）宣布以23億美元收購競爭對手Dollar Thrifty。消息一出，市場反響熱烈，兩家公司的股價大幅上揚。雖然從各個角度來看，兩家公司合并看起來都是前途一片光明，但現(xiàn)在遠未到塵埃落定的時候。要想順利完成收購，赫茲還得獲得政府監(jiān)管部門與Dollar股東的批準。而對這兩個方面，市場不能過于樂觀。而且，即便交易獲得批準，我們也不清楚赫茲計劃采取什么方式實現(xiàn)收入?yún)f(xié)同效益，證明它所支付的巨額溢價物有所值。

????為了更好地理解此次交易，我們需要回顧一下歷史。過去十年，美國汽車租賃業(yè)經(jīng)歷了巨大變革。以前，形形色色的小公司為了爭奪市場份額和在當?shù)貦C場的柜臺空間展開激烈廝殺。如今，市場份額已經(jīng)集中到幾大巨頭手中。過去幾年，全美汽車租賃公司（National）收購了阿拉莫（Alamo），安飛士租車（Avis）與巴吉（Budget）合并，Thrifty與Dollar成功聯(lián)姻，而赫茲則收購了優(yōu)勢租車公司（Advantage）。2007年，企業(yè)租車公司（Enterprise Rent-A-Car）收購了合并之后的全美/阿拉莫車隊，成為美國最大的汽車租賃公司。

????過去這個十年行將結(jié)束之時，美國大型汽車租賃公司從原來的九家銳減到四家，分別是赫茲、安飛士/巴吉、企業(yè)租車公司和Dollar/Thrifty。這四家公司控制了美國汽車租賃市場87%的份額。但對于汽車租賃業(yè)寡頭壟斷的情況，大部分公眾并不知情，因為許多公司保留了原先的品牌，結(jié)果讓消費者誤以為自己還有更多選擇。但在2008年經(jīng)濟危機期間，雖然這四家公司均具有強大的市場支配能力，但租車定價仍然面臨著巨大的壓力。雖然沒有公司破產(chǎn)，但由于商務(wù)出行與休閑旅客出行數(shù)量減少，整個汽車租賃業(yè)的利潤嚴重縮水。

????此時，赫茲將行業(yè)衰退看作擴張的大好機會，于是便將目標對準了競爭對手Dollar Thrifty。表明上看，赫茲收購的目的是實現(xiàn)公司客戶群多樣化。當時赫茲的核心客戶是商務(wù)旅行者。而Dollar公司的客戶主要是休閑旅客，兩家公司合并可以更加有效地利用其龐大的車隊，公司可以在周末將車租給回家的商務(wù)旅行者和出行的休閑旅客。

????經(jīng)過數(shù)月談判，2010年4月，Dollar終于同意赫茲以每股41美元、或總價12億美元發(fā)起收購（首次）。由于擔心錯失機會，赫茲競爭對手安飛士巴吉決定抬高收購價格，主動向Dollar提出約13億美元的收購要約。結(jié)果，赫茲與安飛士之間爆發(fā)競購戰(zhàn)。然而，盡管安飛士的出價一直高于赫茲，但Dollar董事會似乎更傾向于與赫茲合作。對于自己的立場，Dollar公司給出的理由是，雖然安飛士的出價更高，但公司擔心與其合并可能會受到反壟斷問題的阻礙。

????但最后，Dollar Thrifty股東感覺自己吃了虧，而且與安飛士一樣，赫茲也得面對同樣的反壟斷問題。于是，Dollar公司股東投票否決了赫茲的首次收購要約，整個收購過程重新回到了起點。這種情況表明，要想收購Dollar，股東的力量不容小覷，但要想獲得他們的支持絕非易事。據(jù)稱，在公布最近一次收購要約之前，赫茲就收購價格咨詢了Dollar大股東，至于他們對赫茲開出的價格是否滿意，我們不得而知。如果不滿意，他們肯定還會阻止收購。

????然而，即便收購價格令股東滿意，收購還需要獲得政府監(jiān)管部門的批準。公司股東否決首次收購時，最大的擔憂就是反壟斷問題。有鑒于此，外界普遍認為，在政府發(fā)表意見之前，新交易不會對外公布。然而冗長的政府審查過程早在2010年便已開始，至今仍在繼續(xù)，不禁讓外界對赫茲的動機產(chǎn)生了一系列疑問。

????鑒于收購?fù)瓿珊蠊君嫶蟮囊?guī)模，這筆交易能否順利獲得監(jiān)管部門批準現(xiàn)在還很難說。赫茲曾試圖淡化關(guān)于市場份額的爭論，稱合并后的新公司僅占美國汽車租賃市場的23%，而其最大競爭對手企業(yè)租車公司所占市場份額則是36%。聽起來很有道理，但實際上這種說法歪曲了事實，因為它把機場內(nèi)與機場外汽車租賃都計算在內(nèi)。而實際上，汽車租賃巨頭最賺錢的是機場內(nèi)租車，因為機場內(nèi)租車收取的費用是機場外租車的兩倍。所以，如果不算機場外租車點，赫茲與Dollar合并后將占汽車租賃市場的38%，肯定會引起華盛頓的警覺。

????The markets fervently applauded the $2.3 billion merger announcement between car rental giants Hertz and Dollar Thrifty on Monday, giving both companies a healthy bump in shareholder value. But while the merger looks promising on many levels, it is hardly a done deal. Hertz still needs the approval of government regulators as well as Dollar shareholders to make it happen, two things the market shouldn't take for granted. And even if the deal goes through, it is still unclear how Hertz plans to achieve the revenue synergies needed to justify the hefty premium it will have paid.

????In order to understand this deal we need to take a look back in time. The car rental business in the US has changed dramatically in the last decade. What used to be a diverse set of small companies fighting it out for market share and counter space at the local airport has become very concentrated. In the last few years National bought Alamo, Avis merged with Budget, Thrifty hooked up with Dollar (DTG) and Hertz acquired Advantage. Then in 2007, Enterprise Rent-A-Car acquired the combined National/Alamo fleet, making it the largest car rental company in the US.

????By the end of the last decade the number of major car rental companies in the US had gone from about nine to just four: Hertz, Avis/Budget, Enterprise and Dollar/Thrifty. Together, the four car companies controlled 87% of the US car rental market. But the public remained mostly oblivious of the car rental oligopoly as the companies retained their old brand names, giving the illusion of choice when in fact there was very little. But despite their strong market power, rental car pricing still came under pressure during the 2008 recession. While none of the companies faced bankruptcy, profits were severely curtailed across the board as both the business and leisure traveler stayed off the road.

????Seeing an opportunity to expand during the dip, Hertz decided to move in on its smaller rival, Dollar Thrifty. The rationale behind the deal was to ostensibly diversify Hertz's client base beyond its core customer: the business traveler. The story was that a combination with Dollar, whose customers were mainly leisure travelers, would allow the company to utilize its extensive fleet in a more efficient way as it could rent cars on the weekends when business travelers go home and leisure travelers take to the roads.

????After a few months of negotiations, Dollar agreed to be acquired by Hertz (for the first time) in April 2010 for $41 a share or $1.2 billion. Fearing a lost opportunity, rival Avis Budget decided to make a higher, unsolicited offer for Dollar for around $1.3 billion. A bidding war between Hertz and Avis commenced, but Dollar's board seemed set on doing a deal with Hertz, even though Avis consistently outbid its rival. Dollar justified its position saying that while Avis's bid may be higher, it feared that any deal with Avis would be blocked on anti-trust grounds.

????Dollar Thrifty shareholders felt they were being short-changed and that anti-trust concerns was just as much, if not more, of an issue with Hertz as it was with Avis. Shareholders ended up voting down Hertz's first offer, sending the whole process back to the drawing board. The move showed that Dollar's shareholders were a force to be reckoned with and that their support shouldn't be taken for granted. There is talk that major Dollar shareholders were consulted on the price before the latest offer was announced, but it is unclear if they were happy with the numbers. If not, they could end up derailing the merger yet again.

????But even if the price is right, the deal still has to get past government regulators. Given that anti-trust was a major issue to shareholders the first time around, it was widely believed that a new deal wouldn't be announced until after the government issued its opinion. But the tedious government review process, which began all the way back in 2010, is still ongoing, raising questions as to Hertz's motives.

????It is hard to see how all could be fine on the regulatory front given how big the company's footprint would be after the deal is consummated. Hertz has tried to downplay the market share argument, saying that the combined company would make up just 23% of the US car rental market, while its next biggest competitor, Enterprise, would have 36%. While that is true, it distorts the picture somewhat as it counts car rentals both on- and off-airport. It is at the airport where the big firms make most of their money as they can charge customers double the going rate off-airport. So if one strips out off-airport locations, the Hertz and Dollar deal would command around 38% of the of the rental market, which is sure to raise alarm bells in Washington.