Newport Firm Played Key Role in Smith & Wesson Deal
In the movies, Clint Eastwood took out his enemies with seeming ease using his trademark Smith & Wesson .44 Magnum handgun. Working on the sale of Springfield, Mass.-based Smith & Wesson Corp. wasn’t so easy, says Fred Jager.
Jager, chief executive of Newport Beach-based Hunter Wise Financial Group LLC, worked on the May sale of Smith & Wesson to Scottsdale, Ariz.-based Saf-T-Hammer Corp., a maker of gun safety and security products.
It was a deal that almost never was, he said, and that came about after nine months of heated negotiations, several starts and stops and a scramble for financing.
“The most frustrating part was that we had commitments for capital on several different occasions that for one reason or another didn’t close,” said Jager, whose firm was an adviser to Saf-T-Hammer. “We got one investor fairly quickly who said he was willing to put up all the money. At the 11th hour, he didn’t.”
Saf-T-Hammer is paying $15 million for Smith & Wesson to Britain’s Tomkins PLC, a onetime maker of food and firearms known for its “guns and buns.” These days, Tomkins focuses on automotive and construction products.
Back in 1987, Tomkins plunked down a handsome $112 million for Smith & Wesson. By comparison, and considering Smith & Wesson’s $97 million in assets, Saf-T-Hammer got a relative deal. But Saf-T-Hammer also took on a great deal of liability.
Smith & Wesson and other gun makers face government lawsuits and a public image that rivals that of big tobacco. Last year, Smith & Wesson irked gun proponents,some of whom promised to boycott the company,after it struck a gun-safety pact with the Clinton administration.
Tomkins’ main goal in selling Smith & Wesson: getting out of the troubled gun business and clearing itself from litigation.
In September, Dunn Johnston & Co., a New York private investment banking firm representing Tomkins, visited Saf-T-Hammer to see if the company was interested in buying Smith & Wesson. The two companies had something in common: Saf-T-Hammer President Bob Scott once was the No. 2 guy at Smith & Wesson.
But there were size differences. Last year, Saf-T-Hammer’s sales were a mere $13 million, while Smith & Wesson sold pistols and other products worth $71 million in 2000. To finance the deal, Safe-T-Hammer had to find investors, which wasn’t easy, according to Jager.
“You’ve got to have a backup, and then a backup to the backup investor,” he said. “It wasn’t until we got to about our third backup investor that we finally got it done.”
Hunter Wise brought in a New York-based private investor who funded Saf-T-Hammer through debt financing.
Hunter Wise started working with Saf-T-Hammer in September, about a month after Saf-T-Hammer and Tomkins started talking. The work with Saf-T-Hammer came about almost by accident, according to Jager.
The investment bank has a Scottsdale office where it is a neighbor to Saf-T-Hammer. Last year, Saf-T-Hammer chairman Mitch Saltz bumped into Gary Pryor, a managing director of Hunter Wise Capital.
“We literally ran into these people in the hallway,” Jager said. “The conversation started next to the elevator.”
The relationship started this way, according to Jager:
“We are an investment banking firm,” Pryor said.
“Oh, we sure can use some investment banking,” Saltz replied.
The chance encounter led to what arguably is the most high-profile project yet for Hunter Wise, a mid-size firm with nine bankers and five other employees.
“It’s never too soon to start marketing,” Jager said. “You never know where your next deal is coming from.”
Jager said Hunter Wise now is working on its next challenge: drumming up more funding for Saf-T-Hammer. This time, though, Jager said he hopes to raise money through an equity offering.
“We are currently negotiating a $30 million transaction for the company,” he said. “The equity funding could close within four weeks.”
Saf-T-Hammer is looking to make the most out of the Smith & Wesson name, according to Jager. The company plans to change its name to Smith & Wesson Holding Corp. to take advantage of its acquisition’s notoriety, he said.
“It is the intention of the company to go in to all kinds of unique branding opportunities, whether it is clothes or whatever, much in the same way as Harley Davidson has done,” he said. n
