SPACs

• The Bottom Line: SPACs, or “blank check” companies, are publicly traded shell corporations created solely to acquire a private company and take it public, but they are often riddled with misaligned incentives, extreme dilution, and speculative hype that are toxic to a value investor's portfolio.
• Key Takeaways:
• What it is: A publicly traded pool of cash that gives its managers (sponsors) a limited time—typically two years—to find and merge with a private business.
• Why it matters: They offer a faster, less scrutinized backdoor to the public markets, often leading to overvalued, unproven companies being sold to retail investors. This process can be a minefield for anyone focused on intrinsic_value.
• How to use it: A value investor should view the SPAC structure itself with extreme skepticism. The real analysis only begins after a target company is announced, and it should be evaluated with even greater scrutiny and a larger required margin_of_safety than a typical investment.

Imagine you meet a charismatic treasure hunter who asks you for money. They don't have a map, a specific destination, or even a particular treasure in mind. They just have a boat, a two-year deadline, and a promise that they are really good at finding treasure. If they succeed, you get a share of the loot. If they fail, you get your initial investment back. In a nutshell, that's a Special Purpose Acquisition Company, or SPAC. It's often called a “blank check” company because when you invest in a SPAC's Initial Public Offering (IPO), you are literally handing its management team—known as the sponsors—a blank check. You are trusting them to go out and find a promising private company, buy it with the money you and other investors provided, and merge with it. This merger effectively takes the private company public, bypassing the long and rigorous process of a traditional IPO. The typical SPAC lifecycle looks like this:

1. 1. The IPO: The SPAC, which is just a shell company with no operations, raises capital by selling “units” to the public, typically at a fixed price of $10 per unit. This money is placed into a trust account.
2. 2. The Hunt: The sponsors now have a ticking clock, usually 18 to 24 months, to identify a suitable private company to acquire. They are on the hunt for a merger target.
3. 3. The Deal (or “de-SPAC”): Once a target is found and a deal is negotiated, it's presented to the SPAC's shareholders for a vote. If they approve, the merger is completed. The private company is now a publicly traded entity, and the SPAC's stock ticker changes to reflect the newly combined company.
4. 4. The Alternative (Liquidation): If the sponsors can't find a suitable deal before their deadline, the SPAC is dissolved, and the money in the trust account is returned to the shareholders.

On the surface, it might sound like a low-risk way to get in on the ground floor of the “next big thing.” But as a value investor, your job is to look beneath the surface. And with SPACs, the structure of the ship is often more dangerous than the promise of the treasure.

“The stock market is a no-called-strike game. You don't have to swing at everything—you can wait for your pitch.” - Warren Buffett

SPACs are, in many ways, the philosophical opposite of value investing. Value investing is about patiently buying wonderful businesses you understand at sensible prices. SPACs encourage you to buy a management team you may not know, in the hope they'll find a business you don't yet know, at a price that has yet to be determined. This structure presents several fundamental problems for a disciplined investor. 1. Perverse Incentives & The Sponsor's “Promote” This is the most critical flaw. SPAC sponsors don't invest on the same terms as you. For a nominal investment, they typically receive “founder shares” equivalent to 20% of the SPAC's equity. This is called the “promote.” This means if a SPAC raises $400 million from the public, the sponsors get an additional $100 million in equity almost for free. This creates a dangerous incentive: the sponsors make a fortune if any deal is completed, regardless of whether it's a good deal for long-term shareholders. Their primary motivation is to avoid liquidating the SPAC, because if they do, their 20% “promote” becomes worthless. This ticking clock pressures them to overpay for a mediocre company rather than return cash to shareholders and admit defeat. This is a clear conflict of interest that a value investor must never ignore. 2. Speculation Disguised as Investment Value investors analyze balance sheets, income statements, and cash flows. They build detailed models to estimate a company's intrinsic_value. When you buy a SPAC at its IPO, there are no fundamentals to analyze. There is no business, no revenue, and no profit. You are purely betting on the sponsors' ability to make a good deal. This is the definition of speculation, not investment. It's a bet on a story, not on a business. 3. Extreme Shareholder Dilution The sponsor's 20% promote is just the beginning of the dilution. SPACs also issue warrants (the right to buy more shares at a fixed price later) to initial investors. When the merger happens, the combined effect of the sponsor shares and the exercise of warrants can massively dilute the ownership stake of public shareholders. This means the underlying business has to perform spectacularly well just for you to break even, let alone earn a satisfactory return. The bar for success is set incredibly high before you even start. 4. Rushed Due Diligence and Hype The traditional IPO process is grueling for a reason. It forces a company to undergo months of intense scrutiny from regulators, auditors, and underwriters. The SPAC process is a shortcut. This can lead to less thorough due_diligence, allowing weaker companies with unproven business models to enter the public market. Furthermore, SPACs are allowed to market their deals using forward-looking projections, something strictly forbidden in a traditional IPO prospectus. This opens the door for companies with no revenue to sell a grand story based on hockey-stick-shaped charts of future profits that may never materialize. This is a recipe for buying hype, not value. For a value investor, the SPAC structure itself is a giant red flag. It prioritizes deal-making over value creation, speed over diligence, and story over substance.

A prudent value investor will likely avoid SPACs altogether before a merger target is announced. However, once a deal is on the table (the “de-SPAC” phase), the shell company becomes a real business that can be analyzed. If you insist on evaluating a post-merger SPAC, you must do so with extraordinary caution.

1. 1. Forget the Hype, Analyze the Business: The first step is to completely ignore the SPAC structure, the sponsors' reputation, and the market chatter. Focus 100% on the target company. Does it have a durable competitive advantage, or a moat? Does it generate consistent and growing free cash flow? Is it in an industry you understand, within your circle_of_competence? Treat it as you would any other potential investment. If it doesn't pass these fundamental tests, walk away immediately.
2. 2. Calculate the True Price (Fully Diluted Valuation): The announced “deal value” is almost always misleading. You must do the hard work of digging through the merger filings to find the fully diluted share count. Add up the existing public shares, the sponsor's promote shares, any private investment (PIPE) shares, and all the shares that will be created when warrants are exercised. Multiply this total share count by the current stock price to find the true enterprise value. You are almost guaranteed to find that the company is far more expensive than the headlines suggest.
3. 3. Scrutinize the Projections: De-SPAC companies often publish incredibly optimistic financial projections. Ask yourself: Are these realistic? What are the key assumptions? How does their projected growth and profitability compare to established public companies in the same industry? More often than not, these projections are a sales tool, not a sober forecast. Base your valuation on historical performance and conservative future estimates, not the company's PowerPoint presentation.
4. 4. Demand an Enormous Margin of Safety: Given the structural flaws, the inherent hype, and the often unproven nature of the target businesses, a standard margin of safety is not enough. The price you pay must be at a massive discount to a very conservative estimate of the company's intrinsic_value. The risk of permanent capital loss is exceptionally high in this space, and you must be compensated for taking it on.

Let's imagine a SPAC called “Blank Check Capital Corp.” (BCCC), which trades at $10 per share and has raised $200 million from the public (20 million shares). The sponsors hold 5 million “promote” shares (20% of the total). BCCC announces a merger with “FutureVolt,” a pre-revenue electric scooter company. The deal values FutureVolt at $1 billion. The press release is filled with exciting projections of capturing 30% of the global scooter market by 2030. The stock, BCCC, jumps to $15 on the news. A speculative investor sees a hot EV company and jumps in. A value investor stops and does the math.

This simple example shows how the SPAC process can obscure a terrible business proposition behind a veil of hype and complex financial engineering.

• Speed to Market: A SPAC merger can be completed in a few months, whereas a traditional IPO can take a year or more. This allows a company to go public quickly when market sentiment is favorable.
• Valuation Certainty: The company negotiates a fixed valuation directly with the SPAC sponsors. In a traditional IPO, the final price is subject to market conditions on the day of the offering.
• Access for “Story” Companies: SPACs provide a path to public markets for companies that are too young, speculative, or unprofitable to withstand the scrutiny of a traditional IPO. ¹⁾

• Conflicts of Interest: The sponsor's promote creates a powerful incentive to get a deal done, even if it's a bad one at an inflated price, directly conflicting with the interests of long-term shareholders.
• Excessive Dilution: The combination of sponsor shares and warrants systematically transfers wealth away from public shareholders, making it incredibly difficult to earn a good return even if the underlying business does well.
• Lack of Scrutiny: The reduced regulatory oversight and rushed due diligence process increase the risk of investing in low-quality or even fraudulent businesses.
• Valuations Based on Hype: The ability to use optimistic, forward-looking projections encourages valuations based on exciting stories rather than on current business fundamentals and a proven track record.

• initial_public_offering_ipo
• speculation
• intrinsic_value
• margin_of_safety
• due_diligence
• dilution
• circle_of_competence