Lockheed Martin finalized its $9 billion purchase of Sikorsky helicopters from United Technologies in November of last year. No sooner had it done so, though, than a new red flag popped up on Lockheed's annual report:
If you own Lockheed Martin stock, the Sikorsky deal could cost you money.
Sikorsky's Black Hawk helicopter is the most popular combat helo on the planet. Image source: Lockheed Martin .
Caveat emptor
I paraphrase, of course. But here, see for yourself what Lockheed said in spelling out its risk factors:
Lockheed went on to warn that integrating Sikorsky into Lockheed's business will be a "complex, costly and time-consuming" affair. What's more, even after integrated:
Topping it all off, Lockheed also raised the worry that in the process of becoming a bigger defense contractor, it may have made itself a bigger target for Congressional budget cutters -- or for Pentagon acquisition specialists who have "expressed concerns regarding greater consolidation in the defense industry" and may decide to "preserve diversity at the prime contract level."
Translation: Even if Lockheed Martin has better products, and better prices, the Pentagon may give contracts to rivals such as Boeing (which builds the Apache helicopter) or Textron (which owns Bell), just to preserve balance in the defense industry.
That would not be good news for Lockheed Martin -- at all .
Minuses, and pluses, too
If the risks to acquiring Sikorsky were so big, though, an investor might wonder why Lockheed Martin bothered to buy it at all? The answer is simple: The opportunities are even bigger than the risks.
Remember: Lockheed Martin paid $9 billion for Sikorsky. But according to Lockheed's 10-K filing with the SEC, Sikorsky brought with it $15.6 billion in backlogged business. That's a huge amount of business already "in the bag" for Lockheed Martin. And it doesn't even count the opportunities on the horizon, such as Turkey's plan to buy as much as $20 billion worth of Sikorsky helicopters as it upgrades its air forces. And call me a crazy optimist, but I suspect Turkey doesn't give a fig whether it's buying those helos from United Technologies subsidiary Sikorsky or Lockheed Martin subsidiary Sikorsky.
As long as the helicopters fly right and cost right, Turkey will be happy.
The upshot for investors
Will all of Lockheed Martin's hopes and dreams for Sikorsky come true, and the deal turn out to be as profitable as it promised when "selling" the deal to its shareholders? Of course not.
Facts change. For example, already, the downturn in the oil market is costing Sikorsky sales among oil production companies -- and synergies from such deals almost never materialize as promised . But other opportunities will emerge. And with Lockheed Martin now the biggest name in fighter jets , in transport aircraft , and finally in helicopters, too , I think this deal is going to work out for investors just fine.
That said, if a little bit of pessimistic talk about Lockheed Martin's chances helps to scare down Lockheed Martin stock from its current high perch of 19 times earnings -- and make the stock a bit cheaper to buy -- I for one wouldn't mind at all.
A secret billion-dollar stock opportunity
The world's biggest tech company forgot to show you something, but a few Wall Street analysts and the Fool didn't miss a beat: There's a small company that's powering their brand-new gadgets and the coming revolution in technology. And we think its stock price has nearly unlimited room to run for early, in-the-know investors! To be one of them, just click here .
The article Sikorsky Deal Forces Lockheed to Update Its 10-K. Should You Worry? originally appeared on Fool.com.
Rich Smith does not own shares of, nor is he short, any company named above. You can find him onMotley Fool CAPS, publicly pontificating under the handleTMFDitty, where he's currently ranked No. 270 out of more than 75,000 rated members.The Motley Fool has no position in any of the stocks mentioned. Try any of our Foolish newsletter services free for 30 days . We Fools may not all hold the same opinions, but we all believe that considering a diverse range of insights makes us better investors. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy .
Copyright © 1995 - 2016 The Motley Fool, LLC. All rights reserved. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy .
The views and opinions expressed herein are the views and opinions of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of Nasdaq, Inc.
The views and opinions expressed herein are the views and opinions of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of Nasdaq, Inc.
