AvidXchange swallowed in $2B deal
This story was originally published on Payments Dive. To receive daily news and insights, subscribe to our free daily Payments Dive newsletter.
AvidXchange, an accounts payable and payments software provider, has agreed to be taken private by global asset management firm TPG in a transaction that values the business at $2.2 billion, according to a Tuesday press release from the two companies.
As part of the acquisition, another payments company Corpay, formerly known as FleetCor Technologies, will buy a 33% stake in the publicly-traded AvidXchange for $500 million, according to its separate release Tuesday. Corpay, which is also publicly-traded, said in its release that it will have the option to buy all of AvidXchange.
'There is a very large opportunity for businesses to improve their accounts payable processes through automation and become more efficient, more secure, and more accurate,' TPG Partner John Flynn said in the joint release.
Charlotte, North Carolina-based AvidXchange has focused its software business on the middle market, collecting some 8,500 clients in various verticals, including real estate, homeowners' associations, financial institutions and media, according to the Corpay release. When AvidXchange sold shares to the public for the first time in 2021, it had about 7,000 clients.
The payments company is a good fit for Fort Worth, Texas-based TPG's $76 billion portfolio partly because it has previously invested in payments companies, including the digital payments processor Toast as well as payments orchestration company Freedom Pay, according to the investment firm's website.
Flynn explained how AvidXchange offers payments set-up that easily integrates into corporate workflows, allowing for connectivity between businesses and suppliers. His TPG partner, Tim Millikin, predicted a growing need for such software.
'Modern businesses require modern payment technology, and we see significant opportunity for AvidXchange as a private company to continue enhancing its solutions to improve visibility and unlock efficiencies across the payment process,' Millikin said in the release.
Corpay CEO and Chairman Ron Clarke also highlighted the business prospects for AvidXchange. He has experience with AvidXchange because Atlanta-based Corpay has acted as its card payments processor.
'We really like AvidXchange's business model: diverse revenue streams from payments and software, high retention rates, and very little working capital and credit exposure,' he said in his company's release.
Last month, Corpay itself attracted an investment from Mastercard, which injected $300 million into its cross-border unit as part of a broader commercial, cross-border services agreement.
AvidXchange's CEO, Michael Praeger, is a career entrepreneur who co-founded the company in 2000. Prior to launching AvidXchange, he co-founded career and recruiting web site PlanetResume.com and the tax billing and collections software company InfoLink Partners.
'With TPG and Corpay, we will have the resources and long-term focus to scale our platform and provide more innovative solutions that help our customers across the country transform their accounts payable processes,' Praeger said in his company's press release.
In a Tuesday letter to employees, Praeger talked about the milestone deal as the company marks its 25th anniversary.
'We've accomplished a lot over the past 25 years, growing from an AP automation software company for the real estate business into a leading B2B payments network and processing more than 79 million transactions in 2024 with annual revenue of more than $425 million,' he said in the letter, which was included in a Wednesday filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission.
A spokesperson for AvidXchange didn't respond to a question about whether Praeger will remain at the company once the transaction is completed.
AvidXchange will institute a $3 million retention bonus program for top executives in an effort to 'to promote retention and incentivize efforts to consummate' the transaction, according to another SEC filing by the company on Wednesday. Those bonuses will vest annually over the next three years.
The transaction is expected to close in the fourth quarter, subject to regulatory approvals, according to the releases.
Recommended Reading
Mastercard invests $300M in Corpay unit
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Business of Fashion
32 minutes ago
- Business of Fashion
H&M Billionaire Quietly Moves Retailer Toward Private Ownership
Hennes & Mauritz AB, the fast-fashion retailer that's been listed on the Swedish stock market since 1974, is steadily moving back toward private ownership. The founding family has stepped up purchases of H&M shares, spending more than 63 billion kronor ($6.6 billion) since 2016 and fuelling speculation it could take the Stockholm-based company back into private hands — despite denials from family members. The Perssons, one of Sweden's wealthiest families, have amassed a growing stake through holding company Ramsbury Invest, saying little about their intentions other than that they 'believe' in H&M, which was founded in 1947 by Erling Persson. The media-shy clan is now getting within striking distance of full control of the retailer, which in recent years has been losing ground among shoppers to its main rival Zara and 'ultra-fast fashion' upstarts like Shein. 'This is something we've been talking about for years, and few would doubt that's the direction things are headed,' said Sverre Linton, chief legal officer and spokesperson for the Swedish Shareholders' Association, which represents small stock investors. If the family doesn't plan to take H&M private, it should communicate that more clearly and stop buying shares, he added. Within Striking Distance of Full Control The family has ramped up insider buying by reinvesting dividends, boosting its H&M stake to almost 64 percent from 35.5 percent over the past nine years via Ramsbury, a vehicle named after billionaire Stefan Persson's sprawling estate, one of the largest private landholdings in southern England. Including extended family holdings, the Perssons now control roughly 70 percent of the capital and some 85 percent of voting rights, according to H&M's website. In an interview last year with Bloomberg, H&M Chairman Karl-Johan Persson — grandson of the founder — dismissed talk that the family intended to take the company private. 'There are no plans,' he said. 'We just buy because we believe in the company.' Representatives at Ramsbury Invest and H&M declined to comment. Analysts including Niklas Ekman at DNB Carnegie say the regular purchases could be more than a show of confidence in the retailer. In a note to clients last month, he estimated that if the family keeps acquiring shares at the same pace a buyout could come as early as two years from now. If the family's holding reached 90 percent, it could request a de-listing of the shares. A take-private would be 'based on emotional rather than financial motives,' Ekman wrote, given that the family already has a controlling stake and has long managed the company with little regard for minority shareholders. He attributed the push to patriarch Stefan Persson, 77, who built H&M into one of the world's largest fast-fashion retailers during his 16 years as chief executive officer and more than two decades as chairman. He remains deeply invested in the company's future. Stefan's fortune amounts to $18.6 billion, mostly in H&M stock, making him the richest person in Sweden, according to the Bloomberg Billionaires Index. He bought the 3,000-acre Ramsbury estate in 1997 and has since expanded it to 19,000 acres, building a brewery, distillery and oil press on the property. His son Karl-Johan, who took over as H&M chairman in 2020 after serving as CEO, also holds an active role at Ramsbury Invest. He has voiced frustration in interviews with the stock market's short-term focus on maximizing profits. 'They've never, at least in modern times, expressed a strong desire to remain public,' said Daniel Schmidt, an analyst at Danske Bank. 'I would say that transparency has always been a part of it.' H&M's shares reached an all-time high about a decade ago, and have since fallen by around 60 percent, valuing the group at 220 billion kronor. Zara owner Inditex SA, by contrast, has climbed about 60 percent over that period. For the Perssons, the sagging stock price is no doubt a frustration, but also presents an opportunity by making full control more attainable. At the current price it would cost the family at least 70 billion kronor to buy the remaining outstanding shares, according to Ekman. That would likely require them to take on debt. A delisting would probably also require a premium, according to Bloomberg Intelligence analyst Charles Allen. 'If the bid were financed by debt then it may reduce the company's operating flexibility,' Allen said. 'It wouldn't really matter if the debt was in the company or the family as either way cash flow would have to be diverted from investment to pay interest and then repay.' Operationally, the fast-fashion retailer appears stuck in the slow lane, facing tepid demand for its apparel, fierce competition and now US tariffs. The first-quarter results were weaker than analysts had expected and showed that efforts to claw back customers through higher marketing spending hadn't brought a rebound. CEO Daniel Erver, an H&M veteran who took the top job last January, was involved in setting the current strategy and has yet to reverse market share losses in countries including Germany, France and the UK. Attempts to reconnect with younger audiences through collaborations, such as with pop artist Charli XCX, haven't significantly boosted growth. H&M Shares Continue to Underperform Rival Inditex H&M has been criticised for a lack of transparency over sudden management changes and being the only company in Stockholm's benchmark index not to disclose the shareholdings of its top executive team. 'Obviously, being a listed company puts management under more scrutiny than if they were private, but it also presumably offers some incentives to management and other employees that would not be available if it were private,' BI's Allen said. Anders Oscarsson, the head of equities at AMF, one of Sweden's biggest pension managers and the largest non-family shareholder, said he hasn't heard the family say anything about taking H&M private, and that such a move would be a big loss for investors. 'It would be sad if the company disappears from the stock exchange,' he said. 'If we're to generate returns from the stock market, we need strong companies listed.' Yet if the family's purchases lead to a marked deterioration in the stock's liquidity, that wouldn't be a good outcome either. 'It might become a bit like Hotel California — where you can neither check in nor check out.' By Rafaela Lindeberg
Yahoo
32 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Gavin Newsom is trying to rescue Hollywood. It may be too late.
LOS ANGELES — Gavin Newsom wants to claim the role of Hollywood's superhero. But California's iconic industry is so battered that even its governor may not be able to save it. Newsom has made doubling the state's film tax credit his No. 1 budget priority as he tries to lure back show business production that has fled in droves to other states and countries, even while he proposes slashing other pet causes such as expanded health care benefits. It's a clear bid to rewrite the 'California crack-up' script that has transfixed conservative media — and President Donald Trump — and play the leading man role that woos production back to its homeland. But Newsom's effort also calls attention to the yawning gulf between what the industry wants and what Sacramento can deliver. Already, there are fears that Newsom's best efforts could amount to too little, too late. Newsom has doggedly pursued support from the Los Angeles-based power players and their lavish political donations as he has climbed the ranks of California politics. But now, as his term's expiration date approaches and he eyes a potential 2028 White House bid, the industry exodus has opened a window for Trump to claim the title of industry savior for himself. The president, Newsom's frequent archnemesis, has disparaged the governor's stewardship of his state's signature industry as 'grossly incompetent.' California's film tax credit, which has languished for years behind more lucrative offers from states like Georgia or overseas options like the U.K., could be a place for Newsom to cement his bonafides as Hollywood's champion. The most active players lobbying for its expansion — a coalition of labor unions, studios and industry execs — feel 'an enormous sense of gratitude' toward Newsom, said Scott Budnick, the film producer behind 'The Hangover' and other blockbusters. But there's no guarantee that the heftier tax credit will make it through this fraught budget season unscathed. And even staunch supporters like Budnick acknowledge the effort, if successful, is only an initial step to a Hollywood course correction. 'My hope is we blow through this money, and we're gonna have to go back to the governor for even more next year, and we can show that it's an economic engine for the state as well,' he said. Complicating Newsom's Hollywood courtship is the pronounced funk that has pervaded the industry, which has been pummeled by a series of crises. The pandemic, the dual writers' and actors' strikes in 2023 and the historic Los Angeles wildfires in January have convulsed a town already rocked by changing business models. The industry-wide malaise has led some insiders to greet Newsom's tax credit push with a weary shrug or a sense this is a fruitless endeavor. 'The time for this discussion was 10, 15, 20 years ago,' said Richard Rushfield, editorial director and columnist with The Ankler, an industry newsletter. And even if he does notch a win with a doubled tax credit, it far from guarantees loyalty from a Hollywood political class that tends to prioritize other causes, such as LGBTQ+ issues or abortion rights, when backing a candidate. 'The overwhelming majority of Hollywood dollars that go into politics is not based on industry needs or priorities, but rather based on personal policy beliefs [and] values – often to the dismay of industry lobbyists,' said Donna Bojarsky, a longtime Democratic consultant and Hollywood fundraiser. In other words, Newsom's controversial podcast interview with conservative influencer Charlie Kirk may end up being more influential to Hollywood donor checkbooks than any budgetary mountains he moves for the film tax credit. 'Depression-era level' unemployment As a Northern Californian, Newsom was never one of Hollywood's own. But over the course of his governorship, he has diligently built bonds with industry heavy-hitters such as Netflix CEO Ted Sarandos, whom he frequently texts. Newsom met privately on Thursday with Jon Voight, the actor whom Trump named a 'special ambassador' to Hollywood. 'He has real relationships with Hollywood and that makes a substantial difference, as opposed to the way [previous governor] Jerry Brown was a bit more of an outsider,' said Jay Sures, vice chair of United Talent Agency who was appointed by Newsom to the University of California Board of Regents. 'He can pick up the phone and call just about any CEO and knows them on a first-name basis.' Among the Hollywood donor crowd, Newsom has mostly been regarded as a strong standout among national Democrats considered potential 2028 contenders — though many in the industry, burned by Trump's win in 2024, say they're still shopping around for the next fresh face. Newsom's vocal advocacy on national issues like abortion rights has won plaudits; his comments questioning the fairness of transgender athletes in girls' sports have been less warmly received. 'Gavin has very solid support, but of course, he has his detractors too. And his more recent actions have mystified some,' Bojarsky said. 'But generally people feel positively that he's a sophisticated, charismatic politician that is willing to be out there and take risks.' Lately, the wobbly state of the industry has become a major tentpole in Newsom's Hollywood outreach. FilmLA, which tracks the number of days movies, television shows and reality programs are shot in Los Angeles city and county, found that 2024 was the second-least productive year it had ever observed since its formation 30 years ago — only 2020, the height of the coronavirus pandemic, was worse. 'The levels of unemployment in this industry in Los Angeles are at Depression-era levels,' said Assemblymember Rick Chavez Zbur, one of the primary lawmakers championing the new film tax credit in the Legislature. 'In some of the unions, they have had unemployment levels of 40 and 50 percent.' Tax incentives are seen by the industry as a way to stop the bleeding — even if some economists say such credits can be revenue-losers for states. Proponents argue that in-state production has wide-reaching economic ripple effects that bolster not just the camera grips and makeup artists working on set, but dry cleaners, caterers and other small businesses that benefit from a local film shoot. The projects approved for the tax credit in California from 2020 to mid-2023 generated $7.3 billion in in-state economic activity, according to the California Film Commission. In recent weeks, awareness of the crisis crossed into the broader zeitgeist. Even a recent episode of HBO's acclaimed comedy 'Hacks' included a joke about the film tax credit, complete with a Newsom name drop. A Newsom aide said he was amused by the shoutout and happy the issue had 'broken through' — glossing over the fact that the industry's clear frustration with state government was manifest as a punchline on a hit television show. But it was a surprise social media missive from Trump that catapulted the issue to international attention, as the president touted his favorite policy tool, tariffs, as the solution to stanch the overseas production bleeding. Caught off guard by Trump's post, Newsom challenged the president on X to back a $7.5 billion federal tax incentive. Newsom, using the shorthand of finance and Silicon Valley, came up with the figure as a way to '10x' the $750 million tax break he was championing in California, according to the aide, who was granted anonymity to describe internal discussions. After proposing that enormous sum, however, Newsom has not been deeply involved in the Washington efforts that have stirred to life now that Trump has shown at least some awareness of runaway production. The governor has had some conversations with figures in Washington who are working on a federal proposal, such as Rep. Laura Friedman, a Democrat from Los Angeles and a former film producer. But, Friedman said, the push to craft a new federal incentive and for California to expand its existing tax credits are 'completely separate efforts.' 'His job is to get a budget allocation through the California Legislature … and it's not a slam dunk that they're going to get the money that he asked for,' said Friedman, who served eight years in the statehouse. 'If my experience in the Legislature is any indication, he's going to have a lot of work to do to make that happen. So he should be focusing there.' 'Help is on the way' Sacramento has always been a source of frustration for Hollywood, dating far earlier than Newsom's tenure. There was a sense that California leaders did little to boost their crown-jewel industry, giving other states and countries a prime opportunity to poach the business by offering lavish incentives. 'We, for so many years, have sat on our laurels, assumed dominance in this area because of the history of Hollywood and expected that we didn't need to do very much to retain this iconic industry,' said state Sen. Ben Allen, a Los Angeles Democrat who is one of the lead legislators involved in negotiations. 'Unfortunately, dollars speak louder than tradition.' One hurdle for advocates of a film tax credit is the perception that the program is a subsidy for glitzy Los Angeles studio execs and celebrities, a view that stoked regional rivalries with representatives from other parts of the state. This time, Newsom put a marker down in October — days before he knew the outcome of the presidential election and months before the typical budget negotiating season — about his intention to more than double the tax incentive, which currently sits at $330 million. 'We made a decision … to put a stake in the ground and go,' said DeeDee Myers, Newsom's chief economic adviser. 'That will give us time to make the case, to educate people, and it's also a signal to the industry: 'Hey, we've got your back, and help is on the way.'' The goal of $750 million has remained unchanged, even as the state's budget outlook darkened dramatically in recent months, setting off fierce battles for funding among competing Democratic interest groups. Newsom and his legislative partners have tried to avoid the usual political tripwires. To entice lawmakers far from Hollywood's center, they proposed a bonus for productions filmed outside of the 30-mile zone encircling Los Angeles. They made union entertainment workers, not studio bosses or celebrities, the face of their campaign. By portraying the incentive as a middle-class jobs program, they've largely neutralized objections from elsewhere in organized labor, which would otherwise target the tax credit as a corporate giveaway. 'This was the story of hundreds of union workers who have had to mortgage homes and foreclose on their homes and move to different states because of just how slow the business is,' said Budnick, an advocate for getting formerly incarcerated people into the pipeline for industry jobs. Hollywood hopes collide with Sacramento reality As budget negotiations careen toward a June 15 spending plan deadline, Newsom is trying to assure the anxious industry he'll be able to deliver. His office reiterated on Thursday he is 'fully committed' to securing a revamped $750 millon credit. Even if Newsom is able to claim victory in the final gauntlet of budget negotiations, it's far from assured that the effort will break through Hollywood's current malaise. A panel of top studio executives at the ritzy Milken Global Issues conference last month offered a stark illustration of the gap between Hollywood's expectations and the realities in Sacramento. Casey Bloys, who runs HBO, lamented how California's tax credits — which are capped and distributed via lottery — compared to Georgia's uncapped incentive program. 'Because it's capped, you can't plan,' Bloys said. 'You have to get into a lottery, and you're not sure if your show is going to get the tax break or not.' But an uncapped tax credit was never in the cards in California, especially in this fraught budget year. Newsom is betting that he can make at least some headway in pulling Hollywood out of its doldrums. But that success depends on the studios actually being open to returning to California — or if the enticements from outside its borders prove too tempting to pass up. 'My sense is that people throughout the industry — from the folks building sets to studio execs — recognize that Newsom is doing more than any governor in memory to try and save California's entertainment industry,' said Brian Brokaw, a Newsom adviser who sits on the California Film Commission. 'Ultimately what this will come down to is whether those who actually make the decisions about where to shoot share the governor's commitment to California.' The exodus of production from the state may be so long gone that nothing Newsom does now will substantially reverse the tide. But perhaps the governor's film tax flex could at least quell some uncomfortable questions about Hollywood flight under his watch — particularly if he wants to tout his record in a 2028 White House run. 'If he's going to run for president, this is gonna come up,' said Rushfield, the longtime industry watcher. 'And he's got to be able to say that he tried.'
Forbes
34 minutes ago
- Forbes
Beyond Backups: A Practical Guide To Data Recovery
Chongwei Chen is the President & CEO of DataNumen, a global data recovery leader with solutions trusted by Fortune 500 companies worldwide. As a data-recovery expert with 24 years of experience, I have witnessed countless examples of companies facing catastrophic consequences when faced with data loss. Take, for example, a mid-sized manufacturing company I worked with that could not access its production database due to a hardware failure. Although they had regular backups, the latest incremental backup file was also corrupted. Because of these issues, they had to pause production for several weeks, causing losses of about $1.2 million. Unfortunately, this company's experience isn't unique. A 2022 Arcserve study found that 76% of businesses lost mission-critical company data. Verizon research supports this, concluding that small instances of data loss cost businesses between $18,000 to $36,000, while large-scale incidents can cost up to $15.6 million. The stakes are so high that, according to the University of Texas, 94% of companies facing catastrophic data loss don't survive—43% never reopen, and 51% shut down within two years. Given these risks, understanding how to recover data is critical. Let's look at common storage methods and recovery techniques that organizations should be familiar with. In modern computers, data is generally stored logically as files, which are managed by a file system. Companies typically use two types of infrastructures to store data: • On-Premises: This includes traditional hard drives, USB flash drives, SD cards, CDs, DVDs, etc. • Cloud: Today, over 60% of all corporate data is stored in the cloud, according to G2 research, which includes Google Drive, Amazon S3 Storage, Microsoft OneDrive and so on. While human error is the leading cause of data loss, other causes include hardware failure, theft, software corruption, viruses, natural disasters and power failure. Data recovery is closely linked to the storage methods used to preserve the data, and the recovery techniques can generally be classified into these two categories: This method is geared toward hardware failures in storage devices, and it focuses on using the most advanced hardware technologies to: • Replace damaged interfaces, circuit boards or write heads. • Use specialized devices or environments to extract data. This recovery method uses an advanced software algorithm. There are two sub-categories: • Raw-Level Recovery: Generally deployed when the target files are lost due to issues like accidental deletion or reformatting the disk by mistake, the data-recovery software scans the raw disk or drive and recovers the files. In general, this software will support multiple file types. • File-Level Recovery: This method is used when target files exist but cannot be opened by the necessary application due to file corruption. Normally, for each file format, there will be a dedicated tool from the designer of the file format to check the integrity of the file and fix errors in it. For example, for an Outlook PST file, Microsoft provides an Inbox Repair Tool ( that can scan and fix errors in the PST file. For a SQL Server database file, a SQL command—DBCC CHECKDB—can check the integrity of a database and fix it if necessary. The two above classifications are not absolute. In real-world practice, multiple techniques may be required. For example, consider a situation where a criminal deleted a database containing financial data from a hard drive and then used software to overwrite the entire hard drive. Start by using a hardware method to recover most of the raw data from the drive. Then, apply raw-level recovery software to scan and extract the database file. If the recovered file still isn't recognized by SQL Server, use the DBCC CHECKDB command to attempt a repair, hopefully recovering most of the financial records from the database. These techniques can also be very flexible, and the techniques in one category can often be applied to another category to obtain better recovery results or lower the cost. For example, some file-level recovery software can also recover data from the hard drive directly if no files are available, which will normally offer a better recovery rate than using a raw-level recovery tool first and then a file-level recovery tool second. Some raw-level recovery software can also recover files with hardware issues, such as bad sectors, which will lower the cost because this method does not require specialized hardware devices. Data loss is often unavoidable, but it doesn't have to be a disaster if organizations familiarize themselves with the proper planning and techniques. To minimize the impact of data loss and ensure a swift recovery, organizations should follow a few essential best practices: • Prevention is the most important. Design a comprehensive business continuity plan, including a regular backup strategy and an incident response plan. Implement this plan strictly. • Act quickly after a disaster. Once you know there has been data loss, respond quickly, ideally within 48 hours of the incident. • Get professional help. For complex cases, seek professional help from data-recovery experts; they have likely seen the issues you're facing before, and they can help design the best recovery strategy. • Implement post-recovery review. After the incident, update the continuity plan and backup strategy based on the findings to reduce the likelihood of future incidents. With these best practices and by responding strategically, companies can often turn a data-loss incident from a crisis into a manageable challenge. Forbes Technology Council is an invitation-only community for world-class CIOs, CTOs and technology executives. Do I qualify?
