Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Businesses The Almighty Buck

Broadcom Close To Buying Symantec's Enterprise Business (wsj.com) 27

phalse phace writes: Broadcom's on-again, off-again talks to buy Symantec are on again, but this time Broadcom is just interested in Symantec's Enterprise Business.

According to the Wall Street Journal: "Broadcom is nearing a deal to buy Symantec's enterprise business after its attempted purchase of the entire cybersecurity firm fell apart. A deal for the Symantec business could be announced as early as Thursday, when Symantec reports its results, according to people familiar with the matter. The deal could value the Symantec division at around $10 billion, one of the people said. Broadcom had previously been in late-stage discussions to buy all of Symantec before the talks collapsed last month. Since then, the two sides have restarted discussions, with Broadcom zeroing in on the Symantec business that serves businesses and accounts for roughly half its $5 billion in annual revenue. The consumer segment accounts for the rest. The deal would be big for Symantec. Its entire market value is about $12.6 billion -- it has more than $2 billion of net debt -- compared with about $107.6 billion for Broadcom."
UPDATE: It's official, Broadcom is acquiring Symantec's Enterprise Business for $10.7 billion.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Broadcom Close To Buying Symantec's Enterprise Business

Comments Filter:
  • I'd like to hear some input on Symantec. It seemed very bad last time I saw it. But a lot of businesses must use it.

    Is it terrible or are my impressions incorrect?

    • by Anonymous Coward

      Symantec is garbage compared to the highly acclaimed APK Hosts File Engine -- the only security you will ever need.

    • Symantec hasn't had a valid reason to exist since gcc was invented. The only product they ever had that wasn't shit was think c. And they bought that.

    • by jonwil ( 467024 )

      The only reasons Symantec is still around in 2019 are firstly all their deals with OEMs to bundle their crap with new PCs (which then leads to more revenue as people who don't know any better just pay the money to keep the crap going rather than figure out how to get a better alternative working) and secondly that their enterprise stuff is both comprehensive (with products for all the different places an enterprise might want an anti-virus solution including email servers and firewalls) and easy to keep upd

    • by geek ( 5680 )

      The AV detections aren't any worse than the others. Performance is probably about the same. They have other security interests though, for example DLP and PKI solutions. Its a sizable company. Just largely becoming irrelevant in a lot of ways.

  • by onyxruby ( 118189 ) <onyxrubyNO@SPAMcomcast.net> on Thursday August 08, 2019 @09:58AM (#59062386)

    First, I'm going to assume this is nothing more than rumor at this time. That being said, I need someone to explain this one to me. I'm reminded of Intel buying McAfee and that didn't work out at all. I just don't see the synergy in Broadcom buying Symantec. I would get it if it was someone like Microsoft.

    • by geek ( 5680 ) on Thursday August 08, 2019 @11:08AM (#59062768)

      First, I'm going to assume this is nothing more than rumor at this time. That being said, I need someone to explain this one to me. I'm reminded of Intel buying McAfee and that didn't work out at all. I just don't see the synergy in Broadcom buying Symantec. I would get it if it was someone like Microsoft.

      Similar to Intel/McAfee but some differences. First, Intel sucks at just about anything service related and their support for McAfee was really nothing more than security theatre. They've never done that sort of thing well and having worked with the people involved in that purchase, no one really took it seriously. For example, they never actually renamed the product. They had plans to and started the motions for it but never followed through because they lost interest.

      Broadcom may be doing the same thing. Everyone is expected to have a stake in security and the fastest way to get there is through a purchase. The problem of course is Symantec sucks. They do ave good people there but the tech is ancient and they have no solutions to modern problems and haven't done anything to move the ball forward. They are a name only these days and that is probably what the board of directors is looking at. I would expect that after a purchase the company would be gutted.

    • by xlsior ( 524145 )
      Symantec also owns verisign these days.
  • by chuckugly ( 2030942 ) on Thursday August 08, 2019 @10:37AM (#59062596)
    An investment firm came in, bought up a bunch of Symantec stock, took up a few seats on the board, and fired the CEO and a bunch of engineers. This is their closing move as a way to make a quick buck. As for Symantec, the thing being sold this time isn't Norton, it's the enterprise biz which is pretty big and sophisticated but not super profitable. It includes the Blue Coat acquisition from a few years back and so on. The Norton side of the business routinely runs some pretty decent margins, but would also no longer share R&D, so not sure how they would do. Would probably make the McAfee vs Norton thing back into a real dogfight again though.

Dynamically binding, you realize the magic. Statically binding, you see only the hierarchy.

Working...