evaluating-sum-of-parts-activism
Assesses conglomerate break-up activism with segment valuation, separation feasibility, and tax-free qualification analysis. Use when evaluating SOTP activism, analyzing break-up proposals, or modeling separation value.
Best use case
evaluating-sum-of-parts-activism is best used when you need a repeatable AI agent workflow instead of a one-off prompt.
Assesses conglomerate break-up activism with segment valuation, separation feasibility, and tax-free qualification analysis. Use when evaluating SOTP activism, analyzing break-up proposals, or modeling separation value.
Teams using evaluating-sum-of-parts-activism should expect a more consistent output, faster repeated execution, less prompt rewriting.
When to use this skill
- You want a reusable workflow that can be run more than once with consistent structure.
When not to use this skill
- You only need a quick one-off answer and do not need a reusable workflow.
- You cannot install or maintain the underlying files, dependencies, or repository context.
Installation
Claude Code / Cursor / Codex
Manual Installation
- Download SKILL.md from GitHub
- Place it in
.claude/skills/evaluating-sum-of-parts-activism/SKILL.mdinside your project - Restart your AI agent — it will auto-discover the skill
How evaluating-sum-of-parts-activism Compares
| Feature / Agent | evaluating-sum-of-parts-activism | Standard Approach |
|---|---|---|
| Platform Support | Not specified | Limited / Varies |
| Context Awareness | High | Baseline |
| Installation Complexity | Unknown | N/A |
Frequently Asked Questions
What does this skill do?
Assesses conglomerate break-up activism with segment valuation, separation feasibility, and tax-free qualification analysis. Use when evaluating SOTP activism, analyzing break-up proposals, or modeling separation value.
Where can I find the source code?
You can find the source code on GitHub using the link provided at the top of the page.
SKILL.md Source
# Evaluating Sum Of Parts Activism ## When To Use - An activist investor files a 13D or white paper advocating a conglomerate break-up, spin-off, or asset sale - Evaluating whether a multi-segment company trades at a meaningful conglomerate discount - Modeling the standalone value of individual business units versus the consolidated entity - Assessing feasibility and timeline for a proposed separation (spin-off, split-off, carve-out, or asset sale) - Determining whether a separation can qualify as tax-free under IRC §355 or requires a taxable structure ## Inputs To Gather - **Segment financials**: Revenue, EBITDA, capital expenditure, and working capital by reportable segment (from 10-K segment disclosures and quarterly supplements) - **Activist materials**: 13D filing, investor presentation, white paper, or public letter detailing the proposed break-up thesis - **Peer trading data**: EV/EBITDA, EV/Revenue, and P/E multiples for pure-play comparables in each segment's industry - **Precedent transactions**: Recent M&A multiples for similar businesses in each segment vertical - **Corporate overhead allocation**: Shared services costs, corporate G&A, and intercompany transfer pricing arrangements - **Capital structure details**: Debt covenants, change-of-control provisions, cross-default clauses, pension obligations, and guarantee structures - **Tax basis information**: Inside basis of assets by segment, E&P history, and any prior §355 transactions within the past five years - **Synergy and dissynergy estimates**: Revenue synergies at risk, shared procurement savings, and incremental standalone public-company costs (board, audit, IT, insurance) ## Workflow 1. **Compute the SOTP valuation** - Value each segment independently using a blended median of trading comps and precedent transaction multiples - Apply a range (e.g., 25th–75th percentile) to bracket valuation uncertainty per segment - Subtract net debt, pension/OPEB obligations, minority interests, and unallocated corporate costs from the aggregate segment value - Compare the resulting SOTP equity value to the current market cap to quantify the conglomerate discount (typically expressed as a percentage) 2. **Assess separation feasibility** - Map intercompany dependencies: shared IT systems, supply agreements, co-mingled manufacturing, cross-selling arrangements - Estimate one-time separation costs (IT carve-out, legal/advisory fees, branding, facility separation) and ongoing dis-synergies (duplicated overhead, lost procurement scale) - Identify stranded costs — corporate overhead that does not naturally migrate to any single segment - Review debt instruments for change-of-control triggers, consent requirements, and make-whole provisions that affect separation cost - Evaluate management bandwidth and board composition for running a separation while operating the business 3. **Analyze tax-free qualification (IRC §355)** - Confirm the distributing corporation has controlled the subsidiary for at least five years (the "control" requirement) [VERIFY against current §355(a)(1)(D) rules] - Verify both the distributing and controlled corporations have an active trade or business satisfying the five-year active-business test under §355(b) [VERIFY] - Assess whether a valid corporate business purpose exists (not merely shareholder-level tax avoidance) - Check device restrictions — whether the transaction is principally a device for distributing E&P (analyze asset composition, post-spin sale plans, and nature of consideration) - Evaluate continuity of interest and continuity of business enterprise requirements - Flag any §355(e) "plan or series of related transactions" risk if an acquisition of either entity is anticipated within two years pre- or post-spin - Determine whether a private letter ruling (PLR) will be sought or whether the transaction proceeds on opinion-only basis [VERIFY IRS current PLR policy for §355 transactions] 4. **Model value creation versus leakage** - Build a bridge from current market cap to post-separation aggregate value: SOTP uplift minus separation costs, tax friction (if taxable), dis-synergies, and incremental standalone costs - Sensitivity-test the discount closure: what percentage of the conglomerate discount must close to break even after all friction costs? - Model the timeline — typical spin-off execution takes 9–18 months from announcement to completion; factor in SEC Form 10 registration, IRS ruling timeline, and any required regulatory approvals 5. **Evaluate activist credibility and strategic alternatives** - Review the activist's track record with SOTP campaigns (win rate, timeline to outcome, typical discount closure achieved) - Assess the company's likely defensive response: accelerated capital return, portfolio review, strategic alternatives process, or governance concessions - Identify whether a negotiated settlement (board seats, capital allocation changes) could unlock partial value without full separation - Consider whether a third-party acquirer for individual segments is more likely than a spin-off ## Output Produce an **SOTP Activism Evaluation Report** containing: - **Executive summary**: Headline conglomerate discount, feasibility grade (High / Medium / Low), and tax-qualification preliminary assessment - **Segment valuation table**: Each segment with revenue, EBITDA, applied multiple range, and implied enterprise value - **Conglomerate discount calculation**: Aggregate SOTP value vs. current market cap with a clear walk from gross SOTP to net equity value - **Separation feasibility matrix**: Key dependencies, estimated separation costs, timeline, and identified blockers - **Tax-free qualification checklist**: Each §355 requirement with pass/fail/uncertain status and [VERIFY] flags for jurisdiction-dependent items - **Value bridge**: Waterfall showing gross SOTP uplift, minus tax leakage, separation costs, dis-synergies, and incremental public-company costs, arriving at net value creation - **Risk factors**: Top 3–5 risks to the thesis (regulatory, execution, market, management entrenchment) - **Recommendation**: Probability-weighted expected value of the activism campaign relative to current share price ## Quality Checks - Confirm all segment EBITDA figures reconcile to consolidated EBITDA after eliminations and unallocated corporate costs - Verify that comparable company multiples are sourced from the same fiscal period and adjusted for non-recurring items - Ensure tax-qualification analysis flags every element that depends on specific fact patterns with [VERIFY] - Cross-check separation cost estimates against disclosed costs from recent comparable spin-offs (e.g., SEC filings of completed separations) - Validate that the value bridge accounts for all friction costs — no "free" discount closure assumed - Confirm debt covenant analysis reflects the most restrictive indenture or credit agreement terms currently in effect
Related Skills
evaluating-syncope
Risk-stratifies syncope presentations using San Francisco, Canadian, and OESIL rules. Use when evaluating syncope, determining admission criteria, or risk-stratifying fainting episodes.
evaluating-abdominal-emergencies
Structures abdominal pain workups with differential by quadrant and surgical consultation criteria. Use when assessing acute abdomen, determining imaging needs, or identifying surgical emergencies.
modeling-sum-of-parts-valuations
Builds SOTP valuations for conglomerates and multi-segment companies with segment-appropriate methodologies. Use when valuing diversified companies, calculating conglomerate discounts, or modeling segment breakups.
evaluating-transition-bonds
Structures transition bond analysis with credibility assessment and transition plan evaluation. Use when evaluating transition bonds, assessing issuer transition plans, or analyzing climate transition financing.
evaluating-sustainability-linked-loans
Structures SLL analysis with KPI assessment, margin ratchet evaluation, and ambition verification. Use when evaluating sustainability-linked loans, assessing SLL KPIs, or analyzing margin ratchets.
evaluating-social-bonds
Structures social bond analysis with eligible population targeting, impact metrics, and SBP alignment. Use when evaluating social bonds, assessing social bond frameworks, or measuring social outcomes.
evaluating-investment-opportunities
Structures PE/VC investment evaluation with business model assessment, market analysis, and return potential. Use when evaluating deals, screening investment opportunities, or assessing company fit.
evaluating-green-bonds
Structures green bond analysis with use-of-proceeds verification, impact reporting, and ICMA alignment. Use when evaluating green bonds, verifying green credentials, or analyzing sustainable debt.
evaluating-fintech-business-models
Structures fintech company analysis with unit economics, customer acquisition, and regulatory moat assessment. Use when evaluating fintech companies, analyzing unit economics, or assessing fintech business models.
analyzing-shareholder-activism
Tracks activist investor campaigns with thesis analysis and outcome assessment. Use when monitoring activist situations, analyzing proxy fights, or evaluating activist theses.
evaluating-upstream-energy-assets
Assesses upstream oil and gas assets with reserve estimation, production decline curves, and net asset value modeling. Use when evaluating E&P assets, analyzing reserve reports, or modeling upstream economics.
evaluating-timber-and-agriculture-assets
Assesses timberland and agricultural investments with biological growth rates, harvest economics, and land value appreciation. Use when evaluating timber investments, analyzing farmland, or assessing biological asset returns.