No offense intended, but St. Louisans, in general, can be so insecure.
"Remains to be seen"? Although anything could happen, I trust Bayer will follow through - until they give clues otherwise. I think Monsanto CEO, Hugh Grant, likely promoted and advocated hard for St. Louis.
While St. Louis loses a major independent corporate HQs, it's still potentially good for St. Louis for a number of reasons.
If approved by regulators,
1. St. Louis will be the HQs for Bayer's Seeds and Traits as well as the North American Commercial HQs. STL is not being "thrown under the bus" - so to speak.
2. Bayer cannot renege on St. Louis. There are too many significant assets - researchers, structures, state-of-the-art greenhouses and labs and ag expertise in the region - especially on the Monsanto campuses. They will reassess their St. Louis assets and needs, surely, but Bayer will not leave those valuable assets vulnerable to competitors. They could even ADD to the local infrastructure possibly.
3. While there certainly will be HQs job losses - particularly in management duplications - this creates a big opportunity for spin-offs and new startups. The layoffs could bolster other local firms.
4. With Bayer, St. Louis will be associated with a HUGE global conglomerate - bigger than Monsanto.
5. Bayer could (I emphasize......could), bring/consolidate other work in St. Louis similar to what AB InBev did.
6. The Bayer name and presence alone
could help lure new firms - particularly biotech and plant science - to St. Louis.
7. St. Louis will potentially lose the Monsanto name
and potentially the stigma associated with the name. Bayer doesn't have a stigma.
8. With Pfizer planning a campus in Chesterfield and Bayer's new presence, I think it bolds WELL for more pharma activity and jobs in St. Louis.
9. Overall, the residual impacts are potentially positive for St. Louis - despite the loss of the independent corporate HQs.
A "gobble up" was inevitable after Monsanto failed to make a complimentary acquisition and
I think analysts helped to drive this merger because of industry consolidation. Monsanto was left dangling out in the big corporate ag community because of industry consolidations. It tried to grow by going after Syngenta and others - including Bayer Crop Science. It just couldn't get other firms to agree to acquisition - and it could've been due to Monsanto's international stigma and reputation. With consolidation in the industry, Bayer and Monsanto were among the largest left. And guess what? Bayer is a behemoth (and richer) moreso than Monsanto, which allowed it to swallow Monsanto with a cash offering.
Be prepared for all of the silly talk and lamenting about St. Louis' "declining" economy and its tragic "loss of another corporate HQs".
Although St. Louis' "economic prowess" has diminished on a national level as its economy has faced challenges in recent years - particularly as other faster-growing and competitor markets have surged - St. Louis' economy (GDP) is still growing as is its startup and venture capital communities. In regards to the local economy, the "seeds" have been planted and are being nurtured.
The acquisition of Monsanto is simply more evidence that St. Louis' economy is transitioning into the global economy, which in many ways is good. In upcoming years, don't be surprised if you hear more people speaking the German language around St. Louis as well as living in the area.
Nonetheless, St. Louis will be okay. And it still has more F1000 per capita than its peers.
