[ACademic]

M&A involves seeking synergies, plain and simple (cycleguy55 is correct).

Assume for a moment that Hoosier is accretive (helps the buyer make higher profit margins) to Continental's bottom line. The first people to go are usually Finance/Accounting and Human Resources, as the integration will bring both companies onto a common accounting and personnel framework. You don't need the redundancy...you eliminate that quickly to save money. Salesforce overlap will also be impacted fairly early on so some regional sales people will also be impacted. Consolidating IT departments can be a little tricky, but that eventually occurs, too. This is all typical post-M&A fact.

Hoosier will more than likely benefit from better purchasing power via Continental's larger enterprise-wide national agreements with key vendors. So they should actually MAKE more money per tire after the acquisition than before. If it's a niche market (it is), then expect price increases, too. So Continental wins twice...sells the same tires for more money AND reduce their costs.

Most senior management (except where there is overlap) will all be tied down to 2-3 year employment agreements with non-compete provisions. That will keep them fed until they either prove themselves worthy of being part of the larger organization (and the change in culture that will persist), or they will be leveraged out as some consolidation invariably takes place within the first two years of the acquisition. I was always jealous of the acquirees receiving those deals (guaranteed income).

Any Continental managers that kill the Hoosier brand/following/quality won't last three years. So Continental (and their senior management team) is heavily motivated to keep the brand very alive and for it to continue to prosper.

I've done M&A for over two decades so I would suggest that the naysayers relax a little and let the process work itself out.