Some links on this page are affiliate links: if you buy through them we may earn a commission, at no extra cost to you.
Inktomi Corp. announced on November 14, 2002, that it would sell its enterprise-search software business to Verity Inc. for $25 million in cash, with Verity also assuming specified contractual and customer-support obligations. The transaction was not a sale of Inktomi itself: it was an asset sale that closed on December 17, 2002, as Inktomi narrowed its focus to Web search and Verity expanded its enterprise-software business.
What Inktomi announced
Inktomi, then under financial pressure and restructuring its operations, agreed to sell its corporate or enterprise-search software unit to Verity. Contemporary coverage reported the announcement on November 14, 2002; Inktomi filed an 8-K on November 15. The underlying asset-purchase agreement was dated November 13, and the companies expected the deal to close within roughly 30 to 60 days, subject to closing conditions.
The headline consideration was $25 million. That figure included cash consideration and was accompanied by Verity’s assumption of selected contractual obligations. It did not mean Verity was purchasing Inktomi Corp. or all of its products.
Recommended Free Tools
Contemporary reporting described the sale and the companies’ stated strategy. Inktomi’s SEC transaction filing provides the legal and asset-sale details.
#1 Best Overall
What Verity acquired
The transaction covered assets associated with Inktomi’s enterprise-search business, including:
- Basic search functionality
- Categorization capabilities
- Content-refinement technology
- XML technology assets
- Related enterprise-search business assets
- Selected customer contracts and associated support responsibilities
Verity also obtained an installed customer base that its president described contemporaneously as approximately 2,500 customers. That number should be treated as a company estimate, not as an independently audited count of active contracts. The customers used the software in settings such as intranets, extranets, portals, e-commerce sites and other information systems.
This was therefore more than a transaction for a generic search engine. It transferred an enterprise-information-retrieval product line, related technology and parts of the commercial relationship supporting it.
The Tool Desk
Outbyte Driver Updater FREEFix the driver behind crashes, sound loss and screen glitchesFind Drivers →Outbyte PC Repair FREERepair Windows errors before they cause bigger problemsFix Now →Why Inktomi sold the unit
For Inktomi, the sale was part of a broader restructuring rather than a routine product divestiture. Management said the company wanted to concentrate on Web search and that the proceeds would strengthen its cash position and help it move toward profitability on an EBITDA basis.
That profitability assessment was management’s stated expectation, attributed at the time to CEO David Peterschmidt; it should not be read as proof that the restructuring achieved that result. The company was also reducing its workforce and attempting to limit the cash demands of a business environment that had become difficult for technology vendors.
The sale separated the enterprise-software operation from the Web-search business Inktomi considered strategically central. It also provided liquidity at a time when the company was under significant financial pressure.
Why Verity wanted the business
Verity already sold enterprise information-management products to larger organizations. Inktomi’s assets offered a way to broaden that reach to smaller and medium-sized companies, individual departments within large enterprises and customers looking for search-only deployments.
The acquired technology complemented Verity’s wider “intellectual capital management” product strategy. Verity continued developing and supporting the software and later marketed it under the name Verity Ultraseek. The rebranding shows that the product line continued within Verity, but it does not mean every Inktomi product, contract or employee moved to the buyer.
Rank #3
The $25 million was not all paid immediately
Inktomi’s filings clarify the payment schedule:
- Approximately $22 million was paid at the December 17 closing.
- $3 million, plus applicable interest, was deferred for 18 months.
- The deferred amount could be reduced by indemnification claims.
Verity later reported that it paid the deferred $3 million, along with $67,500 in interest, on June 17, 2004. Describing the transaction as “$25 million upfront” would therefore be inaccurate. The payment terms are detailed in Inktomi’s filing and Verity’s later filing.
Employees and customers
Contemporary reporting said Verity planned to hire approximately 42 of the 50 employees Inktomi expected to lay off as a result of the sale. Inktomi SEC materials used a different figure, referring to an overall workforce reduction of approximately 58 employees connected with the transaction.
Those figures may cover different scopes: employees directly associated with the sold unit versus the wider restructuring. They should not be combined into a claim that all affected employees transferred to Verity. The available accounts support a more limited conclusion: Verity hired a substantial portion of the employees tied to the business, while Inktomi reduced its workforce overall.
Why the price looked so low
The transaction attracted attention because the $25 million price was far below the approximately $311 million Inktomi had reportedly paid in cash and stock for the underlying business or assets more than two years earlier. That earlier figure was given by Peterschmidt in contemporary reporting.
The comparison is striking, but it is not a like-for-like valuation. The assets, market conditions, revenue base, obligations and competitive outlook may not have been identical at the two dates. Contemporary observers characterized the sale as a fire-sale outcome, reflecting Inktomi’s distressed position. The price is best understood as evidence of the sharp deterioration in the market and Inktomi’s bargaining position, not as proof that the assets had one objectively correct value.
Announcement versus completed transaction
The chronology matters:
| Date | Event |
|---|---|
| November 13, 2002 | The asset-purchase agreement was dated. |
| November 14, 2002 | Inktomi publicly announced the planned sale to Verity. |
| November 15, 2002 | Inktomi filed an 8-K describing the agreement. |
| December 17, 2002 | The asset sale closed; approximately $22 million was paid at closing. |
| June 17, 2004 | Verity reported paying the deferred $3 million plus $67,500 interest. |
Calling the November announcement a completed acquisition misses the distinction between a proposed transaction and its later closing. The SEC filings describe the December 17 completion as an asset sale.
Independent reader supportYour contribution helps us test, update, and keep practical guides available for everyone.Accounting impact and the Yahoo! context
Inktomi reported a $12.4 million accounting gain on the sale. It also recorded approximately $3.7 million in employee-severance and other restructuring costs in the quarter ended December 31, 2002. These figures measure different things: the $25 million was transaction consideration, the $12.4 million was an accounting gain after applicable adjustments, and the $3.7 million represented restructuring expenses.
Quick wins for a faster PC:
Scan for outdated or missing drivers - takes under a minuteDriver Scan →Repair Windows errors before they cause bigger problemsFix Now →The enterprise-search operation was treated as divested or discontinued in related reporting. Soon afterward, on December 23, 2002, Inktomi and Yahoo! entered into a definitive agreement under which Yahoo! would acquire Inktomi for $1.65 per share in cash, according to Inktomi’s filing.
The timing places the Verity sale within Inktomi’s final restructuring period as an independent company. It does not establish that the Verity transaction itself caused Yahoo!’s acquisition. Rather, both events belonged to the broader process by which Inktomi reduced its scope and ultimately left the public-company market.
What the deal meant
The Verity transaction had opposite strategic meanings for the two companies. Inktomi traded a noncore enterprise-software operation for liquidity and a narrower Web-search focus while cutting costs. Verity gained technology, customer relationships and a product that could extend its reach beyond large enterprise-wide deployments.
It was also a snapshot of early-2000s technology consolidation. Enterprise search remained commercially valuable, but vendors under financial pressure could be forced to sell substantial technology businesses for a fraction of their earlier acquisition cost. For Inktomi, the sale was a defensive restructuring move; for Verity, it was an opportunity to acquire an established product line and installed base at a distressed-period price.
Quick Recap
Sources
- Computerworld: Inktomi to sell business search software unit to Verity
- SEC filing on the completed asset sale
- Inktomi filing describing the transaction terms
- Inktomi filing on the accounting and restructuring impact
- Verity filing on Ultraseek and deferred consideration
Product prices and availability are accurate as of the date/time indicated and are subject to change. Any price and availability information displayed on Amazon at the time of purchase will apply.
