Re: Quick question
It's only normal when you're dealing with a buying company run by idiots, although I'll grant you that's sadly common, especially with cash rich globo-corporations spending other people's money. I've been involved in M&A where there's been no break fee. Seems to occur when the seller's advisors spot that the buyer is a slavering idiot, blind to everything except the idea of making an acquisition.
Both buyer and seller hope to gain something through a transaction. What genuine logic is there for one side to cover the other's costs in any event? Any director would have to be a total Jeremy Hunt to sign on for huge liabilities in respect of events outside their control. What would have happened if Intel had said no to break clauses? Tower would have had to either accepted their share of the risk or walked away, and if the latter who else was going to be popping up with five billion in cash, and a belief in "strategic fit"?