Company: APO
Filing Date: 2025-05-12
Form Type: S-4/A
Source: 0001193125-25-117912
Chunk: 81

Company: Apollo Global Management, Inc.
Filing Date: 2025-05-12
Form: S-4/A
Chunk 81
---
discussions with various potential counterparties. In light of the progress made with various bidders, the Bridge Board, on the recommendation of the special committee, determined it was appropriate for Latham and Cravath to begin drafting a
definitive merger agreement to be shared with Apollo and other potential counterparties for their review and markup as part of the second round of the bid process.

On July 3, 2024, on behalf of the special committee, representatives of Lazard and J.P. Morgan circulated second round process letters to
Apollo and Bidder B, which included a deadline of July 31, 2024 for a definitive

45

proposal. The second round process letter sent to Apollo additionally included a request for a markup of the draft merger agreement by July 31, 2024. Given the preliminary nature of Bidder
B’s proposal on May 28, 2024, the second round process letter sent to Bidder B included a request for a term sheet outlining the structure and key terms for its proposed transaction by July 31, 2024.

On July 8, 2024, the special committee held a meeting with representatives of Cravath and Lazard. At the meeting, Mr. Leat reported
to the special committee that, following the July 2, 2024 call with Apollo, Mr. Morse had conveyed to Mr. Leat that Bridge’s management team would like to propose retaining approximately 40% of the total equity interest in Bridge
in order to move forward with the May 2024 Proposal. Representatives of Cravath discussed with the special committee the equity retention proposed by Bridge’s management, including the potential impact on the consideration received by
Bridge’s management team and the unaffiliated stockholders in a potential transaction. Following extensive discussion, the special committee decided to permit Bridge’s management team to propose their 40% equity retention to Apollo for a
range of reasons, including (a) the fact that the unaffiliated stockholders could nevertheless receive an attractive premium in a transaction with Apollo, (b) the potential to request additional value for the unaffiliated stockholders if
Apollo were willing to consider the proposed equity retention, (c) that the proposed transaction with Bidder B involved a buyout solely of the unaffiliated stockholders and (d) the need for Bridge’s management team, in their capacity
as significant stockholders of Bridge, to ultimately support any potential transaction that might be pursued with Apollo. Following discussion, the