Company: CTLPP
Filing Date: 2025-07-24
Form Type: DEFM14A
Source: 0001140361-25-027048
Chunk: 76

Company: CANTALOUPE, INC.
Filing Date: 2025-07-24
Form: DEFM14A
Chunk 76
---
. The offer letter included a schedule of diligence items required by Party C before Party C would be in a position to execute definitive documentation, and Party C requested that Cantaloupe enter into an exclusivity agreement providing for exclusive negotiations for 15 business days. Party C also submitted a revised draft of the merger agreement and a draft, unexecuted debt commitment letter. The draft merger agreement provided by Party C included, among other things, a proposed company termination fee of 4.5% of Cantaloupe’s equity value.

During the morning of June 11, 2025, the Transaction Committee held a meeting with members of Cantaloupe’s management and representatives of King & Spalding and J.P. Morgan present. Representatives of J.P. Morgan updated the Transaction Committee on the offers received from potential acquirors and the transaction process to date, including that Cantaloupe’s management and representatives of J.P. Morgan had discussed a sale of Cantaloupe with 36 potential acquirors, of which 27 were financial acquirors and nine were strategic acquirors. Cantaloupe’s management and representatives of J.P. Morgan then provided their preliminary view of the offers received from 365, Party C, Party D and Party B and Party I on June 10. Cantaloupe’s management and representatives of J.P. Morgan described to the Transaction Committee that the June 10 365 Proposal and the June 10 Party D Proposal had no material contingencies, while the June 10 Party C Proposal and the June 10 Party B Proposal had material contingencies and would require more time before Party C or Party B and Party I was prepared to sign definitive documentation, including, in the case of Party B and Party I, time required for Party B and Party I to obtain financing for a potential transaction.

Next, representatives of King & Spalding reviewed the draft merger agreements submitted by 365, Party D and Party C with their respective proposals. Representatives of King & Spalding compared the terms of the draft merger agreements submitted by 365, Party C and Party D, including terms related to the financing, remedies of the parties and certain regulatory matters, and how such terms of the merger agreements affected the timing and certainty of closing. Representatives of King & Spalding advised the Transaction Committee that the draft merger agreement with Party D had no material outstanding issues and that representatives of King & Spalding could quickly finalize the terms of the merger agreement with representatives of Party D’s outside