According to the terms presented to investors, Sidara is offering Wood 30 pence per share. Depending on the reporting, this proposal values the company at approximately £216–£242 million, and it has been referred to internally as a recommended cash acquisition.
The UK engineering company Wood Group has agreed to a lifeline from Sidara, a company based in Dubai, which could stabilize the troubled company and change its immediate future. Following a year-long pursuit, the proposed deal, which includes a $450 million capital infusion along with Sidara’s agreement to assume a significant portion of Wood’s debt, represents the most tangible step to date in resolving the group’s funding and governance issues.
According to the terms presented to investors, Sidara is offering Wood 30 pence per share. Depending on the reporting, this proposal values the company at approximately £216–£242 million, and it has been referred to internally as a recommended cash acquisition. Importantly, the deal would see Sidara assume about $1.6 billion of Wood’s obligations and provide up to $450 million in new funding, divided between an upfront interim facility and a subsequent “new money” tranche meant to bolster liquidity.
The offer is a direct admission of how much Wood’s fortunes have declined for a company that was once worth over £5 billion. Poor acquisitions, most notably the £2.2 billion acquisition of Amec Foster Wheeler in 2017, a series of troublesome contracts, frequent restatements, and criticism of the company’s governance that undermined investor confidence are all well-documented. Due to these legacy problems, Wood had few financing options and was under increasing pressure from shareholders and lenders to find a clear solution.
Sidara, a private, engineering-led organization with a global presence, has presented the relocation as a strategic opportunity as opposed to a simple rescue. Sidara’s public declarations and materials distributed to Wood’s investors emphasize a desire to preserve the Wood brand, safeguard employment, and use the company as the basis for a larger Energy & Materials division. The pitch emphasizes investing in client relationships and offering “greater stability,” indicating a desire to restore rather than undermine the company’s commercial standing.
Critics who contend that the transaction’s economics strongly favour the buyer will not be deterred by that message. In comparison to Wood’s historic market peak, Sidara’s effective cost of control is substantially lower due to the low per-share price and the assumption of existing debt. The question for shareholders now is whether a quick, certain, but small payment is better than the unpredictable possibility of a protracted restructuring that could render equity worthless. The tipping point has shifted in Sidara’s favor, according to recent shareholder votes and board recommendations.
In terms of operations, the capital infusion is meant to facilitate the renegotiation of Wood’s debt facilities and offer short-term headroom while longer-term integration and reorganization plans are formulated. A number of conditional steps, such as modifications and extensions to current facilities, the implementation of new guarantees, and regulatory approvals, are outlined in documents submitted by Wood and advisers and must be finished before full completion. Both lenders’ caution and Sidara’s wish to reduce risk are reflected in the funding’s staged nature.
The deal carries broader industry significance. It underlines the ongoing consolidation and repositioning within the global energy services sector, where digital and decarbonisation pressures have squeezed margins and heightened the need for scale and balance-sheet resilience. For Sidara, acquiring Wood offers a rapid lift in capability and geographic reach; for Wood, it offers the chance to reset under private ownership with the backing of fresh capital.
There are, however, clear execution risks. The acquisition is subject to a number of exceptional conditions-including lender consent and the publication of audited accounts-any of which could scuttle the transaction. Meanwhile, political and geopolitical sensitivities around foreign ownership of strategic engineering capability remain a live consideration in Westminster and among some institutional stakeholders.
