Yet industry experts say they are flummoxed when asked to explain CBRE's setting its cap for G&E. According to William C. Marks, senior research analyst with San Francisco-based merchant banking organization Jolson Merchant Partners Group LLC, the proposed acquisition raises more questions than it answers. "I don't think it makes sense but I'm sure we'll hear some good reasons," he tells GlobeSt.com. "Grubb & Ellis recently hired what seems to be a strong management team."

Moreover, "when two national companies merge and have competing offices, you will likely lose a lot of brokers," Marks notes. "Grubb & Ellis could actually have revenue losses instead of revenue synergies." The analyst also questions CBRE's ability to finance a G&E buyout. "CBRE will have to come up with extra equity to pay for the deal and I think it may be a challenge finding an interested equity partner."

Other industry watchers echo Marks' questions regarding the wisdom of CBRE going into debt to buy such a potentially redundant asset. "What new technology, capability, patent or license is being sought?" asks one observer. "What new market areas or services will be expanded? What new operating economies of scale will emerge post-merger? The proposed merger appears to offer few obvious answers. Ultimately, one must ask, 'how does this add value for the client?'"

"More brokers create more overhead without changing the size of the commercial brokerage pie," states another perplexed expert, who goes on to ask, "Wouldn't CBRE be better off if G&E failed, or are they playing defense against Cushman & Wakefield? The new reality for everyone is that commissions are falling, and the correct survival strategy is yet to emerge."