May 20, 2011

Six Huge American Companies With Total Revenue Over $250 Billion That Will Never Have An IPO

24/7 Wall St.
May 19, 2011

Some, such as media company Bloomberg L.P., are in businesses controlled by their founders or their heirs and do not see the need to be answerable to public shareholders. Others, Including fast food chicken chain Chick-Fil-A, may be worried about comparisons to large public competitors such as McDonald’s Corp. (NYSE:MCD). Some including Perdue Farms probably wouldn’t go public now because investors remain concerned about rising commodities prices. Cargill, the agribusiness giant, may not see the point in going public since it already reports its earnings since its bonds are publicly traded. Cargill is the largest private firm in the US. Update: A company spokeswoman says that the firm has voluntarily reported its earnings for years and that it has nothing to do with its bonds being traded on the open market.

Then there are the expenses of being public. When Sarbanes-Oxley was enacted after a wave of corporate scandals in the late 1990s including Enron and WorldCom, many business leaders argued that the law’s costs -- which averaged about $3 million, far exceeding the SEC’s estimates of $91,000 excluding audit fees — were not worth its benefits. Some make that same argument today even though the public largely favored the law when it was enacted.

“Paradoxically, the companies that were most aggressive in manipulating earnings were the companies that benefited the most from SOX,” writes Cheryl L. Wade, Dean Harold F. McNiece Professor of Law at St. John’s University School of Law, in a 2008 article in the Loyola University Chicago Law Journal. “Because of SOX, investors believed the information they received was more reliable.”

Despite all the hoopla surrounding the big tech IPOs and the growth of the private stock market, the IPO market needs to be kept in perspective. As Renaissance Capital noted in January, China surpassed the US in 2010 in the IPO market and China-based companies accounted for one-third of US IPOs. Those figures were helped by the mammoth $16 billion General Motors IPO. It was the only U.S.-based company to rank among the world’s biggest IPOs.

“Despite GM’s blockbuster offering, average deal size fell 28% from 2009 to $251 million as several high-profile buyout firms pushed out their IPO plans, most notably Nielsen, HCA and Toys “R” Us. Of note, only five US companies raised more than $500 million in their IPOs, well below the trailing five-year average of 13 companies,” Renaissance Capital says.

Indeed, US IPOs showed a total return of 25% in 2010, which though better than 2008′s -33% and 2009′s 16% still lagged behind 2006′s 26% gain. Renaissance expects the 2011 IPO to increase this year. Venture capitalist William Quigly recently opined that the next 10 years will be “great” for tech company founders and the venture capitalists who back them.

Maybe Quigly has a point that addresses the high-fliers such as Facebook (more than $200 billion) valuation, Groupon’s estimated value of as much as $20 billion and Twitter’s $7.7 billion, that’s not the case for all companies. Some prefer to stay private because they don’t need the money or the aggravation. Here is our picks for firms that have never gone public and may stay private forever. It is in no particular order.

  1. Bloomberg L.P., the media company controlled by New York Mayor Mike Bloomberg, has been the subject of buyout rumors for years. I heard plenty of them myself when I worked there for seven years. None of them, including one involving Microsoft Corp. (NASDAQ:MSFT), proved to be true. Bloomberg, who owns a 68% stake in the company, has received buyout offers for years and turned them down. Fortune reported in 2007 that the mayor held discussions with private equity players that went nowhere.

    In any case, there is a pointed question to be asked of Mike about his sale explorations, and Fortune asked it in a phone conversation with him in January: “Considering how proud you are of this company, could you really sell it to a private-equity firm?” And he answered, “No, I couldn’t.”

    Besides, what would be the point? Bloomberg already is quite successful and has been one of the few media companies that have continued to expand during the economic slowdown. It even bought BusinessWeek in 2009 and has turned around the moribund publication. In 2008, it acquired Merrill Lynch’s 20% stake for $4.5 billion, which valued the entire firm at $25 billion. The value has probably increased more since then. Bloomberg the business person decided years ago not to discount his product even though that’s what his rivals did such as Dow Jones and Reuters did. Customers thought the service was worth the money. Revenue at the New York-based company reportedly rose from $4.6 billion in 2006 to $6.25 billion in 2010, according to Fortune and Forbes. Integrating Bloomberg’s unique business model and corporate culture into a larger organization would be exceedingly difficult. An IPO seems unlikely. A spokesperson could not immediately be reached for comment.

  2. Koch Industries Inc., which does everything from refine chemicals to make consumer products such as Brawny paper towels, clearly likes the flexibility that comes with being a private company. In 2007, CEO Charles Koch told Amity Shales of the Council on Foreign Relations that he found quarterly earnings to be “pernicious.” As Shales wrote:

    He said the old truism still held: If you, as a chief executive, obsess about delivering those “ever-increasing and predictable quarterly earnings, you are going to sacrifice long- term value.” He says only companies whose bosses the markets trust – such as Warren Buffett at Berkshire Hathaway Inc. – can focus on multiyear investments. In doing so, Buffett, the Sage of Omaha, has made a public company seem as if it is private.

    The Kochs are savvy business people who are also huge backers of conservative political causes. They also very successful. Revenue at the Kansas-based company was $100 billion last year, according to Forbes. Koch was not immediately available for comment.

  3. Chick fil-A offers something that many fast food customers never get — service. Workers are unfailingly polite and will even help customers carry their food to their tables. Later, they even go around to clean up trash and offer free soda refills. This attention to detail has paid off. Chick-fil-A, which owns more than 1,500 restaurants in 39 states, has posted 43 straight annual sales increases. Sales hit $3.58 billion in 2010 and rose 5.62% on a same-store basis, surpassing McDonald’s which rose 5%. What makes these figures even more impressive is that the chain is closed on Sunday. The family of founder S. Truett Cathy likes that Chick-fil-A is a family business and has vowed never to sell, a spokeswoman says.
  4. TV pitchman Jim Perdue is the third generation of his family to run Perdue Food Products. The food and agribusiness firm generates more than $4.6 billion in annual sales and is the third-largest poultry producer in the United States. Clearly, the Salisbury, Maryland firm, which has ruffled the feathers of environmentalists and animal rights activists takes pride is being “family run.” In fact, the corporate headquarters is across the street from the original Perdue family farm. That makes an IPO or sale seem unlikely. A spokesperson couldn’t be reached for comment.
  5. Cargill generated more than $109 billion in revenue last year, the most of any private company, according to Forbes. Cargill was founded at the end of the Civil War by William Wallace Cargill and his descendants have controlled the company ever since then. It probably too sees no reason to go public more than 140 years later, as the Minneapolis Star Tribune explained in January:

    When the late Margaret Cargill’s charitable trusts wanted to sell off their company stock to free up billions of dollars for philanthropy, their representatives suggested a typical approach for a major corporation — a public stock offering.

    But Cargill isn’t a typical major corporation.

    The proposal went nowhere with the roughly 100 descendants of the company’s early leaders who control the Minnetonka-based agribusiness behemoth. And the complex deal that ultimately emerged — selling Cargill’s $20 billion-plus stake in fertilizer giant Mosaic Co. — underscored their determination to to keep Cargill private, immune to the whims and scrutiny of Wall Street.

    An IPO or a sale seems as unlikely as ever. Cargill spokeswoman Lisa Clemens told 24/7 Wall St. that the firm has no plans to go public. “Through the years, our family shareholders have supported the benefits of private, patient capital,” she says in an email. “They continue to express support for private ownership.”

  6. Bechtel Corp. , the world’s largest construction and engineering firm,, takes pride in being a family run business. Its recent history, though, has been rough. “In the late 1990s, Bechtel, under the direction of its fourth-generation family scion, CEO and chairman Riley Bechtel, began pumping nearly $1 billion into a series of disastrously timed investments in everything from e-commerce plays to telecom start-ups to power plants,” according to a 2004 story in Business 2.0. Since its founding in 1898, four generations of Bechtels have lead company through 23,000 projects in 140 nations and seven continents including the Hoover Dam. Kuwait Oil Fires and the Channel Tunnel, and given the unpredictability of the construction business, it would make a poor candidate to go public. Wall Street likes predictable earnings. Its revenue in 2010 was $27.9 billion, down from $30.8 billion in 2009. Like the Kochs, the Bechtel’s are known for their ties to conservative political causes. Bechtel could not be reached for comment.

Private Equity Returns, Blackstone & Electricity (BX, DYN, KKR, NRG)


The Blackstone Group, L.P. (NYSE: BX) has agreed to purchase electricity generator Dynegy Inc. (NYSE: DYN). Blackstone will pay $4.50/share in cash, for a total of about $543 million, and assume Dynegy’s existing debt. The total deal is valued at about $4.7 billion. Blackstone’s cash offers represents a premium of 62% over Dynegy’s closing price last night of $2.78.

While just a tenth the size of the $48 billion deal that Kohlberg Kravis Roberts & Co. (NYSE: KKR) made for TXU in 2007, this is Blackstone’s largest ever acquisition of an electricity generation company.

The acquisition is expected to be completed by the end of 2010, and requires regulatory and shareholder approvals. Blackstone is not using any financing, instead putting up all the cash itself. Dynegy expects to issue a preliminary proxy statement within 15 days, and is permitted to seek other bids for a period of 40 days.

Blackstone has also entered into a deal with NRG Energy, Inc. (NYSE: NRG), in which NRG will purchase four natural gas-fired plants from Blackstone for $1.36 billion, once the acquisition of Dynegy is completed. The sale to NRG is contingent on the Dynegy acquisition.

That deal leaves Blackstone with a cash profit of about $800 million, but debt amounting to roughly $4.1 billion. The four plants represent about a third of Dynegy’s generating capacity, and 90% of its generating capacity in California, where three of the plants are located.

Blackstone says that it “look[s] forward to working together with Dynegy’s employees to realize the full potential of the company’s attractive portfolio of power generation assets.” Dynegy employees might not want to buy Blackstone-logo gear on the strength of that statement.

Dynegy shares are up about 60% this morning. Blackstone shares are off about 0.5%.

April 25, 2011

IPO Rethink: Apollo (and a Private Equity Curse?)

24/7 Wall St
March 15, 2011

The world of private equity is not what it once was, but the remaining private equity leaders that survived out there do now seem to be stronger if they survived.

Apollo Management has tried to come public in an Initial Public Offering before, but the deal has just not been able to make it out of the gate due to market conditions and timing issues. We were expecting an IPO to come fairly soon with a unit (equity in partnership interests) sale of up to almost $500 million. That may now be delayed.

Goldman Sachs, JPMorgan, and Bank of America Merrill Lynch were expected to lead the underwriting. Apollo has wanted to join the ranks of The Blackstone Group (NYSE: BX), Kohlberg Kravis Roberts & Co. (NYSE: KKR), and Fortress Investment Group LLC (NYSE: FIG) in the realm of public private equity.

CNBC reported earlier today that the current IPO, which has been three years in the making, is again being delayed though it’s unclear for how long. Too bad, because Reuters even noted that a price range was already being discussed. Is it fair to ask if Apollo’s market ambitions mark a top each time or if an unofficial hex is placed on the markets when it finally determines “now is the time” to come public? Probably not, but it is hard to not wonder about it.

In all fairness, private equity firms may not be much more intelligent than the rest of us. They may be just as prone to buying companies at the top of the market as Joe Retail. Some of the logic may be as simple as the thought that these firms are ‘smooth buyers’ in normal times but they can’t really be vultures as easily when capital markets are tighter. How many huge M&A deals were made by private equity buyers when share prices were in free-fall in 2008 and into 2009? It was not really until after a significant market rally and after the return of the credit markets came back that private equity firms were able to start aggressively making acquisitions again.

We have not been able to confirm whether Apollo is a dead IPO again or not. For now we’ll just take ‘market conditions’ at face value and assume that a private equity giant will remain private or that it will have to value itself a bit lower than it would have just a few days earlier.

April 24, 2011

Dynamic Applications Corp. Continues Development of Carbon Credit Generating Projects

A proposed initiative by President Barack Obama to establish a carbon credit trading program in the United States has been received well by Dynamic Applications Corp., a 'financier of emission reduction projects' which in-turn produce carbon credits. The company then sales the 'newly-produced carbon credits' on the carbon trading market.

AZoCleantech
April 16, 2010

Carbon credit trading presents a LUCRATIVE AND GROWING MARKET that encourages industrial entities to cut down on greenhouse gas emissions. President Obama hopes that the proposed initiative will help generate revenues for the economy and also reduce the total greenhouse gas emissions.

The budget plan of President Obama estimates revenues of $78.7 billion by 2012 by means of SELLING PERMITS TO POLLUTERS with greenhouse-gas emission. Estimates by the Congressional Budget Office indicate that revenues ranging from $50 billion to $300 billion per year can be produced from such an initiative.

Dynamic Applications Corp. operates by financing emission reduction projects which in-turn produce carbon credits. The produced carbon credits are sold by the company in the carbon trading market.

Dynamic Applications Corp.’s Chief Financial Officer Asher Zwebner commented that the market for carbon trading presents huge growth potential with negligible competition (see stories below).

Dynamic Applications Corp. Continues Development of Carbon Credit Generating Projects in Asia

Dynamic Applications Corp. is one of the players in the lucrative and growing carbon trading markets. It is one of the relatively few companies that is able to 'generate carbon credits' by 'financing private emissions reduction projects.' The company then takes the carbon credits, which they just 'produced,' and sales them on the open carbon trading market. The carbon trading market is a multi-billion dollar industry with tremendous growth potential and minimal competition.

PR Newswire
April 9, 2010

Dynamic Applications Corp. (OTCBB: DYAP), a facilitator of carbon credit generating projects, announced today that the company is continuing business development efforts to initiate projects in China and other Asian countries.

Dynamic Applications is currently in preliminary discussions with industrial entities in China and throughout Asia that are interested in reducing greenhouse gas emissions. The company's business model is to finance emission reduction projects that in-turn generate carbon credits. Dynamic Applications then participates in the sale of the newly-generated carbon credits on the open carbon trading market.

The carbon emissions trading program was established under the Kyoto Protocols which were put into effect in 2005. These protocols, signed by over 185 nations, were established to create limits on global greenhouse gas emissions. As such, a country may only exceed its emissions quota if excess carbon credit allowances are purchased from another entity.
"The carbon trading market is a multi-billion dollar industry, with tremendous growth potential and minimal competition," said Asher Zwebner, Chief Financial Officer of Dynamic Applications. "There are relatively few companies that are able to generate carbon credits by financing private emissions reduction projects."

"Dynamic Applications continues to negotiate towards lucrative carbon credit generating projects in China and throughout Asia. And we look forward to updating the market with continued developments," Zwebner added.
Dynamic Applications Corp. public filings may be viewed at http://www.sec.gov.

Contact:
CFO, Asher Zwebner
asher@fxmng.com
+972-54-464-6363

SOURCE Dynamic Application Corp

Dynamic Applications Corp., Based in Jerusalem, Israel, Has Negligible Competition in the Carbon Trading Market

On August 9, 2009, Dynamic Applications Corp., founded in 2008, entered into an areement with Green Biofuels Holding Ltd., an Israeli corporation, to contribute, convey, assign and transfer all of GBH's rights title and interest in specified Carbon Credit Projects. On the same date, Dynamic Applications Corp. agreed to issue to each of Mr. Shlomo Palas, Mr. Samuel Keshet and Mr. Eliezer Weinberg 7,178,750 shares of the common stock of the Company, which constituted an aggregate total of 21,538,250 of such shares. The share issuances were agreed to be accomplished by means of private placements of common stock, which relied on applicable exemptions from registration under U.S. securities laws.

Company Overview: Dynamic Applications Corp. focuses on manufacturing, marketing, and selling an electromagnetic percussion system that could be used as a chisel, a cutting tool, a magnet, and a coil. The company was founded in 2008 and is based in Jerusalem, Israel.

216 Jaffa Street
Jerusalem, Israel

Founded in 2008
Phone: 972 2 502 1322

Key Executives: Dynamic Applications Corp. does not have any Key Executives recorded.

Key Developments for Dynamic Applications Corp.:

Dynamic Applications Corp. announced delayed annual 10-K filing (04/1/2010)

On 04/01/2010, Dynamic Applications Corp. announced that they will be unable to file their next 10-K by the deadline required by the SEC.

Dynamic Applications Corp. Reports Earnings Results for the Third Quarter Ending Sept. 30, 2009 (11/9/2009): Dynamic Applications Corp. reported earnings results for the the third quarter ending Sept. 30, 2009. Net loss for the quarter was $37.61 million, down from $10.11 million for the same quarter the previous year (2008).

Dynamic Applications Corp. Enters into Co-Operation and Partnership Agreement with Green Biofuels Holding Ltd (08/10/2009)

Form 8-K for DYNAMIC APPLICATIONS CORP

10-Aug-2009

Entry into a Material Definitive Agreement, Creation of a Direct Financial Obligation

On August 9, 2009, Dynamic Applications Corp. (the "Company") entered into a Cooperation and Partnership Agreement with Green Biofuels Holding Ltd. ("GBH"), an Israeli corporation (the "Agreement"). Under the Agreement GBH agreed to contribute, convey, assign and transfer all of GBH's rights title and interest in specified Carbon Credit Projects. As compensation, the Company will pay GBH a compensation payment of 3% of the first six years of total gross income derived from an accepted project, from income paid to Dynamic or to any third party recruited by Dynamic to participate in such project or to any of its affiliated companies. The payment will apply only when the total gross income derived from the accepted project reaches 1 million Euros for the first time.

The Company further agreed to arrange financing of 44,000 Euro for a Fuxin Project within 10 days of the date of the Agreement, and 26,000 Euro for a coal mine and two projects in the Ukraine and Kazakhstan by August 27, 2009. In addition, the Company agreed to provide further financing for the benefit of these aforesaid projects in the amount of 100,000 Euro up until September 15, 2009 and 100,000 Euro up until October 1, 2009.

GBH agreed to a non-compete agreement for a period until 1 year following the date GBH or its affiliates owns, directly or indirectly any interest in the Company.

Private Placement Subscription Agreement

On the same date, the Company agreed to issue to each of Mr. Shlomo Palas, Mr. Samuel Keshet and Mr. Eliezer Weinberg (collectively, the "Recipients") 7,178,750 shares of the common stock of the Company, which constituted an aggregate total of 21,538,250 of such shares (the "Share Issuances"). The Share Issuances are subject to the prior finalization and approval of a stock plan relating to the common stock under applicable Israeli law by the Company and/or its Israeli subsidiary, which finalization and approval remains pending. The Recipients are officers, directors and/or shareholders in GBH. Mr. Weinberg was appointed as a director and Messrs. Palas and Keshet were appointed as employees of the Company's wholly-owned Israeli subsidiary.

The Share Issuances were agreed to be accomplished by means of private placements of common stock, which relied on applicable exemptions from registration under U.S. securities laws.

Forward-Looking Statements

Forward-looking statements in this report include matters that involve known and unknown risks, uncertainties, and other factors that may cause actual results, levels of activity, performance or achievements to differ materially from results expressed or implied by this report. Such risk factors include, among others: uncertainties as to the timing of the matters covered by the Agreement; costs related to the Agreement; availability and terms of capital and financing; the effectiveness of the carbon credits program; the timing and amount of any contracts agreements or rights relating to carbon credit projects; the success of prospect development and contract acquisition GBH and the Company relating to carbon credit projects; the relationship of the Company and GBH with owners of carbon credit projects; the impact of weather and the occurrence of disasters, such as fires, floods, and other events and natural disasters; government regulation of carbon credit industry; developments in China, Ukraine or Kazakhstan or other countries; the success of strategic plans, expectations and objectives for future operations of the Company. Actual results may differ materially from those contained in the forward-looking statements in this report. The Company undertakes no obligation and do not intend to update these forward-looking statements to reflect events or circumstances occurring after the date of this report. You are cautioned not to place undue reliance on these forward-looking statements, which speak only as of the date of this report. All forward-looking statements are qualified in their entirety by this cautionary statement.

Dynamic Applications Additional New Activity

PRNewswireOriginally Published on June 5, 2009

Dynamic Applications Corp. announced today that it has decided to enter the carbon credit market. This market was formed, in general, following the Kyoto Protocol, which required that signatory countries reduce their green house gases ("GHG") to set target levels.

Accordingly, a carbon credit market has evolved whereas activities that are recognized as reducing GHG levels, usually through technology utilization, are traded with activities that exceed their GHG limits. Consequently, a growing number of polluting plants around the world are trading carbon credits so they can achieve their allowed polluting levels.

According to public sources, the carbon credit market is estimated to involve trading of billions of dollars of carbon credits with constant growth streaming from growing demand by countries that are wishing to trade carbon credits in order to manage or reduce their levels of greenhouse gases.

The Company's carbon credit activity is added to its kenaf related activity, which Dynamic has recently initiated. The kenaf crop is used by many industries as an eco-friendly natural raw material. It is believed to have an extraordinary ability to absorb huge quantities of carbon dioxide and accordingly be entitled to carbon credit payment. Thus, Dynamic believes there is a direct synergy between the carbon credit activity and its kenaf activity of which it can benefit greatly.

Dynamic believes that it can utilize its sound networking, business development abilities and knowledge to take a share in the great opportunities that are provided by the carbon credit market.

About Dynamic

Dynamic focuses its activities in the clean tech sector and, among other initiatives, is investigating the market potential for kenaf. Kenaf is a fast-growing crop that, traditionally, has been used as a raw material for the production of ropes, bags and similar products. But, in recent years has been used in a wide range of new industrial applications, including the production of paper, bioplastics and environmentally friendly materials used in automobiles by manufacturers such as Toyota. Moreover, it has been integrated into the product lines of electronics companies such as NEC, Panasonic and others.

Researchers have suggested that kenaf may offer a broad range of environmental advantages, including the extraordinary capacity to absorb and store huge quantities of carbon dioxide, the gas most associated with the adverse effects of global warming. Accordingly, the appropriate use of kenaf might provide a substantial means of coping with global warming.

Currently, the Company is conducting a thorough survey of the kenaf market in China, which is the world's largest producer and the base for several major manufacturers incorporating Kenaf into their products.

In addition the Company has started a new activity in the carbon credit market.

Dynamic Applications Corp.
Mr. Ori Goore, CEO, 972(0)506335800 (see story below)
dynamicapplicationscorp@gmail.com
PR Office:Financial Communication
Mr. Noam Yellin, 972(0)544246720

Dynamic Applications Nominates Ori Goore as New CEO

Trading Markets
Originally Published on April 1, 2009

Dynamic Applications announced the nomination of Ori Goore to serve as a director and Chief Executive Officer of the company.

Until recently, Goore served as the Deputy Chief Executive Officer at Carmel Beach Resort 89, an affiliate of Delek Real Estate Group, a position he had occupied since July 2007. From October 2006 through July 2007 Goore was the senior economic advisor to the Chief Executive Officer at Delek Real Estate Group [Delek Group is one of the largest and most dynamic investment holding groups based out of Israel today investing in best of breed companies in four main sectors: energy, infrastructure, financial services and automotive].

Goore's appointment coincides with Dynamic's planned venture into the clean tech industry.

Goore said: "Dynamic sees that much of the world's attention is dedicated to current global environmental concerns. It believes that the clean tech industry can play a major role in providing solutions to some of the most acute challenges. By entering the clean tech industry Dynamic intends to contribute to both improving world environmental conditions and creating value for its shareholders."

(DYAP) has Short Term PowerRatings at TradingMarkets. Details on (DYAP) Short Term PowerRatings is available at this Link.

Hoover's Profile: Delek Group Ltd.

Delek Group Ltd.
Bet Adar Bldng., 7 Giborei Israel St., New Industrial Park
Netanya (South) 42504, Israel
Tel. +972-9-863-8444
Fax +972-9-885-4955

Type: Public
On the web: http://www.delek-group.com
Employees: 12

Delek Group is a conglomerate that primarily sells refined oil products and lubricants. Operating a network of more than 230 gas stations Delek Petroleum is one of the largest gasoline retailers in Israel. It's Delek US Holdings operates about 500 MAPCO-branded gas stations in the US (in Tennessee). Delek also operates about 1,300 gas stations in Europe. Delek Investments and Properties acts as holding company for subsidiaries in the energy, infrastructure, automotive, media, insurance, and finance sectors. Delek Group has spun off its real estate unit (Delek Real Estate) but retains a 64% share. The Delek Group is controlled by Israeli mogul Yitzhak Tshuva, owner of New York's Plaza Hotel.

The Israel Securities Authority Raids Delek Real Estate Ltd. Offices (12/6/2009)
The Israel Securities Authority is investigating whether Delek Real Estate Ltd. made improper accounting measures to inflate the value of foreign properties. Securities Authority investigators raided the company's offices in Ramat Gan, and questioned CEO Eran Meyital and CFO Daniel Leventhal. The events under investigation occurred before either man was appointed to his present post. So far as is known, the Securities Authority opened the investigation several weeks ago in the wake of the sudden resignation of former CEO Yarom Oren, who replaced longstanding CEO Ilik Rozansky in July, after his eight years in the job. Delek Real Estate went public during Rozansky's tenure.

April 1, 2011

The invisible money power behind these secretive private equity firms are the same international bankers that engineered the worldwide banking crisis, with the goal of consolidating the world's wealth into their hands.

Will Private Equity Be the Next Meltdown?

By Barbara Kiviat, TIME
November 24, 2009

Over the past decade, some 3,000 U.S. companies have been bought by private-equity firms. Their M.O.? Suck up companies with borrowed money, make them more efficient and then resell, turning a profit in the process.

These days, nearly 1 in 10 nongovernmental employees works for a private equity–owned company, and that, says longtime industry reporter Josh Kosman, is a big problem. In his new book, The Buyout of America: How Private Equity Will Cause the Next Great Credit Crisis, Kosman argues that private-equity firms not only pillage the companies they buy, but also put the broader economy at risk by making those companies take on copious amounts of debt.

TIME's Barbara Kiviat spoke with Kosman about where he thinks the industry is headed.

You predict that private equity will go through a shakeout similar to what we've seen in the housing market. How does that analogy work?

Private-equity firms used the same cheap credit to buy companies that caused the housing bubble.

There are about 100 of these firms — KKR, Blackstone and Carlyle are some of the bigger ones — and they buy a company the same way we would buy a house. Put down about 20% and borrow about 80%. The big difference is, the company they're buying borrows the 80%, so they're the ones responsible for repayment. These loans were structured the same way and sold to the same people as mortgages. And the same kind of crazy prices were paid, so unfortunately we probably are going to see a private-equity meltdown just like what we saw in the housing market.

How bad do you think it will get?

The opinions on this shift, but the Boston Consulting Group in late 2008 predicted that about 50% of the companies bought in leveraged buyouts would default on their debt. If half default, and they fire about half of their workers — not the most aggressive estimate — then you're talking about 1.9 million unemployed.

Why haven't we seen more evidence of this yet?

I think the media hasn't put it together, but it actually is starting. The default rate for the past 12 months is roughly 12% — that's very high. Half of those companies that have defaulted, according to Standard & Poor's, had some type of private-equity involvement in their corporate life. A lot of those are PE-owned companies, ranging from Chrysler to the Tribune Company to Simmons Bedding. We've already seen the tip of the iceberg.

More broadly, what sorts of companies should we be worried about?

Unfortunately, private-equity firms infiltrated almost every industry — industrials, consumer goods, retail, hospitals, utilities — so a leveraged-buyout bust will be very widespread. TXU, which is now called Energy Future Holdings, one of the largest utilities in Texas, faces huge problems. They probably won't default on their debt until 2013, but at this point, and this is according to ratings agencies, it looks like they have very little chance of paying their debt. The range is from a huge utility like that to HCA, the largest hospital chain in the country.

And you think the private-equity industry will be the next one to line up for bailout money?

Yes. It's already happened with GMAC. You know, private-equity firms are very well connected. Four of the last eight Treasury secretaries currently work for private-equity firms.

Is there anything we could do now to prevent this wave from coming?

Probably not much. One of the main points of the book is to show how private equity and leveraged buyouts don't work, and even if the credit crisis I'm predicting doesn't happen — even if the economy recovers and some of the companies can refinance and push their debt off — the core practice is still destructive.

Many of these companies will fall apart anyway. In the 1980s, when Michael Milken was funding buyouts, 52% of the biggest 25 companies acquired ended up going bankrupt. I did a study of the 1990s, ideal economic times, and with 6 of the 10 biggest buyouts, the companies clearly were worse off 10 years later. In three cases the results were mixed, and in one case the private-equity firm improved the business.

This decade, 6 of the 10 biggest buyouts are already considered distressed, according to Moody's. The core practice does not work and rips apart our economy.

Fairy Tales of Recovery, Reality of More Failures

By Bob Chapman, The International Forecaster
September 3, 2009

The Illuminists are desperate. They are appealing the Bloomberg directive to reveal who received funding from the Federal Reserve to keep from going bankrupt.

In addition, HR 1207 (Federal Reserve Transparency Act) will pass in the House this month. The question is in what form. No matter what happens, the Illuminati know we are hot on their trail. They have to do everything possible to end the depression, or go for broke.

Thus far there has been little recovery even with an official $23.7 trillion committed by the Treasury and the Fed. This number alone shows you how serious this situation is.

The banking sector is still broke and is using TARP funds to buy out failing smaller banks. The residential TARP funds returned will go toward helping bail out the collapsing commercial real estate industry. Quantitative easing has not worked, nor has TARP and the endless stream of money from TALF.

We are anxious to see if the FASB sticks to its guns and demands mark-to-market accounting. That will pull the cover off of the fraud known as mark-to-model, which really is mark to whatever you want it to be.

As you can now see this is a much deeper problem than a subprime problem - that just triggered events. As we pointed out before, we are still facing a new wave of subprime loans written over the past year by FHA, Ginnie Mae, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, plus ALT-A, Option ARMS Pick-and-Pay Loans, and the failure of prime loans that will stretch to 2013.

On top of that, we have commercial real estate loans now to deal with and credit card failure. This is what the Illuminati crime syndicate has brought you in their lust for more power and riches. We must not forget as well, standing in the wings, are America’s creditors, especially the Chinese who are dumping $25 billion to $100 billion in dollar denominated assets monthly. Their goal is to be out of dollar paper in another 1 1/2 years.

Then there are the other sellers. There are few buyers, so the Fed will have to monetize trillions of dollars in dollar denominated bonds, which presently they are doing secretly. It is no wonder they are terrified of an audit, which would not only uncover their illegal activities, but also expose their leadership and participation in the outrageous suppression of gold and silver prices.

The status of foreign creditors could turn on a dime. We predict they will abandon ship one at a time, as the dollar slips lower and lower. The Fed and the Treasury have tried over and over to keep the USDX, dollar index, over 80 for weeks, and they have been totally unsuccessful. It settled this past Friday at 78.31, just ready to break to new lows. We wonder how long these countries will tolerate such arrogance and the dream of world government? One must remember these countries are suffering the fallout of the actions that have been deliberately executed by these Illuminists, and they are not happy about that. They are all suffering recession and many depression. It is only a matter of time before they too dump dollar denominated assets.

We would like to say for individuals caught up in this mess worldwide, other currencies are not the answer. Only gold and silver related assets are the answer. Remember that, for in the final analysis, all currencies will fall in value versus gold and silver, and there are no exceptions. We have been there before and seen that, so do not be deluded into going into other currencies, or shares in foreign markets denominated in other currencies; they are not the answer, only gold and silver are.

Then we hear the fairy tales of recovery in the US, Europe and Asia. If you spend enough money you can create a recovery, albeit of short duration. No one is out of the woods. Europe, particularly the eurozone, has cut issuance of money and credit to 3.7%, but they are maintaining interest rates at 1%, which is in reality ½%. The European recovery will be a parallel movement for a year, and without more cheap money or an increase in money and credit, it will die and wither away.

Then there are the ongoing real estate collapses in the US, Ireland, Spain and in the Persian Gulf. There could be a bank panic or holiday in any of these regions. If a panic occurs, the first liquid asset sold will be US Treasuries and Agencies and the US dollar. This would spread terror in Frankfurt, Paris, London and NYC. All these stock exchanges could collapse as well.

The world is about to find out that free trade and globalization has been a disaster.

The millions of jobs lost in the US and Europe, so that transnational conglomerates could prosper, is in the final stages of death. The redistribution of wealth from the rich to the poor countries is about to end in a shattering smash-up. The myth of worldwide prosperity is about to end.

Contrary to prevailing thought, the biggest losers will be world exporters, such as China, which has already seen a 40% fall in exports. All the money and credit creation we have seen in China over the past seven months, some $1.9 trillion, isn’t going to work. They still face 30 million unemployed. Those jobs are not going to return for a long time, if ever. Out of desperation, there eventually will be tariffs (legislated in the US, Europe and in other countries), and inflation will rise as a result.

In America, the safety net of the FDIC doesn’t exist. It is virtually broke, and that is why, a few months ago, unofficially the FDIC asked government for $500 billion. Putting this into perspective, about $700 billion would insure about 1% of all the qualifying deposits in the US.

Not only will the Federal Reserve Transparency Act, HR-1207, pass the House, but also it will pass the Senate, because you are going to write every Senator demanding that they pass it.

If passed, we will see our gold inventories. We’ll find out what toxic garbage the Fed has been buying from banks and what they have paid for it. We will find out every company that received funds and how they were spent. We will subpoena every piece of correspondence, fax, e-mail, and phone calls the Fed has ever made. We will get a real balance sheet; not some version the GAO approved. Wait until the public sees how the Fed and its owners have looted the people for almost 100 years.

Two Republican lawmakers, Darrell Issa, (R-CA) and Rep. Spencer Bachus, (R-OK), House Financial Services ranking members, are seeking an audit of the trust that manages the government’s controlling stake in AIG.

Three more U.S. banks failed on Friday, bringing the total to 84 so far this year, as the industry continues to grapple with deteriorating loans on their books. Regulators shuttered Affinity Bank of Ventura, California, Bradford Bank in Baltimore, and Mainstreet Bank of Forest Lake, Minnesota, which in total are expected to cost the government’s deposit insurance fund about $446 million. 



The Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. on Thursday reported that the insurance fund’s balance stood at $10.4 billion at the end of the second quarter. But the agency also noted that the figure was adjusted to account for $32 billion set aside for expected failures over the next year. FDIC Chairman Sheila Bair said this week that bank failures will remain elevated as banks go through the painful process of recognizing loan losses and cleaning up balance sheets. The total of 84 failures this year marks a sharp rise over the 25 last year, and the three failures in all of 2007.

We stated long ago the somewhere between 3,400 and 4,200 banks would go under, and the FDIC would spend trillions of dollars to cover the loses. A loss of 3,400 banks would lead to losses of over $33 trillion.

The FDIC now has foreign banks and private equity groups about to engorge themselves on failing US banks. Worse yet, rather than cash, the FDIC is allowing these financial firms to use equity, which is unprecedented. The use of non-cash collateral assets is being used because the purchasing banks are broke; and without TARP, not only could they not buy anything, but they’d probably be out of business.

What Ms. Bair has done has been to expedite the takeover of banks by bigger banks and involved the use of foreign banks as well as private equity partnerships.

As far as we are concerned, as a foreigner, you have to be deranged to buy dollar denominated assets with the massive monetization of agency securities, collateralized debt obligations, and treasuries going on, never mind the underhanded secret deals the Fed is involved in to fund their markets. If we can understand what the Fed is up too, so can these foreigners. That is what a more than $600 billion swap facility is all about, including suppression of foreign currencies in order to bolster the strength of the dollar.

This month, September, a great confusion will begin. The occupation of Iraq will continue, more troops will be sent to Afghanistan, and Pakistan will become another major battleground. Terrorism will be used to continue to propagandize the American public, along with Cap & Trade and medical reform and the Swine Flu fiasco. These are all distractions to keep the publics’ eye off the continued failure of our financial system.

Deflation continues to eat away at assets, except for gold and silver, and the Fed creates money and credit to offset deflation’s savages.

The torrent of money and credit has pulled some nations, at least temporarily, out of the negative decline on GDP. Japan, France and Germany are examples. The question is when will their economies run out of stream? Probably when they attempt to raise interest rates. In the case of the eurozone, the expansion of money and credit has already fallen 3.7%.

The global economic crisis, now more than two years old, has allowed governments to run banking and financial systems in a usurpation of power over the individual and private property. What we are facing is perpetual crisis and intended government control. There will not be a return to normality. Next will come food shortages and rationing, and one epidemic or pandemic after another.

We wonder what will happen when the public finds out that all these problems were preplanned by the Illuminati. Then comes the control of all labor. Government is now spending 185% of tax receipts. The budget deficit will be between $1.6 and $2.00 trillion for fiscal 2009, ending on 9/30/09.

For those who hadn’t noticed, yoy commercial real estate values fell 27% and are off 36% from their October 2007 peak. We'll see a total drop of 70% to 75% from the highs, when all is said and done. Refinancing has to be found for $165 billion in properties by the end of the year, which is impossible, even with leftover TARP funds.

Deflation has prices somewhere between minus 2% to plus 5% worldwide as imports and exports have fallen over 30%. As an example, in Los Angeles, the busiest port in the US, imports have fallen 16.9% yoy. It is the exporters who are getting hit the hardest and some have cut prices in the process.

The only thing that keeps a veneer of equilibrium is the massive creation of money and credit pumped out by central banks worldwide. We said we had entered depression this past February; and just as when we called the beginning of recession two years before, no one shared our opinion. If we are not in depression, than what is the significance of 20.8% unemployment, a factory utilization level of 65%, and continued massive foreclosures?

As we have said over and over again, the Fed, Treasury, Wall Street and banking are in a box and they cannot get out. They deliberately created this horrible situation, and there is no going back. It is impossible to reverse the process. We are in an economic and financial depression. The palliative supposedly is bigger budget deficits and credit expansion into infinity. We are going to see a replay of the 1970s. Inflation will catch up and overtake deflation one more time, but in the end deflation will prevail.

Fiscal spending is running wild, and our president predicts a budget deficit of $9 trillion dollars over the next ten years. The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) says spending has to be cut 8% permanently over the next several years. In July alone, federal spending rose 26%, as revenues fell 6%. Corporate tax receipts fell 58%, as individual revenues fell 21%.

The official economic contraction is the worst since the great depression. Can you imagine what it really is? 9.4% unemployment is front-page news, but you didn’t hear about the 4.7% loss in salaries and wages of 4.7% for the 12 months ended in June. There are more government employees now than all those employed in manufacturing and construction.

How is it that state employees now make 40% more than the average income in non-governmental jobs? What a perversion of government. It is no wonder that the US poverty rate is higher than in Mexico and Turkey.

FDIC Revises Rules to Favor Takeover of Banks By Private Equity Firms

Reuters
August 27, 2009

U.S. regulators backed down from the tough stance they took a month ago on rules for auctions of troubled banks, clearing the way for more private equity bidders to come back into the game.

A capital requirement for private equity investments in banks was lowered to a Tier 1 common equity ratio of 10 percent, from the 15 percent Tier 1 leverage ratio previously proposed.

The regulators also dropped a requirement that investors serve as a "source of strength" for the bank they buy, which critics said could have put them on the hook for more capital if the institution struggled.

A cross-guarantee proposalmeaning if an investor owns more than one bank , the FDIC can use the assets of the healthier bank to cut losses from the one that has falteredwas modified to only include investors that had an 80 percent common ownership of the two banks...
"On the whole, it's favorable to private equity. It's positive in terms of attracting private equity money," said Brett Barragate, a partner with the Jones Day law firm...
The FDIC also said it would seek comment about whether to phase in the impact on banks' capital requirements of an accounting change that requires institutions to bring off-balance sheet assets back on their books.

A New Abuse on Wall Street

By Robert Kuttner, The Boston Globe
August 11, 2009

...One new abuse that should be stopped before it spreads: big private equity companies, which are largely unregulated, are hungry to take over failed banks. Their argument is that the banks need new capital, and the private equity firms have it. But this is a profoundly bad idea.

Today, the FDIC is sitting on an inventory of failed banks that it needs to unload, and an insurance fund that it needs to replenish. Enter shadowy and unregulated private equity outfits like the Carlyle Group and Blackstone Capital, who are circling like vultures. The FDIC has done the hard part — at taxpayer expense: it has eaten the losses and cleaned up the failed banks’ balance sheets, making them appetizing targets...

In earlier deals, the FDIC has bent its own rules somewhat: it doesn’t permit any single private firm to own a bank, but in the $32 billion collapse of Indy Mac last year, the agency permitted a consortium of private equity firms to be the buyer.

Last month, the FDIC proposed to toughen its policy. It put out a draft policy statement for comment, signaling that it would prefer to merge failed banks with other banks, or to find investors other than private equity conglomerates. It proposed to prohibit self-dealing by firms acquiring failed banks, and to exclude firms based in offshore tax-havens. And if a private equity firm acquired a bank, it would be required to have higher ratios of capital because of its inherently riskier business strategies.

The private-equity companies have mounted a fierce lobbying campaign to soften the terms, arguing that the banking industry needs the capital. But the FDIC, the rare agency in this whole crisis that has put the public interest first, should hold the line.

In financial crises, conflicts of interests by insiders tend to mutate. We got into this mess, after all, because federally guaranteed banks were behaving like compulsive gamblers. Let’s not repeat these abuses in new forms.

SEIU Proposes New Rules for Private Equity Investments in Nation's Struggling Banks

Service Employees International Union
August 22, 2009

With private equity firms publicly calling for radical change to banking regulations that would ease their investment into the nation's struggling banks, the Service Employees International Union (SEIU) today proposed new rules to protect consumers and working families against the buyout firms' riskiest practices, strengthen long-standing consumer protections, and support stronger banks.

The new principles called for by SEIU — the fastest-growing labor union in the Americas and a leading advocate for better private equity and banking practices — directly address recent moves by a number of leading private equity firms to win special treatment by the Federal Reserve allowing them to take over commercial banks but avoid the current transparency and oversight rules by which other investors must abide.

Allowing private equity to purchase controlling stakes in large banks would undermine long-standing banking regulations and consumer protections by permitting buyout firms to access subsidized funding in the form of FDIC-insured deposits. Special rules could allow buyout firms to sell themselves their own debt at a discounted rate from the banks they want to control.

Under the terms called for by the private equity industry, buyout firms would remain exempt from oversight and transparency rules governing bank holding companies. This kind of special treatment from the Federal Reserve could open the door for private equity firms to assume little responsibility if a bank fails, adding unacceptable risk to taxpayer bailouts of banks deemed "too big to fail" by federal regulators.

Private Equity Could Reshape U.S. Banking Industry

Reuters
May 22, 2009

After a disastrous foray into banking early last year, private equity is making a cautious comeback with deals such as the BankUnited takeover, and their return will likely change how the industry looks.

Regulators appear to be working with private equity firms looking to buy banks, and in the next year or two several U.S. regional lenders could end up in the hands of buyout funds, banking analysts said.
"I can't picture a 5,000-branch bank coming out of this. But could I see 300-, 400-, 500-branch networks stitched together? I think so," said Seamus McMahon, chief executive of bank consulting firm McMahon Advisory LLC.

"Private equity firms are going to have a lot of influence."
As real estate markets continue to crater, many of the 8,300 U.S. banks will suffer, and some will fail. Private equity funds, meanwhile, have roughly $1 trillion of untapped funds at their disposal.

Some buyout funds are dipping their toes in the water now.

Firms including Wilbur Ross's WL Ross & Co, Carlyle Group, Blackstone Group, and Centerbridge Partners teamed up to take over Florida-based BankUnited in a government-assisted deal announced on Thursday. The funds put in $900 million of their capital, and are receiving support in the deal from the government.

Earlier this year, private equity firm J.C. Flowers & Co. got together with other investors to take over assets of failed mortgage lender IndyMac. In December, MatlinPatterson Global Advisers LLC agreed to invest in Flagstar Bancorp Inc.

After winning the auction for BankUnited, the group led by former North Fork Bank head John Kanas intends to continue growing through further acquisitions that could be rolled into the new bank once it is fixed. One of the targets could be BankAtlantic Bancorp Inc. a person familiar with the consortium said. The source is anonymous because the plans are not public...

Private equity firms have to structure their deals carefully to stay below thresholds that would subject their entire firms to onerous banking regulations. So as many as eight investors pitched in to buy BankUnited. The largest stake holders are Ross, Carlyle and Blackstone, each holding between 20 percent and 24.9 percent, below the level they are deemed to be in control, the source said...

IndyMac: Private Equity Gets Smart About Banks

By Heidi N. Moore, Wall Street Journal Blogs
January 5, 2009

...This weekend, a group of seven private equity firms led by Dune Capital bought the carcass of failed Pasadena, Calif., mortgage lender IndyMac. The private-equity firms plan to rebuild it and use it as a platform to acquire other financial institutions, while overhauling IndyMac’s business model to steer clear of risky subprime mortgage loans. Because each of the firms are pitching in some money, no one firm owns more than 10% of IndyMac, thus appeasing federal regulators.

Similarly, in August, private-equity investor J. Christopher Flowers, a veteran of Goldman Sachs Group’s financial-institutions group, bought a little bank in Missouri called First Cainsville Bank. The bank, with $14 million in assets and just two branches, probably wouldn’t normally be considered worthy of the attention of a financial sophisticate like Flowers, who kicked the tires at such massive potential M&A targets as Bear Stearns, American International Group and Washington Mutual and advised on Bank of America’s acquisition of Merrill Lynch. But Flowers saw the Cainsville acquisition as a way to get a foothold into the banking business and make it easier to buy other banks. And instead of buying the bank as part of his private-equity firm, J.C. Flowers, he bought it under his own name, overhauled the board of directors and informed the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency of his plan to make more acquisitions.

Federal regulators have been amenable to such solutions thus far. Perhaps that has something to do with the fact that roughly 25 banks have already failed, and more are expected.

The benefit to the private-equity firms of participating in federal auctions for failed banks is the chance to own cheap assets and gain a toehold in the rapidly consolidating banking industry, which they know well. Private-equity firms plowed $23 billion of capital into financial-services deals in 2008, and that is down 69% decrease from the $74 billion of 2007, according to data from Freeman & Co.

Meantime, the federal government gets a known quantity: private-equity firms that are experienced players in financial services. This is something of an echo of the late 1980s and early 1990s, when some private-equity firms snapped up assets from the government’s Resolution Trust Corp. amid the savings & loan crisis. They are also willing buyers, which is no small comfort to the government. Federal regulators looked for a buyer for IndyMac for five months before finally handing it over to a private-equity consortium.

Still, in taking over banks, private-equity firms are entering somewhat complicated contracts to accept federal bank regulators as highly involved overlords, something not all PE firms have been willing to do. Blackstone Group abandoned its proposed $6 billion acquisition of Alliance Data Systems–which owned a bank — arguing that it wouldn’t be able to meeting the changing requirements of federal regulators. In addition, some banks are allowed to choose their regulator, which creates a confusing drama of regulatory competition. IndyMac, for instance, chose the Office of Thrift Supervision, which ended up looking the other way at the lender’s financial troubles...

Private Equity Aims to Snatch Up Banks

By Dollars and Sense
May 7, 2009

Very interesting piece from yesterday's New York Times ("As Investors Circle Ailing Banks, Fed Sets Limits"). Private equity manager J. Christopher Flowers buys a tiny bank in Missouri in the hopes of using its national charter to snap up ailing banks across the country. The last two paragraphs are among the juiciest: Flowers "has estimated his banking empire will one day earn at least a 35 percent return on banks it has bought in the United States. 'I find it to be an extraordinary time to invest,' he said. He was even more blunt when he spoke to an industry group in New York earlier this year. 'Lowlife grave dancers like me will make a fortune,' he predicted."

As Investors Circle Ailing Banks, Fed Sets Limits

By Eric Lipton, The New York Times
May 6, 2009

Cainsville, Mo. — No one seems to want to own a business in this dusty, windswept corner of rural America, population 370, with its crumbling sidewalks and boarded-up storefronts. Except, that is, for J. Christopher Flowers, a media-shy New York billionaire who last year bought the First National Bank of Cainesville, one of the United States’ smallest national banks.

Mr. Flowers, a private equity manager, has no particular love for rural Missouri; in fact, he has never set foot in Cainsville. Rather, he wants to use the national bank charter he picked up in this farm town to go on a nationwide buying spree.

With that charter in hand, Mr. Flowers plans to take over a handful of large struggling banks, casualties of the economic crisis. In some cases, he hopes, the federal government will help...

For all the talk of the banking crisis, Mr. Flowers and other giant private equity players are circling distressed banks around the country, competing to buy into the industry. Bidding wars are now breaking out among private equity firms, including the Carlyle Group, which is going up against Mr. Flowers’s firm for a stake in BankUnited of Florida.

They and other investors see banks as the recession’s biggest prize: potential money machines that could one day generate fabulous returns, particularly after the federal government eats the losses of failed banks, then heavily subsidizes their sale. But like Mr. Flowers, some of them would prefer to take over the banks completely, replace their managements and take all the profit.
“I don’t think the Republic is going to be brought to its knees if private equity owns banks, personally,” Mr. Flowers said from his Midtown Manhattan office with its expansive views of Central Park. “We invest around the world — Japan, Germany, England, no problem.”
The Fed is resisting this pitch, for several reasons. Current law prohibits mixing banking and commerce, based on a fear that if industrialists own banks, they will dominate — and try to manipulate — the economy, as they did during the early-20th-century heyday of John Pierpont Morgan.

The government also wants the ability to stabilize a teetering bank by drawing on the funds of its parent company. That is hard to do with private equity firms, which have numerous businesses owned by funds, each of which is walled off to protect investors.

For these reasons, banks generally cannot be owned by nonfinancial companies like the Carlyle Group, whose assets are as varied as an interest in Dunkin’ Donuts and United Defense Industries, a maker of combat vehicles and missile launchers.

The equity firms counter that banking desperately needs cash if the economy is going to recover, and that they are the only big sources of money around. An executive at the Carlyle Group said the industry had an estimated $400 billion in “dry powder,” or ready-to-invest reserves.

To push their case at the White House, the Treasury and the Fed, Mr. Flowers and others in his industry have enlisted an all-star cast of advisers, lobbyists and lawyers. They include H. Rodgin Cohen, chairman of the Sullivan & Cromwell law firm and Wall Street éminence grise, and Randal K. Quarles, a managing director of the Carlyle Group and a Treasury under secretary in the administration of President George W. Bush...

While they press their case, the firms have found some ways around the rules.

They have formed so-called club deals, in which teams of private equity firms and other investors each buy up to the legal limit of a bank — about a quarter or a third, depending on the type of bank — with their individual pieces adding up to 100 percent control. IndyMac, the failed California bank, was sold by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation last fall to one such club, which includes funds controlled by Mr. Flowers; the hedge fund billionaires George Soros and John Paulson; and Michael S. Dell, founder of the Dell computer company. The investors are barred from acting in concert to, in effect, take control of the bank — an unwieldy arrangement but one that regulators insist they can enforce.

As part of the IndyMac deal, the FDIC agreed to take most of the risk from future losses on loans acquired by the partnership — leading Mr. Flowers to quip at one investor forum in New York in January that “the government has all the downside and we have all the upside.”

Mr. Flowers has come up with another way around the restrictions. There is no limit on an individual’s taking over a bank, so he purchased all of the First National Bank of Cainesville in his own name and with his own funds. But that deprives him of the billions his equity firm has set aside to buy banks, so his new bank sits in this tiny town, waiting for a change in the rules.

First National — whose second story is boarded up and whose $17 million in assets are worth about a third of what Mr. Flowers paid for an Upper East Side town house in 2006 — seems an unlikely launching pad for a new American banking empire. It is so tradition-minded that it refused to change the spelling of its name, even after the town did so back in 1925 to honor its founder, Peter Cain. Suddenly, in February, the First National Bank name was dropped and “Flowers Bank” was painted on the window. New bank executives showed up, passing out packs of promotional sunflower seeds with the bank’s new logo, urging the mostly elderly town residents to get ready to “Grow with Us.”
“Everyone wonders, who is this Flowers guy?” said Lefty McLain, as he finished up the ham, mashed potatoes and butter beans lunch special at the Little Store, an all-in-one restaurant, deli, pool hall and gossip post here in the one-block downtown.
Mr. Flowers, while still in his 20s, founded Goldman Sachs’s financial services merger business, helping line up the $62 billion merger of NationsBank and BankAmerica (now Bank of America) and the $34 billion takeover of Wells Fargo by Norwest...

Mr. Flowers and other executives have lobbied hard; their efforts have included a recent meeting with William C. Dudley, chairman of the New York Fed. At the meeting, Mr. Flowers and his colleagues bragged about how they could raise as much as $10 billion in 48 hours to help with a bank takeover if they were given the chance, according to one executive in attendance.

Mr. Flowers, in an interview, said he was confident he would prevail. Even if he cannot make the Fed reverse its policy, he will consider it a victory if the Fed approves an individual deal. He has estimated his banking empire will one day earn at least a 35 percent return on banks it has bought in the United States. “I find it to be an extraordinary time to invest,” he said. He was even more blunt when he spoke to an industry group in New York earlier this year.
“Lowlife grave dancers like me will make a fortune,” he predicted.
The Carlyle Group & The Carlyle Group Bailout, March 2008
How the Bush Administration Stopped the States from Stepping In to Stop Predatory Lenders
Bush Administration Rejected Tougher Mortgage Rules in 2005
AIG, Blackstone, and Kissinger Associates Joint Venture in Private Equity Funds
Max Keiser: Goldman Sachs Gang Are 'Scum' Who Have Co-Opted the U.S. Government
1,000 Banks to Fail in Next Two Years: Bank CEO
Rothschild to Start $711M Private Equity Fund
Federal Government Needs Massive Hiring Binge of 600,000 New Workers, Study Claims
Ground broken on $3.4 billion Homeland Security complex

March 24, 2011

Companies Sell Junk Bonds to Private Equity Firms to Fund Bankruptcy Exit

Cash-strapped companies emerging from bankruptcy have turned to investors -- not banks -- to help fund their return.

Reuters
March 30, 2010

High-yield bonds may be "junk" but they can be golden for bankrupt companies seeking cash to fund their exit from bankruptcy and pay down debt.

Reader's Digest Association Inc and chemicals maker Lyondell Chemical Co are two formerly bankrupt companies that have tapped the high-yield market to benefit from ravenous demand from investors for higher interest payments. There will likely be more to come.
"We have at least another year of a very favorable backdrop to issue high-yield bonds," said Margaret Patel, senior portfolio manager with Evergreen Investments, who manages more than $1 billion in Boston.
When emerging from bankruptcy, companies need cash to pay down old debt, such as debtor-in-possession loans, and to fund ongoing operations. This financing, called exit financing, has traditionally come from banks.

But banks dramatically curtailed such lending in response to the U.S. economic recession and credit crunch. While there are signs of renewed lending, companies may still turn to high-yield bonds for the benefits they provide, including fewer restrictions on the loan terms and more time to repay.

While companies may pay higher interest on new junk bonds, it buys them wiggle room as the work through any lingering operational issues, strategists said.
"If companies can extend maturities and pay down bank debt, it makes a lot of sense," said Patel. "This is a way to ensure their liquidity in case the market (worsens). It's opportunistic cash raising."
Reader's Digest, in February, used the high-yield market to raise $525 million in bankruptcy exit financing, cutting interest expenses by $30 million annually. The interest rate is 9.5 percent.

Lyondell, meanwhile, sold $2.25 billion of senior secured notes yielding 8 percent to fund its bankruptcy exit.
"As long as liquidity is good, and until the bank loan market becomes fully functional, I think people will continue" to sell junk bonds to finance bankruptcy exits, said Sabur Moini, manager of the Payden High Income Fund in Los Angeles.
In the meantime, new money is pouring into the junk bond market.

Junk bond sales have surged to records every month since December as companies contend with "wall of maturity" over the next few years, prompting a rush to refinance debt ahead of the quickly approaching repayment deadlines. In February, U.S. high-yield bond sales posted their busiest month on record, with $15.8 billion of new issuance, strategists said.

For bankrupt companies, "high-yield is a real option," said Mark Podgainy, senior director in the New York office of Getzler Henrich & Associates.
"How long will the market be favorable for that to take place? For this year, as long as Fed keeps rates low."
Investors, too, have incentives to snap up the junk bonds of formerly bankrupt companies.
"Yield," said Podgainy. "Everyone's looking for yield."
Benchmark 10-year Treasury notes are yielding about 3.86 percent. As of March 26, the average junk bond yielded 5.8 percentage points more than Treasuries according to Bank of America and Merrill Lynch data.

Reader's Digest senior floating rate notes, issued at 97 cents on the dollar, have risen to 101.25 cents, according to high-yield research firm KDP Investment Advisors. Lyondell notes now trade at 103.25 cents on the dollar, KDP said.
"It's pretty hard to live off what you'd make in a certificate of deposit or a Treasury bond," said Dwayne Moyers, chief investment officer of SMH Capital Advisors in Fort Worth.
Buying junk debt of companies exiting bankruptcy "is definitely something we'd look at because the bankruptcy process pretty much cleanses the company," said Moyers.

Junk Bonds and Corporate Takeovers By Private Equity Firms of the Elite

America.gov
September 15, 2009

... The LBO (leveraged buyout) was “created in hell by the devil himself.”

The corporate raiding frenzy subsided in the 1990s after Drexel’s demise was followed by heavy losses for junk bond investors generally. The 1990s boom in technology stocks absorbed larger and larger amounts of investors’ money until that speculative stock surge collapsed in 2000. After a few years, however, a new wave of corporate acquisitions swelled up. It was led by private investment funds whose clients pooled their capital and borrowed additional funds to purchase companies whose profits and stock market prices had slumped, creating possible bargains for the investors.

In 1992, private equity investments totaled just $21 billion. In 2006, private equity firms bought control of 654 U.S. companies for a total of $375 billion, evidence of the constant turnover in American business that Schumpeter would have instantly recognized.

Financiers Flock to Private Equity Firms to Sidestep Tougher Regulations

• Bonus tax deters expat financiers from returning to Britain
• HSBC and Barclays warn of an impending exodus of bankers

The Guardian
January 25, 2010

Many of London's investment bankers are seeking to quit the industry in favour of private equity firms and hedge funds to escape heavy regulation and public censure for the financial crisis, according to a leading firm of City headhunters.

Heidrick & Struggles, which has recruited some of the highest-paid figures in the City, said it was snowed under with requests from middle-ranking and senior staff who wanted to switch to other areas of the financial services industry.

But the firm said fears that bankers were queueing up to leave London was a myth with most senior finance staff declaring they want to stay in London despite the tax on bonuses and an increase to 50% in the top rate of tax.

Chris Gaunt, a principal in the firm's financial services unit, said:

"People are asking to be taken out of banks for jobs in other parts of the industry. Hedge funds and private equity are top of the list."

"We are not seeing anyone looking to leave London, or at least only in small numbers, but we are seeing people wanting to leave banking," he said.
Gaunt said the 50p tax rate, which applies to incomes of more the £150,000 from this April, was deterring bankers located overseas from a move back to ­Britain.
"Brits overseas are much more reluctant to move back. For instance, it is almost impossible to lure back someone from a large financial centre like Hong Kong at the moment," he said.
His experience over the last month supports the growing confidence in the commercial property sector that London's financial district will successfully overcome threats from rival centres.

Office rents in the West End are already back to their peak of 2007, while City rents are beginning to pick up after enduring two years of sliding rates. However, threats from banks that they could relocate some or all of their main businesses overseas are unlikely to abate.

Last week, HSBC boss Michael Geoghegan said:
"I know a large number of bankers are moving out of the UK."
He was quickly followed by warnings from Barclays that London stood to lose some of its brightest and best financiers following the tax hike on highly paid workers in the UK.

Geoghegan also said the "strange" one-off bonus tax imposed by Alistair Darling in his pre-budget report last year will affect large banks' businesses. He echoed Gaunt's view that traders and corporate financiers will want to move out of the spotlight currently shining on banks into less-regulated and potentially more ­profitable firms.
"All will move to what I call shadow banking or twilight banking, where they will not be regulated, and I think that is a risk and it may well lay the foundations for a future problem in financial services," warned Geoghegan.
Private equity firms and hedge funds have suffered from the financial crisis with many shedding jobs or going out of business.

But most analysts believe those firms that have come through the ­'recession are well positioned to benefit from the upturn.

March 8, 2011

Icahn to Return Outside Money in Hedge Fund

The New York Times
March 8, 2011

Carl C. Icahn is returning all outside money in his hedge fund, citing his reluctance to be responsible to investors through another possible crisis.

“While we are not forecasting renewed market dislocation, this possibility cannot be dismissed,” Mr. Icahn wrote in a letter to investors. “Given the rapid market run-up over the past two years and our ongoing concerns about economic outlook, and recent political tensions in the Middle East, I do not wish to be responsible to limited partners through another possible market crisis.”

Mr. Icahn is the latest prominent manager to decide to close off his fund to outside investors after the financial crisis.

Stanley Druckenmiller, who ran Duquesne Capital Management, and Chris Shumway, who founded Shumway Capital Partners, are among those who have handed money back to investors in recent months.

In his letter, Mr. Icahn reflected on the experience of 2008, noting that while it might sound “corny to some, the losses that were incurred by investors in our funds in 2008 bothered me a great deal more, in many respects, than my own losses.”

Mr. Icahn said his firm’s decision not to impose gates during 2008 and 2009 meant many investors withdrew money from the funds. But rather than selling off positions to meet the liquidity demands, his firm pumped its own capital into the fund. As a result, outside money makes up just 25 percent, or $1.76 billion, of fund assets.

Icahn Capital, the fund started in 2004, has earned gross returns of 104 percent since its inception, Mr. Icahn said.

David Shukis, a managing director of hedge fund research and consulting at Cambridge Associates, said of Mr. Icahn:

“He clearly has enough money to do what he’s continued to do without the frustrations of outside investors. It’s unfortunate because the occurrence of really outstanding investors closing their funds and focusing on their own capital is reducing the opportunity set for our clients.”

Mr. Icahn said in his letter that he planned to return 95 percent of outside money in April.

February 16, 2011

Family Dollar Gets Peltz Bid to Take It Private

The Associated Press
February 15, 2011

Discount retailer Family Dollar Stores Inc. on Tuesday received a bid from activist investor Nelson Peltz's firm to take the company private in a deal worth up to $7 billion.

The Trian Fund is offering $55 to $60 per share for Family Dollar, according to a filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission.

Shares of Family Dollar soared 25 percent, or $11.19, to $55.15 in extended trading Tuesday after the filing was made.

Trian owns large stakes in a variety of major American businesses including upscale jeweler Tiffany's & Co., food company H.J. Heinz Co. and fast-food chain Wendy's/Arby's Group Inc.

It is already Family Dollar's largest shareholder with about 8 percent of its shares. Paying $60 each for the Family Dollar shares it does not already own would cost Trian about $6.99 billion.

Family Dollar, a discount retailer based in Matthews, N.C., confirmed late Tuesday that it received the offer. It said its board will review the proposal with its financial and legal advisors, Morgan Stanley and Cleary Gottlieb Steen & Hamilton LLP.

The company has more than 6,800 stores in 44 states and is one of the standout retailers in the post-recession economy. It benefited during the downturn from shoppers heading to its stores for bargains on everything from food to clothing.

Family Dollar's net income rose 23 percent to $358.1 million, or $2.62 per share, on revenue of $7.87 billion in its latest fiscal year.

Last summer, Peltz disclosed that he was buying up shares of Family Dollar, saying the stock was undervalued. He said he met with senior management to discuss the company's direction and attempts to boost shareholder value

The Trian Fund bought up more Family Dollar shares in January.

Value in Dollar Stores After Family Dollar Buyout Offer (FDO, DG, DLTR, NDN, BIG)

24/7 Wall St.
February 16, 2011

Family Dollar Stores, Inc. (NYSE: FDO) soared last night after announcing that it has received an unsolicited conditional buyout proposal from Nelson Peltz’ Trian Group to acquire Family Dollar in a price range of $55.00 to $60.00 per share in cash. The deal is subject to due diligence, financing and other conditions. While the company has said it will “review the proposal in due course,” we really want to see what this does for the valuations of all of the other dollar stores out there.

This will have serious implications for shares of Dollar General Corporation (NYSE: DG), Dollar Tree, Inc. (NASDAQ: DLTR), and even in 99 Cents Only Stores (NYSE: NDN). We ran a comparison of forward earnings and revenue multiples to derive some implied prices on each of those if the same financial terms were applied for value investing purposes. Also, don’t forget about the ‘near-dollar’ store of Big Lots Inc. (NYSE: BIG) after it is already up for sale.

The deal comes to $7.6 billion after a 36% premium price to Tuesday’s closing bell, assuming $60.00. For this year’s Thomson Reuters estimates of $3.12 EPS and $8.54 billion in revenues, that comes to a projected 17.6 to 19.2 times forward earnings and just under 0.9-times revenues. We have not yet seen it on an EBITDA calculation.

Dollar General Corporation (NYSE: DG) was already taken private and refloated by private equity owners. Still, this garners greater value for the dollar king… Shares have backed off all the way to $26.93 to a $9.2 billion market cap and shares rose to above $28.00 per share last night. The 52-week range is $22.27 to $33.73. Unfortunately, its year-end is January rather than August like Family Dollar and that creates a light disparity in apples to apples comparisons. At $28.00, Dollar General trades at 15.4-times projected earnings of $1.82 EPS and trades at 0.73-times revenues. If you interpolate the $60 values of Family Dollar, then Dollar General’s comparable valuation would come to about $34.58 on an earnings basis and over $35.00 on a revenue basis.

Dollar Tree, Inc. (NASDAQ: DLTR) has backed off to $50.94 versus a 52-week range of $32.76 to $57.99, and shares were indicated up around $53.00. At the adjusted price, the market cap would be $6.65 billion. Based upon Thomson Reuters estimates (again Jan-2011 fiscal year end) of $3.21 EPS and $5.9 billion, it trades at 16.5-times earnings and 1.12-times revenues. If you interpolate the $60 values of Family Dollar, then Dollar General’s comparable valuation would come to about $60.99 on an earnings basis but only $47.70 on the same revenue basis.

99 Cents Only Stores (NYSE: NDN) closed at $16.40 yesterday with a $1.15 billion market cap and it has a 52-week range of $13.12 to $19.07. Thomson Reuters has its March fiscal estimates at $1.05 EPS and $1.41 billion in revenues, implying 15.6-times earnings and 0.81-times revenues. If you used the same $60-valuation of Family Dollar, you would end up with a relative value of $19.95 on an earnings basis and just over $18.00 on a revenue basis.

Let’s not forget about Big Lots Inc. (NYSE: BIG) which is in play now… Keep in mind that Big Lots already has a valuation premium based upon its shares having risen from under $34 to over $40 of late after word that it is up for sale.

As you have seen, the Family Dollar deal would highlight some value at other dollar stores while it may actually not highlight others in as positive of a light. Again, we have not done EBITDA calculations that private equity buyers love to do. We do not generally use EBITDA because we know what that translates to. It generally is the “how to leverage the company up and strip out the cash” model.

Back to The Lamb Slain Home Page