April 20, 2024

Chinese Regulator’s Family Profited From Stake in Insurer

The regulator, Dai Xianglong, was the head of China’s central bank and also had oversight of the insurance industry in 2002, when a company his relatives helped control bought a big stake in Ping An Insurance that years later came to be worth billions of dollars. The insurer was drawing new investors ahead of a public stock offering after averting insolvency a few years earlier.

With growing attention on the wealth amassed by families of the politically powerful in China, the investments of Mr. Dai’s relatives illustrate that the riches extend beyond the families of the political elites to the families of regulators with control of the country’s most important business and financial levers. Mr. Dai, an economist, has since left his post with the central bank and now manages the country’s $150 billion social security fund, one of the world’s biggest investment funds.

How much the relatives made in the deal is not known, but analysts say the activity raises further doubts about whether the capital markets are sufficiently regulated in China.

Nicholas C. Howson, an expert in Chinese securities law at the University of Michigan Law School, said: “While not per se illegal or even evidence of corruption, these transactions feed into a problematic perception that is widespread in the P.R.C.: the relatives of China’s highest officials are given privileged access to pre-I.P.O. properties.” He was using the abbreviation for China’s official name, the People’s Republic of China.

The company that bought the Ping An stake was controlled by a group of investment firms, including two set up by Mr. Dai’s son-in-law, Che Feng, as well as other firms associated with Mr. Che’s relatives and business associates, the regulatory filings show.

The company, Dinghe Venture Capital, got the shares for an extremely good price, the records show, paying a small fraction of what a large British bank had paid per share just two months earlier. The company paid $55 million for its Ping An shares on Dec. 26, 2002. By 2007, the last time the value of the investment was made public, the shares were worth $3.1 billion.

In its investigation, The New York Times found no indication that Mr. Dai had been aware of his relatives’ activities, or that any law had been broken. But the relatives appeared to have made a fortune by investing in financial services companies over which Mr. Dai had regulatory authority.

In another instance, in November 2002, Dinghe acquired a big stake in Haitong Securities, a brokerage firm that also fell under Mr. Dai’s jurisdiction, according to the brokerage firm’s Shanghai prospectus.

By 2007, just after Haitong’s public listing in Shanghai, those shares were worth about $1 billion, according to public filings. Later, between 2007 and 2010, Mr. Dai’s wife, Ke Yongzhen, was chairwoman on Haitong’s board of supervisors.

A spokesman for Mr. Dai and the National Social Security Fund did not return phone calls seeking comment. A spokeswoman for Mr. Che, the son-in-law, denied by e-mail that he had ever held a stake in Ping An. The spokeswoman said another businessman had bought the Ping An shares and then, facing financial difficulties, sold them to a group that included Mr. Che’s friends and relatives, but not Mr. Che.

The businessman “could not afford what he has created, so he had to sell his shares all at once,” the spokeswoman, Jenny Lau, wrote in an e-mail.

The corporate records reviewed by The Times, however, show that Mr. Che, his relatives and longtime business associates set up a complex web of companies that effectively gave him and the others control of Dinghe Venture Capital, which made the investments in Ping An and Haitong Securities. The records show that one of the companies later nominated Mr. Che to serve on the Ping An board of supervisors. His term ran from 2006 to 2009.

The Times reported last month that another investment company had also bought shares in Ping An Insurance at an unusually low price on the same day in 2002 as Dinghe Venture Capital. That company, Tianjin Taihong, was later partly controlled by relatives of Prime Minister Wen Jiabao, then serving as vice premier with oversight of China’s financial institutions. In late 2007, the shares Taihong bought in Ping An were valued at $3.7 billion.

The investments by Dinghe and Taihong are significant in part because by late 2002, Beijing regulators had granted Ping An an unusual waiver to rules that would have forced the insurer to sell off some divisions. Throughout the late 1990s, the company was fighting rules that would have required a breakup, a move that Ping An executives worried could lead to bankruptcy.

It is unclear whether Mr. Wen or Mr. Dai intervened on behalf of Ping An, but in April 2002 the company was allowed to reorganize and retain its brokerage and trust division. Two years later, Ping An sold shares to the public for the first time in Hong Kong. In 2007, after a second stock listing in Shanghai, the value of the company’s shares skyrocketed. Today, Ping An is one of the world’s biggest financial institutions, worth an estimated $65 billion.

The decision to grant the waiver came after Ping An executives and the insurer’s bankers had aggressively lobbied regulators, including Mr. Dai.

Article source: http://www.nytimes.com/2012/12/31/business/global/chinese-regulators-family-profited-from-stake-in-insurer.html?partner=rss&emc=rss

DealBook: Ackman Ponders I.P.O. for New Fund

William A. Ackman, head of Pershing Square Capital ManagementJonathan Fickies/Bloomberg NewsWilliam A. Ackman, head of Pershing Square Capital Management.

Hedge fund managers have long bemoaned that investors are too quick to pull their money in rocky times, a condition the financial crisis only exacerbated.

Few have done much about it.

Now, William A. Ackman, head of Pershing Square Capital Management, one of the strongest performing and most closely watched hedge fund managers, is considering raising capital for a new portfolio through an initial public offering, according to people familiar with the matter. He is hoping to raise as much as $3 billion, said one person.

The firm itself would not go public. But the money manager could potentially tap into the capital markets for a new fund that would be listed on an exchange, the people said, adding that the plans were not finalized.

Mr. Ackman has made no secret of his desire for a more permanent capital base, and has referenced it in past letters to his investors.

AR Magazine first reported that Mr. Ackman was considering an I.P.O. for a new fund.

Mr. Ackman, who currently oversees $10 billion, practices a style known as activist investing. His firm takes large stakes in public companies then agitates for change. The battles are often public, with Mr. Ackman calling on management to make certain changes to their businesses and fighting for seats on the corporate boards.

One of Mr. Ackman’s recent victories came this week, when J.C. Penney announced that the architect of Apple’s retail strategy would be their new C.E.O. With 17 percent stake in the retail chain, Mr. Ackman notched paper gains of $475.9 million on Tuesday. Mr. Ackman has also suffered his share of black eyes from bets gone wrong, including an investment in Target.

But overall his fund, which has been a favorite of large investors like the Blackstone Group, has produced an average of roughly 20 percent gains a year.

Article source: http://feeds.nytimes.com/click.phdo?i=83083548d69eb5c8ff3dd84979f63fd7

DealBook: Maple Makes Hostile Bid for Toronto Exchange Owner

The Maple Group on Monday moved forward in its hostile play for TMX Group with a $3.8 billion bid, besting a $3.6 billion offer by the London Stock Exchange.

Maple, a consortium of financial firms, is trying to challenge a deal with the London exchange that has already been approved by TMX. The group, which includes big Canadian banks and pension funds, is mobilizing to keep the Toronto exchange in national hands.

“We believe our offer represents superior value, greater certainty and a better outcome for Canada’s capital markets,” said Luc Bertrand, chief executive of Maple, predicting that the rival deal “would see TMX Group diluted to the status of junior partner within a larger organization based in, and managed and governed from, London.”

The consortium is seeking to buy the TMX Group, with a combination of cash and stock. Maple says its bid represents a 24 percent premium over the London exchange’s proposal. But the deal is based in part on the valuation of Maple’s shares, a newly formed company that may vary in worth.

The group of firms has adjusted its initial proposal. The cash portion of the deal now accounts for 70 percent of the purchase price, up from 60 percent. Shareholders would also receive 40 percent of Maple’s shares, versus 30 percent. Maple is also promising to maintain an annual dividend of 1.60 Canadian dollars per share.

Maple is taking its offer directly to TMX investors. They will have the opportunity to vote on the matter at the upcoming shareholders’ meeting on June 30. If they reject the deal with the London exchange at that point, investors will have until August 8 to accept Maple’s offer.

The London Stock Exchange had no immediate comment.

Article source: http://dealbook.nytimes.com/2011/06/13/maple-group-makes-hostile-bid-for-tmx-group/?partner=rss&emc=rss

Revenue Rises at Google but Profit Misses Forecasts, and Analysts Point to Spending

Not that Mr. Page felt the need to explain. He stayed only a few minutes on a conference call with the analysts and left before taking their questions.

“Maybe he doesn’t want to do it every quarter, but there was nothing meaningful,” said Colin Gillis, an analyst with BGC Financial.

The company reported that first-quarter revenue increased 27 percent. While profits were also up, they fell short of analysts’ predictions. “We’ve had a tremendous quarter,” Mr. Page said before leaving. He said that “it shows the strength of our business and the continuing growth in the tech industry.”

Google’s shares fell 5.5 percent to $546.96 in after-hours trading. The share price was flat during regular trading Thursday.

In the analysts’ eyes, Google’s spending played a big role in the stumble on Thursday. The company had gone on a hiring spree — it added nearly 1,900 new workers during the quarter — and made good on a previous promise to give all its employees a 10 percent raise. Operating costs including salaries were $2.84 billion in the first quarter, up 55 percent from a year earlier.

Asked repeatedly about the spending in a call with analysts, the Google executives who did stick around stressed that the hiring was necessary to help build emerging products like mobile and YouTube that will pay off in the long run. Patrick Pichette, Google’s chief financial officer, emphasized that Google was disciplined and that all units had to justify their costs.

“Everybody that has a cost center has to demonstrate productivity,” he said.

That response got a cool reception from analysts. “They can’t continue to invest at this rate because the law of diminishing returns will kick in at some point,” said Ross Sandler, an analyst with RBS Capital Markets.

The big question before the call was whether Mr. Page would speak. He is not particularly talkative and, previously, while co-president, often missed such meetings with the analysts. Mr. Pichette described Mr. Page’s appearance as “a surprise,” signaling that he will likely be an infrequent participant in the future.

Mr. Gillis, BGC Financial analyst, said that Mr. Page should have made more of an effort. “The reality of running a public company is that that are some of obligations of outreach to the financial community and shareholders,” Mr. Gillis said. “The concern is that he is going to run the company without concern for shareholders and there was nothing here to placate that.”

Mr. Page led Google after co-founding the company in 1998 with Sergey Brin, but then gave up the reins three years later to Eric E. Schmidt, a more experienced technology executive who was hired to balance the offbeat founders who stayed very involved in decision making.

Under Mr. Schmidt, Google, based in Mountain View, Calif., thrived. But with the growth came increasingly slow decision making and a feeling inside the company that other companies, notably Facebook, were perhaps innovating more quickly.

Mr. Page is determined to push back the bureaucracy. During his short tenure, he has already reorganized top management to increase “velocity,” as he put it on Thursday, and revamped the employee bonus program to reward workers for the company’s success with social networking products.

Google executives are concerned about the rise of Facebook. Executives promised more social features from Google, particularly using cues from its users’ behavior to personalize their results.

Google’s first-quarter earnings are the first reported with Mr. Page at the helm. However, they reflect the company’s performance for the first three months of the year, when Mr. Schmidt, was still in charge. Mr. Schmidt is now the company’s chairman.

Google reported that net income in the quarter rose 17 percent to $2.3 billion, or $7.04 cents a share, from $1.96 billion, or $6.06 a share in the year-ago quarter. The company said revenue climbed to $8.58 billion from $6.77 billion.

Google’s adjusted income of $8.08 was just below the expectations of Wall Street analysts. They had forecast $8.11 cents a share on that basis, according to a survey by Thomson Reuters.

Revenue excluding payments to partner Web sites, a measure commonly used by analysts following the company, was $6.54 billion, Google said. Analysts had expected $6.32 billion in revenue on that basis.

Paid clicks, the number of times users clicked on ads on Google and those of its partner sites, increased 18 percent in the first quarter from the same period a year earlier, Google said. The price advertisers paid for Google’s ads grew 8 percent.

Online advertising is by far Google’s biggest business, but the company is pushing into advertising on mobile phones where people are spending an increasing amount of time.

Google said on Thursday that 350,000 mobile devices using its Android operating system were activated daily. Android led all other mobile operating systems with 33 percent of the phone market in the United States for the three months ending in February, according to comScore’s MobiLens report. Research In Motion, maker of the BlackBerry, had a 28.9 percent share, while Apple’s share was 25.2 percent.

Mr. Pichette indicated that Google would remain a technology company looking for new users and “billion dollar businesses.”

The company’s position has not changed,” Mr. Pichette said.

Article source: http://feeds.nytimes.com/click.phdo?i=67ca75c2013f6531cd442269c2223200