May 4, 2024

Deal Professor: An American-Made Business Model Has Less Success Overseas

Harry Campbell

For years, the titans of finance have held out the promise that they could export their business model overseas and mint billions in the process. Yet, there are increasing signs that global deal-making was always a myth.

If you’ve been anywhere near a Wall Street conference in the last five years, you know the drill. Deal makers bemoan the United States as a mature and overregulated economy. They talk about heading abroad, as emerging market economies leave us far behind. To listen to them, one might think the rest of the world was a paradise out of “Atlas Shrugged,” where capital flows and where private equity, investment banks and other investors can freely seek opportunities.

So what country is No. 1 in initial public offerings so far this year? Yes, it is the United States, according to Renaissance Capital, with 75 I.P.O.’s raising $39 billion in total. Compare this activity with China, where 41 I.P.O.’s raised just $8.1 billion.

Deal Professor
View all posts

And in mergers and acquisitions? Again, it is the United States, with 53 percent of the worldwide deal volume, up from 51 percent from last year, according to Dealogic. For investment banks, this means that the United States has a 46 percent share of the $63 billion in worldwide investment banking revenue, up from 34.6 percent in 2009.

With the slowdown in once-hot emerging markets, the tide is going out, baring all of the problems and issues associated with global deal-making.

China is a prime example. Huge amounts of foreign and state investment produced an economic miracle. And in that time, wealth was there to be had.

But let’s be clear about where that wealth came from. In the United States, deal makers make money primarily by buying underperforming assets, adding some financial wizardry and riding any improvements in the stock market. Sometimes, they get lucky by making a quick profit, but often private equity works to squeeze out inefficiencies and make operating improvements in companies and then takes them public a few years later.

In China, what increasingly appears to have been a stock market and asset bubble spurred by hundreds of billions in direct investment has created some spectacular early profits for deal makers. The private equity firm Carlyle Group, for example, has made an estimated $4.4 billion on an investment in China Pacific Insurance, which it took public on the Hong Kong Stock Exchange.

But now, with the Chinese I.P.O. market at a virtual standstill and the Shanghai market down more than 30 percent from its high last year, that avenue to riches is over. People are starting to say that investment in China resembles a “No Exit” sign.

Deal makers are left with a back-to-basics approach that looks to make money from companies through economic growth or improving their performance. Yet most of these investments are made with state actors and minority positions, meaning that there may be little opportunity to actually do anything more than sit and wait and hope. And you know what they say about hope as a strategy.

It appears that deal makers are starting to realize the problem. Foreign direct investment in China was down 3.67 percent from last year to $9.6 billion, and it is likely to remain on a downward trend.

And China has been among the friendliest places for deal makers. Other emerging markets have been less accommodating. Take India, which has been criticized for excessive regulation, high taxes and ownership prohibitions. David Bonderman, the head of the private equity giant TPG Capital, recently said that “we stay away from places that have impossible governments and impossible tax regimes, which means sayonara to India.” The comment about India highlights another problem with foreign deal-making: it’s foreign. Sometimes, the political winds change and local governments that initially welcomed investment change their minds. South Korea, for example, invited foreign capital to invest in its battered financial sector after the Asian currency crisis. But when Lone Star Investments was about to reap billions in profits on an investment in Korea Exchange Bank, a legal battle almost a decade long erupted as Korean government officials accused the fund of vulture investing.

And the political problems are sometimes not directed at foreign investors. South Africa, for example, is undergoing the kind of political turmoil that can stop all foreign investment in its tracks over treatment of its workers and continuing income inequality. Things are not much better in the more mature economies.

Europe is in the economic doldrums, and its governments are increasingly protectionist of both jobs and industry. France, for example, recently threatened to nationalize a factory owned by ArcelorMittal, which sought to shut down two furnaces. The national minister said the company was “not welcome.” It’s hard to see a deal maker profiting from buying an inefficient enterprise that it can’t clean up without risking national censure.

Buying at a low is the lifeblood of any investment strategy — but this assumes that there will be an uptick, and on the Continent, that is uncertain given the state of Greece and the other indebted economies in Southern Europe.

This is all a far cry from the oratory vision-making at conferences. Now that the global gold rush has ended, the belief that the American way of doing deals is portable is being upended.

We are left with a fragmented world where capital moves not so freely, the problems of politics and regulation are more prominent and investing in emerging markets becomes what it always has been: the province of more specialized investors who are in tune with the political and regulatory requirements. Regardless, the easy riches that many thought these countries would bring are now far out of sight.

And the winner in all of this is likely to be the much-maligned United States, where the economic conditions and regulatory environment first gave birth to these deal makers.

This is not to say that there will still not be global deal-making or that American multinationals will not continue to expand abroad. Of course, there will still be profits in deals overseas. But the vision that deal-making will instantly and seamlessly go global is increasingly exposed as one that was more a fairy tale than reality.


Article source: http://dealbook.nytimes.com/2012/12/18/an-american-made-business-model-has-less-success-overseas/?partner=rss&emc=rss

DealBook: Standard Chartered Profit Up 11% on Emerging-Markets Strength

Standard Chartered's headquarters in Hong Kong.Bobby Yip/ReutersStandard Chartered’s headquarters in Hong Kong. The bank is experiencing growth in Asia and other emerging markets.

LONDON — Bucking the industry trend of weak earnings, the British bank Standard Chartered reported on Wednesday that its net income rose 11.3 percent in the first half of the year on strength in Asia and other emerging markets.

The bank, whose activities are primarily based in developing economies, said net income for the six months through June 30 was $2.86 billion, compared with $2.57 billion for the period last year.

While many of its peers, like Deutsche Bank and Barclays, are scaling back their operations after the global financial crisis, Standard Chartered said it planned to increase its presence in Asia, Africa and the Middle East.

The bank said that it would open more branches in countries with fast-growing economies, like China and India, and that it was looking to exploit the decrease in its competitors’ trading activity.

Despite signs that many emerging markets are slowing in response to problems in the West, Standard Chartered said it continued to see robust growth across the regions in which it works.

“Standard Chartered has performed strongly during the first six months of 2012,” the bank’s chairman, John W. Peace, said in a statement. “We have a firm grip on the business, with the ability to turn adversity to our advantage, and we will keep investing as we see long-term opportunities for growth.”

Shares of Standard Chartered closed up 2.1 percent on Wednesday, at £14.95 ($23.46).

The bank benefited from a 15.5 percent rise in operating profit in its wholesale banking unit, to $2.99 billion, while operating profit in its consumer banking division fell 11.3 percent, to $899 million.

The bank said its core Tier 1 capital ratio, a measure of a firm’s ability to weather financial shocks, stood at 11.6 percent based on accounting rules known as Basel III, down slightly from the same period last year.

Article source: http://dealbook.nytimes.com/2012/08/01/standard-chartered-profit-rises-11-in-first-half/?partner=rss&emc=rss

Strategies: How Long Can the Stock Market Forget About the Pain?

Despite a ho-hum week, the Standard Poor’s 500-stock index has already gained more than 4.6 percent in the young year, and emerging markets have done even better. The Hang Seng index in Hong Kong has risen more than 11 percent, even counting time off for the Lunar New Year holiday.

In the United States, some strategists’ year-end targets are already at hand. Jim McDonald, the chief investment strategist for Northern Trust, for example, projected that the S. P. would finish the year at 1,330. It briefly surpassed that mark last week.

“The market may have front-ended its returns for the entire year,” Mr. McDonald said. For the moment, he is not upgrading his forecast.

Others are similarly cautious. Jeff Applegate, the chief investment officer at Morgan Stanley Smith Barney, expects that both “Europe and the United States will slip into recession this year.” Therefore, he said, “we think there’s risk of more downside” in the market, so the firm has recommended that clients cut their exposure to stocks.

In short, despite the buoyant returns so far this year, it may not be time for investors to whistle, “Don’t worry, be happy.”

While there has been some good news, the economy isn’t really on firm ground. No less an authority than Ben S. Bernanke, the chairman of the Federal Reserve, shares that view. “I don’t think we’re ready to declare that we’ve entered a new, stronger phase at this point,” he said on Wednesday.

Fed policy makers last week underscored their fundamental pessimism about the outlook through late 2014. They said they expect to keep interest rates near zero until then — one year longer than earlier indicated. And for the first time, the central bank issued detailed long-term predictions. The purpose of this exercise, Mr. Bernanke said, is to convince investors that interest rates will remain very low, thereby stimulating growth.

But the new information adds color to the central bank’s grim assumptions, with Fed officials anticipating economic growth that will be too weak to make much of a dent in unemployment. The Fed evidently believes that a true recovery from the Great Recession and the global financial crisis is still years away.

The European sovereign debt crisis may have receded from its dominant position in the headlines, but it remains a global flash point, capable of exploding at a moment’s notice. The European Central Bank, under Mario Draghi, its president since November, is providing ample liquidity to the region — helping to keep financial markets lubricated and the yields of crucial Italian and Spanish bonds at manageable levels. The bank has been buying time.

Despite numerous summit meetings, conclaves and agreements, the underlying problems in Europe are unresolved. In an essay in the New York Review of Books, George Soros, the financier, compared Europe to a car in a dangerous skid. First, he says, to avoid a catastrophe, European leaders need to steer in the direction of the skid — toward the draconian fiscal policies that are plunging the Continent into recession. Once a modicum of control has been regained, though, Europe needs to shift to a more sensible course, he says. He recommends economic stimulus, as do many economists. Mr. Soros is calling for bonds guaranteed by the European Union, but many other options have also been proposed.

At best, avoiding a greater calamity will entail an extraordinarily difficult series of maneuvers. Consider that there is no single driver at the wheel but rather dozens of politicians and administrators from 27 governments in the European Union, and numerous multilateral institutions, financial entities and closely linked non-European countries. Most have strong views about what needs to be done.

No wonder, even in this period of relative calm, that fear remains so close to the surface.

Researchers at HSBC in London and at Oxford University have been studying the phenomenon. They say world financial markets have been dominated by a “risk-on, risk-off paradigm” since the onset of the global financial crisis. I wrote about their research in April. Global financial assets were moving in lockstep. Since then, says Stacy Williams, an HSBC strategist in London, correlations have tightened much further. They reached “absurdly high levels” shortly before Christmas.

The new year has brought a relative lull, to be sure, and correlations have dropped somewhat. Even so, he said, the United States equity market is very highly correlated, both with other markets and internally. Late last year, he said, the correlation of individual stocks within the S. P. 500 “exploded to insane, never-seen-before levels, so that all stocks look and behave almost the same.” For old-fashioned stock picking, this is a nightmare, at least over the short term, he said, since the nuances of any particular company are being overwhelmed by broader market forces.

The situation also makes it very hard to execute hedge fund strategies aimed at exploiting the differences between equity sectors — bets that utilities, for example, will outperform industrials. Such strategies require a higher degree of sophistication than many such traders can manage, he said.

Over the last few weeks, “risk on” trades — embracing stocks, which Mr. Williams called the “quintessential risk-on asset” — have generally been in favor. At some point, if the “risk-on, risk-off paradigm” prevails, investors will move en masse to dump stocks, and bid up safe-haven assets, that for now include Treasury bonds and United States dollars.

What is an ordinary investor, one with no claims to financial sophistication, to do under these circumstances? The same thing he or she should do under most circumstances: maintain a well-balanced, diversified portfolio while trying not to worry too much about day-to-day market noise.

Of course, investors trying to save enough for retirement or for a house or for a child’s education need to assess the amount of risk they can bear and the amount of time that they can wait for a return on their assets. Right now, Mr. Applegate advises investors to “underweight” equities and to add some riskless ballast like cash and short-term Treasuries.

Long-term investing in the stock market requires some confidence “in the future economic health” of capitalism, Mr. Williams said, which may seem a tall order on some days. Still, he has been making such a bet in his own retirement account, “like just about everybody else,” and hopes that the unusual market movements of the last several years will ultimately abate.

“If you are trying to be sophisticated, be sure that you are being really sophisticated,” he says. Otherwise, consider taking some risk off the table.

Article source: http://feeds.nytimes.com/click.phdo?i=eca7f08042b99ee6901e0e64710297d0

U.S. Slides, Singapore Rises in Competitiveness Survey

LONDON — The United States is slipping and emerging markets are improving, but European economies still dominate the list of the most competitive economies in the world, according to a World Economic Forum report released Wednesday.

For the third consecutive year, Switzerland ranked first in the forum’s annual competitiveness survey
, which assesses countries based on 12 categories including innovation, infrastructure and the macro-economic environment.

The United States — which topped the list in 2008 — continued its decline, also for the third year in a row, falling one place to fifth position. The weaker performance was attributed to economic vulnerabilities as well as “some aspects of the United States’ institutional environment,” notably low public trust in politicians and concerns about government inefficiency.

Singapore overtook Sweden to claim the second position. But perhaps surprisingly, given the crisis of confidence that continues to plague the European financial system, Western European countries dominated survey’s top 10 economies.

Behind Sweden, Finland ranked fourth, Germany was sixth, followed by the Netherlands and Denmark. Britain was in tenth; France was 18th and indebted Greece slid to 90th.

The results show that while competitiveness in advanced economies has stagnated over recent years, it has improved in many emerging markets, helping their economies to become more robust and mirroring the shift in economic activity from the West to developing economies, the Geneva-based forum said.

“Much of the developing world is still seeing relatively strong growth, despite some risk of overheating, while most advanced economies continue to experience sluggish recovery, persistent unemployment and financial vulnerability, with no clear horizon for improvement,” Klaus Schwab, founder and chairman of the forum, said in a statement.

China, ranked 26th and up one place on a year earlier, was the highest placed of the large developing economies. Among the other major emerging economies, South Africa was 50th, Brazil 53rd, India 56th and Russia 66th.

Among major Asian economies, Japan ranked ninth and Hong Kong 11th.

Qatar was the highest ranked country in the Middle East, at 14th, followed by Saudi Arabia at 17th. The United Arab Emirates stood at 27th.

The rankings are calculated from both publicly available data and a survey of over 14,000 executives in 142 economies. Together they form an index, which was introduced in 2004.

The index takes account of 12 categories: institutions; infrastructure; economic environment; health and primary education; higher education and training; goods market efficiency; labor market efficiency; financial market development; technological readiness; market size; business sophistication; and innovation.

“For the recovery to be put on a more stable footing, emerging and developing economies must ensure that growth is based on productivity enhancements,” said Xavier Sala-i-Martin, a professor of economics, at Columbia University and co-author of the report. “Advanced economies, many of which struggle with fiscal challenges and anaemic growth, need to focus on competitiveness-enhancing measures in order to create a virtuous cycle of growth and ensure solid economic recovery.”

Article source: http://feeds.nytimes.com/click.phdo?i=c476c230a65365d582ee64ab91282b33

Panasonic to Cut 17,000 Jobs

Panasonic, the biggest Japanese maker of consumer electronics, announced a major reorganization Thursday under which it will cut thousands of jobs as it adapts its business to a changing global environment and absorbs recent acquisitions.

It will streamline operations along three main lines, down from five, and said it would cut about 17,000 jobs over the next two years from its work force of 367,000, which is already down from the 385,000 people it employed at the end of March 2010. The reorganization will cost about ¥160 billion, or $2 billion, the chief executive of Panasonic, Fumio Ohtsubo, said in Osaka, where the company is based.

The company, formerly known as Matsushita Electric Industrial, is restructuring to compete with South Korean and Chinese rivals in an industry that is increasingly focusing on emerging markets. It is also eliminating redundancies caused by its acquisitions of Sanyo Electric and Panasonic Electric Works, which were completed this year.

Already facing sluggish demand in Japan, its biggest market, Panasonic said the devastating earthquake and tsunami that struck the Japanese coast north of Tokyo on March 11 had further dimmed the domestic outlook.

Mr. Ohtsubo said he expected the restructuring to contribute ¥60 billion ultimately to Panasonic’s annual operating profit, largely from increased sales of solar cells, lithium-ion batteries, LED lighting and air-conditioning equipment.

Panasonic has a goal for sales of ¥9.7 trillion for the business year that ends March 2013. It said Thursday that its sales in the year through March 31 rose 17 percent, to ¥8.69 billion, though results were enhanced by the inclusion of Sanyo Electric’s sales. It reported net profit of ¥74 billion, compared with a year-earlier loss of ¥103.5 billion.

“The job cuts are really about eliminating duplication, said Yoshiharu Izumi, an analyst in Tokyo for J.P. Morgan Securities. “For example, Panasonic and Sanyo both produce washing machines. They want to consolidate that. They bought Sanyo for its batteries and solar-cells businesses, they don’t need some of the other parts.”

Panasonic bet heavily on plasma display panel technology and now ranks as the world’s top maker of the devices. But two South Korean rivals, Samsung Electronics and LG Electronics, and a Japanese rival, Sony, embraced the more popular LCD display technology.

The market for flat-panel display televisions, is approaching saturation in the developed world, Mr. Izumi noted, and the industry is looking more to India and China in search of profits.

Panasonic said it would increase purchases of LCD panels from outside vendors and increase production overseas. It also plans to overhaul its semiconductor business to reduce its reliance on large-scale integrated circuits.

Price competition in consumer electronics, always intense, has only gotten harder for Japanese manufacturers as the yen has strengthened. A stronger yen reduces profit earned overseas.

The dollar has fallen nearly 25 percent against the yen since the start of 2008, but even more tellingly, the Korean currency, the won, has lost about 35 percent of its value over the same period, giving the Seoul-based manufacturers a critical advantage even as their reputation for quality has come to equal that of their Japanese rivals.

Article source: http://www.nytimes.com/2011/04/29/technology/29panasonic.html?partner=rss&emc=rss