April 25, 2024

Bits Blog: H.P.’s Chief Says a Revival Is Unlikely Before 2016

Hewlett-Packard needs four more years “to have confidence in itself,” says Meg Whitman, the company’s chief executive.Peter DaSilva for The New York Times Hewlett-Packard needs four more years “to have confidence in itself,” says Meg Whitman, the company’s chief executive.

7:45 p.m. | Updated

SAN FRANCISCO — Meg Whitman, Hewlett-Packard’s chief executive, beat up her company on Wednesday.

Ms. Whitman told a meeting of Wall Street analysts that they should expect sharply lower revenue and profits. She also told them not to expect the company to fully right itself before 2016. “We have much more work to do,” she said.

While the news was not completely unexpected, the vehemence of Ms. Whitman’s message drove shareholders to the exits. H.P.’s stock dropped about 8 percent while she was speaking and ended the day at $14.91 a share, down nearly 13 percent on unusually high trading volume. The stock had not been that low in a decade.

The drubbing was probably what Ms. Whitman, the former chief  of eBay, had in mind. Executives involved in her presentation, who requested anonymity because they were not authorized to speak publicly, said she wanted to get as much bad news as possible out at once, so the company could focus on rebuilding rather than having to explain one disappointing quarter after another.

Analysts, while somewhat taken aback by the depth of H.P.’s problems, thought Ms. Whitman had made the right move in putting them out in the open. “In an era where C.E.O.’s watch every word they say, it’s refreshing to see complete candor. H.P. is a mess,” said Patrick Moorhead, president of Moor Insights and Strategy, who attended the meeting. “It will take five to 10 years to fully take care of this, just the way it took I.B.M. to remake itself. Wall Street doesn’t like anything longer than a one- to three-year horizon. It’s too much risk for them.”

For now, Hewlett-Packard is still the world’s leader in sales of personal computers, printers and computer servers, with revenue last year of $127 billion, but it forecast revenue next year of 11 percent to 13 percent below fiscal 2012 levels. Analysts had assumed it would only decrease about 1 percent.

Operating profit margins, which have been about 7 percent, could evaporate completely or, at best, shrink to about 3 percent, the company said. Earnings per share were expected to fall by about 16 percent from what analysts had projected.

The meeting was probably also Ms. Whitman’s last chance to blame previous leaders for any of H.P.’s problems. Since 1999, H.P. has had three other chief executives, each with a different vision and operating strategy. All left under duress, leaving a company that leads the industry in revenue but is internally chaotic.

Those problems now belong to Ms. Whitman, who took over almost 13 months ago. She has replaced a number of top executives, and has initiated changes to product development and the company’s global marketing and branding. These changes will start to appear next year, but she is clearly impatient to fix more things faster.

“Operational excellence should have become a way of life,” she told analysts, but instead, H.P. is hampered by poor internal communications and management systems.

“I’ve learned at H.P. that you do not get what you expect, you get what you inspect,” she said.

Investors may also have been troubled by some of Ms. Whitman’s strategy. She intends to shrink the number of products H.P. makes, and to move out of businesses that are in decline.

For example, she said the company made more than 2,100 varieties of laser printers, causing excess costs in everything from parts to packaging requirements.

Printer cartridges were once responsible for over 90 percent of H.P.’s profits, but they face increasing competition from lower-price suppliers. Consumers are also using their printers less because many of the things they used to print routinely, like maps and boarding passes, are on smartphones.

H.P. is reversing its printer strategy in the developing world by selling cheaper cartridges and more expensive printers. In developed economies like the United States, it wants to move to a subscription model in which business customers pay an annual fee, and their Internet-connected printers get new cartridges when the system detects they are low on ink.

Investors could be skittish about plans like these, simply because they are not yet proved. Indeed, H.P. shares fell further as Ms. Whitman’s lieutenants laid out the new strategies.

In other areas, there are questions about whether H.P.’s new products can replace, or even surpass, the revenue lost from declining businesses. Cloud computing systems, which consist of thousands of servers sold as a unit, are meant for an increasingly important market. Cloud computing is more efficient than existing systems, however, which means it is likely to lower the overall demand for large numbers of servers.

For all the difficulties she identified, Ms. Whitman may have actually cloaked other long-term problems. The new company she foresees, which she projected would exist by 2016 or so, would probably increase revenue no faster than the overall growth of the global economy. Profit margins would improve from better management, but not necessarily from technological innovations.

The new H.P. would most likely employ fewer workers, as well. Ms. Whitman has already announced a total of 29,000 layoffs. The company had 349,600 employees at the end of last October. She said future profitability would depend in part on more automation, indicating even more job cuts.

While Ms. Whitman said H.P. must focus more closely on its top 14 markets and its main  competitors, a continued low stock price may present other worries. The tech industry is facing a transition from traditional PCs and servers to mobile devices and cloud computing, and is consolidating. H.P. could become a target either for corporate raiders or for another tech company in a hostile takeover.

Article source: http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/10/03/h-p-stock-drops-as-meg-whitman-speaks/?partner=rss&emc=rss

DealBook: Wall Street Jostles to Help Silicon Valley Manage Newfound Wealth

From left, Jason Bogardus, senior vice president; Mark Douglas, managing director of wealth management; Greg Vaughan, managing director; and Robert Dixon, managing director of wealth managment, at Morgan Stanley's offices in Menlo Park, Calif.Peter DaSilva for The New York TimesFrom left, Jason Bogardus, senior vice president; Mark Douglas, managing director of wealth management; Greg Vaughan, managing director; and Robert Dixon, managing director of wealth management, at Morgan Stanley’s offices in Menlo Park, Calif.

PALO ALTO, Calif. — Sam Odio expected a few congratulatory e-mails when he sold Divvyshot, his online photo-sharing service, to Facebook last April for millions of dollars.

Instead, his in-box was flooded with pitches from Goldman Sachs, Morgan Stanley and other Wall Street firms looking to manage his newfound wealth. Goldman has the inside track, having courted him with an exclusive factory tour of Tesla, the electric sports-car maker, and tickets to a screening of the final Harry Potter film.

“They sure know the way to a geek’s heart,” said Mr. Odio, 27.

Wall Street, as always, is going where the money is — and right now that is Silicon Valley. The latest Internet boom means there are more newly minted millionaires, and even billionaires, than at any time since the technology bubble a decade ago.

Many are brilliant young entrepreneurs and computer engineers. But for all their knowledge, the technology executives, many of whom are fresh out of college, are relatively clueless when it comes to estate planning.

“Betting the ranch on building a widget for the Facebook platform is very different than managing a long-term nest egg,” said Jay Backstrand, a vice president at JPMorgan Chase’s private bank.

Wall Street is more than happy to help — for a fee. Banks charge roughly 1 percent for overseeing a wealthy investor’s portfolio. Though that may not sound like a lot, it adds up when billions of dollars are involved.

Financial firms are salivating over the wealth being created. Facebook is readying an initial public offering that will most likely value it near $100 billion. Employees and directors at Zynga own more than a third of the online game company, which went public in December at $7 billion. The list of prospects is long: Groupon is worth $12.2 billion; LinkedIn, $6.8 billion; and Pandora, $1.9 billion.

Greg Vaughan speaking with a client at Morgan Stanley's private wealth management offices in Menlo Park, Calif.Peter DaSilva for The New York TimesGreg Vaughan speaking with a client at Morgan Stanley’s private wealth management offices in Menlo Park, Calif.

Banks are casting a wide net for potential clients. At Facebook, Wall Street brokers are wooing executives, rank-and-file employees and administrative staff members. Morgan Stanley has a dual strategy, with one team of advisers responsible for senior executives at large technology start-ups and another for lower-level employees. Chris Dupuy, who leads Merrill Lynch’s wealth management team in the Pacific Northwest, recruits from the C-Suite to the “corporate cafeteria.”

“Someone’s going to capture this wealth,” said Derek Fowler, a wealth adviser at Morgan Stanley. “We just want to make sure we’re out there.”

Banks are aggressively expanding in Northern California, even as they retrench globally. JPMorgan opened a 10,000-square-foot office in Palo Alto, Calif., a hub of venture capital activity. Goldman, which is eliminating some 1,000 jobs worldwide, plans to increase staff in San Francisco by 30 percent over the next year. UBS has more than doubled its wealth management staff in the area since 2008. “It’s very competitive,” said Joseph A. Camarda, who relocated from Philadelphia to lead Goldman’s wealth management group in San Francisco. “I think every firm has an A-list team out here.”

This feeding frenzy is familiar to those who experienced the last Internet boom. In the late 1990s, Wall Street descended on Silicon Valley, luring clients from marquee names like Yahoo and eBay. But after scouting clients from start-ups that flopped when the bubble burst in 2000, some banks pulled back.

This time, banks seem more aggressive. With start-ups growing faster than ever before because of developments in computing technology, it is critical to build relationships early. The emergence of secondary exchanges has allowed employees to sell shares before companies go public. Google, Facebook and other Internet giants are snapping up start-ups to spur growth, turning founders into overnight millionaires.

Geoff Lewis, the co-founder and chief executive of TopGuest, a mobile application acquired by ezRez Software in December, said he was surprised by the banks’ persistence. He was contacted by Goldman, UBS and Merrill within hours of the deal’s announcement.

“One bank, when I didn’t respond, asked if I’d like to attend a Sharks game with one of their managing directors to get to know them better,” Mr. Lewis said. He passed.

Advisers often tap existing clients for prospects and also scour industry sites, like TechCrunch or AllThingsD. The professional social network LinkedIn is an indispensable tool, with its database of start-up employees.

Personal connections matter, too. Andy Ellwood, an executive at Gowalla. a mobile application, received several e-mails when the service was sold to Facebook in December. But Goldman had already been in touch for months, after a broker met Mr. Ellwood’s girlfriend at a book club.

“In the middle of a lot of things going on, I didn’t want to deal with an overly aggressive sales person,” he said. “It was nice to know that there’s a friendly adviser, just a phone call away.”

But Silicon Valley’s culture of flip-flops and T-shirts represents a challenge to Wall Street’s staid, button-down brokers. Mutual funds and other investments don’t typically appeal to entrepreneurs, who often use spare funds to finance other start-ups.

Travis Kalanick, a co-founder of Uber, an on-demand car service, hired a broker a few years ago. But he grew skeptical after the adviser suggested a complicated investment that would make money only if a stock index fell within a narrow range.

“I felt like I was walking into a casino, where the dealer knew more than I did,” said Mr. Kalanick, who eventually left the brokerage firm.

Banks have been slow to adopt the latest technological innovations, which could make for a tougher sell in Silicon Valley. Neither Morgan Stanley nor Goldman has an iPad application for clients to manage their portfolio. Last year, a Merrill adviser met with a start-up employee in her 20s who brought along her parents. They discussed going to grad school or buying a home.

But Wall Street is trying to adapt its strategy.

Merrill executives are seeking advice from company employees under 30 on how to shape pitches. Barclays is pairing older wealth managers with young associates, who tend to be more familiar with social media.

“There are insights that one generation has — about technology, social media, networking — that another one may not fully appreciate,” said Mitch Cox, head of the Americas for Barclays’ private wealth management arm.

With a younger clientele, informational sessions focus on the basics, including buying a first home, paying off debt or building a portfolio.

Merrill offers “boot camps,” that explain fundamentals like mutual funds and dividends. The firm is building such a program for Facebook employees timed to the I.P.O., according to people briefed on the plans.

“It’s a big business opportunity,” said Greg Vaughan, a managing director at Morgan Stanley’s Menlo Park office. “There’s a lot of wealth being created out here.”

Evelyn M. Rusli reported from Palo Alto, Calif., and Ben Protess from New York.

Article source: http://feeds.nytimes.com/click.phdo?i=54059e2348211226689b8fb0fd81622c

DealBook: In Latest Deals, Big Roles for Boutique Investment Banks

From left, Frank Quattrone of Qatalyst, Robert Pruzan of Centerview and Peter Weinberg of Perella Weinberg.Left to right: Peter DaSilva for The New York Times; Kirsten Luce for The New York Times; Simon Dawson, via Bloomberg NewsFrom left, Frank Quattrone of Qatalyst, Robert Pruzan of Centerview and Peter Weinberg of Perella Weinberg.

For merger advisers this year, it has been good to be an independent.

Two big deals last week — Google’s $12.5 billion takeover bid for Motorola Mobility and Hewlett-Packard’s $11.7 billion purchase of Autonomy — underscored the growing influence of boutique investment banks. Among the firms that helped propel the two transactions were Qatalyst Partners, Centerview Partners and Perella Weinberg Partners, as well as the biggest independent investment bank, Lazard.

Only Barclays Capital, which advised H.P., is a full-service bank that can lay claim to a significant role in either deal. While other big names were listed as advisers to Autonomy, nearly all were added at the last minute, according to people briefed on the matter who asked for anonymity because the discussion among the banks was private. “Last week was a boutique week,” said Peter Weinberg, a scion of a legendary Goldman Sachs family who co-founded Perella Weinberg. “It’s a strip of the financial services market that’s experiencing secular growth.”

Since the passing of the financial crisis, boutique investment banks have claimed that their time has come. Their pitch is relatively simple: we sell advice and advice alone. They have no research arms or proprietary trading businesses, which trade for the bank’s own account, that could lead to a conflict of interest.

Boutiques, as well as their larger publicly traded cousins like Lazard and Evercore Partners, have largely risen in the league tables so far this year, bolstered by their work on big deals like ATT’s $39 billion takeover of T-Mobile USA and Express Scripts’ merger agreement with Medco Health Services. (Greenhill Company and Evercore advised ATT alongside JPMorgan Chase. Medco retained Lazard as well as JPMorgan.)

Led by the technology banker Frank P. Quattrone, Qatalyst has climbed to 29th place in Thomson Reuters’ league tables as of Monday, thanks to its role as adviser to Motorola, Autonomy and others. It has earned an estimated $34.2 million in fees this year, according to Thomson Reuters and Freeman Consulting. Mr. Quattrone founded Qatalyst in 2008 after emerging victorious from a long legal battle against obstruction-of-justice charges. In just its second year of operations, the firm was ranked 79th and earned an estimated $14 million.

Centerview Partners, which was founded five years ago, has laid claim to a number of big mandates this year, including advising Express Scripts, Motorola and Capital One Financial in its purchase of the ING Group’s American online banking arm. It is also one of three advisers to Kraft Foods in its planned spinoff of its North American grocery business. That has led to an estimated $71.7 million in fees.

To a firm, the boutiques were founded by longtime deal makers from established names — Goldman, Morgan Stanley and Credit Suisse among them — who say they want to recreate the investment bank of old.

Some are growing at a rapid clip. Moelis Company was founded in 2007 by Kenneth D. Moelis, a former top UBS banker, and has embarked on a hiring spree, as well as opening offices in far-flung places like Dubai and Sydney, Australia. (It is now ranked 20th, ahead of RBC Capital Markets and the Jefferies Group, and has earned an estimated $112.3 million.)

And Perella Weinberg has built up an asset management arm that now oversees more than $8.2 billion in capital.

Still, for many of these firms the model is Felix Rohatyn of Lazard or Sidney Weinberg, Peter Weinberg’s grandfather, of Goldman. Those bankers concentrated on advising clients on an array of matters, deals or otherwise. Such matters may not always become public, according to executives from these firms.

“We do consider ourselves to be consiglieres to C.E.O.’s and to boards,” said Robert A. Pruzan, a Centerview co-founder who was formerly the president of Wasserstein Perella.

Yet each firm appears to have its own take on the independent model. Mr. Pruzan says that his firm is staked on big transactions for longtime clients like Kraft and PepsiCo, while Qatalyst has built itself up as a tech specialist that so far has fetched big premiums for the companies it sells.

But despite some claims from boutiques born after the financial crisis, such firms are unlikely to dislodge the top full-service banks from the league tables.

At No. 2 on Thomson Reuters’ league tables as of Monday, JPMorgan Chase has worked on 207 deals worth $390 billion. The three top independent banks in the tables — Lazard, Evercore and Greenhill — combined have worked on 212 deals worth nearly $394 billion.

Unlike boutiques, the full-service banks benefit from their vast trading arms and other operations. They can provide a fuller picture of how the capital markets may react to a potential deal as well as the necessary financing for a transaction. Barclays Capital, for instance, committed to providing £5 billion ($8.2 billion) to H.P. for its Autonomy deal, which Perella Weinberg could not do.

And many assignments for boutiques are providing fairness opinions to boards, which generate lower fees than active deal management. While they won’t turn down the work, bankers acknowledge that they seek a mix of both kinds of tasks to grow.

Still, these firms say that there can be a healthy balance between the big banks and their smaller brethren.

“The boutiques should have a meaningful share of the M.A. market, but not half, or even close,” Mr. Weinberg said. “The big firms have a critical role to play, particularly on the financing side.”

Article source: http://feeds.nytimes.com/click.phdo?i=4d6bf7329aefa4d04668cf464cc58fb6

Bucks: How Lowering the Cap for U.S.-Backed Mortgages Will Affect Home Buyers

Loans for homes in upscale areas like Monterey, Calif., may be affected by a new limit on federally guaranteed loans.Peter DaSilva for The New York TimesLoans for homes in upscale areas like Monterey, Calif., may be affected by a new limit on federally guaranteed loans.

The approaching end of federal guarantees for very expensive mortgages is worrying potential home buyers — and sellers — in high-cost markets. Will they be able to get financing? How much more will they have to pay for that financing?

The limits on mortgages that can be backed by the federal government were raised in 2008 to ease the pain of the housing debacle in areas with high home prices. (Without government backing, many lenders would have refused to finance such loans when the housing bubble burst.) But the current higher limits are due to expire Sept. 30 unless Congress acts to extend them.

Groups like the National Association of Realtors are lobbying to extend the higher caps, arguing that removing them might cause further declines in home values, given the still-fragile housing market. But, as The Times reported Wednesday, that idea is meeting resistance from both Democrats and Republicans, who think it’s time for the private market, not taxpayers, to bear the risk of very big mortgages.

The impact of the coming change is expected to be felt well before Oct. 1, since most loans take more than a month to close. That means borrowers may confront the new criteria as early as this summer. To help put the change in perspective, Bucks asked Cameron Findlay, chief economist at Lendingtree, to outline a hypothetical example of a borrower who could be affected by the lower limits.

First, some background. Before the housing crisis mushroomed in 2008, the limit for a government-insured loan was $417,000 nationally. Loans above that amount were considered “nonconforming” or “jumbo” loans, in mortgage lingo, and carried a higher interest rate to reflect their higher risk. That loan limit still applies in most of the country, and borrowers seeking loans below that amount shouldn’t be directly affected by the coming change. But for the last three years, the formula used raised the limit to as much as $729,750 in areas with high median home prices. The move created a new tier of loans that were eligible for government backing but, in practice, still subject to slightly higher interest rates.

Now, a change in the formula that takes effect Oct. 1 will lower the maximum to $625,500. The change is expected to be felt especially hard in high-priced markets on the coasts, including California, New York, New Jersey and Washington. (For a detailed explanation of the formula and a rundown of its impact on various counties, see this report from the Federal Housing Finance Administration.)

Now, let’s consider the impact on Mr. Findlay’s borrower. Say “Joe Homebuyer” seeks a $700,000 loan today for a house in an upscale neighborhood. The loan amount falls between the “baseline” limit of $417,000 and the current maximum of $729,750. That makes it a “conforming jumbo” loan, in the latest lender parlance. Such loans carry a premium of about 0.10 percentage point over the going interest rate of 4.75 percent. So Joe’s rate today would be 4.85 percent, which translates into $42 more a month.

Here’s what happens after Oct. 1. Joe’s loan is still $700,000, but it’s over the new $625,500 maximum. It’s now a “true jumbo” — ineligible for federal backing — and subject to a higher premium of 0.60 percentage point, making the interest rate 5.35 percent. That’s a stiff $257 more each month over the going rate.

So in the end, Joe ends end up paying $215 more ($257 minus $42) per month under the new rules.

Mr. Findlay noted that all sorts of factors could affect an actual borrower’s interest rate, including his credit score and debt-to-income ratio. And the premium for jumbo loans, for example, could rise higher than 60 basis points, depending on the mortgage market. In the midst of the housing crisis, it was more than double that. “It can be substantial when the market is in turmoil,” he said.

Do you think the higher loan limits should be extended? Are you concerned about selling your home, or getting a mortgage to buy one, if the limits are not extended?

Article source: http://feeds.nytimes.com/click.phdo?i=e4dd843b4b1bbda6066d3e4e49d6797f