November 15, 2024

DealBook: Undaunted by Past Setbacks, Hands Resumes EMI Fight

Guy Hands, chief of Terra Firma.Qilai Shen/Bloomberg NewsGuy Hands, chief of Terra Firma.

8:08 p.m. | Updated

Guy Hands is back.

Months after Citigroup seized EMI Group from him, Mr. Hands, the charismatic British financier, went to court on Tuesday in an effort to win back control of the music company.

Mr. Hands has asked the High Court in London for access to documents that show the valuation methodology used by the accounting firm PricewaterhouseCoopers to justify Citigroup’s seizure of EMI in February.

If a judge granted Mr. Hands the right to see those documents, he could use them to challenge Citigroup’s taking control of the music company. Mr. Hands believes that EMI, which was making interest payments, was not insolvent when Citigroup took it over.

“We believe there is no basis for any claim against Citi,” said Danielle Romero-Apsilos, a bank spokeswoman.

This latest legal dust-up comes as Citigroup has put EMI up for sale. A handful of private equity firms and music labels have expressed an interest in the company.

Mr. Hands’s action could scare off any potential buyers. But Citigroup plans to indemnify any of the bidders from legal claims by Mr. Hands, according to two people briefed on the deal who were not authorized to speak publicly.

Tuesday’s move rekindles what has been a bitter dispute between Mr. Hands and his former bankers over EMI, the record label whose stable of artists include Snoop Dogg and Katy Perry.

The debut album by Queen, a band signed to the EMI music label.Chris Ratcliffe/BloombergThe EMI music label is being shopped by Citigroup.

Last year, in Federal District Court in Manhattan, a jury cleared Citigroup of any wrongdoing in its role in the sale of EMI. Mr. Hands had sought an $8 billion recovery, plus punitive damages, accusing the bank of defrauding him during the auction of EMI.

He directed his charges at David Wormsley, a top British banker at Citigroup and Mr. Hands’s once-trusted adviser. He said that Mr. Wormsley artificially drove up EMI’s price by lying to him that there was another bidder for the company.

He said that the misrepresentation caused him to pay $6.8 billion for the company.

Mr. Hands is appealing the verdict.

The debt-laden purchase of EMI by Mr. Hands’s firm, Terra Firma Capital Partners, is widely considered one of the buyout boom’s worst deals. It was struck in August 2007 just as the credit markets were freezing up. At the same time, the record business began to tank. Mr. Hands bet about 30 percent of Terra Firma’s most recent fund on EMI. It lost about $2.5 billion on the deal.

Despite those woes, Mr. Hands continues to press on.

Terra Firma plans to raise a new multibillion-dollar fund next year. Aside from the EMI debacle, the rest of Terra Firma’s most recent fund has performed well. Though it is still suffering paper losses, Mr. Hands said that he hopes to return all of the capital invested to his investors.

Citigroup, meanwhile, continues to carry out its auction of EMI. Potential bidders that have expressed an interest in the company include Warner Music and the billionaire investor Ronald O. Perelman.

Article source: http://feeds.nytimes.com/click.phdo?i=df28dc3174eb00f8667df03458ca1426

DealBook: Carlyle Files for an I.P.O.

David Rubenstein, co-founder of the Carlyle Group.Jonathan Alcorn/Bloomberg NewsDavid Rubenstein, co-founder of the Carlyle Group.

The Carlyle Group officially wants to join the exclusive club of publicly traded private equity giants.

Carlyle filed for an initial public offering on Tuesday, a long-awaited development that will finally shed light on the investment firm’s business.

The securities filing listed a provisional fund-raising target of $100 million, which is likely to change over time. That number is used to calculate the registration fee.

Founded in 1987, the Washington-based firm manages $153 billion in assets across 86 funds and 49 fund of funds, according to the filing. It employs more than 1,100.

The firm reported $2.8 billion in revenue last year and $1.5 billion in net income attributable to Carlyle. Using economic net income, a pro forma accounting figure preferred by private equity firms, Carlyle earned just over $1 billion.

By comparison, the Blackstone Group, one of Carlyle’s biggest competitors, reported $3.1 billion in revenue and $485.5 million in economic net income last year.

Like other private equity firms, Carlyle has benefited from improving market conditions and low interest rates. The company reported a 172 percent increase in revenue for the first six months of the year, to $447.2 million.

Its revenue from management fees has grown 16 percent thanks to several fund acquisitions, while its performance fees have jumped an astounding 971 percent because the value of its investments has improved.

The firm also confirmed that it has reorganized its corporate structure, to reflect its transition from a private partnership to a public company. Its three cofounders will remain at the top: Daniel A. D’Aniello will become the firm’s chairman, while David M. Rubenstein and William E. Conway Jr. will become co-chief executives.

Carlyle’s public offering will also allow the firm’s current stakeholders to cash out, including its cofounders and senior executives. Mubadala, an investment arm of Abu Dhabi, purchased a 7.5 percent stake in 2007 and made an additional $500 million investment late last year. And the giant California pension fund Calpers has owned at least a 5.5 percent stake in the firm for several years.

The firm’s offering will be led by JPMorgan Chase, Citigroup and Credit Suisse.

Article source: http://feeds.nytimes.com/click.phdo?i=2580fddbc2771e47bd61551020be0842

DealBook: Morgan Stanley Posts $558 Million Loss but Beats Expectations

Despite showing improvement in its major divisions, Morgan Stanley reported a second-quarter loss of $558 million on Thursday, as it continued to deal with the aftereffects of the financial crisis.

The loss stems from a deal struck earlier this year with the Mitsubishi UFJ Financial Group, which had provided a much-needed cash infusion in the depths of the disaster. With the new agreement, Morgan Stanley freed itself of a costly continuing burden, but got saddled with a $1.7 billion one-time charge in the quarter.

The financial firm posted a loss of 38 cents a share. Still, the results were significantly better than a loss of 61 cents a share expected by analysts.

More important, Morgan Stanley’s underlying businesses all reported gains, and it posted revenue of $9.3 billion, up 17 percent from the first quarter. It was the first time since 2008 that Morgan Stanley’s quarterly revenue had exceeded that Goldman Sachs.

“While global markets remained challenging this quarter, the firm delivered higher year-over-year revenues across our three major business segments,” James P. Gorman, the bank’s chief executive, said in a statement.

Morgan Stanley’s largest business, Institutional Securities, got a significant boost from underwriting and deal-making activity.

The technology banking team, for example, has won coveted underwriting spots on the year’s hottest technology offerings, including LinkedIn, Groupon and Zynga. Underwriting revenues increased 57 percent in the period to $940 million.

Morgan Stanley has also been involved in some big mergers and acquisitions in recent months.

The firm represented BJ’s Wholesale in its deal to sell itself to a group of private equity firms for $2.8 billion. It also worked with Capital One Financial, which bought ING’s American online banking group for $9 billion. For the quarter, advisory revenue jumped 85 percent, to $533 million.

Morgan Stanley Smith Barney, the firm’s global wealth management division, continued to be a steady performer, posting net revenues of $3.5 billion this quarter, compared to $3.0 billion a year ago. Mr. Gorman tapped Gregory J. Fleming to run the division in January, as part of a move to beef up the firm’s less risky arms and make its bottom line less susceptible to market swings.

The bank also took steps this year to improve its asset management arm, which is also run by Mr. Fleming, and which has historically been a sore spot for the firm. This quarter, the division posted net revenue of $645 million, an increase of 57 percent over the same quarter last year. The increase was primarily due to gains in the firm’s real estate investments and higher results in its core asset management groups.

Article source: http://dealbook.nytimes.com/2011/07/21/morgan-stanley-posts-loss-of-558-million/?partner=rss&emc=rss

DealBook: Calling Off Auction, Borders Plans to Liquidate

A Borders bookstore in Washington announces it closing.Mandel Ngan/Agence France-Presse — Getty ImagesA Borders bookstore in Washington announces that it is closing.

8:31 p.m. | Updated

The Borders Group said Monday that it would liquidate, shutting down the 40-year-old bookseller after it failed to find a last-minute savior.

Though it is not a big surprise, the move will still strip the publishing industry of shelf space that is becoming increasingly scarce as brick-and-mortar stores continue to founder.

Borders said it would proceed with a proposal by the private equity firms Hilco and the Gordon Brothers Group to close down its 399 remaining stores. That liquidation plan will be presented on Thursday to the federal judge overseeing the company’s bankruptcy case.

The company will begin closing its remaining stores as soon as Friday, and the liquidation is expected to run through September. The chain has 10,700 employees.

Borders’ fate appeared sealed after a committee of its biggest unsecured creditors rejected the company’s plan to sell itself to the Najafi Companies for $215.1 million. The committee had argued that the bid by Najafi, which also owns the Book-of-the-Month Club, could have allowed the investment firm to liquidate Borders without the creditors benefiting.

Borders had set Sunday as a deadline to find alternatives to liquidation. But while it had held talks with Books-A-Million and other companies, it was unable to sign up another deal.

“Following the best efforts of all parties, we are saddened by this development,” Mike Edwards, Borders’ president, said in a statement. “The headwinds we have been facing for quite some time, including the rapidly changing book industry, e-reader revolution, and turbulent economy, have brought us to where we are now.”

The company, which began in 1971 as a used bookstore in Ann Arbor, Mich., fought to stay afloat for years amid a tough retail environment, persistent management turnover and a failure to move aggressively into digital books. In February, it filed for bankruptcy protection and closed about a third of its 650 stores.

Publishers, disheartened by the news, had watched Borders’ troubles deepen for years. After the bookseller declared bankruptcy in February, many publishers pressed for a reorganization plan, but they were left unconvinced that executives had a workable way to revamp the company.

“It saddens me tremendously because it was a wonderful chain of bookstores that sold our books very well,” said Morgan Entrekin, the president and publisher of Grove/Atlantic, an independent publisher. “It’s part of the whole change that we’re dealing with, which is very confusing.”

The news exposed a deep fear among publishers that bookstores would go the way of the record store, leaving potential customers without the chance to stumble upon a book and make an impulse purchase. Publishers have worried that without a specific place to browse for books, consumers could turn to one of the many other forms of entertainment available and leave books behind.

Independent shops have closed in droves as book sales have moved online, especially to Amazon. Barnes Noble put itself up for sale last year and has focused on expanding its digital footprint as sales of print books slowed.

Publishers said that with Borders gone, they would plan for smaller print runs and shipments. Employees at major publishing houses worried about layoffs because many companies have staff members who work only with Borders.

The closing could particularly hurt paperback sales. Borders was known as a retailer that took special care in selling paperbacks, and its promotion of certain titles could propel them to best-seller status.

When it filed for bankruptcy protection in February, Borders owed $272 million to its 30 largest unsecured creditors, including Penguin Group USA, Hachette Book Group, Simon Schuster, Random House, HarperCollins and Macmillan.

Most publishers were unwilling to restore normal trade terms to Borders after the bankruptcy filing and insisted on being paid for books in cash and in advance.

The closings will almost certainly be a boon for Borders’ competitors. Other national book chains, like Barnes Noble and Books-A-Million, could move into stores vacated by Borders. Some competing bookstores are already nearby. A spokeswoman for Barnes Noble said that 70 percent of Barnes Noble’s stores are within five miles of an existing Borders store.

Independent bookstores, historically the foes of the big chains, stand to benefit from the closings of Borders stores. That effect has already begun to be seen all over the country from the Borders stores that closed earlier this year.

At Next Chapter Bookshop in Mequon, Wis., sales rose 20 percent in June and July after a Borders several miles away went out of business, said Lanora Hurley, the owner.

“Everybody was saying those customers are going to go online,” Ms. Hurley said. “But there’s still a market for print books, and I’m happy to see that that is flowing to an independent bookstore. I’ve got lots of new customers.”

But the effect that superstores have had on independents in the last two decades was not entirely forgotten. Linda Bubon, an owner of Women and Children First, a 31-year-old bookstore in Chicago, said she had watched incredulously as Borders opened store after store in the last 10 years.

“Now we have this behemoth off our backs,” she said. “It’s not the politic answer to say that inside, there’s a little happy bookseller who’s jumping up and down.”

Below is the internal memo to Borders employees from Mr. Edwards:

Good afternoon,

I wanted to reach out to you and give you an update on Borders’ reorganization process. As you know, last week we submitted a proposal from Hilco and Gordon Brothers as the stalking horse bid, which set the minimum bid requirement for the auction.

Following continued negotiations and the best efforts from all parties, no bidders have presented a formal proposal to keep our company operating as a going concern. Therefore, under the terms of our DIP financing agreement, we intend to present to the court for approval the proposal from Hilco and Gordon Brothers, under which these two companies will purchase our stores’ assets and administer the liquidation process. We will submit this proposal at a hearing scheduled for Thursday, July 21, and we will not proceed with the auction originally scheduled for tomorrow, July 19.

All of us have been working hard towards a different outcome, and I wish I had better news to report to you today. The truth is that Borders has been facing headwinds for quite some time, including a rapidly changing book industry, eReader revolution, and turbulent economy. We put in a valiant fight, but regrettably in the end we weren’t able to overcome these external forces.

For decades, our stores have been destinations within our communities – places where people have sought knowledge, entertainment, and enlightenment and connected with others who share their passion. Whether you work in our stores, distribution centers, or at the Store Support Center in Ann Arbor, each of you has played a valuable role in helping ignite the love of reading in our customers. Together, Borders and Waldenbooks associates have helped millions of people discover new books, music, and movies, and I hope you’ll take pride in the role we’ve played in our customers’ lives.

Now we must begin switching gears and preparing for the wind-down process, which we expect to begin for stores as soon as this Friday, July 22 and conclude by the end of September. Wind-down will begin in phases in other areas, such as our Store Support Center and distribution centers, over the next week. Please know that we are committed to sharing information with you as quickly as possible. To that end, you should expect to hear from your manager by the end of this week with details regarding separation information, severance, benefits, and other resources for employees. You have my assurance that we will do whatever we can to help our employees through this transition.

In closing, I’d like to express how much I appreciate each and every one of you and all that you’ve done. The last few months have been stressful, uncertain times, but you’ve stood by Borders and have continued to impress me with your dedication, resilience, and strong drive to fight until the very end to save our company. Whether you’ve been with Borders for a few months or several years, I hope you know how much I value you and all that you’ve contributed. The coming weeks will be difficult as we wind down operations, but I hope you’ll continue to hold your head high. You’ve done me proud and, from the bottom of my heart, I thank you.

– Mike

Article source: http://feeds.nytimes.com/click.phdo?i=f055fc35522c9b05ca71c83510ad4b24

DealBook: Carlyle Is Said to Be in Talks With Energy Buyout Shop

The private equity giant Carlyle Group is in talks to acquire Energy Capital Partners, a buyout shop focused on investments in power plants and gas pipelines, according to two people briefed on the talks.

Carlyle’s potential acquisition of Energy Capital underscores the relentless drive by the firm to gather more assets and broaden its product line as it gears up for an initial public offering.

Carlyle, which is based in Washington, is expected to join its rivals the Blackstone Group, Kohlberg Kravis Roberts Company and Apollo Global Management later this year as publicly traded private equity firms.

David M. Rubenstein, co-founder of the Carlyle Group.Jonathan Ernst/ReutersDavid M. Rubenstein, co-founder of the Carlyle Group.

A Carlyle initial public offering would highlight a three-decade transformation of these firms, which were once small private partnerships that bought companies with borrowed money, but are now among the world’s most powerful asset-management businesses.

A deal for Energy Capital would be among the first transactions in which one large private equity firm buys another. Negotiations are continuing and could still fall apart, said these people, who requested anonymity because they were not authorized to discuss it publicly.

Spokesmen for Carlyle and Energy Capital declined to comment.

The firm has gone on a dizzying acquisition spree over the last year to diversify its business beyond its core private equity funds and make itself more attractive to its investors and public shareholders.

It recently took majority stakes in two hedge funds: Claren Road Asset Management, a fixed-income hedge fund with $4.5 billion in assets, and the Emerging Sovereign Group, an emerging-markets manager partly owned by the billionaire investor Julian Robertson. In January, it announced a deal to acquire 60 percent of AlpInvest Partners, a firm that manages about $43 billion for two Dutch pension fund managers.

The AlpInvest deal, which closed last week, gives Carlyle about $150 billion in assets, making it the world’s largest private equity firm as ranked by assets under management.

Carlyle’s acquisitions of new businesses is a departure from the firm’s longtime strategy of developing products from within the firm. Co-founded in 1987 by David Rubenstein, Carlyle runs about 84 separate funds, including an Asian real estate vehicle and a fund focused exclusively on buying Mexican companies. In its core buyout funds it owns businesses that include Dunkin’ Brands, the Hertz Corporation and Freescale Semiconductor.

There are potential problems with Carlyle’s rapid expansion, private equity industry observers say. By slapping its brand on a wider array of products and straying from its core competency, the firm runs a risk.

“The main risk is that Carlyle’s diversification, if not well-managed, could hurt investment performance,” said David Teten, a partner at ff Venture Capital who has published research on private-equity investment management.

Carlyle has already had problems with its diversification strategy. During the financial crisis two of its homegrown hedge funds — Carlyle Capital and Carlyle Blue Wave — collapsed after wrong-way bets in the debt markets.

In some ways, Carlyle’s acquisition binge is an effort to replicate the broad set of businesses built by the Blackstone Group, one of its chief competitors and the first large private equity firm to go public back in 2007. Blackstone, which is run by Stephen A. Schwarzman, has established hedge fund, real estate investment and investment bank advisory units that diversify its revenues.

The other large publicly traded firms, Kohlberg Kravis Roberts and Apollo, have also aggressively added new business lines in recent months. K.K.R. has hired a group of nine Goldman Sachs traders to start a hedge fund and brought on Ralph Rosenberg, a former Goldman partner, to start a real estate business. Apollo acquired the real estate investment group of Citigroup and is also in the process of raising an energy-focused fund.

None of them has yet to acquire another private equity firm, which would make Carlyle’s acquisition of Energy Capital unusual. Energy Capital, based in Short Hills, N.J., was started in 2005 by Douglas Kimmelman, also a former partner at Goldman Sachs. The firm, which manages about $7 billion in assets, has emerged as one of a handful of large private equity funds focused exclusively on the energy industry. It owns a variety of energy assets, including three power plants in New England, electrical lines in Southern California and a gas pipeline being built in Texas.

Energy Capital also owns a small stake in Energy Future Holdings, formerly TXU, which it acquired in 2007 alongside Kohlberg Kravis Roberts, TPG and Goldman for $44 billion in the largest buyout ever. The giant Texas utility has struggled amid persistently low natural gas prices and a huge debt load.

Talks between Carlyle and Energy Capital came as a surprise because of Carlyle’s longstanding relationship with Riverstone Holdings, the country’s largest energy-focused private equity firm. Carlyle and Riverstone, which have co-sponsored six energy and power funds over the last decade, notified their investors in a letter sent last week that they would not raise another fund together and would go their separate ways. Riverstone’s partners have decided to stay independent.

The Carlyle and Riverstone relationship became strained a few years ago when their funds became ensnared by the New York attorney general’s investigation of corruption of the state’s public pension fund by political officials and private equity funds. Carlyle paid $20 million and Riverstone paid $30 million, to resolve their roles in the case.

Article source: http://feeds.nytimes.com/click.phdo?i=62a2b14d54f1454a375f54d317b10466

DealBook: Go Daddy to Sell Itself to K.K.R. and Silver Lake

The Go Daddy Group, the controversial giant of Internet address registration companies, said on Friday that it will sell itself to a group led by Kohlberg Kravis Roberts and Silver Lake.

While the company did not disclose financial terms of the deal, the buyers are paying about $2.25 billion, according to people briefed on the matter.

In Go Daddy, the investor group — which also includes Technology Crossover Ventures as a minority partner — will buy the biggest domain name registrar in the world. The company manages more than 48 million domain names and has nearly 9.4 million customers.

When Go Daddy sought to go public in 2006, the company reported $139.8 million and conceded that it had consecutive annual losses. Since then, however, it has built up its business significantly: It reported $1.1 billion in sales for its most recent fiscal year.

Its business revolves around steady subscription fees for the registrar and Web hosting services, which are attractive to private equity firms.

But Go Daddy is perhaps best-known for its risqué advertising, including “too-hot-for-TV” Super Bowl commercials featuring scantily clad spokeswomen like the race car driver Danica Patrick and the celebrity trainer Jillian Michaels.

But the company’s most outspoken champion is its founder and chief executive, Robert Parsons. He will remain with the company, despite his occasional brushes with controversy, including his shooting an elephant in Zimbabwe.

Unlike most chief executives, Mr. Parsons puts a premium on speaking his mind. One of the reasons the company gave in 2006 for withdrawings its planned initial offering was Mr. Parsons’ chafing at the quiet-period rules mandated by the Securities and Exchange Commission.

And to this day, he maintains a personal video blog, where he posts video skits that address topics like cyberbullying and donating to Haitian charities.

The buyout firms have received financing commitments from their financial advisers, Barclays Capital, Deutsche Bank and RBC Capital Markets, as well as K.K.R.’s own capital markets arm.

Go Daddy is the latest technology leveraged buyout in which K.K.R. and Silver Lake have worked together. They were both part of the investors groups that acquired Sungard and Avago.

Only about half of the purchase price is in debt financing, according to the people briefed on the matter. That leaves the company with less debt than many private equity investments.

Go Daddy was advised by Qatalyst Partners, the investment bank run by Frank Quattrone.

Article source: http://feeds.nytimes.com/click.phdo?i=2407a8962e8cf03f637a9d66490b7403

DealBook: PAI Partners to Sell Engineering Firm for $3 Billion

PAI Partners, the French buyout firm, said on Tuesday that it had entered into a period of exclusivity with an investment group led by Clayton, Dubilier Rice and AXA Private Equity to sell its stake in the engineering company SPIE.

SPIE was put in play about two months ago, almost five years after PAI bought it for just over a billion euros.  The investment group, which is offering 2.1 billion euros ($3 billion), has emerged with the best bid, but the deal is contingent on talks with SPIE’s labor representatives.

Clayton, Dubilier Rice will own two-thirds of the majority stake in SPIE, with the remaining third split between AXA and the Canadian pension fund, Caisse de dépôt et placement du Québec, a person with direct knowledge of the situation said.

The private equity firms CVC, Bain and Carlyle all expressed interest in SPIE, but the winning investment group engaged in an accelerated process that took its rivals by surprise, the person said, without elaborating.

Olivier de Vregille, a PAI partner, said that under PAI’s ownership, SPIE “has grown dramatically –- it has acquired more than 50 companies across Europe and its workforce has increased from 23,000 to almost 29,000 -– its operational profit has doubled.”

Annual revenue at the company has grown to 3.8 billion euros last year from 2.8 billion euros in 2006.

The deal is the latest exit for PAI, which has sold its 50 percent stake in Yoplait to General Mills for about 810 million euros this year, and its controlling stake in the Italian clothing retailer Gruppo Coin to BC Partners for 644 million euros.

A group of about 23 percent of SPIE’s employees own 12.75 percent of the company, which specializes in electrical and mechanical engineering, building heating, cooling, energy and communication systems.

Roberto Quarta, a partner at Clayton, Dubilier Rice, said his firm’s previous investment in Rexel, an electronic goods distributor, had exposed it to SPIE’s markets.

“We are highly confident in the resilience of SPIE’s business model and its outstanding growth prospects,” Mr. Quarta  said.

Morgan Stanley and HSBC advised the investment group, the person with knowledge of the matter said.

Article source: http://feeds.nytimes.com/click.phdo?i=c0913e64429edd67385130b38d65d180

DealBook: Blackstone Says Plain L.B.O.’s Are Too ‘Pricey’

While the Blackstone Group reported its best quarterly earnings since going public in 2007, the investment firm’s big gains came once again from its big real estate division.

So what about the business it’s best known for: private equity deals?

According to Blackstone’s president, Hamilton E. James, the traditional leveraged buyout just isn’t as attractive, for now.

That is reflected in the results of the private equity business. Revenue dipped slightly in the quarter, to $273.7 million, and its profit fell 9 percent, to $175.5 million.

Mr. James said on a conference call with reporters on Thursday that a litany of factors made it harder for private equity firms to buy companies of size. He acknowledged that strategic buyers had again returned to the fore, their treasuries bulging with cash and their lenders ready to loan money at attractive rates.

“There’s a lot of corporate competition that has come out of the woodwork,” he said. “That has made the plain vanilla buyout pricey.”

Bankers and private equity officials have said for some time that while buyout firms have plenty of cash to put to work — Blackstone said it had $16.9 billion available as of the quarter’s end — they still face a few constraints.

Banks still require equity checks of about 25 to 30 percent, meaning that a buyout firm would need to put up $2.5 billion to $3 billion in a $10 billion leveraged buyout. That is a lot for any one shop to commit to, requiring them to form consortiums (something investors are not too wild about these days) or find other sources of capital, like sovereign wealth funds or limited partners willing to co-invest.

And many deal-makers say corporate buyers can afford to pay more for any given deal, since they can squeeze out more cost savings than a buyout firm. In fairness, however, some private equity shops can combine an acquisition with an existing portfolio company to reap some of the same cost benefits.

In any case, Blackstone is turning to other opportunities for now, Mr. James said. The firm is more focused on investment opportunities in the energy sector, emerging markets and in “smaller companies needing growth.”

And Mr. James predicted that leveraged buyouts would eventually return, especially as corporations spent their cash piles.

Article source: http://feeds.nytimes.com/click.phdo?i=c086dee997f47b03c9c344728b8da4fa

Contrarian Adding Bets in Mideast

Instability is nothing new in the region, he said. It’s been that way for 5,000 years.

“The Middle East is printing money and it’s used to operating in chaos,” said Mr. Barrack, who runs Colony Capital, which controls $36 billion in private equity and real estate investments around the globe, including more than $200 million in the Arab world. “In fact, it tends to do better in times of chaos than it does in times of peace. Regime changes are just a fact of life.”

While other private equity investors back away from the area, Mr. Barrack said he was “looking hard” at adding to his holdings there, which include hotels in Cairo and Bahrain, and grocery stores in Syria.

“Even though the West is thinking that this is a once-in-a-civilization kind of event, these events have taken place many times,” he said. “The time to buy is when everybody else is running for the hills.”

Indeed, executives at the private equity giant Carlyle Group, which is partly owned by the Abu Dhabi investment firm Mubadala Development and raised a $500 million fund to make Middle East investments in 2009, said they were suspending some of their investment plans in Egypt.

A Carlyle co-founder, David Rubenstein, warned in a speech last month that while his firm was not rushing for the exits, “today isn’t the day to do an investment in Egypt.” He added that “what’s going on in the Middle East isn’t going to end anytime soon.”

In an e-mailed statement on Tuesday, Mr. Rubenstein added, “The events taking place in the Middle East are significant and will take time to resolve themselves, but we are optimistic about the region’s long-term prospects.”

Until recently, the Middle East was a hot area for private equity firms, which raised billions of dollars to invest in the region only to discover that their visions of quick profits were a mirage. Some players, meanwhile, are concerned that with the current unrest stretching from North African nations like Libya, Tunisia and Egypt to Bahrain in the Persian Gulf as well as Yemen and Syria, people will seek opportunities elsewhere.

“Over the last three years or so, we had big investors in the U.S. and Europe starting to get interested in private equity investments in the region,” said Ahmed Youssef, a partner in the Dubai office of the consulting firm Booz Company. “Now my worry is when will this interest come back or whether it will come back at all if people are scared,” he said.

Mr. Barrack, however, has a long history of challenging the conventional wisdom. The grandson of Lebanese immigrants who owned a grocery store in the suburbs of Los Angeles, Mr. Barrack became a billionaire by buying out-of-favor assets.

Those contrarian bets include buying bad loans during the savings and loan crisis as well as betting on Asian assets after the Asian currency crisis of the late 1990s, both of which turned out to be hugely successful investments. The Colony funds that were raised from 1998 to 2003 posted annual returns of more than 20 percent, according to one investor.

Now 63, with a gleaming shaved head and trim figure — his hobbies include polo and surfing — Mr. Barrack, who speaks Arabic, has moved comfortably within the worlds of Middle East royalty and powerful leaders for four decades. When he’s not traveling, he splits his time between a ranch in Santa Barbara with four polo fields, where he raises horses and makes four wines (Wine Spectator rated his 2005 Piocho a 92), and a 6,000-acre oceanfront resort in Sardinia, called Costa Smeralda.

Mr. Barrack landed in Saudi Arabia in the early 1970s, just after finishing law school, when a partner at his law firm learned of his family’s roots. Soon after arriving to work on a deal for a gas liquefaction plant, one of the Saudi operating executives there asked Mr. Barrack if he knew how to play squash, because someone needed a partner.

“So I started playing squash with a local Saudi,” he recalled. “I had no idea who it was, and he asked if I could play the next day for a couple of hours. Turns out this guy was one of the sons of the king. So my first break had nothing to do with gray matter in my head or intellect or knowledge of deals. It was because I was the one person within 1,000 miles who could play squash.”

His connections came in handy again in 1974, when Mr. Barrack was the legal counsel for an agreement involving Lonnie Dunn, a Texan who bought land in Haiti with the goal of building a refinery, the Haitian dictator Jean-Claude Duvalier, and two Saudi princes, for the rights for Saudi oil to be sold to Haiti at a discount.

Article source: http://www.nytimes.com/2011/04/06/business/global/06equity.html?partner=rss&emc=rss