Home » Finance Blog You are browsing entries filed in “Finance Blog”

Pre-Marketing: Kraft to split up

This all can be yours, for just 920 calories…

* Mac Inc and Cheese Corp? Kraft to split in half

* Roger Altman: Why the U.S. deserves to keep its AAA rating

* Indecent proposal: Would you give up the Internet for $1 million?

* Morning Call: U.S. futures point lower, London falls early, European shares hit 11-month low and the Nikkei edges higher.

* Travel alert: The nation’s most delayed flights are…

* David Callaway: Stocks are pricing in a double-dip recession

* Michael Nierenberg: There is no room for online physician anonymity

* Reuters: Obama and Bernanke are out of ammo to boost jobs and GDP growth

* Top techie: Ex-Microsoft exec Steven VanRoekel will be the country’s next CIO

* John Cook: Why Zillow (Z) insiders want the stock to remain above $25 per share

* Line of the Day, from Heidi Moore: “It doesn’t seem a coincidence that voter apathy, financial illiteracy, and government spending have all risen in tandem.”

* Jobs: The good news is that ADP says the U.S. economy added more jobs than expected last month. The bad news is that ADP and the Department of Labor rarely agree with one another.

* Left behind? Vox reports that U.S. share of global IPOs has declined, but isn’t that as much a reflection of foreign capital market maturation as it is of American slowdown? Moreover, data only goes through 2007. Should look much different once the 2011 bumper crop is included (HCA, GM, LinkedIn, Groupon, Zynga, etc).


Filed under: Term Sheet

Read More Stock Market Blogs from:

August 4 2011 | Posted in Finance Blog | Read More »

How China hurts its own economy

When lending, Beijing favors state companies over private ones. Trouble is, that’s not where innovation happens.

By Bill Powell, contributor

Are state-owned outfits like Sinopec favored by Beijing?

FORTUNE — The outside world is finally coming to grips with the realization that China has some serious economic problems of its own. Moody’s recently issued a report saying that bad debts in the Chinese banking system could rise from 1.1% to as much as 12% of the nation’s $7.83 trillion in total loans. The mounting bad-debt problem obscures an equally important, and related, phenomenon: For the past three years, at least, the huge credit explosion in China has overwhelmingly ended up in the hands of China’s state-owned companies. In the wake of the global economic crisis, Beijing’s state-owned banks have frantically shoveled money to their state-owned brethren in the hope of mitigating its impact (particularly on employment). A former executive at Bank of China remembers meeting with a branch manager in central China last year and asking him how much they were lending to local state-owned firms. The answer: “Whatever they want.”

By contrast, the private sector has been starved of capital. (Remarkably, no reliable data exist that parse state and private sector credit, but no one doubts it’s a very lopsided picture.) To the extent that private firms have been able to get credit, they have to pay more for it. A study on China’s A-share market by the brokerage firm CLSA Asia-Pacific Markets shows that the overall cost of capital (debt and equity financing) for big private firms is on average 100 basis points higher than for state-owned ones. For smaller companies, anecdotal evidence suggests the gap is much greater.

Private sector executives in China, understandably, are not happy with this. Few are willing to stick their heads above the parapet and complain publicly for fear of angering the government. But to judge by conversations Fortune has had with CEOs of private companies, they’re furious. “Our only hope is that the new government [which assumes power next year] understands this and makes the necessary changes.” Whether that new government — expected to be led by Xi Jinping as President and Li Keqiang as Premier — will be responsive to those complaints is decidedly unclear.

Given China’s economic success, why does credit allocation need to be overhauled? As Daniel Rosen, principal at the New York consultancy Rhodium Group, puts it: “China has the potential for a lot more growth, but it needs to come now from innovation — not more steel mills. The question is, Which ownership group [state vs. private] is capable of delivering that growth?” Most people feel it’s the private sector, which over time tends to be more efficient and more innovative than big, state-owned companies. Think Geely in autos or Alibaba Taobao in e-commerce. But with the institutional bias in lending so entrenched, Rosen asks: “How do they make that happen?”

That’s the right question. And if it doesn’t happen, China’s “miracle” years of growth may be over.

This article is from the August 15, 2011 issue of Fortune.


Filed under: Contributors, Term Sheet

Read More Stock Market Blogs from:

August 4 2011 | Posted in Finance Blog | Read More »

Worst-dressed of ‘Silicon Valley’

Can you be one of Silicon Valley’s “worst-dressed” if you don’t live in Silicon Valley?

No one will ever confuse GQ with National Geographic, but aren’t male fashionistas able to read an atlas?

GQ today unveiled its list of the 15 worst-dressed men in Silicon Valley. Only problem is that four of these guys don’t live anywhere near Buck’s or The Rosewood. In fact, they don’t even live in California:

  • Dennis Crowley, lives in New York
  • Howard Stringer, CEO of Sony Corp., lives in New York.
  • Seth Priebatsch, CEO of SCVNGR, lives in the Boston area.
  • Bill Gates, co-founder of Microsoft, lives in Medina, Washington.

Moreover, MySpace founder Tom Anderson lives in Los Angeles, while venture capitalist/ex-Googler Chris Sacca resides in Truckee, California (a mere 200+ miles north of Palo Alto).

So GQ really gave us the nine worst-dressed men of Silicon Valley, plus six other guys. Well, so long as “Silicon Valley” is still considered more of a geography than a state of mind…


Filed under: Term Sheet

Read More Stock Market Blogs from:

August 3 2011 | Posted in Finance Blog | Read More »

RRE Ventures passes halfway mark on new fund

RRE Ventures, a New York-based early-stage investment firm, has raised more than $137 million for its fifth fund, according to a regulatory filing. It is targeting a total of $250 million, although an earlier report suggested that RRE might actually want to replicate the $300 million it raised in 2006 for its fourth fund.

RRE was co-founded in 1994 by former American Express CEO James Robinson, his son Jim and Stuart Ellman (who had previously launched a startup with Jim to create in-stadium touchscreen ordering systems).

The elder Robinson has since stepped back, but RRE has kept plenty busy. It has around 70 active portfolio companies, including URL shortener Bit.ly, financial news website Business Insider and incentives-based recycling platform RecycleTree. In general, it describes its investment strategy and seed and early-stage investments in “products or services enabled by information technology.”


Filed under: Term Sheet

Read More Stock Market Blogs from:

August 3 2011 | Posted in Finance Blog | Read More »

Bad bunny: Insider trading at Playboy

Hugh Hefner’s son-in-law is accused of illegally trading Playboy stock.

Christie Hefner & Bill Marovitz

The Securities and Exchange Commission today sued Bill Marovitz, husband of former Playboy CEO Christie Hefner, accusing him of illegally trading Playboy shares on information gleaned from Hefner.

An SEC spokesman says that “Marovitz has consented to pay $168,352 in disgorgement, prejudgment interest and civil penalties.”

From the complaint, which was filed today in an Illinois federal district court:

Despite instructions from his wife that he should nottrade in shares of Playboy and a warning from the general counsel of Playboy about his buyingor selling Playboy stock, Marovitz bought and sold shares of Playboy in his own brokerageaccounts between 2004 and 2009 ahead of public news announcements related to Iconix’spotential acquisition of Playboy, Playboy’s negative earnings announcements and Playboy’soffering of stock. As a result of his misuse of confidential information about Playboy, Marovitzgained profits and avoided losses totaling $100,952.40.

The most severe offense appeared to come in November 2009, when Marovitz purchased 9,000 shares of Playboy stock at $2.77 per share. The company was in the midst of private negotiations to be acquired by Iconix Brand Group, with Hefner (who had resigned as CEO earlier that year) continuing to advise Playboy on the deal. The Iconix transaction broke on Bloomberg two days later, sending the stock price up 42% to $4.07 per share.

One month later, Iconix ended its pursuit of Playboy. On the same day that Hefner received word of Iconix’s decision, Marovitz called his broker and asked him to sell his entire Playboy holdings (the broker could only dump about 2/3 of them).

Marovitz also is accused of trading on non-public earnings information.

Playboy was taken private earlier this year by Hugh Hefner, Playboy’s founder and Christie’s father, and private equity firm Rizvi Traverse Management for $6.15 per share.

Here is a copy of the complaint:


Filed under: Term Sheet

Read More Stock Market Blogs from:

August 3 2011 | Posted in Finance Blog | Read More »

The recession never truly ended

How can we have a double dip when we never climbed out in the first place?

By Larry Doyle, contributor

A wide array of supposedly smart people are now informing us that the economy is slowing and may slip back into recession. The new phrase being used to describe our economic condition is ‘stall speed.’

Well how about that? Stall speed, they say. Is the economy truly slowing? Is it really? Or perhaps did the real economy — the one in which we live and operate, not the one fabricated by Wall Street pundits and Washington politicians — never truly rebound?

I ask because I firmly believe that our domestic economy never truly rebounded in a meaningful fashion over the last few years.

I cautioned people to avoid the regular smoke and mirrors emanating from our financial and political hotbeds in spring 2010 when I first equated our economic malady as akin to “walking pneumonia.”

I wrote then, U.S. Economy = “Walking Pneumonia”:

I strongly recommend that people not get caught up in the daily, weekly, or even monthly reports. Take a step back and look at things from a quarterly, semi-annually, and annual basis. Let’s work a little harder to eliminate the noise in figures so we can grasp the fact that the economic road in front of us will remain long and hard.

We were not healthier then and we are not meaningfully healthier now. How do we know?

We received a more honest and complete economic reading a few days ago in the revisions to prior year’s GDP reports. These reports received limited attention.

How can we accurately measure our current condition if we do not appreciate and understand the depth of our ‘walking pneumonia’? We can’t, although the aforementioned strategists and Washington wizards would rather you not know that.

On that note, let’s look at the report released by the Bureau of Economic Analysis last week highlighting the fact that our recession ran deeper then and, in my opinion, continues to significantly impact us now:

For 2007-2010, real GDP decreased at an average annual rate of 0.3 percent; in the previously published estimates, real GDP had increased at an average annual rate of less than 0.1 percent. From the fourth quarter of 2007 to the first quarter of 2011, real GDP decreased at an average annual rate of 0.2 percent; in the previously published estimates, real GDP had increased at an average annual rate of 0.2 percent.

Negative real GDP readings to me spell one thing. We have never officially gotten out of recession despite all the sugar highs produced by Uncle Sam and executed by his boys, Ben and Tim. Talk of green shoots, V-shaped recovery, and assorted other tricks were designed by those who are more interested in your vote, your spending, your purchasing overpriced securities, and your daily trading than your long term economic well being.

As an eternal optimist, though, let me also share with you how I concluded my March 2010 commentary referenced above:

We’ll make it. I am fully confident. That said, much like those with ‘walking pneumonia,’ we need to take care of ourselves rather than allow the daily spin to trick us into believing we are healthier than we really are.

Navigate accordingly and spread the ‘sense on cents.’

Larry is a Wall Street veteran, having worked at such banks as First Boston, Bear Stearns and Union Bank. He blogs at www.senseoncents.com 


 

 

 


Filed under: Contributors, From the Crowd

Read More Stock Market Blogs from:

August 3 2011 | Posted in Finance Blog | Read More »

Augusta Columbia joins the tech PE fray

Earlier this year we reported that Chip Schorr had stepped down as a senior managing director with The Blackstone Group (BX), in order to form a new tech-focused private equity firm. Now we’ve got a couple additional details.

The new firm is named Augusta Columbia Capital, and describes its investment strategy as “control investments in growth and technology companies.” Schorr’s partner is Clayton Albertson, who previously was with Court Square Capital Partners.

No word yet on how their inaugural fundraising effort is progressing. Its plan is to raise between $1 billion and $1.5 billion, with Blackstone having agreed to serve as a limited partner.


Filed under: Term Sheet

Read More Stock Market Blogs from:

August 3 2011 | Posted in Finance Blog | Read More »

Silicon Valley Bank loses India team

India is about to get another independent venture capital firm.

The India-focused investment team of Silicon Valley Bank (SIVB) is spinning out into an independent group called Saama Capital, as first reported by Mint.

A source familiar with the situation says that the team will continue to manage the existing portfolio of SVB India Capital Partners Fund, a $54 million stage and sector-agnostic co-investment vehicle raised in 2005. It already has begun fundraising for Saama, although I’ve been unable to learn the target.

The entire team is in Bangalore except for co-lead Ash Lilani, who also serves as president of India for SVB Financial Group. Lilani will be part of the spinout, but plans to remain in Silicon Valley until his daughter graduates high school. Lilani will continue part-time with SVB as a consultant. No word yet on who SVB has tapped to replace him.

Both Lilani and an SVB spokeswoman declined to comment.

Update: A different SVB spokeswoman just tweeted the following:


Filed under: Term Sheet

Read More Stock Market Blogs from:

August 3 2011 | Posted in Finance Blog | Read More »

Lightspeed preps next fund without key member

Leaving Lightspeed

Lightspeed Venture Partners plans to begin marketing its ninth fund later this year, but will be doing so without longtime managing director Eric O’Brien.

Multiple sources tell me that O’Brien has decided not to participate in the next effort, with one saying that he will be heading Midwest to invest in farmland alongside an old friend (part of me thinks I’m getting my leg pulled on that, so let’s consider that a rumor for now). He originally joined the firm in February 2000, and works out of Lightspeed’s Silicon Valley office.

Neither O’Brien nor Lightspeed partner Chris Schaepe returned requests for comment.

According to Lightspeed’s website, O’Brien’s investments include:

* Aquantia : 10G ethernet semiconductors
* Bling Nation: Mobile payments platform
* Evolv: Talent intelligence SaaS platform
* Exclara: Power management for LED lighting
* Gmedia: Mobile marketing platform
* Lucky Pai (LOTTE): China TV home shopping network
* PCH: Global supply chain mgmt services
* Pivot 3: Scalable virtualized storage
* Project Slice: Organizes online purchases
* Streamlite: Technology-enabled mail services

No word yet on how much Lightspeed will be seeking for the new fund, but there is a decent chance that it could vary significantly from the $800 million it raised in 2008.

For example, it could decide to follow the Benchmark Capital model, retrenching to a U.S.-only model. This would require less than $800 million. It also could decide that it wants enough flexibility to participate in large later-stage rounds — like the recent $400 million infusion for portfolio company Living Social — which could bump the total ask to around $1 billion. But, again, no final decisions have been made.


Filed under: Term Sheet

Read More Stock Market Blogs from:

August 3 2011 | Posted in Finance Blog | Read More »

We’re all losers in the debt deal

Washington thinks it won a victory on the debt ceiling debate, but a victory for whom remains the question — it will do very little to alleviate the bleak fiscal outlook of the United States.

By Daryl G. Jones, Hedgeye

The debt deal is done and, despite the best fear mongering by both parties and many of the talking heads on TV, the credit markets — both Treasury yields and credit defaults swaps — have been consistently signaling that a U.S. debt default was highly unlikely. The derivative impact of the fear mongering is that a deal is being pushed through, but it will not truly address deficit issues and continues to leave the door wide open for a potential ratings downgrade.

Keynesian economist and Nobel laureate Paul Krugman voiced his concern about this bill in the New York Times with his emphasis that “there will be big spending cuts.” We are not sure whether Dr. Krugman has a calculator in either his Upper West Side apartment or hallowed Ivy League office, but nothing could be further from the truth.

In the short term, according to the most recent scoring by the Congressional Budget Office, the impact of this bill is minimal with a mere $21 billion in cuts in fiscal 2012 and $42 billion in cuts in 2013. Last week we called this a Congressional comb-over. That is, while the amount of cuts to the deficit and the amount that the debt ceiling will be extended are roughly equal, they are on two very different time frames. As noted, in the short term, the bill literally does nothing to alleviate the deficit and if the ratings agencies are being intellectually honest, this bill should not meaningfully change the creditworthiness of U.S. government debt.

Moreover, it is important to understand that the proposed spending cuts come off of the Congressional Budget Office baseline. Based on the current CBO baseline, as represented in “An Analysis of the President’s Budget Proposal For Fiscal Year 2012,” total debt held by the public will increase from ~ $10.4 trillion in 2011 to ~ $20.8 trillion in  2021. Therefore, the baseline projections will still add over $8 trillion in debt to the U.S. balance sheet over the next decade AFTER the proposed cuts. As Senator Rand Paul wrote in an open letter stating why he wouldn’t vote for this deal:

“This deal, even if all targets are met and the Super Committee wields its mandate – results in a BEST case scenario of still adding more than $7 trillion more in debt over the next 10 years. That is sickening.”

In the intermediate term, the more critical issue impacting the U.S. deficit is the domestic outlook for economic growth. Hedgeye has been on the low end of U.S. GDP estimates for the majority of the year, and consensus growth forecasts for the second half are still nearly twice that of ours. The actual reported numbers have supported our contrarian stance, coming in at 0.4% on a quarter-over-quarter basis in Q1 2011 and 1.3% in Q2 2011 (advance estimate – which may also wind up being ~80% too high after future revisions!).  There are many issues with slow growth, but the key one that is not currently being contemplated is its impact on the federal deficit.

From a bigger picture perspective, the deficit projections provided by the CBO, which are the basis on which the spending cuts are predicated, are highly questionable based on a number of the embedded economic assumptions, in particular GDP growth. According to the CBO’s January 2011 publication, “The Budget and Economic Outlook: Fiscal Years 2011 to 2021“:

“All told, if growth of real GDP each year was 0.1 percentage point lower than is assumed in CBO’s baseline, annual deficits would be larger by amounts that would climb to $68 billion in 2021. The cumulative deficit for 2011 through 2021 would rise by $310 billion.”

In its economic projections, the CBO assumes 2.9% real annualized GDP growth from 2011 to 2021. Interestingly, that is a noted acceleration from the last ten years, which produced an average annual rate of 1.7% real GDP growth. If the next ten years produce comparable growth to the prior ten years, which is reasonable for an economy that is at 90%+ debt-to-GDP, the incremental deficit in that period over the CBO baseline would be $3.7 trillion, upping Rand Paul’s $7 trillion figure to a whopping $10.7 trillion in additional deficits added to the U.S. balance sheet through 2021.

And that, my friends, is a lot of billions.

 


Filed under: Contributors

Read More Stock Market Blogs from:

August 3 2011 | Posted in Finance Blog | Read More »