Old timers at Dealbreaker will remember with fondness the days when Volkswagen briefly became the largest company by market-cap in the world, and when it became clear to a much wider audience that Porsche made more money from their barbarian-like, hedge fund behavior* than that whole selling cars thing.
You might also remember that Porsche has been lusting, in the German sense, after Volkswagen, for a long time.
Now this:
Porsche Automobil Holding SE and Volkswagen AG, two of the storied names in Germany’s car-making history, said Wednesday they plan to merge their operations, creating an integrated auto giant with 10 independent brands, including Porsche’s coveted sports-car operations.
Following a meeting of Porsche’s owner families – Porsche and Piech – the company said in a statement that a task force is set to establish within the next four weeks the basis for a merged company.
Porsche said the families Wednesday discussed proposals laid out by Porsche’s and Volkswagen’s executive boards, which include capital measures, and agreed that an integrated car-manufacturing group should be forged.
A person familiar with the situation said the current plan includes a possible capital increase by around EUR5 billion to reduce Porsche’s debts, which fueled speculation about its financial situation in recent weeks.
“In the final structure, 10 brands shall stand below an integrative leading company alongside each other, whereby the independence of all brands and explicitly also of Porsche shall be ensured,” the Stuttgart-based auto maker said.
Porsche wants, Porsche gets. No? Well, not exactly. The line that seems to be coming out is that famous “mergers of equals” play. You know, like Daimler-Chrysler? But, now even Lower Saxony (which holds a veto right) looks ready to stand aside. The times they are a changing. We’ll see who is left standing.
* “To crush your financial enemies. See der capital driven before you. Hear the lamentations of dee regulatory relations women.”
Porsche, Volkswagen Seek To Merge Operations [The Wall Street Journal]
Arguments in favor of anonymity for the Non-TARP Chrysler lenders never particularly convinced us. Whatever else may be true about the bankruptcy process, it should be a public one. It is interesting, however, that what was once 20 members, became 5 once disclosure became an issue. If there is an argument in favor of anonymity it is likely buried in that bit of trivia. Clearly, there is a chilling effect at work here. What does it say about the integrity of the process that holdouts who believe they are being treated unfairly, and are using legal means to lodge their protest scatter for cover when their exposure is threatened. Again: When it became clear that the exercise of their legal dissenters rights would be made public, 15 members withdrew their objections. Nothing about the fundamentals of the deal has changed in the last 48 hours.
Frightening.
Who is left standing?
The members include three funds associated with Schultze Asset Management; Stairway Capital Management; Oppenheimer, which holds debt in two funds; Group G Partners, which has holdings in two funds; and Foxhill Capital Partners.
By opposing the Obama administration’s out-of-court debt restructuring plan, this group of holdout creditors has found themselves in the national spotlight. Last Thursday, as Chrysler filed for bankruptcy protection in New York, President Obama criticized the holdouts as “speculators,” even as the creditors argued that they were being treated unfairly under the government’s plan.
If you needed a clear demonstration that this process is tainted, we believe you now have it. Given this, you should be very wary of anyone who calls this result a “victory.”
Meet The Chrysler Holdouts [DealBook]
And yes, he could test his attempts at public rehabilitation and just stop any old person on the street and hit them up for the contents of their wallet. But then he’d need to come with a new topic for the ole Slate column. So scoring the scratch under his Right of the Taxpayer it’ll have to be. Okay, here’s the pitch. The New York Fed and its leaders has failed us, especially those selected from banks to sit on the board. They, with their clubhouse and their group think and their group sex got us into this sitch, and they should get us out. Or they should at least be punished and forced to hand over some dough. Nothing too outlandish. Whatever covers a roundtrip ticket to the Mayflower Hotel and back these days should do it.
So whom have the banks chosen to be the public representatives on the board during the past decade, as the crisis developed and unfolded? Dick Fuld, the former chairman of Lehman; Jeff Immelt, the chairman of GE; Gene McGrath, the chairman of Con Edison; Ronay Menschel, the chairwoman of Phipps Houses and also, not insignificantly, the wife of Richard Menschel, a former senior partner at Goldman. Whom did the Board of Governors choose as its public representatives? Steve Friedman, the former chairman of Goldman; Pete Peterson; Jerry Speyer, CEO of real estate giant Tishman Speyer; and Jerry Levin, the former chairman of Time Warner. These were the people who were supposedly representing our interests!
[...]
So is it any wonder that the N.Y. Fed has been complicit in the single greatest bailout of poorly managed banks in history? Any wonder that it has given–with virtually no strings attached–practically the entire contents of the Treasury to the very banks whose inability to manage risk has brought our economy to its knees? Any wonder that not a single CEO or senior executive of a major bank has been removed as a condition of hundreds of billions of direct cash and guarantees? Any wonder that, despite its fundamental responsibility to preserve the integrity of the banking system, it sat quietly on the sidelines as the leverage beneath the banks exploded and the capital underlying their investments shrank?
I do not mean to suggest that any of these board members intentionally discharged their duties with the specific goal of benefitting themselves. Rather, what we have seen is disastrous groupthink, a way of looking at the world from the perspective of Wall Street and Wall Street alone. That failure has brought the world economy to the edge of unraveling. And some of Geithner’s early missteps betrayed an inability to get beyond this tunnel vision, such as the idea that the banks need to be first in line to be paid and to be paid in full. We can only hope that Geithner, who, to his credit, did try to raise some of the regulatory issues that mattered while he was at the Fed, is no longer in the mental prison of Lower Manhattan and will have more success now that he has a board of one–President Obama.
Perhaps it is time to calculate what these board members have been paid by their banks in salary and bonuses over the years and seek to have them return it to the public as small compensation for their failed oversight of the N.Y. Fed. And more fundamentally, perhaps it is time to take a hard look at the governing structure and supposed independence of this institution that actually controls the use of our tax dollars and, heaven help us, the fate of our economy.
That’s the answer Michael Bienes came up with when he paused one day to wonder if something was awry at Madoff Securities, which we’ll likely hear more on in the upcoming PBS investigation “The Madoff Affair,” airing next Tuesday. Also interviewed for the flick are Tremont founder Sandra Manzke, and Sherry Cohen, former assistant to Fairfield Greenwich founder Walter Noel, who’s probably going to take a moment to discuss how Wallie is a big fan of the for-pay-handies,* if we’re continuing with that theme.
*Hopefully including shout-outs for his favorite Fairfield county establishments.
Given what passes for thought in the Republican party these days, it is refreshing to see at least a little bit of reason emanating from that party in the House. True, about their only redeeming quality right now (or at all, for that matter) is that they are the opposition party. True, Cliff Asness he isn’t, but Congressman Scott Garrett at least has something to say:
I am troubled by President Obama’s statements that single out a certain class of Chrysler’s creditors. The president’s comments display complete disregard for the rule of law, as well as the practices which govern our bankruptcy code.
The actions of the hedge fund managers in exercising their fiduciary responsibilities to their investors is not the reason why Chrysler is in jeopardy, and their acceptance of the government’s offer would not have guaranteed the company’s success. I think the president should think about who he’s attacking when he makes these statements. Many of those invested in these funds were seniors, school teachers, and others whose pension funds are an important component in maintaining a healthy standard of living throughout their retirement.
This demonization of investors comes at the same time when the administration’s Treasury Department is begging for participation from the private sector in its Public-Private Investment Program. The president’s comments beg the question: why would private investors enter into a partnership with the government when there is the future possibility of being publicly scolded for making business decisions the government dislikes?
It’s time for the government to stop interfering in the marketplace. It simply creates greater uncertainty, facilitates the choosing of winners and losers, and prevents private capital from entering the marketplace.
Are you ready for your personalized tax rate, Congressman?
Garrett Statement on Hedge Funds [house.gov]
Instead he’ll be getting a 9-11 morning spot starting June 29 on MSNBC. Which means he’s keeping in the GE family, but will be in direct competition with Squawk Box‘s Erin Burnett and Mark Haines. Who will show us their tits first in the name of ratings (or just good will)? Stay tuned. Passive aggressive statement from D-rat: “While I look forward to broadening my scope in covering the multitude of issues facing our country today, what draws me to MSNBC is that they have offered me a 2-hour forum to discuss any and all political issues with no directive other than to provide compelling content. Which apparently now I actually have to do.”
Earlier: Late Night With Dylan Ratigan
Dylan Ratigan Stays with NBC, Will Join MSNBC [mediabistro]
As we discussed this morning, Bernie Madoff was (is?) a big fan of rub and tugs, escort services, and grabbing the ass of former secretary Eleanor Squillari. But apparently all those hours logged on the massage table, seeing what “Ladies of Discretion” had to offer, and telling Liza Minelli’s doppelgänger how good she looked while typing letters to investors he was screwing were an elaborate displacement defense mechanism by Ponzi-boy, unable to sate his and (and Little Bernie’s) true desire.
Continue reading »
As you likely heard, Philip Falcone was sued last week by a former mid-level employee. Howard Kagan claims he didn’t get paid enough after he stopped working for Harbinger Capital Partners, and that Falcone owes him something in the ballpark of $62 million. According to sources close to Kagan and inside Harbinger, the Guccione mansion-dwelling fund manager doesn’t owe the guy near that amount, and that Howie-boy has yet to find a new job. And while court documents show Kagan claims he was let go without cause, many involved in the drama say he was clearly fired for non-performance. “The street knows he’s toxic. Who would want to hire him after he’d been booted from Harbinger,” says a person familiar with the situation.
Continue reading »
We were going to spend some time making fun of the fact that the cost of the fight to seize Snowflake’s not-quite-a-billion-dollar inheritance from AIG’s Hank Greenberg is fast approaching the $120 million paid to AIG employees in Bonuses and other compensation earlier this year, except that latter figure has been revised upward just a bit in the interim- from $120 million to $454 million. Of course, this latest figure has little to do with the accursed AIG Financial Products division (AIGFP) anymore, instead representing “other forms of compensation across all of its businesses” as opposed to “what was paid to executives at the company’s headquarters and high-ranking officials at various AIG units.” But, seriously, what kind of fun is it to say “Quickly approaching the sums spent by AIG on “executives at the company’s headquarters and high-ranking officials at various AIG units”?
AIG’s Bonuses Inflate To $454m [The New York Post]
The Truth Is In Stamford
By Bess LevinWe know, we know. The crushing blows being delivered to New York’s financial sector are crushing every other sector in New York. Yes, we feel it too. But take a few moments to remember that Manhattan is not the center of the world. Well, not entirely the center of the world. You know, get some… what do they call it exactly… perspective? Express some deeper understanding for your fellows. After all, New York City is not the only hub of finance in New England. Have you forgotten Stamford, Connecticut?
Yeah… maybe not so much.
Remember how Vancouver was sort of the Stamford of Canada (ok, it is nothing like Stamford but that’s not the point) until some sage film production tax breaks and media incentives turned it into a throbbing, vibrant mecca for people who wanted to film the X-Files? That is, until no one wanted to film X-Files in Vancouver anymore and they all preferred to be in Los Angeles. But in the interim, there were a lot of good years.
Well, Vancouver, Stamford is going to eat your lunch:
Outstanding!
Trouble in ‘Wall Street North’ Spurs Search for New Identity [The Wall Street Journal]
Tags: Connecticut, over-under on number of sarcasm impaired commenters: 12, Stamford