John Paulson Ditches Banks, Drums Up Some Business For Them

I think everyone who's ever worked at an investment bank saw at least a little something of themselves in the Journal's fat asshole article this morning. My own feelings are mixed since, for me, investment banking was a lifestyle improvement over a previous job that left me partially paralyzed from overwork (true story! I got better). So in a sense I don't have that much to complain about, but I did, and do, constantly and loudly and now on the internet. Part of what sucks about banking - that I think the Journal article missed - is the frequent pointlessness of your activity: you get on a plane, go see a guy, tell him about this awesome merger or financing or whatever you've got planned for him, shake hands, and fly away never to see him again. And by "never" I mean "not until six months later, after he's printed a deal away from you, when you go and do the same thing, but this time maybe you don't shave." You'd probably still be a fat, stressed, overworked cabbie-puncher if most of your ideas actually got executed, but you'd perhaps be less suffused with metaphysical dread. That's how I'd feel anyway. Then, I blog now. Anyway, a thing that I don't know anything about, and never ever want to know anything about, so don't tell me, is the proper price-to-book trading multiples of life vs. P&C insurance companies and whether there's a conglomerate discount for being in both businesses. So with that as a disclaimer I found this pretty damn convincing:
Author:
Publish date:
Updated on

I think everyone who's ever worked at an investment bank saw at least a little something of themselves in the Journal'sfat asshole article this morning. My own feelings are mixed since, for me, investment banking was a lifestyle improvement over a previous job that left me partially paralyzed from overwork (true story! I got better). So in a sense I don't have that much to complain about, but I did, and do, constantly and loudly and now on the internet.

Part of what sucks about banking - that I think the Journal article missed - is the frequent pointlessness of your activity: you get on a plane, go see a guy, tell him about this awesome merger or financing or whatever you've got planned for him, shake hands, and fly away never to see him again. And by "never" I mean "not until six months later, after he's printed a deal away from you, when you go and do the same thing, but this time maybe you don't shave." You'd probably still be a fat, stressed, overworked cabbie-puncher if most of your ideas actually got executed, but you'd perhaps be less suffused with metaphysical dread. That's how I'd feel anyway. Then, I blog now.

Anyway, a thing that I don't know anything about, and never ever want to know anything about, so don't tell me, is the proper price-to-book trading multiples of life vs. P&C insurance companies and whether there's a conglomerate discount for being in both businesses. So with that as a disclaimer I found this pretty damn convincing:

That's from John Paulson's presentation about how The Hartford should spin off its P&C business because both life and P&C should trade at higher multiples than the current mixture. That presentation serves as sort of the launch party for his new career as an activist investor, which is a follow-up to his old career as a guy who had terrible timing re: bank stocks, which in turn was a follow-up to his career as a gold bug, which in turn was a follow-up to his career as a guy who hates America/mortgages and loves Goldman Sachs/shorting mortgages, which in turn was ... um, was there merger arbitrage in there somewhere? Let's say yes. Anyway:

The moves ring of activism, a strategy practiced by many a hedge fund manager, from the old school raider Carl C. Icahn to his figurative heir, William A. Ackman. But it is a new strategy for Mr. Paulson, who has largely stuck to merger arbitrage and is best known for his credit bet against the subprime mortgage market that earned him billions of dollars.

Early days yet but it looks like Paulson is pretty good at this activism thing, with HIG up 3ish percent today, supposedly on JP's efforts. And that deck is ... I mean, to me, as just some guy who knows nothing about the insurance industry, it's fairly convincing. On the other hand, it's a little slim on analytics, and it lacks a certain visual panache that the finest banking PowerPoints can provide. Remember, though, that people in banking are actually going around trying to add visual panache to their PowerPoints, and that is a terrible way to live.

But it's a way to live because maybe that panache gets you a deal. On the other hand, this paper claims "a success rate of about 60% in accomplishing activists’ original objectives." This one says 41 or 67% success depending how you count. Those are JUST STAGGERING NUMBERS if your point of comparison is success rate of investment banking pitches.

There are fairly obvious reasons for the discrepancy and they aren't about PowerPoint skills. They're about the difference between, on the one hand, a dozen investment banks chasing a company to churn up business for fees - "sell stock! buy back stock! buy another company! sell yourself" - and, on the other hand, one or two shareholders betting their own money that the company can create more value for shareholders. When John Paulson, not known as a greenmailing saber-rattler, pitches you on a spin-off, you've got to take him seriously - or at least explain to his satisfaction why you're blowing him off. When some banker shows up and gives you an unsolicited pitch for a spin-off, your obligations extend no further than letting him use your bathroom before heading out to the airport.

So it's no surprise that people leave banking - the study cited by the Journal finds that one in five bankers left over the six-year study, which, what?, there were days where it seemed like one in five bankers had quit - to try to find a way to the buy side. Not only because of the often better money and hours, but because there's a so much better chance that if you have a good idea you can actually convince someone to carry it out. And, on the flip side, banking refugees at places like Paulson have the training and desire to flog corporate restructuring ideas to their investments - and a much improved chance of making those ideas happen.

This is good for their former employers, of course. If HIG actually does a spin-off there's work in it for a bank - hopefully, for irony's sake, one of the banks that Paulson has sold out of - but even if they don't this is good for business. Activist hedgies are convinced that investment banks use them as a boogieman to scare companies - "I hear Icahn was buying calls on your stock, you'd better hire us as your anti-raid advisor and maybe do a buyback to head off activism." Paulson has never been much of a name to threaten companies with - rather the reverse; he's typically a good solid supportive owner of your gold mining / terrible banking concern. Expect a lot of bankers to be getting on planes to see those gold miners next week to warn them about Paulson's newfound activism - and recommend just the transaction to head it off.

Hedge Funds Switch Positions, While Paulson Switches Investing Style [DealBook]
The hedgies’ tool of choice [FT]
Hazard of the Trade: Bankers' Health [WSJ]

Related

Paulson and Co Investor Finds New And Interesting Way To Kick John Paulson When He's Down

As Paulson and Co employees, clients, and people named John Paulson do not need to be told, the past year and half has not been the most joyous of times for the hedge fund giant. After making billions shorting subprime mortgages, the firm ended 2011 down 55 percent, was down 16 percent through the first half of 2012, and as of July, saw assets under management decline 44.9 percent to $21 billion from $38.1 billion, due to a combination of unfortunate performance and redemptions by investors so angry at the fund that they've felt the need to repeatedly tell anyone who will listen that parting ways with P&C was among the best if not the best decision they've ever made. One investor that hasn't had to consider voicing its unhappiness to the press or even worry about losing money at all? The 92nd Street Y. Last November Paulson guaranteed that he would personally cover their losses, whatever they turned out to be, come year-end. And the generosity did not stop there: for this one investor only, Paulson offered his services pro-bono, waiving all fees. So while he probably didn't expect representatives of the Y to rent a skywriting plane to proclaim their love and appreciation for him over midtown, lobby the city of New York to get 92nd renamed Paulson Street, or have his face tattooed to their chests, he probably also figured they wouldn't turn around and hit him the mother of all slaps in the face. In this case the declaration that despite the highly favorable terms of their arrangement, any involvement with P&C still felt a tad too risky for everyone's comfort level. In the midst of the financial crisis, the 92nd Street Y came up with a sweetheart deal for its endowment: investments in funds run by the likes of John Paulson, Marc Lasry, and other hedge-fund luminaries that were fee-free and guaranteed against losses. The strategy performed well for several years, said people familiar with how it worked, as the Y benefited from risk-free investing in some of the fund industry’s most successful strategies. But, concerned about the impact of a catastrophe in which a money manager couldn’t repay losses and eager to construct a more diversified portfolio, the Y recently opted to redeem its hedge-fund investments, these people said, and rebuild its financial strategy from scratch. Paulson himself is worth $15 billion, so a catastrophe in which he couldn't repay the Y's losses would have to be a big one. And don't give him some line about how you're pulling out of all hedge fund investments and it's not personal. You could have let him have this. Despite Sweet Deal, 92nd Street Y Redeems Paulson Money [CNBC] Earlier: John Paulson: I’ll Get The Losses This Year, Next Year We Go Dutch?

All John Paulson Does Is Win

Starting today! Every day before it (not including 2007-2009) shall never be spoken of again! Don't even entertain the thought of uttering '2010-2012,' in his presence or otherwise! Don't say it, don't even think it! Someone run out and get some holy water because this is nothing short of a rebirth! Today is the first day of the rest of his life!