Big Fish Tantrums

I was dialed into the steering committee meeting yesterday for the post-insolvency / time wasting project , and who should dial in but the COO of the bank!

To put that into context, for those unfamiliar with working in the sector and the sheer size of the big investment banks, imagine a combination of a medieval king and Paris Hilton all rolled into one. Vast power, able to behead on a whim, combined with plenty of preening and a vast ego.

Thus he had not stopped by to listen and learn, only to be heard. Aww, bless him - isn't he cute?

We were treated to a 15min speech, although I wasn't bothered as I am not running this whole affair; it certainly didn't stop me reviewing the latest Court docs from GGP while he rambled on. In short though, he had dropped by to tell us all how pissed off he is that we have been beaten to the punch in delivering our insolvency solution by a major rival (announced in the WSJ on Tuesday).

Never mind the fact that ours will be far superior, applying not just in the US but globally, and crucially enabling Hedge Funds to margin securities rather than having to fully fund their positions - the whole point of Prime Brokerage after all. Nope, at the top this was a big corporate race, picture all the CEO's lined up in their sacks and jumping as fast as they could to the finish line. In his eyes we have lost - the trifling details are an irrelevance.

So the Court decision relating to GGP is going to take more time to reach a conclusion. Given the length of my four legal analysis posts, which in themselves are a hugely condensed summary of the arguments put forwards, I would have been surprised had the Court managed to review all of the submissions that have been flooding in right up until the last minute, much less reach a considered opinion so quickly.

The only public information out there is that the Court could take until the end of June before deciding on whether the proceedings by MetLife, Wells Fargo and ING Clarion Capital to remove their underlying collateral from the GGP bankruptcy filing are upheld. This ruling is important, as it would of course enable GGP to negotiate from a position of greater power with many more creditors, while using the combined cashflow as required, and should be able to secure more favourable extension terms. Regardless of the decision however, it will be useful for GGP to focus on its restructuring plan - expected that some time in August.

In an unrelated announced on Wednesday, Jim Graham, GGP's Director of Public Affairs also announced that the company had "very recently" made the decision not to sell the Bridgeland development as previously planned, and instead develop the site itself. This directly reflects the improvement in GGP's position since it filed for Chapter 11 and received DIP financing.

No longer is the firm desperately seeking ways to avoid Chapter 11, and is instead making considered decisions in-line with both Adam Metz and Bill Ackman's comments about there not being any rash asset sales. An encouraging sign that demonstrates mutually aligned interests with common shareholders.

Other minor points of interest this week:

• Pershing Square submitted a motion on Wednesday for their Chief Legal Officer, Roy Katzovicz, to start receiving paper copies of all notices and papers going forwards. No reason is given, but it suggests that the fund will be taking an increasingly active involvement in GGP's legal maneouvering, planning and positioning over the coming months.
• GGP have settled the DIPS financing claim with Brookfield Financial LLC and Goldman Sachs. The original claim was $5.78m, and the settlement is for $2.75m, and is fully supported by the committee of unsecured creditors.
• Ahead of the deadline for objections by unsecured creditors, various claims have been filed. This includes the occupant at various malls J.C. Penney, filed a limited objection and reservation of their rights to the inclusion of related SPE's into the GGP bankruptcy filing. They add nothing to the actual case beyond suggesting GGP's inclusion of relevant malls "blatantly ignore the due process rights of numerous Lien holders - including J.C. Penney - who have Liens in or on property owned by the Debtors [GGP]".
• A similar limited objection claim has been filed by A&K Endowment Inc, and many others - mostly around proposed amendments to establishing alternative procedures under Chapter 11.

Expenses Scandal Highlights Uncomfortable Parallels

Earlier I drafted up a mock client statement for this ridiculous post-insolvency initiative taking place here at the bank. It looks pretty good to me, but a particularly anal MD just replied back to take issue with my naming the example client 'Dodgy Hedgefund Ltd' (located at 1 Hedgefund Alley, Kensington, London).

Christ, if you can't have a sense of humour in this job then it's time to visit a clinic for some colonic irrigation, miserable old bastard.

On the subject of this initiative, to illustrate how absurd the work is - and current estimates are that it is set to cost over $30 million of the bank's resources to implement, and all the major banks are doing the same - the FT reported over the weekend that the Chancellor is preparing to change laws in this area. "Suggestions that the US operated more effectively than the UK are misconceived," a government official said.

In that case why is the US not rushing to change its bankruptcy laws as well? The problem with the government is that they seem incapable of admitting mistakes, even when they are obvious to all. It is rather like their attitude to MP's expenses, although it would be utterly hypocritical of me to criticise them, given what I have claimed over the years.  

A favourite has to be my generously volunteering to pilot a working from home scheme at a previous bank back in 2002. At the time colleagues smirked at my youthful enthusiasm, but I soon had the last laugh. Without any adequate controls, I went ahead and set-up a full 'home office'.  

That meant decking out my second bedroom (designated as my 'office') with an expensive, new PC of course. I also took the opportunity to furnish the room with a new bed, table, wardrobe and - my personal favourite - a 42" flat screen TV, which I categorised as an 'office presentation device'.  

In fact, there were even further parallels with politicians and their second home allowances now, remembering back. I became particularly ingenious at looking at ways of stretching the 'home office expenses' pot. My logic at the time was much like MP's I suspect, and demonstrates human nature: I treated as unacceptable anything that was refused, otherwise it was open game.  

My team quickly went from ridicule, to amusement, to envy, to applying to join the pilot scheme.

I finally reached the zenith when for 6mths (until they ended the scheme), I charged 40% of my rent as 'office rent'. The logic was infallible: apparently I only lived in a 2 bedroom place because I needed an 'office'. My pad at the time consisted of 2 bedrooms, 2 bathrooms and a main room. So 2 of the 5 rooms were 'office', since the en-suite toilet was also clearly an office expense and a necessity.

I know, all the morals of a politican. I was young.. underpaid.. naive.. how is it that they say it? I made several 'errors of judgement' that lead to 'clerical errors' and 'financial oversight'.  

To you, my internet audience of morality, I throw myself on the alter of judgement.. I have sinned!  Fortunately I couldn't care less about public opinion, so only promise not to pay any of it back.

A Change Of Perspective

"Woe betide thee, who has a desk move imposed upon them and loses a spectacular City window view and privacy, to face an office cupboard with a sign reading 'Restricted Access Area' while surrounded by irritating colleagues on all sides"  The Emerging Investor

Having been pulled onto this tedious Hedge Fund confidence-boosting initiative at the bank, I was duly forced to move desks to sit with the new team this week. Quite why is beyond me, as I was only sitting about 20 yards away from them before, and in this digital age we mostly communicate through email, communicator and conference calls anyway.

The bank being as tight as it is, rather than paying for the desk/equipment movers to come in, they left it to me to spend 1.5hrs crawling around on my hands and knees to unplug and switch PC's - all while avoiding the mouse traps down under the desks (we have a problem with rodents - both human and otherwise).

I'm mostly not pleased because I was happily working on my site on the quiet at work as I haven't been too busy recently, and the wireframes for the Functional Spec are rather too visible to pass as financial work.  Now I might even have to do some work for my money at this rate.

Anyway it's not all bad news, as the actual site design has been progressing very well, and I am confident that within the next week or so I will have it sufficiently completed to approach vendors.  They are in for a grilling given that part of my daily job is managing incompetence, and I expect nothing less from them with the build.

There is nothing of interest happening yet regarding GGP, besides Vornado being confirmed as a major potential front runner in buying any GGP assets put up for sale, and having raised sufficient capital to make reasonable offers.  Also following on from my last post regarding GGP including CMBS subsidiaries in its Chapter 11 filing, which has major ramifications for the credit markets; unsurprisingly a challenge is being mounted by one of the groups who would be adversely impacted.

The creditor meeting in a fortnight from now should prove interesting, but this is going to be a slow, lengthy process in which patience is the biggest strength any investor can show.

Next time I am going to move back to investing, which will be especially useful for those interested in shorting. It is a question I have been asked by several people recently, and is actually much easier than you would think. Anybody with a standard broker account can do it today, and I will outline how and some of the options.

Raising Eyebrows

"So over the next 6 months, we have been undertaking extensive measures to ensure that key clients are reassured that banking with us is both safe and advantageous to rivals", so droned a Partner to me on Wednesday.

 
I was initially apprehensive when I got a meeting 'invitation' from him, wondering what somebody so senior wanted a one-to-one meeting with me about. As it turned out, it seemed to be to give him a chance to rehearse a speech he is giving to even more senior partners next week, and he wanted input from somebody nearer to the actual work.

It was a hugely boring meeting so I'll skip the detail, but suffice to say that I have been pulled onto an enormous drive to boost Hedge Fund confidence that trading with us won't risk their money in the event of bankruptcy by it getting locked up by administrators as happened with Lehman Brothers.  It's a huge waste of everybody's time, as in the event it won't actually provide any such guarantee - but hey, as long as we can show them 'proof' that it is in place, it reassures them.  

As he droned on, my eyes glazed over and then wandered over his shoulder to the trading floor beyond, and fell on one of the news screens. I squinted and couldn't help saying "ooh, does that say 50% tax rate in 2010?"

I might as well have slapped the Partner in the face for the reaction it had - he stopped his diatribe, turned to read the mid-Budget headline, paled, and then went increasingly pink. I had to keep a straight face as he went out to get a better look, and then came back for a rant as he calculated how much more tax he would now be paying a year. (He ended up confirming it would be £90,000 next year, which for those not so good at maths means he takes home a 'mere' £1.1m - presumably excluding bonuses given that is such an unknown for 2009).

I know, even a part of me had the same reaction: my heart bleeds you lucky, overpaid fat bastard. On the other hand, if we put aside wealth envy for one moment, his subsequent reaction proves the criticism of this move made by many in the press about the potentially limited (and negative impact) of this on the country.  He's a smart chap, and quickly starting mentioning having various income recategorised next year - no details, so I can only assume he means bonus-related and other asset income - and even rebasing to another office, since in theory it doesn't matter where he works from that perspective.

At a high level, people are either assets or liabilities to a country from an economic perspective. Are they net contributors like the Partner, who work hard and pay a lot in taxes, or at the other extreme are they like Karen Matthews, the benefit leech with 5+ children, who lives off the state and costs the country £100k+ each year in benefits?

It clearly makes no sense to incentivise high contributing wealth generators, both in the City and other key industries in which the UK currently has a competitive industry, to seek ways to avoid paying tax by setting it to a level perceived as unfair.  It didn't work in the 1970's and it won't work now.  The real problem is the relative rate, and at 50% over £150,000, this catapults us above all our main rivals, even quasi-socialist states such as France and Germany.

What is most depressing is that the budget seems to have been politically motivated above all, not what is in the best interests of the country.  It was always going to be a nightmare for Alistair Darling. Old Eyebrows finally had to admit that the government have completely and utterly fucked up the economy over the last decade.

I think we all know that our beloved, unelected leader shoulders 90% of the blame for the degree of pain the country is about to experience, and I put that down to the kind of mismanagement that would have anybody in the private sector fired. MP's expenses are another fine example of the double standards.  Still, I must admit that with my wedding to L being only 5 months away, and with my plan to launch the business this summer gaining momentum, I can't help feeling the same as the Partner - perhaps I will just relocate.  After all, blogging's a global game.

Old Boy 'Career Breaks'

Well, our junior trader is leaving today; he didn't qualify for gardening leave and instead had his market access revoked, and so has been our tea boy for the last fortnight. He certainly personifies the cocky Essex youth that is the stereotype of the modern City barrow boy trader - if his performance had lived up to even a tenth of that arrogance I suspect he would not be on his way. However he has spent the last week loudly proclaiming he knows the head of an obscure hedge fund (I had to look it up), and will soon be landing a job there.

Either that or he's desperately insecure about his failure to make it here. Naturally we're all assuming the latter for now, and the Desk is running a sweepstake on how long it will actually take him to secure a new position. The stipulation is that it has to be a City job - I've gone for a nice, round 10 months.

Either way he really does seem to have something about him with the girls in the office. Several of them seemed upset at his leaving ceremony this morning. On that note, leaving speeches really are one of the most vacuous aspects of corporate life, but today was a rare exception. The Boss used the occasion to impress us with his leadership and oratory skills, his speech ran thus:

"I would.. err.. first like to say a few words to thank [junior trader] for his outstanding contribution to the Desk and [bank]". We waited expectantly, while the Boss shuffled his feet, clearly not sure what to say next. Bless him, he's never been particularly good at thinking on his feet.

"I know that [junior trader] will be very much missed by many in the team". Whole team turns to look at the PA whom he was rumoured to be shagging - several give her a knowing wink.

"He has contributed a great deal throughout his relatively short time here such as.. err.. " Boss shuffles again uncomfortably, now aware he has not got a clue what the junior trader has actually been doing. Several in the team give the PA another wink - presumably a reference to junior traders actual 'contribution'.

"..such as helping Mark and Gary on the Emerging Markets desk." The Boss was clearly relieved to have strung the whole sentence together, meanwhile I had been toying with whether I should interrupt this nonsense with a few prompts to help him out. I did find my eyes constantly drawn to junior trader's dinner plate ears meantime. Should any of my future children end up with such a recessive gene, I pledge now to ensure they have whatever surgery it takes on their 18th birthday to enable them to hear behind them.

Fittingly I was in the 'Barrow Boy and Banker' last night with some non-City friends, and it still surprises me how so many of the old stereotypes persist about the City. In particular, one of the most outdated is the assumption that the entire place is a plummy, old boys network that relies exclusively on nepotism as the fuel for new entrants. There is the odd backwater such as the Lloyds reinsurance market and some niche private banks, where that is the case, but by and large nothing could be further from the truth. The invasion of Wall Street fortunately ended that particularly unpleasant aspect of the City, and I can honestly say it is now one of the most meritocratic places in the world.

Well with the weekend approaching, L and I need to confirm our holiday plans, and meantime have the good fortune of cat sitting for my brother all weekend. Either way it will be an improvement on the office tedium.

Investing for a Recession (Part II)

Having outlined how I have made some useful money from the recession to date, it would be worth now moving to my current main investment at present, so that there is some context when I update on this going forwards.

Apart from putting a proportion of my funds into a gold ETF, which is an excellent hedge both against recessionary worries, a devaluing dollar and future inflationary concerns from all the quantitive easing taking place, I have also placed a significant sum into something that is much less obvious in these turbulent times: US commercial property.

You might think that is insane, and is totally contrary to what everybody else is putting their money into at the moment. But part of investing is looking for value, and sometimes that means looking beyond the conventional wisdom. I have bought into something called a Real Estate Investment Trust (REIT) - these are essentially US commercial property companies, which by and large have plunged by enormous amounts in the last 6 months.

As such, several are rumoured to be on the verge of bankruptcy, and one in particular is down a staggering 97% since the summer of 2008. When you factor in a fall of that magnitude, you have to start looking at the price and ask why, and whether this is rational or fueled by other factors. The underlying reason is the credit crunch, combined with investor fear of a Chapter 11 bankruptcy filing.

To give some background here, REIT's have by and large used a previously acceptable business model, whereby they were highly leveraged and routinely took out large levels of debt to increase their asset base and buy up more property. They then serviced this debt, steadily paying it off while periodicially refinancing this - without problems in a normally functioning credit market. Of course, everybody now sees US property as having been in a huge bubble, and all associated loans as necessarily toxic. As such, suddenly some enormous commercial property companies are on the brink of bankruptcy - including the particular REIT I have invested in called General Growth Properties (GGP).

To put it into context, GGP is the second largest mall owner in the US. That is not an insignificant statistic in itself, and should it fold there would be enormous ramifications for the US retail sector, not to mention a political backlash. I would actually not mind if it did file for Chapter 11 within the next few weeks, for reasons summarised well in this Reuters article.

Estimates suggest that GGP's assets exceed liabilities on the balance sheet by several billion dollars already. Additionally it has no problems servicing its actual debts, just refinancing them. In effect the problems of GGP are not with solvency, as with normal bankruptcy risk, but liquidity - this is a direct result of the banks own liquidity issues that have made them more risk averse.

What is most interesting with GGP is also that the balance sheet is not fully marked to market, which means that if its assets are valued at today's prices instead of when purchased there will be a change. Many properties on its books were bought years ago and have never been revalued, so it is reasonable to expect many will be worth more than marked, even with the current woes of the US property market. As such, assuming GGP were to go bust, what does that mean for ordinary shareholders? Normally it is a disaster and means no money, but in this case it should mean that the US courts would order the banks to agree refinancing terms, after which GGP would emerge out on the other side without that perceived stigma. Meantime the shares will continue trading on the stock exchange.

Since the Reuters article, all indications are that GGP will not file for Chapter 11 however, with its banking consortium of lenders bending over to give multiple loan extensions (including one over the weekend through to mid-March). There are many factors at play in whether full refinancing of the loans due in 2009 will take place - that is what would remove the market risk of bankruptcy that has so severely depressed the share price.

The main sticking point for lenders is several billion dollars of loans that are currently unsecured (i.e. have no assets backing them up), which are due for refinancing. Understandably the banks want assurances they would have some collateral to offset should GGP go under at a later date, and at present the unsecured loans are not acceptable to them. As such GGP is looking to either sell assets to pay those off, or negotiate terms. Both are possibilities, but at this stage it is unclear which is the more likely.

Another factor is the recent extension of uses for the Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP) by Barack Obama, to now explicitly include money for Commercial Real Estate. This bill has passed through congress, and the campaign is continuing - again it provides political pressure on the banks to lend and not push under a company as significant as GGP.

Once terms are agreed, or GGP manages to sell off a number of assets to enable refinancing, I expect there to be significant upwards movement on the stock price. I have gradually increased my long position on GGP from $1.61 down to $1.03 in the last 2 months, although it is worth adding that a recent sell off last week on fears ahead of the loan deadline (prior to extension again) lead to a sharp fall back to around 55 cents a share. As of yesterday, GGP's share price bounced up 30% on the news of the loan extension, and is now currently at around 80 cents a share as I type.

So I am sitting on an unrealised loss at present. Since I bought into this REIT in December, the share price has risen by 80% at its peak, and fallen by 50% from where I entered at its lows. I turned down the chance to cash in a £50k profit in early January because I am more interested in the bigger picture here. That's how trading works - I have a strategy which does not include day trading this stock, because I do not know when the news will be announced that will make the crucial difference.

To give you an idea of the potential rewards at stake here, if the share price were to rise back to just $3.50, where it was in October, I would make in the region of £150k from the trade.

I should add a cautionary note that this is considered a speculative play. I am speculating on the most likely outcome based on extensive research - what makes this unusual is that there appears to be significant upside regardless of whether GGP files for bankruptcy protection or not. To me the share price of GGP is significantly undervalued, and at some point the market is going to realise that.

Most people are not prepared to accept this level of risk, and that is entirely right, although it is worth pointing out that you can take a zero off the figures and it could easily be you making (or losing) these amounts. In my case, if everything goes as well as I expect, I could make over £1 million from the trade. Admittedly that is unlikely and would require me holding for a couple of years. I am looking at cashing in £250k as a more realistic profit, but it gives you an idea of how risk vs reward works in the markets.

I will keep you updated on the progress of this particular hot potato in the coming months. Anyway back to work.