Is it possible to determine whether a company is a potential takeover candidate before a public announcement has been made? Absolutely - if you know what to look for. Read on to learn the characteristics that well-financed suitors look for in their target companies. Once you know what the big companies are looking for, you'll be able to determine which companies are prime candidates for takeovers. (To learn about how you can benefit from takeovers as an investor, read Trade Takeover Stocks With Merger Arbitrage and Cashing In On Corporate Restructuring.)
Product/Service Niche
A large company has the luxury of being able to develop or acquire an arsenal of varying services and products. However, if it can buy a company at a reasonable price that has a unique niche in a particular industry (either in terms of a product, or service), it will probably do so.
Smart suitors will wait until the smaller company has done the risky footwork and advertising before buying in. But once a niche is carved out, the larger firm will probably come knocking. In terms of both money and time, it is often cheaper for larger companies to acquire a given product or a service than to build it out from scratch. This allows them to avoid much of the risk associated with a startup procedure.
Additional Financing Needed
Smaller companies often don't have the ability to market their items nationally, much less internationally. Larger firms with deep pockets have this ability. Therefore, look for not only a company with a viable product line, but one that, with the proper financing, could have the potential for large-scale growth. (For more insight, see Venturing Into Early-Stage Growth Stocks.)
Clean Capital Structure
Large firms want an acquisition to go forward on a timely basis, but some companies have a large amount of overhang that dissuades potential suitors. Be wary of companies with a lot of convertible bonds or varying classes of common or preferred stock, especially those with super voting rights. (For related reading, see Knowing Your Rights As A Shareholder.)
The reason that overhang dissuades companies from making an acquisition is that the acquiring firm has to go through a painstaking due diligence process. Overhang presents the risk of significant dilution and presents the possibility that some pesky shareholder with 10 to 1 voting rights might try to hold up the deal. If you think a company may be a prospective takeover target, make sure it has a clean capital structure. In other words, look for companies that have just one class of common stock and a minimal amount of debt that can be converted into common shares.
Debt Refinance Possible
In the latter half of the 1990s, when interest rates began to decline, a number of casino companies found themselves saddled with high fixed interest first mortgage notes. Because many of them were already drowning in debt, the banks weren't keen on refinancing those notes. And so, along came larger players in the industry. These larger players had better credit ratings and deeper pockets, as well as access to capital and were able to buy up many of the smaller, struggling casino companies.
Naturally, a large amount of consolidation occurred. After the deals were done, the larger companies refinanced these first mortgage notes which, in many cases, had very high interest rates. The result was millions in cost savings.
When considering the possibility of a takeover, look for companies that could be much more profitable if their debt loads were refinanced at a more favorable rate.
Geographic Proximity
When one company acquires another, management usually tries to save money by eliminating redundant overhead. In other words, why maintain two warehouses if one can do the job and is accessible by both companies? Therefore, in considering takeover targets, look for companies that are geographically convenient to each other and, that if combined, would present shareholders with a huge potential for cost savings.
For example, many analysts believe consolidation in the drug industry is likely because it is not uncommon to see company headquarters and operations in this industry situated near competing firms. As such, consolidation of these firms could lead to higher margins and increased shareholder value.
Clean Operating History
Takeover candidates usually have a clean operating history. They have consistent revenue streams and steady businesses. Remember, suitors and financing companies want a smooth transition, so they will be wary if a company has, for instance, previously filed for bankruptcy, has a history of reporting erratic earnings results, or has recently lost major customers.
History of Enhancing Shareholder Value
Has the target company been proactive in telling its story to the investment community? Has it repurchased its shares in the open market? Suitors want to buy companies that will thrive as part of a larger company, but also those that, if needed, could continue to work on their own. This ability to work as a standalone applies to the investor relations and public relations function. Suitors like companies are able to enhance shareholder value.
Experienced Management
In some cases, when one company acquires another, the management team at the acquired company is sacked. However, in other instances, management is kept on board because they know the company better than anyone else. Therefore, acquiring companies often look for candidates that have been well run. Remember, good stewardship implies that the company's facilities are probably in good order, and that its customer base is content. (For related reading, check out Evaluating A Company's Management.)
Minimal Litigation Risk/Threats
Almost every company at some point in time will be engaged in some sort of litigation. However, companies seeking acquisition candidates will usually steer clear of firms that are saddled down with lawsuits. In general, suitors avoid acquiring unknown risks.
Expandable Margins
As a company grows its revenue base, it develops economies of scale. In other words, its revenues grow, but its overhead - its rent, interest payments and maybe even its labor costs - stays the same, or increases at a much lower rate than revenue. Acquirers want to buy companies that have the potential to develop these economies of scale and increase margins. They also want to buy companies that have their cost structure in line, and that have a viable plan to grow revenue.
Solid Distribution Network
Particularly if the company is a manufacturer, it must have a solid distribution network or the ability to plug into the acquiring company's network if it is going to be a serious takeover target. What good is a product if it can't be brought to market?
Make certain that any company you believe could be a potential takeover target has not only the ability to develop a product, but also the ability to deliver it to its customers on a timely basis.
Word of Warning
Investors should never buy a company solely because they believe it is, or may become, a takeover target. These suggestions are merely meant to enhance the research process and to help identify characteristics that may be attractive to potential suitors. (To learn more about these companies, read Pinpoint Takeovers First.)
Bottom Line
With the investment community focused on ever-increasing profitability, large companies will always be looking for acquisitions that can add to earnings fast! Therefore, companies that are well run, have excellent products and have the best distribution networks are logical targets for a possible takeover.
by Glenn Curtis, (Contact Author | Biography)
Glenn Curtis started his career as an equity analyst at Cantone Research, a New Jersey-based regional brokerage firm. He has since worked as an equity analyst and a financial writer at a number of print/web publications and brokerage firms including Registered Representative Magazine, Advanced Trading Magazine, Worldlyinvestor.com, RealMoney.com, TheStreet.com and Prudential Securities. Curtis has also held Series 6,7,24 and 63 securities licenses.
Friday, October 3, 2008
Falling Knife In Motion (RIMM)
It's always dangerous to try to catch a falling knife. Buying a former highflying stock at a discount price is certainly tempting; but make sure you grab the handle, not the blade.
Research in Motion (Nasdaq:RIMM) is one such falling knife. On Friday, after Research in Motion slashed its profit margins guidance for coming quarters, the stock plunged 27%. The stock is down 55% from its highs in June. Is its safe to reach out for Research-In-Motion? To find out, it's worth taking a look at the company's valuation.
Beware of Sharp Objects
Research In Motion's enterprise value is about $37 billion and by my calculations the company will probably generate about $1.4 billion of free cash flow this year. Research In Motion is therefore trading at about 26 times free cash flow. That multiple is still on the high side, but it is much more reasonable than the multiples that market has given it over the past two years. I reckon a safe multiple for Research In Motion is about 20-25.
The stock is finally close to that range and could be approaching a floor. If the company's business really falls apart, the stock price could drop below $50 per share which would be far below today's $67 share price. That's unlikely, but not impossible as expectations of market growth fall across the broader market. (To learn more, read Analyze Cash Flow The Easy Way.)
DCF Tells the Story
I've also been working on a discounted cash flow analysis. My rosiest forecast assumes that Research in Motion will grow its free cash flow of $1.4 billion by 20% over the next four years, then by 10% through year ten, and 5% for years 11 through eternity. I've also assumed a discount rate of 10%.
This scenario - which demands lot from the wireless messaging specialist - generates a share valuation of $65.40. In other words, Research in Motion has pretty aggressive growth built into its current price.
Over the next few quarters, there is the chance that as the global economy weakens and it faces heightened competition from the likes of Apple (Nasdaq:AAPL) and Palm (Nasdaq:PALM), we could start to see Research In Motion's revenue forecasts trimmed further for 2009. The stock could weigh on the downside until that's over.
Bottom Line
In this market, Research In Motion is a risky place to put your money. Sure, it's nearing fair value. But stocks that fall fast tend to fall much further than you might expect. And for buyers that can hurt.
By Ben McClure
Research in Motion (Nasdaq:RIMM) is one such falling knife. On Friday, after Research in Motion slashed its profit margins guidance for coming quarters, the stock plunged 27%. The stock is down 55% from its highs in June. Is its safe to reach out for Research-In-Motion? To find out, it's worth taking a look at the company's valuation.
Beware of Sharp Objects
Research In Motion's enterprise value is about $37 billion and by my calculations the company will probably generate about $1.4 billion of free cash flow this year. Research In Motion is therefore trading at about 26 times free cash flow. That multiple is still on the high side, but it is much more reasonable than the multiples that market has given it over the past two years. I reckon a safe multiple for Research In Motion is about 20-25.
The stock is finally close to that range and could be approaching a floor. If the company's business really falls apart, the stock price could drop below $50 per share which would be far below today's $67 share price. That's unlikely, but not impossible as expectations of market growth fall across the broader market. (To learn more, read Analyze Cash Flow The Easy Way.)
DCF Tells the Story
I've also been working on a discounted cash flow analysis. My rosiest forecast assumes that Research in Motion will grow its free cash flow of $1.4 billion by 20% over the next four years, then by 10% through year ten, and 5% for years 11 through eternity. I've also assumed a discount rate of 10%.
This scenario - which demands lot from the wireless messaging specialist - generates a share valuation of $65.40. In other words, Research in Motion has pretty aggressive growth built into its current price.
Over the next few quarters, there is the chance that as the global economy weakens and it faces heightened competition from the likes of Apple (Nasdaq:AAPL) and Palm (Nasdaq:PALM), we could start to see Research In Motion's revenue forecasts trimmed further for 2009. The stock could weigh on the downside until that's over.
Bottom Line
In this market, Research In Motion is a risky place to put your money. Sure, it's nearing fair value. But stocks that fall fast tend to fall much further than you might expect. And for buyers that can hurt.
By Ben McClure
Thursday, October 2, 2008
Two Tech Stocks Trading at a Rare Value
With the stock market in turmoil, Cisco (CSCO) and Juniper (JNPR) have again fallen below our Consider Buying price. Although we can understand investors' reluctance to jump feet first into equities at this point, we believe both of these firms' long-term prospects remain intact.
Both companies fell victim to the collapse of the technology bubble earlier this decade. From August 2000 to March 2001, each stock lost 80% of its market value, and both remain well below the peak in 2000. Although it's clear that investors overestimated the amount of value that these two networking firms would capture as people around the world plugged into the Internet, both firms have steadily grown during the last eight years. We're now in another period of high uncertainty, and with the U.S. economy on shaky ground and non-U.S. markets losing steam, corporate IT budgets will likely be cut. Despite this short-term murkiness--which has pushed both Cisco and Juniper shares sharply lower thus far in 2008--we think investors will be handsomely rewarded by owning these stocks over the long haul.
Three Reasons Why Cisco and Juniper Are Great Buys
Our investment thesis on both firms rests on three points. First--and most important in the short run--both companies are flush with cash. Cisco has more than $20 billion in net cash, while Juniper has more than $2 billion. Cisco has already generated nearly $6 billion in free cash flow since the beginning of the year. Although Juniper's $375 million in free cash flow pales in comparison to its larger rival, that number is still impressive considering Juniper has generated all of that cash on less than $2 billion in revenue. While recent performance has been solid, history suggests that both companies will navigate a downturn reasonably well. During 2001 and 2002, when earlier years of overinvestment combined with recessionary pressures led to a precipitous decline in corporate IT spending, Cisco managed to generate more than $8 billion in free cash flow, while a much smaller Juniper eked out $18 million.
Looking longer term, the underlying fundamentals for these businesses also remain healthy. Both firms are key enablers of global interconnectivity--that is, helping people communicate anywhere in the world. We think that the trends of mobility, network convergence, and global connectivity will ensure that the markets for these firms' primary products will grow over the long run. Cisco and Juniper are market leaders, and we expect both firms to take share from weaker competitors.
Finally, unlike the heady market capitalizations enjoyed by Cisco and Juniper prior to the tech bubble collapse earlier this decade, each of these companies is trading at a reasonable valuation today. Our discounted cash-flow models bear this out, but so does a quick gut check. Subtracting each firm's net cash balance from its market capitalization, Cisco is trading at roughly 10 times the amount of cash it generated in the previous 12 months, and Juniper is trading at roughly 12 times its trailing 12-month free cash flow. Although not dirt cheap, we think these are very modest valuations given the strength of the underlying businesses.
Each firm's stock price could certainly fall further in the near term, but it's not often that investors can buy such great businesses at such reasonable prices, in our view. These are two of a number of firms within the technology sector that have become attractively priced, and now is a good time to be choosy. Particularly in the current market environment, we would look to invest in firms trading at a reasonable discount to our fair value estimate that have narrow or wide moats, healthy balance sheets, and generate plenty of cash. We think investors with longer time horizons will do very well by sticking with this strategy.
Both companies fell victim to the collapse of the technology bubble earlier this decade. From August 2000 to March 2001, each stock lost 80% of its market value, and both remain well below the peak in 2000. Although it's clear that investors overestimated the amount of value that these two networking firms would capture as people around the world plugged into the Internet, both firms have steadily grown during the last eight years. We're now in another period of high uncertainty, and with the U.S. economy on shaky ground and non-U.S. markets losing steam, corporate IT budgets will likely be cut. Despite this short-term murkiness--which has pushed both Cisco and Juniper shares sharply lower thus far in 2008--we think investors will be handsomely rewarded by owning these stocks over the long haul.
Three Reasons Why Cisco and Juniper Are Great Buys
Our investment thesis on both firms rests on three points. First--and most important in the short run--both companies are flush with cash. Cisco has more than $20 billion in net cash, while Juniper has more than $2 billion. Cisco has already generated nearly $6 billion in free cash flow since the beginning of the year. Although Juniper's $375 million in free cash flow pales in comparison to its larger rival, that number is still impressive considering Juniper has generated all of that cash on less than $2 billion in revenue. While recent performance has been solid, history suggests that both companies will navigate a downturn reasonably well. During 2001 and 2002, when earlier years of overinvestment combined with recessionary pressures led to a precipitous decline in corporate IT spending, Cisco managed to generate more than $8 billion in free cash flow, while a much smaller Juniper eked out $18 million.
Looking longer term, the underlying fundamentals for these businesses also remain healthy. Both firms are key enablers of global interconnectivity--that is, helping people communicate anywhere in the world. We think that the trends of mobility, network convergence, and global connectivity will ensure that the markets for these firms' primary products will grow over the long run. Cisco and Juniper are market leaders, and we expect both firms to take share from weaker competitors.
Finally, unlike the heady market capitalizations enjoyed by Cisco and Juniper prior to the tech bubble collapse earlier this decade, each of these companies is trading at a reasonable valuation today. Our discounted cash-flow models bear this out, but so does a quick gut check. Subtracting each firm's net cash balance from its market capitalization, Cisco is trading at roughly 10 times the amount of cash it generated in the previous 12 months, and Juniper is trading at roughly 12 times its trailing 12-month free cash flow. Although not dirt cheap, we think these are very modest valuations given the strength of the underlying businesses.
Each firm's stock price could certainly fall further in the near term, but it's not often that investors can buy such great businesses at such reasonable prices, in our view. These are two of a number of firms within the technology sector that have become attractively priced, and now is a good time to be choosy. Particularly in the current market environment, we would look to invest in firms trading at a reasonable discount to our fair value estimate that have narrow or wide moats, healthy balance sheets, and generate plenty of cash. We think investors with longer time horizons will do very well by sticking with this strategy.
Tuesday, September 9, 2008
how bond reacts to equity market news
But the move also raises questions about U.S. government borrowing, he said. As a result, supply concerns could continue to weigh on the long end of the U.S. yield curve, pushing interest rates higher and steepening the yield curve.
Ten-year Treasury note prices fell, pushing yields up (UST10Y 3.69, +0.00, +0.1%) 4 basis points, or 0.04%, to 3.74%.
Ten-year Treasury note prices fell, pushing yields up (UST10Y 3.69, +0.00, +0.1%) 4 basis points, or 0.04%, to 3.74%.
Sunday, September 7, 2008
房市决定未来走向
因为美国的经济增长还会下降，苏晖认为，美元短期走强后，中线(6个月)可能就只会保持某一个区间，而长线来说，特别对亚洲货币，美元在两到三年之内可能会走软。
“除非美国经济出现转型，才可能真正出现反转，”她说，美国有贸易逆差和政府赤字，这导致货币供应量增加，美元贬值。
徐建海说，如果美国经济恢复到石油泡沫前的水平，包括房屋市场和金融行业都恢复的话，未来两年油价肯定还能够达到每桶150美元，可能会更高，到200美元。
苏晖认为，目前决定美国经济最重要的因素就是房屋市场的走向。从今年年初到现在，房屋按揭贷款违约率一直在加速，但目前已经到了一定的程度，违约率会保持在一个比较稳定的水平。
但如果房价继续下降，违约率无法保持，大量的银行还会倒闭，失业率会进一步上升，股票市场等都会受到较大影响。
“如果这种情形发生，利息不但是下调，还可能会降到零，”苏晖说。
她表示，未来美元利率的走向将由失业率和通胀率两个数据决定，如果失业率超过5.8％，或者是核心通胀率(不包括能源和食品)从目前的2.4%下降到2%，美国都可能进一步采取降息措施。
“除非美国经济出现转型，才可能真正出现反转，”她说，美国有贸易逆差和政府赤字，这导致货币供应量增加，美元贬值。
徐建海说，如果美国经济恢复到石油泡沫前的水平，包括房屋市场和金融行业都恢复的话，未来两年油价肯定还能够达到每桶150美元，可能会更高，到200美元。
苏晖认为，目前决定美国经济最重要的因素就是房屋市场的走向。从今年年初到现在，房屋按揭贷款违约率一直在加速，但目前已经到了一定的程度，违约率会保持在一个比较稳定的水平。
但如果房价继续下降，违约率无法保持，大量的银行还会倒闭，失业率会进一步上升，股票市场等都会受到较大影响。
“如果这种情形发生，利息不但是下调，还可能会降到零，”苏晖说。
她表示，未来美元利率的走向将由失业率和通胀率两个数据决定，如果失业率超过5.8％，或者是核心通胀率(不包括能源和食品)从目前的2.4%下降到2%，美国都可能进一步采取降息措施。
Saturday, August 16, 2008
中国式并购“拯救”华尔街
对于身陷次贷窘境的华尔街投行们来说，中国式并购显然成为其惨淡业绩的“救命稻草”。
一个明显的例子是，由中铝与美铝共同成立的Shining Prospect公司以143亿美元收购力拓(Rio Tinto)股份，成为今年以来最大一宗对外并购交易。而为此交易提供财务顾问服务的雷曼兄弟就此坐上今年中国区并购排行榜的头把交椅。
然而，上述交易充其量只能说是在华投资银行今年以来在并购领域众多的“得意”之作之一。伴随着市场环境的急剧变化，投资银行的战略也在悄然转变。既然IPO市场乏善可陈，并购便逐渐成为投行们的新战场。
惨淡业绩的亮点
2008年的并购市场可谓风声水起。
工商银行出资约338亿元人民币认购了标准银行1.525亿股新股；中国平安以21.5亿欧元收购富通集团旗下的富通投资管理公司50%的股权；中钢则获得中西部公司(Midwest Corporation Limited)54.81％的股份……
根据汤姆森路透的统计，今年以来，中国并购交易金额达到1136亿美元，已经超过2007年全年的1121亿美元。
而全球并购市场则呈现相反走势。据统计，截至2008年7月，全球并购交易额约为2万亿美元，而2007年全球为4.8万亿美元，2006年为3.9万亿美元。以年化估算，2008年的并购交易额基本将与2006年持平，较2007年略有下降。
亚洲市场，尤其是中国市场在并购领域的突出表现，为一些投行的业绩增色不少。较为典型的要数雷曼兄弟。
由于次贷危机，以往在固定收益方面颇为强势的雷曼兄弟近半年来业绩惨淡。截至2008年5月31日，该公司第二季度净亏损约28亿美元，合每股稀释后损失5.14美元。
失之东隅，收之桑榆。截至目前，在中国已公布和已完成的并购交易额中，雷曼兄弟均排名第一。今年一季度，雷曼兄弟在亚洲(除日本外)参与的已公布交易及已完成交易等各项数据中均排名第一。
今年上半年在中国市场的出色表现，尤其是成为中铝与美铝共同收购力拓这宗对外最大并购交易的财务顾问，成为雷曼兄弟夺回第一名“宝座”的关键因素。
与雷曼公司相仿，另一个典型案例是瑞银集团。尽管该集团于近期公告称今年第二季度亏损3.58亿瑞士法郎，但瑞银集团中国区主席兼总裁李一仍然认为，瑞银在亚太地区的收入相当稳健，分散的业务组合可以对个别业务的收益下降进行平衡弥补。
“受惠于活跃的并购活动，瑞银投资银行的收益继续居亚太地区投资银行界之首。在财富管理方面，前两个季度，亚太区新增资金保持良好的净流入。”李一对记者说。
同样把并购业务作为业务重点的摩根大通也颇为得意。在2008年上半年全球已经公布的10宗最大并购案中，摩根大通担任收购方或被收购方财务顾问的并购交易就占4宗。目前中国已公布的10大并购案中，摩根大通也占4席。
“ 展望2008年，下半年我觉得并购的大趋势没有太大的变化，中国公司到海外并购的力度、强度都会保持上半年非常活跃的局势，自然资源类还是非常重要的一个投资方向，其他一些行业，包括工业、科技行业都会不断有并购的举措。”摩根大通董事总经理、大中华区并购部主管顾宏地自信满满。
他表示，现在西方一些竞标的公司，融资成本相对来说比较高，所以中国企业有一定的优势。同时，国内一些公司也会做进一步的整合，并购的举动会逐渐活跃起来。
IPO市场萎靡
受全球股市低迷影响，“IPO储备”逐渐枯竭的窘境也让投行们重新审视原来的IPO战略。
“2008年美国资本市场下降了50%，很多想上市的公司看到市场波动性巨大，不愿估值受到影响，所以等待上市的公司数目非常多。”纽约泛欧交易所集团的副总裁凯瑟琳·金尼表示。
“在香港排队的很多公司都陷入了漫长的等待，有的公司已经没有希望在今年上市了。”一家美资投行中国区高管表示。
瑞银证券负责股权资本市场的Joseph Chee表示，那些意欲通过股市融资的中国房地产开发商至少得等到明年或者更晚一些时候再采取行动，因同类公司目前在中国大陆和香港股市均被低估。如果现在发行股票，则有可能被贱卖。
知情人士称，中国大陆服装零售商ITAT集团(ITAT Group Ltd.)首次公开募股的筹备工作已经停止。在会计问题浮现出来后，ITAT集团与协助其上市的两家机构──高盛集团和美林分道扬镳。
“还有一堆长长的名单，但在今年IPO如此萎靡的情况下，上市显得异常艰难。这对投资银行来说，特别是做IPO的人来说，是十分难熬的一年。”某外资投行负责人无奈道。
今年以来，香港的IPO规模只有70亿美元，远远低于上年同期。其中，凭借参与一家中国基建公司的IPO承销，包括花旗在内的3家投行成为今年香港IPO承销业务的领头羊。摩根士丹利排名第四，该行今年拿下了5家公司共计7.06亿美元的IPO承销业务。
花旗银行报告指出，过去两年，中国大陆的市场环境和政策已经由鼓励中国企业海外上市转而鼓励国内上市。A股发行总量从2005年不到40亿美元增长到去年的 740亿美元——与整个亚太地区的首次公开发行总量几近持平。其中超过70％的交易量来自于国有企业在上海进行的大规模增发上市。
“为鼓励中国公司在境内上市，除了极少数的超大型公司A/H股两地同时上市之外，中国证监会原则上不再批准在中国注册成立的公司进行海外首次公开发行，中国商务部也停止审批新的红筹重组申请，只有此前已经完成境外注册的公司才能继续在海外上市，因为红筹公司的首次公开发行不需要取得中国证监会的批准。”上述报告表示。
结果，国内交易所的首次公开发行量从2005年不到10亿美元增长到去年将近200亿美元，几乎从零开始一跃占据中国公司首次公开发行总量的26%。
而今，在A股市场表现不佳、情势逆转之际，一张中国本土的证券经纪牌照就显得尤为宝贵。但这正是很多在华外资投行的业务“短板”。于是，并购领域的硝烟四起也便顺理成章。
一个明显的例子是，由中铝与美铝共同成立的Shining Prospect公司以143亿美元收购力拓(Rio Tinto)股份，成为今年以来最大一宗对外并购交易。而为此交易提供财务顾问服务的雷曼兄弟就此坐上今年中国区并购排行榜的头把交椅。
然而，上述交易充其量只能说是在华投资银行今年以来在并购领域众多的“得意”之作之一。伴随着市场环境的急剧变化，投资银行的战略也在悄然转变。既然IPO市场乏善可陈，并购便逐渐成为投行们的新战场。
惨淡业绩的亮点
2008年的并购市场可谓风声水起。
工商银行出资约338亿元人民币认购了标准银行1.525亿股新股；中国平安以21.5亿欧元收购富通集团旗下的富通投资管理公司50%的股权；中钢则获得中西部公司(Midwest Corporation Limited)54.81％的股份……
根据汤姆森路透的统计，今年以来，中国并购交易金额达到1136亿美元，已经超过2007年全年的1121亿美元。
而全球并购市场则呈现相反走势。据统计，截至2008年7月，全球并购交易额约为2万亿美元，而2007年全球为4.8万亿美元，2006年为3.9万亿美元。以年化估算，2008年的并购交易额基本将与2006年持平，较2007年略有下降。
亚洲市场，尤其是中国市场在并购领域的突出表现，为一些投行的业绩增色不少。较为典型的要数雷曼兄弟。
由于次贷危机，以往在固定收益方面颇为强势的雷曼兄弟近半年来业绩惨淡。截至2008年5月31日，该公司第二季度净亏损约28亿美元，合每股稀释后损失5.14美元。
失之东隅，收之桑榆。截至目前，在中国已公布和已完成的并购交易额中，雷曼兄弟均排名第一。今年一季度，雷曼兄弟在亚洲(除日本外)参与的已公布交易及已完成交易等各项数据中均排名第一。
今年上半年在中国市场的出色表现，尤其是成为中铝与美铝共同收购力拓这宗对外最大并购交易的财务顾问，成为雷曼兄弟夺回第一名“宝座”的关键因素。
与雷曼公司相仿，另一个典型案例是瑞银集团。尽管该集团于近期公告称今年第二季度亏损3.58亿瑞士法郎，但瑞银集团中国区主席兼总裁李一仍然认为，瑞银在亚太地区的收入相当稳健，分散的业务组合可以对个别业务的收益下降进行平衡弥补。
“受惠于活跃的并购活动，瑞银投资银行的收益继续居亚太地区投资银行界之首。在财富管理方面，前两个季度，亚太区新增资金保持良好的净流入。”李一对记者说。
同样把并购业务作为业务重点的摩根大通也颇为得意。在2008年上半年全球已经公布的10宗最大并购案中，摩根大通担任收购方或被收购方财务顾问的并购交易就占4宗。目前中国已公布的10大并购案中，摩根大通也占4席。
“ 展望2008年，下半年我觉得并购的大趋势没有太大的变化，中国公司到海外并购的力度、强度都会保持上半年非常活跃的局势，自然资源类还是非常重要的一个投资方向，其他一些行业，包括工业、科技行业都会不断有并购的举措。”摩根大通董事总经理、大中华区并购部主管顾宏地自信满满。
他表示，现在西方一些竞标的公司，融资成本相对来说比较高，所以中国企业有一定的优势。同时，国内一些公司也会做进一步的整合，并购的举动会逐渐活跃起来。
IPO市场萎靡
受全球股市低迷影响，“IPO储备”逐渐枯竭的窘境也让投行们重新审视原来的IPO战略。
“2008年美国资本市场下降了50%，很多想上市的公司看到市场波动性巨大，不愿估值受到影响，所以等待上市的公司数目非常多。”纽约泛欧交易所集团的副总裁凯瑟琳·金尼表示。
“在香港排队的很多公司都陷入了漫长的等待，有的公司已经没有希望在今年上市了。”一家美资投行中国区高管表示。
瑞银证券负责股权资本市场的Joseph Chee表示，那些意欲通过股市融资的中国房地产开发商至少得等到明年或者更晚一些时候再采取行动，因同类公司目前在中国大陆和香港股市均被低估。如果现在发行股票，则有可能被贱卖。
知情人士称，中国大陆服装零售商ITAT集团(ITAT Group Ltd.)首次公开募股的筹备工作已经停止。在会计问题浮现出来后，ITAT集团与协助其上市的两家机构──高盛集团和美林分道扬镳。
“还有一堆长长的名单，但在今年IPO如此萎靡的情况下，上市显得异常艰难。这对投资银行来说，特别是做IPO的人来说，是十分难熬的一年。”某外资投行负责人无奈道。
今年以来，香港的IPO规模只有70亿美元，远远低于上年同期。其中，凭借参与一家中国基建公司的IPO承销，包括花旗在内的3家投行成为今年香港IPO承销业务的领头羊。摩根士丹利排名第四，该行今年拿下了5家公司共计7.06亿美元的IPO承销业务。
花旗银行报告指出，过去两年，中国大陆的市场环境和政策已经由鼓励中国企业海外上市转而鼓励国内上市。A股发行总量从2005年不到40亿美元增长到去年的 740亿美元——与整个亚太地区的首次公开发行总量几近持平。其中超过70％的交易量来自于国有企业在上海进行的大规模增发上市。
“为鼓励中国公司在境内上市，除了极少数的超大型公司A/H股两地同时上市之外，中国证监会原则上不再批准在中国注册成立的公司进行海外首次公开发行，中国商务部也停止审批新的红筹重组申请，只有此前已经完成境外注册的公司才能继续在海外上市，因为红筹公司的首次公开发行不需要取得中国证监会的批准。”上述报告表示。
结果，国内交易所的首次公开发行量从2005年不到10亿美元增长到去年将近200亿美元，几乎从零开始一跃占据中国公司首次公开发行总量的26%。
而今，在A股市场表现不佳、情势逆转之际，一张中国本土的证券经纪牌照就显得尤为宝贵。但这正是很多在华外资投行的业务“短板”。于是，并购领域的硝烟四起也便顺理成章。
格林斯潘批评美政府两房救助方案
21世纪网讯 美国联邦储备委员会前主席格林斯潘本周表示，美国政府救助房利美和房地美这两大住房抵押贷款融资机构的方案是一个“糟糕”的决定。
据《华尔街日报》14日报道，美国政府用纳税人的钱给房利美和房地美提供资金的救助办法，让格林斯潘很不以为然。他认为，“两房”是存在根本性问题的金融机构，而政府的解决之道应该是对“两房”实行重组，将两家公司分组为5个至10个独立的私人持股公司，然后进行拍卖。许多经济学家也认为，美国政府是在以纳税人的钱为“两房”等金融机构的损失埋单，这种方法损害的是纳税人的利益，而且违背了市场规律。
但对于格林斯潘等经济学家的批评，美国财政部发言人米歇尔·戴维斯表示，政府目前的救助方案有两个重要目标：一是有助于恢复市场信心；二是推出了一个新的监管者，以此防范相关企业的系统型风险。
格林斯潘在接受采访时还认为，美国房价很可能在明年上半年的某个时间触底并开始回稳。他说，美国房价回稳不仅事关普通购房者，而且关系到全球金融动荡能否很快平息。
据《华尔街日报》14日报道，美国政府用纳税人的钱给房利美和房地美提供资金的救助办法，让格林斯潘很不以为然。他认为，“两房”是存在根本性问题的金融机构，而政府的解决之道应该是对“两房”实行重组，将两家公司分组为5个至10个独立的私人持股公司，然后进行拍卖。许多经济学家也认为，美国政府是在以纳税人的钱为“两房”等金融机构的损失埋单，这种方法损害的是纳税人的利益，而且违背了市场规律。
但对于格林斯潘等经济学家的批评，美国财政部发言人米歇尔·戴维斯表示，政府目前的救助方案有两个重要目标：一是有助于恢复市场信心；二是推出了一个新的监管者，以此防范相关企业的系统型风险。
格林斯潘在接受采访时还认为，美国房价很可能在明年上半年的某个时间触底并开始回稳。他说，美国房价回稳不仅事关普通购房者，而且关系到全球金融动荡能否很快平息。
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
