I badly sprained my ankle (and quite possibly tore a ligament, as yet undetermined) playing some after work sports and, stupid me, limped back to work to finish off a couple of things and pick up my stuff. This is obviously the exact opposite of the RICE principle used to treat sprains. The brave front I put on at work ("it's just a sprain, I'm not infectious") was quickly shut down by my doctor the next day, saying it was quite silly I'm still walking around on it and making it worse than it already was (it had bloated to the size of a melon overnight and cause some serious pain, and therefore cursing in between microsleeps). So I had to take the last couple of days off to keep my leg elevated every hour or so and undo my self-inflicted damage.
Being stuck at home on a work day is really crap. For one, I can't play office soccer because all the breakables are at my expense. Another is the fact that I missed out on Friday night drinks, which is particularly important tonight as I was scheduled to catch up with various friends I have not seen for a little while (apparently my fault, but whatever). I did have the option of going to drinks supported by my crutch, but somehow I don't think it qualified as "acceptable accessory" in the pretentious bar scene that this stupid city is so desperate to cultivate. Not worth the trouble.
Anyway, the one good thing is that I can do a link dump of all the fun things that recently happened:
- ABC Learning (ASX: ABS) continues its trading halt. I once had some money invested in this company, and fundamentally speaking the business idea is great, the capital structure just really sucks in the current market. Whoever is trying to buy it at current prices will pick up a great bargain... if it has a healthy balance sheet itself.
- Every company that says anything spooky becomes a takeover target; IAG is the latest in a recent line that includes MFS, Allco, and ABC Learning. Interestingly, not the Macquarie Group.
- With this much money disappearing, why aren't any hitting my pockets? Are my pants not baggy enough?
- Rockett Girlfriend has a certain affinity for this firm at the moment. And I know that one day, calling this firm "Allen's Ovaries" will get me in trouble with an actual lawyer working there.
- By the way, Rockett Girlfriend totally missed out on proposing to me on Feb 29, so her loss. I better get a decent present from London to compensate.
Friday, 29 February 2008
Monday, 25 February 2008
EA, Take-Two, and why I love games
Electronic Arts, the biggest video game maker in the world, offers $26/share of Take-Two, a 49.8% premium. This comes a pretty good second on my list of "Dream Deals To Work On", after a potential takeover of Limited Brands. Sometimes (relatively OK capital markets aside) I absolutely hate working in this backwater colony of a city.
Take-Two board and management will be hard-pressed to justify rejecting this deal, given current markets and the relatively high premium on the table. Other thoughts on the matter:
- it will be interesting to see what the "crucial initiatives" are, and how certain these are to create value for shareholders.
- at the heart of it, video game creation has common characteristics with other R&D businesses. It is a capital-intensive enterprise, even more so for Take-Two, who have specialised in creation of large, complex and immersive 3D worlds. It has a bit of a "hit or miss" nature, and missing is very costly. Eventually, franchises will have to be revamped or replaced with new ones, and the result may or may not appeal to players.
- The very nature of Take-Two's most popular franchises (M-rated or higher) means a fair portion of the gaming population (kids under 15, females) are unable to get into the games, and a fair few others who can play it, won't, because of the large time investment involved in some of these games (a general criticism for most game makers, but still applicable).
- On the other hand, having a successful stable of franchises is half the battle, both as sources of relatively dependable revenue (from sequels), and as a legitimising factor when launching new franchises ("these guys created Grand Theft Auto; they know what they're doing"). Success breeds success, and all that.
- What exactly does EA see that the market didn't? Do they really think the franchises, the game brains, and the marketing team are worth 50% more under EA management than on their own? Is there alot of fat in this business? Is it just to take out one of its serious competitors? And is that really good for gamers?
On a somewhat related note, given the current development in video game technology (both computing power and the ability to create highly complex worlds with realistic and causal parts), why is there such an utter lack of good business simulation games? I think we are well beyond the "Tycoon" and "Sim" simulators that keep getting churned out, which tend to focus on closed systems (zoo, theme park, etc) rather than a full-scale corporate environment with many industries all interacting, competing, cooperating, and co-depending. If I build a theme park, I want to be able to sell the damn thing to Disney! While of course remaining as owner of the plot of land, charging exorbitant rent, and using this cash cow to fund the growing army of politicians I employ.
Imagine playing as a private equity barbarian, a hedge fund activist, or the CEO of a Fortune 500 (or a startup!). Imagine getting calls and emails through your Blackberry, which causes you to rush out of some inane meeting, just so you can send instructions to your "executives" about that hostile takeover! Imagine being Greenspan or Bernanke, overreacting in a dizzy panic and unwittingly setting off the start of a new bust several years in the future!
I love games.
Take-Two board and management will be hard-pressed to justify rejecting this deal, given current markets and the relatively high premium on the table. Other thoughts on the matter:
- it will be interesting to see what the "crucial initiatives" are, and how certain these are to create value for shareholders.
- at the heart of it, video game creation has common characteristics with other R&D businesses. It is a capital-intensive enterprise, even more so for Take-Two, who have specialised in creation of large, complex and immersive 3D worlds. It has a bit of a "hit or miss" nature, and missing is very costly. Eventually, franchises will have to be revamped or replaced with new ones, and the result may or may not appeal to players.
- The very nature of Take-Two's most popular franchises (M-rated or higher) means a fair portion of the gaming population (kids under 15, females) are unable to get into the games, and a fair few others who can play it, won't, because of the large time investment involved in some of these games (a general criticism for most game makers, but still applicable).
- On the other hand, having a successful stable of franchises is half the battle, both as sources of relatively dependable revenue (from sequels), and as a legitimising factor when launching new franchises ("these guys created Grand Theft Auto; they know what they're doing"). Success breeds success, and all that.
- What exactly does EA see that the market didn't? Do they really think the franchises, the game brains, and the marketing team are worth 50% more under EA management than on their own? Is there alot of fat in this business? Is it just to take out one of its serious competitors? And is that really good for gamers?
On a somewhat related note, given the current development in video game technology (both computing power and the ability to create highly complex worlds with realistic and causal parts), why is there such an utter lack of good business simulation games? I think we are well beyond the "Tycoon" and "Sim" simulators that keep getting churned out, which tend to focus on closed systems (zoo, theme park, etc) rather than a full-scale corporate environment with many industries all interacting, competing, cooperating, and co-depending. If I build a theme park, I want to be able to sell the damn thing to Disney! While of course remaining as owner of the plot of land, charging exorbitant rent, and using this cash cow to fund the growing army of politicians I employ.
Imagine playing as a private equity barbarian, a hedge fund activist, or the CEO of a Fortune 500 (or a startup!). Imagine getting calls and emails through your Blackberry, which causes you to rush out of some inane meeting, just so you can send instructions to your "executives" about that hostile takeover! Imagine being Greenspan or Bernanke, overreacting in a dizzy panic and unwittingly setting off the start of a new bust several years in the future!
I love games.
Tuesday, 12 February 2008
Intelsat
Thanks to Going Private for writing about this interesting deal.
Intelsat key stats:
Initial equity investment = $128M
Investment period = 37 months
Current (last sale) equity value = $1.2B
Estimated IRR = 106.65% pa (go on, lick that IRR, you know you want to)
Current EV = $16.5B
Total Debt = $15.4B ($10.4B of existing debt to roll over + $5B bridge loan, arranged by Credit Suisse, Morgan Stanley and Bank of America)
Total Leverage = ~9.8x EBITDA (after annualising YTD published Sep 07 results)
Even if we assume that this is a high-margin, high-growth, limited competition business (which a cursory glance at the company information and financials seem to indicate, but I must dig further), 9.8x is a very high leverage multiple. Quite rightly, a few comments point out that this leverage would never have happened had the lead banks worked on the assumption that they would have to hold a significant chunk of the debt on their books (and all its related risks). The bridge loan will be problematic - it is basically a bet by the lead banks that by the time it matures, things will be considerably closer to normal and that it can be refinanced in the debt market.
Also it seems that this is a HoldCo lend (i.e. the debt is borrowed by the holding company that owns the actual operating companies), which raises an extra level of risk. HoldCos rely on dividend streams from the OpCos to pay the expenses and repay debt. Often, OpCos have their own debt to service (which appears to be the case with Intelsat), and there are (or should be) severe restrictions on the dividends it can pay to HoldCo. Should things go slightly askew at OpCo level, the dividend stream might get dammed up by the banks lending to the OpCos - which means less cash to HoldCo, putting HoldCo principal and interest repayments at risk.
The interesting part is that BC Partners (the new owners) and the banks chose to roll over the existing loans rather than have the existing loans refinanced by new debt as part of the transaction (which is how these are typically done). The reason? The current leveraged loans market is not conducive to issuing new debt. So instead of having to sell a fresh new $15B batch of debt to a group of banks suffering indigestion, why not just let the existing bankers (who presumably still like their debtor) stick around? Sure, this means lower fees for the lead arrangers, but given the option to forgo some fees to significantly reduce your headache and the hit to your capital provisions, it's worth it.
Other tidbits
- Our new graduate started last Monday. The second thing I did (after I said hello) was rescue him from the fiery exchange between our Executive Assistant and some back office guy in Bangalore. The next day he brought his iPod with noise-cancelling earphones.
- Overheard:
[Person 1 gets flicked in a certain protruding area of the thorax region]
Person 1: "I don't know if I should feel good or bad about that."
Person 2: "It's because you feel guilty about how good it feels."
- Interesting analysis of the BHP Billiton-Rio Tinto deal from Deal Professor.
Intelsat key stats:
Initial equity investment = $128M
Investment period = 37 months
Current (last sale) equity value = $1.2B
Estimated IRR = 106.65% pa (go on, lick that IRR, you know you want to)
Current EV = $16.5B
Total Debt = $15.4B ($10.4B of existing debt to roll over + $5B bridge loan, arranged by Credit Suisse, Morgan Stanley and Bank of America)
Total Leverage = ~9.8x EBITDA (after annualising YTD published Sep 07 results)
Even if we assume that this is a high-margin, high-growth, limited competition business (which a cursory glance at the company information and financials seem to indicate, but I must dig further), 9.8x is a very high leverage multiple. Quite rightly, a few comments point out that this leverage would never have happened had the lead banks worked on the assumption that they would have to hold a significant chunk of the debt on their books (and all its related risks). The bridge loan will be problematic - it is basically a bet by the lead banks that by the time it matures, things will be considerably closer to normal and that it can be refinanced in the debt market.
Also it seems that this is a HoldCo lend (i.e. the debt is borrowed by the holding company that owns the actual operating companies), which raises an extra level of risk. HoldCos rely on dividend streams from the OpCos to pay the expenses and repay debt. Often, OpCos have their own debt to service (which appears to be the case with Intelsat), and there are (or should be) severe restrictions on the dividends it can pay to HoldCo. Should things go slightly askew at OpCo level, the dividend stream might get dammed up by the banks lending to the OpCos - which means less cash to HoldCo, putting HoldCo principal and interest repayments at risk.
The interesting part is that BC Partners (the new owners) and the banks chose to roll over the existing loans rather than have the existing loans refinanced by new debt as part of the transaction (which is how these are typically done). The reason? The current leveraged loans market is not conducive to issuing new debt. So instead of having to sell a fresh new $15B batch of debt to a group of banks suffering indigestion, why not just let the existing bankers (who presumably still like their debtor) stick around? Sure, this means lower fees for the lead arrangers, but given the option to forgo some fees to significantly reduce your headache and the hit to your capital provisions, it's worth it.
Other tidbits
- Our new graduate started last Monday. The second thing I did (after I said hello) was rescue him from the fiery exchange between our Executive Assistant and some back office guy in Bangalore. The next day he brought his iPod with noise-cancelling earphones.
- Overheard:
[Person 1 gets flicked in a certain protruding area of the thorax region]
Person 1: "I don't know if I should feel good or bad about that."
Person 2: "It's because you feel guilty about how good it feels."
- Interesting analysis of the BHP Billiton-Rio Tinto deal from Deal Professor.
Thursday, 24 January 2008
Soc-ked In
Wow. Societe Generale just lost 4.9B euro in what looks like a fraudulent job by a junior trader. In today's hyper-automated trading desks, VaR, and layers upon layers of compliance measures, I thought maybe you could get away with a couple of hundred million, at most, before you (a) get caught, (b) reach a safe haven island, or (c) kill yourself.
Crap job by SocGen. All those millions of euros spent on risk management and compliance, and you couldn't stop a noob trader trading some vanilla futures. You might as well just have given him a nice big vault full of cash, you would have lost less money.
And while it is very very wrong and illegal and should not be done by anyone under any circumstances, kudos to the junior trader. (Hey, it's Biblical so it's OK.) You give hope to many subpar traders the world over that if they dream it, it will happen. May you receive a lucrative book/movie deal out of this. Might be the next Liar's Poker. Or not.
Crap job by SocGen. All those millions of euros spent on risk management and compliance, and you couldn't stop a noob trader trading some vanilla futures. You might as well just have given him a nice big vault full of cash, you would have lost less money.
And while it is very very wrong and illegal and should not be done by anyone under any circumstances, kudos to the junior trader. (Hey, it's Biblical so it's OK.) You give hope to many subpar traders the world over that if they dream it, it will happen. May you receive a lucrative book/movie deal out of this. Might be the next Liar's Poker. Or not.
Tuesday, 22 January 2008
Where's an open window when you need one?
So today, all eyes were on the bloodbath in the market, with the S&P ASX 200 shedding 7% today, officially entering "bear market" territory (thank you, Mr/Ms Hedge Fund Manager) and essentially wiping out all the gains of the past 12 months.
Neeeeeeaaat. And to have it happen during my lifetime... what a story to tell the kids. I look forward to the day when people will be writing about the current crop of wheelers and dealers, and how it was such an extravagant lifestyle fueled by debt and ego, etc etc. The 80's baby... when it comes back, it comes roaring back!
Sure, he started it, but he didn't love the 80s like I do.
Now my 99% cash allocation doesn't look so stupid anymore, and who knows, I might even go on a bit of a bargain hunt.
I like this article, dedicated to a mostly illiterate audience, just in case they've been holidaying in the Pacific for six months using the money found after they mortgaged their house and retirement savings. I especially like this section: "What is the sub-prime market?" It's you and your kind, you bogan (and valued reader).
UPDATE: The Fed has made an emergency cut of 75 bp to its target rate. George Bush also announces new expansionary policy to stimulate the economy, to be funded by a (larger-than-ever) budget deficit, and proceeds from sales of a half-share in the USA to a consortium led by the Carlyle Group and Saudi sovereign funds.
Neeeeeeaaat. And to have it happen during my lifetime... what a story to tell the kids. I look forward to the day when people will be writing about the current crop of wheelers and dealers, and how it was such an extravagant lifestyle fueled by debt and ego, etc etc. The 80's baby... when it comes back, it comes roaring back!
Sure, he started it, but he didn't love the 80s like I do.Now my 99% cash allocation doesn't look so stupid anymore, and who knows, I might even go on a bit of a bargain hunt.
I like this article, dedicated to a mostly illiterate audience, just in case they've been holidaying in the Pacific for six months using the money found after they mortgaged their house and retirement savings. I especially like this section: "What is the sub-prime market?" It's you and your kind, you bogan (and valued reader).
UPDATE: The Fed has made an emergency cut of 75 bp to its target rate. George Bush also announces new expansionary policy to stimulate the economy, to be funded by a (larger-than-ever) budget deficit, and proceeds from sales of a half-share in the USA to a consortium led by the Carlyle Group and Saudi sovereign funds.
Monday, 7 January 2008
Adios 2007, and haroo 2008
Well after the flurry of blogging leading up to the final month of the year, Rockett Fuel falters, tripped up by the many Christmas functions to attend. And a deal or three in between. So a belated Merry Christmas, Happy New Year, and so on.
Now my normal blogus modus operandi is to get one of those question lists you get from your spamming friends, and answer them here. Unfortunately I am yet to receive such spam (perhaps because I have alienated many friends in the past 12 months), so this is a placeholder entry until I find such a list.
In other news:
Oil touches USD 100/barrel.
Latest megarich toy: a brand-name US or European bank.
Rockett Fuel: go-to guy for jumpstarting failed syndications. (Well, can't link to them, obviously. Who wants to announce failed syndications?)
Now my normal blogus modus operandi is to get one of those question lists you get from your spamming friends, and answer them here. Unfortunately I am yet to receive such spam (perhaps because I have alienated many friends in the past 12 months), so this is a placeholder entry until I find such a list.
In other news:
Oil touches USD 100/barrel.
Latest megarich toy: a brand-name US or European bank.
Rockett Fuel: go-to guy for jumpstarting failed syndications. (Well, can't link to them, obviously. Who wants to announce failed syndications?)
Sunday, 25 November 2007
Wii Points Index
I recently got a Wii. How I am going to find time to play it is irrelevant, I just wanted one.
Those who have one, or may have been following its progress, would probably know that Nintendo has a Wii Points system to allow players to purchase retro games from its online channels. The games are priced by Wii Points, with the more popular/more recent games obviously charging higher prices.
That, and my great admiration for The Economist's Big Mac Index, gave me a thought: how much do these Wii Points cost in different countries? Clearly every Wii Point is exactly the same, and should theoretically be worth exactly the same. In practice, regional restrictions mean there are no arbitrage opportunities. In any case, I started with what I could find off the net, as follows:
So the lesson isn't so much about international economics and arbitrage; it's simply that UK and AUS gamers are clearly being ripped off by local retailers, who aren't passing on the benefits of a weaker USD. Time to campaign, geeks. Japanese players, as usual, are treated to an entirely different echelon of gaming goodness. I would move there just to be hooked into Nintendo nirvana.
Highly doubt this will replace the Big Mac Index; for one, it does not account for the "basket of goods". Still, makes you realise why game console makers continue to maintain region coding even though there are clear benefits to gamers to remove them (i.e. being able to import hot games from overseas, rather than relying on the pitiful supply from local distributors).
Those who have one, or may have been following its progress, would probably know that Nintendo has a Wii Points system to allow players to purchase retro games from its online channels. The games are priced by Wii Points, with the more popular/more recent games obviously charging higher prices.
That, and my great admiration for The Economist's Big Mac Index, gave me a thought: how much do these Wii Points cost in different countries? Clearly every Wii Point is exactly the same, and should theoretically be worth exactly the same. In practice, regional restrictions mean there are no arbitrage opportunities. In any case, I started with what I could find off the net, as follows:
| Cost of 2000 Wii Points | ||||
| Country | Local Currency | Store | Price (in local currency) | Implied FX Rate to USD |
| US | USD | Toys R Us | 21.9900 | 1.0000 |
| | GBP | Woolworths | 13.9900 | 1.5718 |
| AUS | AUD | EB | 35.0000 | 0.6283 |
| CAN | CAD | Sears Canada | 24.9900 | 0.8800 |
| JAP | JPY | Indicative | 2,000.0000 | 0.0110 |
| | | | | |
| Country | Local Currency | Current FX Rate (USD equiv) www.xe.com | Implied Price based on Current FX Rate | Over/(under) pricing relative to current FX rate |
| US | USD | 1.0000 | 21.9900 | N/A |
| | GBP | 2.0609 | 10.6701 | 31.11% |
| AUS | AUD | 0.8770 | 25.0741 | 39.59% |
| CAN | CAD | 0.9895 | 22.2233 | 12.45% |
| JAP | JPY | 0.0092 | 2,390.2174 | (16.33%) |
So the lesson isn't so much about international economics and arbitrage; it's simply that UK and AUS gamers are clearly being ripped off by local retailers, who aren't passing on the benefits of a weaker USD. Time to campaign, geeks. Japanese players, as usual, are treated to an entirely different echelon of gaming goodness. I would move there just to be hooked into Nintendo nirvana.
Highly doubt this will replace the Big Mac Index; for one, it does not account for the "basket of goods". Still, makes you realise why game console makers continue to maintain region coding even though there are clear benefits to gamers to remove them (i.e. being able to import hot games from overseas, rather than relying on the pitiful supply from local distributors).
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
