PureVC

Don't Bite The Hand That Feeds

One key concept in business is to take good care of your best customers. In the startup world, a marquee customer can lay the pipeline for further deals with that company as well as serve as a reference to get your foot in the door of new leads. In business when times get rough and the economy is in recession, it is important to hunker down and to think of creative ways to add revenue. Generally, you don't increase fees and rates to increase revenue. Doing so is a great way to get customers to stop using your product. When your customers are having tough times, you don't want to squeeze them. They will leave and never come back. You must get in better touch with your customer and perhaps come out with new products to meet their needs.

Most of the above is pretty intuitive for managers in business. This is in stark contrast to the way local, state, and the federal government is run. Governments like to compare themselves to businesses that have a simple business model - generate revenue through taxes and deploy the capital to services vital to the people. Essentially they have a pretty easy mandate - collect money and spend it. Try not to look dumb by spending more than you collect. Obviously California is having a problem and they look really dumb. And even the Feds look pretty dumb because anybody knows that in a time of fiscal crisis you must cut the fat and cut back on spending and new projects.

So California at this point is looking to increase taxes to make up for the budget shortfall. The White House is even worse as they are looking to create a new and expensive health care plan AND pay for it by taxing the wealthiest Americans. If California was a company and had stock it would surely almost be worthless. If the Federal Government was a company and had stock it would surely be almost worthless as well. When times are tough you get small and cut back. When times are good you lean in. If you are aggressive and well capitalized you can take advantage of the downturn and expand and grow. But most companies used leverage to get where they are today and are not sitting on a bunch of idle capital.

Both California and the Federal Government are well on their way to alienating their major revenue generators, wealthy taxpayers.

If I were running the state or the country I would take a different approach. Create products and incentives to attract customers (revenue generating taxpayers) to the state. Ideally, I would want a predictable revenue stream and I would create a flat tax. I would also want guarantees on that revenue stream beyond just one tax year so I would make tax payers pay their bill over a several year period. Thus like any good business, I would be able to lock in predictable customer payments over several years and create a nice cash flow cushion from which to budget and spend. I wouldn't have to waste time each year wondering how much revenue was coming in the door and waiting until the last minute to balance the budget. The budget could actually be balanced in advance based on the guaranteed payments.

Of course we all know that this would never happen. First because no one that smart in business is dumb enough to go into politics. And second, no one in politics is smart enough financially to think in terms of basic business.

Why Commercial RE May Not Crash

Many market commentators have been predicting that commercial real estate is the next shoe to drop in the credit crisis. I've seen a handful of presentations with whopping statistics on the amount of outstanding debt that will need to be revolved in the upcoming years. However, there has not been the massive apocalypse in commercial RE. At least not yet.

And there actually may not be. At least for a long while. The reason is that early this year the IRS changed some rules to allow REITs to pay some or all of their dividends in the form of stock. Typically a REIT pays its dividend in 100% cash out of its funds from operations. Because it pays a certain percentage of all of its income as dividends, it gets favorable tax treatment as a REIT. Late last year when the credit crisis was in full swing, REITs suddenly had to reduce their dividends because their funds from operations were reduced. Additionally, the terms for renewing debt was highly unfavorable so many REITs were in a bind as to whether they could revolve the debt at all or even pay out a dividend. As you can imagine, failure to pay a dividend would cause investors to flee the REIT as the primary reason to even invest in one is for income.

So the overall prediction was that as REITs would need to renew their debt in massive proportions, the credit markets would continue to be frozen and many would become insolvent. However, that has not happened. Fortunately, this single IRS change has allowed REITs to continue to pay large dividends to shareholders by issuing the dividend partially or fully in stock. Thus, there has been no massive exodus and crashing of these REITs. With their stock intact or even elevated due to the recent market bounce, many REITs have even been able to issue stock to repay debt.

One potential side effect of this IRS change is that the current shareholder is diluted at each dividend payment. Essentially, by issuing more shares each quarter, the REIT is slowly diluting and watering down its own investors.

This form of dividend payment reminds me of PIK toggle notes. These "Payment In Kind" notes allow a debtor to defer payment of the debt and allow it to accrue for a certain period. In the LBO world, PIK notes are very favorable for the debtor because it allows the debtor to essentially change the terms of his loan if his cash flow is thin. As you can imagine though, the use of PIK notes are a clear indication of potential financial distress and in general are only issued during frothy boom times. Thus, it is surprising that in this time of financial crisis the IRS would allow payment of dividends in stock.

This either means that commercial RE will never have its projected crash. Or it means that the death will be slow and it will be inevitable.

When Your Investor Owns the Marketplace

One reader has commented that I seem to be going on a lot of tirades about the economy and the bailout and that this blog has seemingly taken a political bent. That comment is well taken and so I will post this final post about the bailout and the excessive governmental tampering with the free markets now. I promise to leave the topic alone after today and move on.

So now that it appears that the economy has bottomed, banks are paying back their TARP loans. This is good news but it seems that now banks are negotiating with the government to buy back the warrants owned by the government. These negotiations are apparently taking longer than necessary due to the government wanting a better price for the warrants.

I find this both awesome and disturbing. First let's start with disturbing. This is disturbing because the Fed essentially forced these banks to take the TARP funds even when the banks did not want them. Now, when the banks are trying to get out of TARP, the government is essentially forcing them to pay inflated prices to buy back the warrants. This is the ultimate form of federal manipulation in a transaction involving a public company. It is unacceptable and simply not fair to the shareholders of those companies.

Now on the other hand this is quite an awesome phenomenon from an investor's standpoint. Essentially, this investor (the government) has been able to force a transaction on a company that the company must do in order to survive. Then when that company has clearly demonstrated that it is going to survive and not become insolvent, the investor is trying to milk all it can from the company. It reminds me of the old days of hostile takeovers when raider firms would take over companies and strip them of all of their value.

What I don't understand is why the government would try and milk those same companies that they tried to prop up. Don't they want the banks to succeed financially and don't they want to restore shareholder value?

This may be the ultimate grind down or it may simply be another securities violation implemented by the government who essentially owns the marketplace. Either way, the backasswardness of it all hasn't seem to have caught the attention of anyone in the financial media. Hopefully, the buybacks of these warrants and closure of TARP marks the end of our government's manipulative intervention in the marketplace.

The Private Equity Grind Down

Every industry has its own "Grind Down". Perhaps it goes by another name, but our firm refers to a "Grind Down" as a negotiating tactic that occurs in deals when one party or the other at the last minute tries to achieve more favorable terms for itself or threaten to back out of the deal at a time so late in the game that the other party cannot find another transactor.

Most homeowners have experienced the common retail mortgage grind down where when you go to buy a house and the deal is about to happen that the lender has some funny stuff fees in the transaction that you must pay. It is too late to find another lender and failure to go through with the deal opens up the property to another buyer. The other common grind down is from one party who asks for excessive concessions after the inspection and then threatens to back out of the deal if those concessions are not met.

In any deal, particularly private equity negotiations, there are lots of Grind Downs. One way some firms put the press on their portfolio companies is by not letting other co-investors in the deal. In the initial investment the firm promises to feed the startup until a liquidity event. These assurances allow that investor to be the sole investor and prevents the need for the company to deal with multiple investors. However, inevitably the company burns through that round of cash and needs another round of funding. The investor presents a term sheet and drags on signing it until the company is nearly out of cash. Suddenly, they must change the terms of the term sheet and so the company must sign the deal with those terms otherwise become insolvent.

As in any transaction it is imperative to create a market for your investment so that you can get a competitive price.

The Best Prop Show You'll Ever See In Your Lifetime

Most of you know my views on what has been happening to our financial system. Ken Lewis' testimony today on being pressured by Bernanke and Paulson further confirms that the government is running the best damn prop show you will ever see in your lifetime. Not only are we printing money like there is no tomorrow in order to prop up our sad banks who destroyed themselves on bad bets, we are propping up the notion that our financial markets are sound and fair.

For those of you that don't know the deal with Bank of America and Merrill Lynch, essentially, the government told Ken Lewis that Bank of America had to buy Merrill at an inflated price otherwise he would suffer the consequences. The complete truth of the story has not come out yet, but Ken Lewis is a very bright guy and it is obvious that he was told to do the deal and to conceal that fact from shareholders. As you can image, government tampering with a financial transaction in this manner is a very big problem. It's also a big problem from a public shareholder perspective. It's obvious that shareholders could sue Bank of America because essentially the ML transaction was made on their dime. However, can they also sue the government? Can they sue the SEC? Or can the SEC sue the government? What happens when the managers of the very system that stands for fairness become corrupt? What happens when the bosses who the SEC report to end up being the ones who manipulated the market?

In this case, probably nothing. But mark my words, we have descended down a slippery slope and perhaps there is no return.

I can't help but wonder that if the guys at Enron, Tyco, Madoff funds, Stanford Financial and countless others can go to jail for lying, cheating, and running a Ponzi scheme, certainly Bernanke and Paulson and everybody privy to this transaction can go to jail for securities fraud and market manipulation?

The truth is unlikely to ever come to light. Ken Lewis himself is in a unique situation. He can't tell the complete truth otherwise he incriminates himself by admitting that he did a deal that he knew was bad for shareholders. He also can't strongly defend the deal because then he just looks like an idiot because he overpaid when the whole world knew in a few days Merrill's stock price would collapse. So he is stuck avoiding the tough questions and being elusive. I guess essentially he was at the wrong place at the wrong time.

This entire episode confirms that at the end of the day nobody is "Holier Than Thou". Bernanke can sit up there and wax eloquent about the stability of the financial markets. Yet in an extraordinary time of stress of the financial markets he manipulates a public transaction.

In extreme times of stress people do shady things and everyone has skeletons in their closet. Perhaps our only salvation in this country is that we are less shady than everyone else.

We are #53 - Thanks PureVC Readers

Not that I really care or that I even keep track, but today someone informed me that TechCrunch has posted the top 100 VC blogs based on number of Google Reader subscribers. This blog came in at #53 and I thank all the readers who continue to enjoy its content.

When this blog started it was more of an experiment to help me flush out my thoughts and post on interesting topics specifically in the field of venture capital. Over time, I really couldn't help myself but post on all areas of private equity that I am involved in including real estate, hedge funds, leveraged buyouts, and general market commentary. Hopefully I haven't alienated too many readers by broadening my horizon.

While Google Reader is only one source of readers of this blog and this list doesn't really mean much, it does confirm that there is a hunger out in cyberspace for information on the overall venture and private equity industries. And we all know that where there is demand, supply will come.

I am happy to be one of those suppliers of information. Feel free to drop me a line anytime with questions, ideas, or comments. Thanks again for joining me in this rewarding endeavor.

Looking for a Web Designer & Programmer

About a year and a half ago, I posted looking for a web designer and programmer for our firm and a few of our portfolio companies in need of work. Unfortunately we never found anyone promising. We have used a variety of people in the past but decided that continuity between programmers and constant maintenance is important. We have previously used developers in the US and have also tried outsourcing. Both have been great, but the most important thing we need is someone who can communicate effectively.

We are looking for the type of person that we could potentially build a business around or provide strategic investment if necessary. Foremost, we want to find a Web Designer/Developer/Programmer who has a passion for his or her work and has an entrepreneurial spirit.

If you or someone you know might fit this bill, please send over a resume and blurb about yourself.

About a year and a half ago, I posted looking for a web designer and programmer for our firm and a few of our portfolio companies in need of work. Unfortunately we never found anyone promising. We have used a variety of people in the past but decided that continuity between programmers and constant maintenance is important. We have previously used developers in the US and have also tried outsourcing. Both have been great, but the most important thing we need is someone who can communicate effectively.

We are looking for the type of person that we could potentially build a business around or provide strategic investment if necessary. Foremost, we want to find a Web Designer/Developer/Programmer who has a passion for his or her work and has an entrepreneurial spirit.

If you or someone you know might fit this bill, please send over a resume and blurb about yourself.

You Can't Regulate Greed

A lot people are surprised at how far our new president has gone to propose regulations over the financial markets. Clearly, times are changing for the entire financial industry. Bonuses are being targeted to firms that have taken federal bailout money. The government is now pressing banks to shakeup their boards. A transaction tax may be implemented on all stocks and bonds sales to pay for bailout funds. And now the tradings of derivatives will be regulated over central clearing exchanges. Clearly the new administration is trying to regulate risk and speculation.

On the one hand, it seems like the administration is out to punish the industry for sins that have caused the financial meltdown. On the other hand, it is trying to stimulate the economy by encouraging lending. Ultimately, risk taking must return in order for the economy to get moving. Further regulation will only confirm that risk taking in this country will never be the same again. It will also confirm that the poor administration really has no clue about what drives financial markets.

History has shown markets that encourage risk and speculation thrive and grow faster while those that do not ultimately wither and die.

Speculation and greed will never disappear from humankind no matter what kind of regulations are put in place. It is only a matter of finding that next frontier where all of this can happen. There will be plenty of countries opening their doors and taking advantage of this rare opportunity. If our administration doesn't realize this soon, the US financial markets will not be premier place to do business. There already is a scramble going on among a lot of firms that are looking to move out.

Prosper Files an S-1

Prosper has filed an S-1. I first posted about this interesting peer to peer lending network back in 2006. At the time I thought of it as a real pure play - a marketplace that utilized the ubiquity of the internet to help people connect and loan money to each other. Over the years I've been watching the company and while it has grown to over 830,000 members and has done over $178,000,000 in loan volume, it has not reached its potential.

Now I don't know what the actual financials of the company are. But their S-1 states that they charge 3% per loan and up to 1% per year in loan servicing fees. Based on their stated $178 mm in loan volume, that would be $5.3 mm in revenue on loan volume plus another $5.3 mm on loan servicing for the three years they have been in business. That's good revenue for a startup but just not enough for a company with this potential. I guess what I am trying to say is that the business model of Prosper requires a high volume of loans. Given that deliquency rates have undoubtedly risen from the current financial climate it is no wonder that Prosper has tweaked their business model.

So what would you do if you were in their situation and needed to ramp up loan volume? Well they have gone ahead and created a marketplace for people to trade loans. Thus their S-1 is not an IPO of the company. Rather it is a listing of their notes that will allow them to be traded on their marketplace. Essentially they are securitizing the loans on the marketplace. Thus not only will they make money on loans but also on their trading. The more the notes trade hands the more they make in fees. It's a very smart way to ramp volume.

Interestingly, securitization of loans is one of the very reasons that we are in the whole financial crisis in the first place. Bankers securitized subprime loans and sold them to investors for fat profits. When those notes started to go sour, things went bad. So it will be very interesting to see how the note trading proceeds on Prosper.

Taking Advantage of the Pain - Citadel Expands Into I-Banking

For those of you who haven't heard, Citadel is expanding into the investment banking arena by hiring some ex-Merrill guys. I've said this before - when times get tough and there is pain it is a great time to take advantage. The financial turmoil and destruction of almost every investment banking unit on Wall Street has created a huge opportunity for those looking to expand. Almost every boutique bank I know of has been hiring non-stop all of the bulge bracket refugees, looking to become the next big player.

Expansion and diversification into financial infrastructure plays is not new to Ken Griffin and Citadel. A lot of people don't know but Citadel makes a ton of money in its market-making business. It essentially has so much market flow that it IS part of the financial exchanges as we know it. Additionally, it has a turn-key hedge fund infrastructure program that caters to the hedge fund industry.

So not only it is a hedge fund, it is knee deep into the infrastructure of the US financial markets. Expansion into I-banking is a natural step and a very smart one. A lot of big players such as Blackstone do advisory work that practically equates to banking but most have not officially crossed the line. It will be interesting to see how it all plays out and whether someday Citadel's hedge fund will only be a tiny part of its overall business.