Total Pageviews

A Citi Hedge Fund Business Prepares for Life on Its Own

Come Friday, one of Citigroup’s internal hedge fund units will begin a new life, free from its corporate parent and the restrictions that have come with new banking regulations.

What once was part of Citi Capital Advisors will now be known as Napier Park Global Capital, a $6.8 billion hedge fund, in one of the biggest spinoffs of a hedge fund from a major bank.

The move, months in the making, comes as Citi and other American banks divest themselves of businesses that are prohibited by the sweeping financial regulatory overhaul that is Dodd-Frank. One of the most prominent parts of the new law, the Volcker Rule, prevents these institutions from owning more than 3 ercent of a hedge fund or private equity firm.

The spinoff is a new test for Jim O’Brien and Jonathan Dorfman, the Citi executives who will serve as Napier Park’s co-chief executives. But in some ways, it opens up new opportunities for the nascent firm and its more than 100 employees, especially since it may attract new clients who hesitated to invest in alternative-asset operations owned by banks.

That said, there may be a little bittersweetness in the parting.

“Citi has been a terrific parent and partner to us,” Mr. O’Brien told DealBook in an interview.

“It was fairly obvious to everyone nine months to a year ago that it would make the most sense to engage in a spinoff,” Mr. O’Brien said.

The talks between Napier Park and Citi went largely smoothly and amicably, he added, and required enormou! s amounts of paperwork.

Though the process was mostly drama-free, Mr. O’Brien acknowledged that he breathed a sigh of relief and gratitude when substantially all of the business’ investors agreed to the spinoff. He had guessed that perhaps 85 percent to 90 percent would give their consent over three to five months.

“I’m a natural pessimist,” he said.

Instead, the firm’s investors said yes within seven weeks, with the largest institutions agreeing very quickly.

What will emerge on Friday is a firm mostly owned by its employees that focuses on debt investments. Napier Park â€" named after John Napier, a Scottish mathematician who was a pioneer of logarithms, and the firm’s Park Avenue offices in Midtown Manhattan â€" runs hedge funds, managed accounts and specialized loan investment vehicles.

Citi isn’t completely letting go of its former unit from the outset. It will still retain a sizable minority position in the new firm, but will withdraw its capital over time fully exiting by the July 2014 deadline stipulated by the Volcker Rule.

Mr. O’Brien and Mr. Dorfman said that they continue to see a number of opportunities for the firm to profit. Some of those have emerged from the new financial rules that gave rise to Napier Park’s independence, including the removal of banks and insurance firms as investors in complex debt because of new capital requirements.



A Citi Hedge Fund Business Prepares for Life on Its Own

Come Friday, one of Citigroup’s internal hedge fund units will begin a new life, free from its corporate parent and the restrictions that have come with new banking regulations.

What once was part of Citi Capital Advisors will now be known as Napier Park Global Capital, a $6.8 billion hedge fund, in one of the biggest spinoffs of a hedge fund from a major bank.

The move, months in the making, comes as Citi and other American banks divest themselves of businesses that are prohibited by the sweeping financial regulatory overhaul that is Dodd-Frank. One of the most prominent parts of the new law, the Volcker Rule, prevents these institutions from owning more than 3 ercent of a hedge fund or private equity firm.

The spinoff is a new test for Jim O’Brien and Jonathan Dorfman, the Citi executives who will serve as Napier Park’s co-chief executives. But in some ways, it opens up new opportunities for the nascent firm and its more than 100 employees, especially since it may attract new clients who hesitated to invest in alternative-asset operations owned by banks.

That said, there may be a little bittersweetness in the parting.

“Citi has been a terrific parent and partner to us,” Mr. O’Brien told DealBook in an interview.

“It was fairly obvious to everyone nine months to a year ago that it would make the most sense to engage in a spinoff,” Mr. O’Brien said.

The talks between Napier Park and Citi went largely smoothly and amicably, he added, and required enormou! s amounts of paperwork.

Though the process was mostly drama-free, Mr. O’Brien acknowledged that he breathed a sigh of relief and gratitude when substantially all of the business’ investors agreed to the spinoff. He had guessed that perhaps 85 percent to 90 percent would give their consent over three to five months.

“I’m a natural pessimist,” he said.

Instead, the firm’s investors said yes within seven weeks, with the largest institutions agreeing very quickly.

What will emerge on Friday is a firm mostly owned by its employees that focuses on debt investments. Napier Park â€" named after John Napier, a Scottish mathematician who was a pioneer of logarithms, and the firm’s Park Avenue offices in Midtown Manhattan â€" runs hedge funds, managed accounts and specialized loan investment vehicles.

Citi isn’t completely letting go of its former unit from the outset. It will still retain a sizable minority position in the new firm, but will withdraw its capital over time fully exiting by the July 2014 deadline stipulated by the Volcker Rule.

Mr. O’Brien and Mr. Dorfman said that they continue to see a number of opportunities for the firm to profit. Some of those have emerged from the new financial rules that gave rise to Napier Park’s independence, including the removal of banks and insurance firms as investors in complex debt because of new capital requirements.



Breuer Reflects on Prosecutions That Were, and Weren’t

After spending four years under the microscope as he led investigations of some of the world’s biggest banks, Lanny A. Breuer hasn’t lost his swagger.

The 54-year-old prosecutor, with a Rolodex as thick as his Queens dialect, will leave the Justice Department on Friday, emboldened after mounting recent cases against banking giants. But Mr. Breuer, the department’s criminal division chief, also leaves somewhat bruised, having taken criticism for not throwing Wall Street executives behind bars after the financial crisis.

In short, it has been grueling.

“I think he’s handled the pressure very well,” said former Attorney General Michael B. Mukasey, who is now a defense lawyer at Debevoise & Plimpton and has gone up against Mr. Breuer in corporate bribery cases.

For his part, Mr. Breuer highlighs his unit’s crackdown on money laundering; the prosecution of Allen Stanford, who was sentenced to 110 years in prison for a Ponzi scheme; and the criminal cases against BP for the Gulf of Mexico oil spill.

Mr. Breuer won perhaps his biggest victory when a Japanese subsidiary of UBS pleaded guilty to manipulating the ! London interbank offered rate, or Libor. It was the first unit of a big global bank to plead guilty in two decades.

But the Occupy Wall Street crowd, among others, has been critical. When the Justice Department stopped short of indicting HSBC on money laundering charges, choosing instead to press a record fine against the bank, it prompted a tirade in Rolling Stone magazine. A recent “Frontline” documentary featuring Mr. Breuer took aim at his decision not to charge banks that sold toxic mortgage securities before the crisis.

In a recent interview, Mr. Breuer reflected on his crisis cases, his days defending President Bill Clinton from impeachment and his upbringing as the son of Holocaust survivors who settled in Elmhurst, Queens.

The following are excerpts from the interview:

When you joined the Justice Department, the nation was reeling and people wanted Wall Street to pay. Back then, didn’t you expect to mount charges against bank executives

I understand and share the public’s outrage about the financial crisis. Of course we want to make these cases. I can tell you that I assigned the top, most talented lawyers to investigate them, and I know that U.S. attorneys’ offices across the country assigned aggressive prosecutors to these cases as well. I assigned people from my fraud section and my own front office to look at them. And I approached these cases exactly the same way I approached BP, the same way I approached Libor, the same way I approach! every ca! se. If there had been a case to make, we would have brought it. I would have wanted nothing more, but it doesn’t work that way.

You agreed to go on “60 Minutes” and “Frontline” to discuss the lack of crisis cases. Why open yourself to such scrutiny

People have been asking legitimate questions about what happened in the wake of the financial crisis, and they deserve answers. Someone had to go on television to explain the Justice Department’s point of view, and it was appropriate that, as head of the criminal division, I would do it.

But federal prosecutors in New York and elsewhere also played big roles in the crisis cases. Why you

As you point out, the U.S. attorneys don’t report to me, but someone had to tell the public how hard prosecutors across the department have been investigating these cases. I was willing to talk about these issues, to continue to talk about them in the face of criticism, and I’m still willing to talk about them.

Given that you’ve take a beating on crisis cases, what is your legacy here

The criminal division is now at the center of criminal law enforcement, both in prosecutions and policy. I don’t think that was ever the case before.

And now you’re leaving. You must feel relieved.

I have very mixed emotions. I’ve loved this job so very much, and I’m incredibly proud of what we’ve accomplished over the last four years. But I’m a big believer in change, and I think the timing is about right to move on.

What’s next

I’m probably going to take a few months off. I’m also going to start talking to law firms and the like and make a decision about where I’m going to go.

The interviews are just a formality, right The legal world assumes you’re heading back to Covington & Burling.

I love Covington. But I’m going to look at Covington; I’ll look at other firms. It’s certainly not a formality.

For years, you’ve moved in and out of government service, like many prosecu! tors. Doe! s the revolving door compromise objectivity

For me, it’s been a pretty effortless transition. I think it’s made me a better public servant, but I think it’s also made me a better private lawyer.

You’ve had no shortage of interesting clients: Roger Clemens, President Clinton, Sandy Berger. What was the most fascinating assignment

There’s nothing like representing the president of the United States. Representing people like that in general can be gratifying, because you’re getting people often who are incredibly proud of their careers, and you’re dealing with them at their most vulnerable time.

What gear did you assemble from your ex-Yankee client

Balls, posters â€" we’ve got a lot of Clemens memorabilia. You need to recognize, I was a lifelong Mets fan.

You were raised in Queens.

<>My dad was an intellectual. He had been a writer in Vienna before the Anschluss. During my childhood, he was one of the editors of Aufbau, which was a German-Jewish newspaper in New York. In our house there was opera always blaring. It was a very sort of ethnically rich, warm home.

So why did you pursue the law

I was the mediator in a lot of family issues, even at a young age.

How did your family react to your decision to become a junior district attorney in Manhattan after a pricey education at Columbia

My parents just never made any money at all. I called up my mother to break the news that her son was not going to a law firm: “Mom, you’ve just got to remember that Cy Vance Jr. â€" who, of course, is now the D.A. â€" he’s in the D.A.’s office. And Dan Rather Jr., he’s in the D.A.’s office. And Andrew Cuomo, the son of the governor, he’s in the D.A.’s office.” There was a long pause. And my mother said: “Them They should go to the D.A.’s office. You You should go to a firm.”



Best Buy’s Talks With Its Founder Said to Have Ended

Richard Schulze’s efforts to take over Best Buy, the struggling electronics retailer he founded nearly 47 years ago, have ended.

Talks between Best Buy and a group comprising Mr. Schulze and three private equity firms have ended, people briefed on the matter told DealBook on Thursday. Discussions could resume at some point, one of these people cautioned.

By the end, Mr. Schulze and the firms â€" Cerberus Capital Management, Leonard Green & Partners and TPG Capital â€" had been negotiating to buy a bigger stake in Best Buy that would have added to his roughly 20 percent stake, these people said.

Any prospect of a full takeover of Best Buy had disappeared several weeks ago, they added, after the investor consortium discovered little appetite for the debt that would have been involved in a leveraged buyout.

Shares in Best Buy had already fallen earlier on Thursday, after The Minneapolis Star-Tribune reported that the cmpany’s founder had moved on to trying for a minority stake in the retailer. They closed at $16.41, leading to a market value of just $5.6 billion.

By comparison, when Mr. Schulze first disclosed his potential interest in buying all of the electronics chain, a takeover offer would have been worth in excess of $8.8 billion.

Shares in Best Buy have fallen over 11 percent since word of Mr. Schulze’s interest in a potential takeover first emerged last June.

Best Buy is expected to give a final update on its discussions when it reports quarterly earnings on Friday.



Paulson Opposes MetroPCS Merger With T-Mobile

The investment firm Paulson & Company, the largest shareholder in MetroPCS Communications, announced on Thursday that it would oppose a planned merger with T-Mobile, saying the deal would saddle the new company with too much debt.

“We believe MetroPCS is worth more as a stand-alone company,” the firm, founded by the billionaire hedge fund manager John Paulson, said in a statement. The firm has a 9.9 percent stake in MetroPCS.

Last October, the two companies announced a complex transaction, under which MetroPCS would conduct a 1-for-2 reverse stock split and pay out $1.5 bllion in cash to its existing shareholders. The new company would then issue new stock worth about 74 percent to T-Mobile’s parent, Deutsche Telekom, leaving existing MetroPCS investors with a 26 percent stake.

P. Schoenfeld Asset Management, another large shareholder with a 1.6 percent stake in MetroPCS, announced earlier this month that it was leading a proxy battle opposing the merger.

The deal has not been viewed favorably by the markets, and MetroPCS’s stock is down about 32 percent since before the deal was announced.

In a letter to the MetroPCS and Deutsche Telekom boards on Thursday, Mr. Paulson outlined several issues he had with the merger, including that T-Mobile’s performance ha! s been “poor.”

He did conclude in his letter, however, that he would support a restructured deal that reduces the new company’s debt by $6.6 billion and lower its interest rate to 4.2 percent.

“Indeed, Paulson believes this lower debt and lower interest rate will result in a significantly improved multiple for MetroPCS/T-Mobile, increasing the economic return not only to MetroPCS shareholders, but also to 74% owner Deutsche Telekom,” he wrote.

Officials for MetroPCS and T-Mobile could not be reached immediately for comment.



Remembering the Long, Strange Trip of Groupon’s Now-Fired Chief

With Andrew Mason’s forced resignation from Groupon on Thursday, the career of one of the most unusual corporate chieftains has ended.

And what an … eclectic journey it has been for the onetime darling of Silicon Valley, which ascended with blinding speed, and then crashed just as quickly.

Though Mr. Mason’s departure from the four-year-old company he founded had been speculated about for some time â€" certainly in light of Groupon’s poor financial performance since its initial public offering â€" the exit was finalized only on Thursday morning, according to people briefed on the matter.

It was little surprise, coming after yet another disappointing quarter, in which the company missed analyst estimates and posted revenue guidane that also fell short of expectations. The company’s stock slid 24.3 percent on Thursday, to $4.53.

That valued Groupon at just $3 billion â€" after the company went public in late 2011 at a $12.7 billion valuation.

After meeting Thursday morning, Groupon’s board requested that Mr. Mason resign. He agreed.

It followed yet another disappointing quarter, in which the company missed analyst estimates and posted revenue guidance that also fell short of expectations.

Mr. Mason will be replaced on an interim basis by an “office of the chief executive” formed Thursday morning, made up of Eric Lefkofsky, a Groupon chairman and co-founder, and Ted Leonsis, the vice chairman.

Mr. Lefkofsky bid Mr. Mason farewell in a fairly typical corporate statement: “On behalf of the entire Groupon board, I want to thank Andrew for his leadership, his creativity and his deep loyalty to Groupon. A! s a founder, Andrew helped invent the daily deals space, leading Groupon to become one of the fastest growing companies in history.”

In typical fashion, Mr. Mason described the circumstances a bit more trenchantly. Here’s an excerpt from a letter he sent to company employees on Thursday, which he posted online “since it will leak anyway”:

After four and a half intense and wonderful years as C.E.O. of Groupon, I’ve decided that I’d like to spend more time with my family. Just kidding - I was fired today.

He also references “Battletoads,” a cult videogame for the Nintendo Entertainment System that a small minority of DealBok remembers as being sometimes absurdly difficult.

A Pittsburgh native who graduated from Northwestern University with a degree in music, Mr. Mason rarely ever seemed like the corporate type. He originally created Groupon as part of a bigger Web venture, focusing on daily deals as the most commercially viable part of that start-up.

Even then, he was known for his quirky humor. Three years ago, Mr. Mason made a video for a fictional “Monkey for a Week” lending service.

As Groupon grew, Mr. Mason’s peculiar demeanor sense of humor continued to garner attention. His grooming came up at least once, as Silicon Valley denizens pondered whether he’d hit a tanning salon before appearing at a TechCrunch conference in 2010 with a prominent bronze glow.

And in 2011, Mr. Mason had an unusual way of not responding to a question by All Things D’s Kara Swisher that he di! dn’t wa! nt to answer: with a “death stare.”

By that fall, as the daily deals giant was preparing to go public, Mr. Mason took on a more professional cast. In a video to prospective investors, the Groupon chief executive looked a bit more professional, complete with slicked-back hair and a dark suit and tie.

It was a persona he settled into post-initial offering, usually delivering sober financial information in his public appearances.

But other parts of the run-up to Groupon’s late 2011 initial public offering were hardly laughing matters. The company took fire for introducing controversial accounting measures in its prospectus, which critics contended masked losses and unfairly diminished a need to spend heavily on marketing.

The Securities and Exchange Commission queried the company over its financial information in a series of letters that were eventually made public.

In August of 2011, Groupon announced that it was dropping the metric.

Two months later, the company revised its prospectus again to further clarify additional financial reporting measures, as well as to include an internal e-mail from Mr. Mason that was subsequently leaked to the press.

Eve! n after g! oing public, Groupon still ran into the occasional issue. It restated quarterly results last year after disclosing a “material weakness” in its internal accounting controls.

For all those troubles, Mr. Mason accepted responsibility.

“From controversial metrics in our S1 to our material weakness to two quarters of missing our own expectations and a stock price that’s hovering around one quarter of our listing price, the events of the last year and a half speak for themselves. As CEO, I am accountable,” he wrote in his letter.

(This is for Groupon employees, but I’m posting it publicly since it will leak anyway)

People of Groupon,

After four and a half intense and wonderful years as CEO of Groupon, I’ve decided that I’d like to spend more time with my family. Just kidding - I was fired today. If you’re wndering why… you haven’t been paying attention. From controversial metrics in our S1 to our material weakness to two quarters of missing our own expectations and a stock price that’s hovering around one quarter of our listing price, the events of the last year and a half speak for themselves. As CEO, I am accountable.

You are doing amazing things at Groupon, and you deserve the outside world to give you a second chance. I’m getting in the way of that. A fresh CEO earns you that chance. The board is aligned behind the strategy we’ve shared over the last few months, and I’ve never seen you working together more effectively as a global company - it’s time to give Groupon a relief valve from the public noise.

For those who are concerned about me, please don’t be - I love Groupon, and I’m terribly proud of what we’ve created. I’m OK with having failed at this part of the journey. If Groupon was Battletoads, it would be like I made it all the way to the Terra Tubes without! dying on! my first ever play through. I am so lucky to have had the opportunity to take the company this far with all of you. I’ll now take some time to decompress (FYI I’m looking for a good fat camp to lose my Groupon 40, if anyone has a suggestion), and then maybe I’ll figure out how to channel this experience into something productive.

If there’s one piece of wisdom that this simple pilgrim would like to impart upon you: have the courage to start with the customer. My biggest regrets are the moments that I let a lack of data override my intuition on what’s best for our customers. This leadership change gives you some breathing room to break bad habits and deliver sustainable customer happiness - don’t waste the opportunity!

I will miss you terribly.

Love,

Andrew



Morgan Stanley’s Simkowitz Is Promoted

Morgan Stanley has named Dan Simkowitz as the firm’s co-head of global capital markets, according to an internal memo recently sent to firm employees.

Mr. Simkowitz, chairman of global capital markets, will run the department with the current head, Raj Dhanda.

The move is a promotion for Mr. Simkowitz, who had been rumored to be a contender to become the firm’s chief financial officer. Morgan Stanley’s current chief financial officer, Ruth Porat, is seen as a leading contender for deputy secretary at the United States Treasury Department.

Morgan Stanley’s move to name a co-head of the department has led to speculation that the firm may have other plans for Mr. Dhanda. However, a number of people at the firm played down that suggestion, saying Mr. Simkowitz brings strong client skills to the job, which complement Mr. Dhanda’s mangerial strengths.

Mr. Simkowitz is a well-known figure on Wall Street. He played a crucial role in the 2010 public offering of General Motors. During the financial crisis, he advised the Treasury Department on how best to deal with Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the government-controlled mortgage giants. Mr. Simkowitz was also heavily involved in the public offering of Facebook, which ! has drawn criticism from investors who say it was overpriced. Morgan Stanley, which led that offering, has stood by its actions.

Capital markets is a bright spot at Morgan Stanley. In 2012, Morgan Stanley was the top global underwriter of public offerings, according to data provider Thomson Reuters. So far this year it is running fifth.



What Is the Point of Google’s Chromebook Pixel

Google, as you’ve probably noticed, has become a hardware company. It’s designing phones, tablets and even laptops.

Its Chromebook laptop concept has some extremely compelling aspects. As I wrote in November, it’s a fast, silent, light, beautiful laptop â€" for $250.

The catch, of course, is that a Chromebook has no hard drive and very little storage; it’s exclusively for online activities. It’s great for Web, e-mail, YouTube and apps like Google Drive (free online word processor, spreadsheet and slide show programs). For $250, many people might find a fine value propositio in the Chromebook as a second computer.

But what if it cost five times as much

That’s the baffling news from Google’s latest offering, the Chromebook Pixel. It’s a high, high, high-end version of the earlier laptop that made so much sense at $250.

What does the additional money buy you Not much, really. The Pixel looks and feels better. It’s made of metal â€" sleek, crisp-edged aluminum. The trackpad feels nicer. The keys light up in the dark, and there’s a colorful light that comes on when you wake the Pixel or put it to sleep.

The beautiful screen distinguishes itself twice â€" once because it has extremely high resolution (239 pixels an inch, slightly more than even Apple’s MacBook Retina screens), and once because it’s a touch screen.

But why does it have a touch screen Web sites aren’t designed for finger operation â€" links are generally too small. So the addition of the touch screen is a little superfluous, and of course it adds thickness, weight ! and cost to the laptop.

And it’s a lot of weight: 3.3 pounds. For a stripped-down, online-only laptop, that’s ridiculously heavy. Why would you give up a hard drive, DVD drive and a full complement of ports, if not because you wanted a superlight laptop

(Speaking of ports: $1,300 for a laptop that comes with USB 2.0 ports instead of the much superior USB 3 What is this, 2009)

There’s also a $1,450 version of the Chromebook Pixel that includes a built-in 4G LTE modem, so that you can get online almost anywhere. That’s a delicious luxury â€" if you’re willing to pay $20 to $50 a month, or $10 a day, for the privilege.

But in the end, the screamingly obvious argument against the Chromebook Pixel boils down to two words: MacBook Air.

The Air costs $100 less. It weighs 12 percent less and has four times as much built-in storage, 128 gigabytes vs. the Chromebook’s 32. Its battery lasts longer, six hours vs. the Chromebook’s five. It’s thinner. At the Air’s hinge, it€™s one millimeter thicker, but it tapers down to almost nothing, so it feels much thinner than the Pixel, which is a solid, non-tapered block.

Above all, the Air, or a similar ultralight Windows laptop, runs real desktop software â€" Photoshop, Quicken, iTunes, games â€" that the Chromebook can only dream about.

If you’re going to spend $1,300, why on earth would you buy a laptop that does nothing but surf the Web

At $250, the Chromebook is an easy recommendation as a homework computer or TV couch accessory. But at $1,300 or $1,450, the same concept just doesn’t make much sense. The Chromebook Pixel is lovely, polished and just a little bit silly.



What Is the Point of Google’s Chromebook Pixel

Google, as you’ve probably noticed, has become a hardware company. It’s designing phones, tablets and even laptops.

Its Chromebook laptop concept has some extremely compelling aspects. As I wrote in November, it’s a fast, silent, light, beautiful laptop â€" for $250.

The catch, of course, is that a Chromebook has no hard drive and very little storage; it’s exclusively for online activities. It’s great for Web, e-mail, YouTube and apps like Google Drive (free online word processor, spreadsheet and slide show programs). For $250, many people might find a fine value propositio in the Chromebook as a second computer.

But what if it cost five times as much

That’s the baffling news from Google’s latest offering, the Chromebook Pixel. It’s a high, high, high-end version of the earlier laptop that made so much sense at $250.

What does the additional money buy you Not much, really. The Pixel looks and feels better. It’s made of metal â€" sleek, crisp-edged aluminum. The trackpad feels nicer. The keys light up in the dark, and there’s a colorful light that comes on when you wake the Pixel or put it to sleep.

The beautiful screen distinguishes itself twice â€" once because it has extremely high resolution (239 pixels an inch, slightly more than even Apple’s MacBook Retina screens), and once because it’s a touch screen.

But why does it have a touch screen Web sites aren’t designed for finger operation â€" links are generally too small. So the addition of the touch screen is a little superfluous, and of course it adds thickness, weight ! and cost to the laptop.

And it’s a lot of weight: 3.3 pounds. For a stripped-down, online-only laptop, that’s ridiculously heavy. Why would you give up a hard drive, DVD drive and a full complement of ports, if not because you wanted a superlight laptop

(Speaking of ports: $1,300 for a laptop that comes with USB 2.0 ports instead of the much superior USB 3 What is this, 2009)

There’s also a $1,450 version of the Chromebook Pixel that includes a built-in 4G LTE modem, so that you can get online almost anywhere. That’s a delicious luxury â€" if you’re willing to pay $20 to $50 a month, or $10 a day, for the privilege.

But in the end, the screamingly obvious argument against the Chromebook Pixel boils down to two words: MacBook Air.

The Air costs $100 less. It weighs 12 percent less and has four times as much built-in storage, 128 gigabytes vs. the Chromebook’s 32. Its battery lasts longer, six hours vs. the Chromebook’s five. It’s thinner. At the Air’s hinge, it€™s one millimeter thicker, but it tapers down to almost nothing, so it feels much thinner than the Pixel, which is a solid, non-tapered block.

Above all, the Air, or a similar ultralight Windows laptop, runs real desktop software â€" Photoshop, Quicken, iTunes, games â€" that the Chromebook can only dream about.

If you’re going to spend $1,300, why on earth would you buy a laptop that does nothing but surf the Web

At $250, the Chromebook is an easy recommendation as a homework computer or TV couch accessory. But at $1,300 or $1,450, the same concept just doesn’t make much sense. The Chromebook Pixel is lovely, polished and just a little bit silly.



Icahn Gains 2 Seats on Herbalife’s Board

Herbalife said on Thursday that it planned to give two board seats to Carl C. Icahn, as the health supplements maker further binds itself to its most outspoken outside defender of late.

Herbalife will expand its board by two seats, giving both to the billionaire investor. As part of the agreement, Mr. Icahn will also have permission to raise his stake in the company to 25 percent, from its current 13.6 percent.

“We have a good rapport with the company,” Mr. Icahn said in an interview on Bloomberg TV on Thursday. “We like them.”

Michael O. Johnson, Herbalife’s chairman and chief executive, said in a statement: “We appreciate the Icahn Parties’ shared viewson the inherent value of Herbalife’s operations, products and future prospects.”

Shares of Herbalife were up more than 5 percent in midafternoon trading on Thursday, at $39.67, after having been halted for the pending news.

The move comes two weeks after Mr. Icahn officially disclosed holding a stake in Herbalife and over a month after the hedge fund manager sparred with a rival, William A. Ackman, on CNBC over the company. Mr. Ackman has taken a very public bet against the nutritional supplements company, declaring it a pyramid scheme and arguing that it is in risk of being shut down by federal regulators.

During that confrontation, one that gripped Wall Street, Mr. Icahn allowed only that he believed Herbalife could be “the mother of all short squeezes.” That referred to the shares in a company rising substantially, hurting investors who like Mr. Ackman are betting tha! t the price will go down.

In his interview with Bloomberg TV, Mr. Icahn continued to criticize Mr. Ackman’s tactics, arguing that the campaign is simply an attempt to smear the company and trash its stock price.

“Ackman has given us the opportunity to buy a company at a discounted price,” Mr. Icahn said.



Bonus Rules May Just Reinforce Existing Pay Practices, Rather Than Overhaul

European lawmakers have stirred up the ire of the financial industry by proposing rules that would limit banker bonuses. But the regulations, assuming they are passed, may not prove the sweeping overhaul that bankers are lamenting.

For one, existing regulations have already forced financial firms in the United States and Europe to rethink their pay packages. And big banks, struggling to bolster profits and share prices, have been trying to keep a lid on compensations levels since the financial crisis.

On the surface, the proposed rules seem drastic.

Late Wednesday, the European Parliament and European Commission struck a provisional agreement to limit bonuses to 100 percent of bankers’ salaries. Financial firms would be able to hand out payments that amount to double the salaries, with the approval of a majority of shareholders. If bonuses exceed salaries, then a quarter of that additional payout must be deferred for at least five years.

By doing so, lawmakers are hoping to curtal the type of risky behavior that led to the financial crisis. And given the high level of government support that these institutions have received, the argument goes, these countries should have a bigger say in corporate governance that could help prevent another disaster from happening again.

It’s prompted an outcry in Europe, and particularly the London financial district, known as the City. European bankers decry that the onerous rules will prompt top talent to flee to less restrictive regions like Hong Kong and New York City.

Others indicate they will simply find some ways around the rules. Top banking executives are said to already be discussing sharp rises in base pay, which would go a long way toward circumventing the new rules.

“It will drive up fixed salaries to compensate,” one British financial services executive told the BBC. “Businesses that do not need to be inside the European Union will leave. And when banks invest in future divisions, it will be outside the! E.U.”

It’s a tactic that institutions have used before when lawmakers have pushed for changes in the ways banks dole out compensation. In the aftermath of the crisis, several big banks tried to quell the political outrage by tempering their annual bonuses, quietly adding to base pay at the same time.

The recent move by European Union officials only further solidifies the changed world of banker pay, rather than shaking up compensation practices. And regulators, with increased powers to oversee bank compensation, may be anticipating modest efforts to skirt the new rules.

Big financial firms once had a lot of leeway over how much they compensated their employees, but â€" on paper, at least â€" that changed considerably after the financial crisis of 2008. With the industry reeling, the Group of 20, a collection of finance ministers and central bankers, set up a framework for regulating pay.

One of the key principles that the G20 agreed to is tying bankers’ pay to the amount of rik they take when doing trades. That can involve making sure that banks have employment agreements in place that allow banks to “claw back” pay if trades don’t work out.

Bankers are typically rewarded compensation for one year’s performance, but then they receive the cash or shares that make up that sum in a staggered fashion over several years. In theory, that gives banks the ability to cancel that pay if trades don’t meet pre-set targets. This approach doesn’t necessarily target the overall level of pay, however.

Raising base salaries could run straight into regulatory guidelines that demand pay be link to the financial performance of trades. By promising to pay an employee a large sum upfront, the bank would essentially loosen the link between compensation and risk. Connecting the two is the main principle at the heart of regulators’ new approach to pay. If traders makes a bad bet, it would be harder for bosses to punish them through their paycheck.

In addition, bank! s may the! mselves decide that it’s not in their interests to commit to giving employees large upfront salaries. The financial industry has traditionally used bonuses to incentivize hard work throughout the year. Simply increasing the base pay of a banker may lessen the power of that motivational tool.

At the same time, banks, especially in Europe, don’t exactly have deep pockets to dole out large salaries or bonuses. Many of the region’s banks have reported staggering losses in recent quarters. On Thursday, the Royal Bank of Scotland announced a $9 billion loss for the year.

In the current environment, European banks, especially in Britain, have been under pressure to rein in pay, especially in the face of their legal woes. R.B.S. and Barclays have both recouped past pay from executives to help cover fines related to rate-rigging cases.

Nationalist appeals to preserve countries’ financial services industries may not hold much sway, at least for the moment. Legislators are showing a willingnes to pursue moves that could prompt financial institutions to move more of their operations to jurisdictions outside of European Union control, like the United States and Asia. Britain, which has zealously protected its reputation as a global financial capital, has professed precisely this worry.

It’s also not clear that banks will lose their best employees to rival, as some executives have argued. Othmar Karas, an Austrian lawmaker who helped spearhead the new initiative, has described the current plan as encompassing any banking operations that reside within the European Union.

In the end, the rules may just help codify what’s already happening. Since the crisis, big banks â€" in the face of new regulation and waning profits â€" have retooled their compensation practices. The European Union’s latest bonus rules will make it hard for banks to go back to their old ways, if the boom times return.



Regulators and 13 Banks Complete $9.3 Billion Deal for Foreclosure Relief

Federal banking regulators have reached a $9.3 billion pact with 13 major lenders to settle claims of foreclosure abuses like bungled loan modification and flawed paperwork.

The details the settlement, made up of $3.6 billion in cash relief and $5.7 billion in relief to avert foreclosures, were announced Thursday.

Under the deal, homeowners can receive up to $125,000 in cash relief. Despite the banner numbers in the settlement, consumer groups and a range of lawmakers have criticized it for not providing enough relief for aggrieved homeowners.

The agreement formalizes the tentative deals that were reached in January between the mortgage servicing companies and the regulators from the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency and the Federal Reserve.

The pact, reached after weeks of harried negotiations, halted a flawed review of millions of mortgages in foreclosure. Regulators, led by the comptroller’s office, hastily scuttled that review amid heightened concerns that the process was generating billions of dollars in fees for consultants, but providing little relief for borrowers.

The effort was abandoned after consultants examined a tiny fraction of more than four million loans in foreclosure from 2009 to 2010. Ultimately, consultants completed a review of 104,000 loans, regulators said Thursday.

As part of a consent order in April 2011, the comptroller’s office and the Federal Reserve set up the Independent Foreclosure Review, which required banks hire a fleet of outside consultants to comb through loan files. The aim was to spot problems like ! illegal fees, botched loan modifications and examples where borrowers were evicted even though they were current on their mortgage payments.

By halting the review with only a sliver of the loans reviewed for problems, federal regulators don’t have a complete picture of the extent of the abuse. As a result, consumer groups have argued, borrowers harmed by shoddy practices could still receive less money than they deserve.

In a speech this month, Thomas J. Curry, who heads the comptroller’s office, defended the relief allocated through the settlement, describing it as “several times the potential payout had the reviews run their course.”

An estimated 4.2 million borrowers in foreclosure will be contacted by Rust Consulting, a firm handling the payment details, by the end of March, according to the regulators.

Beyond the cash relief, the 13 mortgage lenders will provide $5.7 billion in other assistance like reducing mortgage balances and refinancing burdensome loans.

Three irms â€" GMAC Mortgage, Everbank and OneWest â€" didn’t sign the pact. The lenders will continue to review their mortgages, according to the regulator. Those three companies service more than 450,000 loans in foreclosure from 2009 to 2010.



Investor Outflows Continue at Man Group

LONDON - Clients continued to withdraw money from Man Group, the world’s largest publicly-traded hedge fund, in the final quarter of last year, raising the stakes for the new chief executive Manny Roman to win back investors.

Man Group’s funds had $2.7 billion of net outflows in the three months to Dec. 31, the sixth quarter of outflows in a row. Assets under management fell to $57 billion at the end of December, the company said in a statement on Thursday.

“2012 was another tough year for Man,” Mr. Roman said in the statement. “Trading conditions were highly challenging as markets continued to be dominated by political uncertainties in Europe and the U.S. and macroeconomic risks. Investor appetite remained muted.”

Mr. Roman also said “business conditions remain very tough”, adding that “sales are likely to remain muted in the first half and we are yet to see a slow down in the rate of redemptions.”

The outflows weighed on profit. Man Group reported a loss of $75 million for last year compared with a profit of $187 million in the year earlier because it took an impairment charge for the acquisition of hedge fund firm GLG Partners in 2010.

To help attract client funds and fix a disappointing performance, Man Group named a new chief for its flagship AHL fund. Sandy Rattray, who ran Man Group’s Systematic Strategies business, took over from Tim Wong as AHL chief executive earlier this month.

In a separate statement late on Wednesday, Man Group said it suspended a GLG employee, who was arrested by the Financial Services Authority, the British regulator, as part of an insider trading investigation. Man Group said it was informed by the F.S.A. that the investigation concerns private actions by the person, who was one of three people arrested in London yesterday.

Man’s shares fell 2.4 percent in afternoon trading in London on Thursday.



For S.E.C., a Setback in Bid for More Time in Fraud Cases

The Supreme Court on Wednesday delivered a swift and decisive rejection of the Securities and Exchange Commission’s argument that it should operate under a more forgiving statute of limitations in pursuing penalties in fraud cases.

As a result of the decision, the agency will have to find a long-term solution to give itself more time to investigate cases.

In Gabelli v. Securities and Exchange Commission, Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. wrote in the unanimous decision ejecting the S.E.C.’s argument that a federal statute that limits the government’s authority to pursue civil penalties should commence when a fraud is discovered, not when it occurred.

The S.E.C. was hoping that the court would apply what is known as the “discovery rule.” In 2010, the Supreme Court endorsed this rule in a private securities fraud class-action suit, Merck & Co. v. Reynolds, stating “that something different was needed in the case of fraud, where a defendant’s deceptive conduct may prevent a plaintiff from even knowing that he or she has been defrauded.”

The discovery rule is an exception to the protection afforded by a statute of limitations, which puts an endpoint on potential legal liability for conduct. Unlike most cases, when fraud is involved, it may not be apparent to the victims that they were harmed because the primary goal of deceptive conduct is to keep it! from being exposed.

In the Gabelli case, the S.E.C. filed fraud charges in 2008 against the mutual fund manager Marc Gabelli and a colleague, Bruce Alpert, saying they had violated the Investment Advisers Act of 1940 for permitting an investor to engage in market timing. Ten years ago, a major scandal erupted when it came to light that some advisers had permitted select investors to buy shares at favorable prices to take advantage of pricing disparities in the securities held by mutual funds.

In its complaint, the S.E.C. sought civil monetary penalties based on market timing that it claimed had taken place from 1999 to 2002, and resulted in the preferred investor purportedly reaping sinificant profits while ordinary investors suffered large losses. The defendants denied the charges and filed a motion to dismiss the case because it was not brought in time.

A federal statute, 28 U.S.C. § 2462, provides that “an action, suit or proceeding for the enforcement of any civil fine, penalty, or forfeiture, pecuniary or otherwise, shall not be entertained unless commenced within five years from the date when the claim first accrued.” The provision dates to 1839, and applies to any government agency.

A decision by the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit in Manhattan allowed the case to proceed by applying the discovery rule to a governmental action. Coincidentally, that decision was written by Judge Jed S. Rakoff, who despite being an occasional thorn in the S.E.C.’s side, accepted the! agencyâ€! ™s argument to avoid a strict application of the five-year statute of limitations.

The Supreme Court, however, saw things differently. This week, it issued its opinion less than two months after it heard oral argument in the case in January, a clear sign the justices found no merit in the S.E.C.’s contention that the agency should be treated the same as private plaintiffs in trying to get around the statute of limitations.

According to the Supreme Court, victims in securities fraud cases should have a longer period to file a claim - from when the fraud was discovered. “Most of us do not live in a state of constant investigation,” the court wrote. “Absent any reason to think we have been injured, we do not typically spend our days looking for evidence that we were lied to or defrauded.”

Chief Justice Roberts explained that “the S.E.C. as enforcer is a far cry from the defrauded victim the discovery rule evolved to protect.” One of the reasons the agency exists is to detect andpenalize violations, with tools that the ordinary investor simply does not have, like the authority to compel testimony and the production of documents. The message is simple. When it’s your job to investigate fraud, you cannot argue that your failure to do so is a justification for not meeting a statute of limitations.

The Supreme Court’s decision puts increased pressure on the S.E.C. to pursue its investigations with greater alacrity and not let them gather dust, which can occur as a result of staff turnover or other pressing issues. The market timing case is a good example of how an investigation might get lost in the shuffle as corporate accounting frauds at large companies like Enron and WorldCom, which also came to light in 2002, strained the S.E.C.’s investigative resources.

There are a couple of options to deal with this iss! ue in the! long run, apart from a substantial increase in the agency’s budget - an unlikely prospect in the face of the looming federal budget sequestration deadline.

The S.E.C. can obtain an agreement to stop the statute of limitations, known as tolling, from those it is investigating, something it has done in the past. For example, in its insider trading and securities fraud case against Samuel E. Wyly, his now deceased brother, Charles J. Wyly Jr., and two other defendants, the S.E.C. got an agreement that let it pursue claims beyond the normal five-year limitations period.

A permanent solution would be to seek legislation from Congress that would give the S.E.C. a longer window to complete its investigations. The statute of limitations is not a constitutional protection, so Congress can amend it as it sees fit, which it has done in other areas involving fraud.

The limitations period for banking crimes, for example, was extended to 10 years during the savings and loan crisis because of the crush of cases that made it difficult to finish investigations in the five-year window to initiate criminal prosecutions. The Fraud Enforcement and Recovery Act of 2009 added mail and wire fraud affecting a financial institution to the list of crimes that get the benefit of the 10-year limitations period, again because of fear that cases would be lost beca! use of th! e number of investigations taking place after the financial crisis.

The issue of the statute of limitations may even come up at the confirmation hearings of Mary Jo White, who has been nominated to be chairwoman of the S.E.C. That could be an early indicator of whether she would be willing to push for relief from the effect of the Gabelli opinion to help out the enforcement division.

In the short run, the Supreme Court’s decision will cause defendants in government enforcement actions to examine whether they might be able to take advantage of the five-year limitations period. Given how slowly the government has been known to move on occasion, it may be that some cases will fall by the wayside because of the Gabelli decision.



In Heinz Case, an Opaque Bet in London

Regulators looking into suspicious trading ahead of the $23 billion takeover of H.J. Heinz are focusing on a complex derivative bet routed through London, DealBook’s Ben Protess and Susanne Craig report. The Securities and Exchange Commission is examining a product known as a contract-for-difference, which allows investors to bet on changes in stock prices without owning the shares, two people briefed on the matter said. The development comes after the F.B.I. said it had opened a criminal inquiry.

The expanding investigation “illustrates the growing challenges facing American regulators,” Mr. Protess and Ms. Craig write. “Charged with policing the American exchanges, authorities increasingly find themselves having to hunt through a dizzyingly complex global marketplace.” As the government cracks down on insider trading, investorsare seeking subtler ways to take advantage of confidential information. The derivative product in question is not regulated in the United States but is popular in Britain, where authorities also opened an inquiry into the Heinz trades, according to one of the people briefed on the matter. The inquiry began when regulators noticed an unusual spike in trading volume in Heinz options a day before the deal was announced.

Complicating the job for regulators, the suspicious options trades were routed through a Goldman Sachs account in Zurich that masked information about the trader. “While the identity remains a secret, the account holder is a Goldman private wealth management client, according to a person briefed on the matter who was not authorized to speak on the record. Goldman executives in Zurich know the identity of the person, but laws prohibit those executives from sharing the name with American regulators and even Goldman executives outside of Switzerland.”

DEWEY IS OFFICIALLY DISSOLVED  |  The once-venerable law firm Dewey & LeBoeuf effectively ceased to exist when it filed for bankruptcy nine months ago. But its dissolution became official when a federal bankruptcy judge on Wednesday confirmed a plan to unwind the firm and pay back creditors, DealBook’s Peter Lattman reports. Dewey’s lead bankruptcy lawyer, Al Togut, said the process had moved more swiftly and less contentiously than previous law firm liquidations. “I want to congratulate all the professionals,” Judge Martin Glenn said at the end of a three-hour hearing.

The liquidation plan describes how the estate will compensate creditors, whose claims total about $550 million. “At the heart of the proposal is an innovative arrangement under which about 450 former Dewey partners agreed to returna portion of their pay, raising about $72 million for creditors,” Mr. Lattman writes. “By accepting the deal, former Dewey partners insulate themselves from future lawsuits connected to the firm’s demise.” Still, a criminal investigation into possible financial misconduct at Dewey is in progress.

EUROPE MOVES TO LIMIT BONUSES  |  The European Parliament reached a tentative deal on Wednesday evening to limit bankers’ bonuses at twice the value of their fixed pay, moving to impose the toughest limits on pay since the financial crisis. The deal, which still must be endorsed formally by governments and lawmakers, caps 18 months of negotiating and sets the stage for the implementation of the so-called Basel III rules on capital. It is “a major victory for the European Parl! iament ne! gotiators, who insisted on pay curbs as their price for passing Basel, and a sign of London’s relative isolation on some financial services issues,” The Financial Times writes. Britain had opposed some of the limits.

“I find it difficult to imagine that we would now scrap this compromise,” Michel Barnier, the European Union’s financial services chief, said, according to Bloomberg News. Under the terms of the deal, a one-to-one ratio of salary to bonus can increase to two-to-one with shareholder approval. “While bonuses worth more than twice fixed pay would be banned, special treatment would be given to loss-absorbing securities such as shares and debt that can be written down during a crisis, according to E.U. officials. That would apply if that part of the bonus is deerred for at least five years, they said,” Bloomberg News writes.

ON THE AGENDA  |  Barnes & Noble, Best Buy and Sears report earnings before the market opens. Jamie Dimon, chief executive of JPMorgan Chase, appears on Fox Business Network at 5 p.m. James E. Rogers, chief executive of Duke Energy, is on Bloomberg TV at 4 p.m. A revised estimate of gross domestic product for the fourth quarter is out at 8:30 a.m.

ACKMAN’S RETAIL WOES  |  J.C. Penney’s disappointing fourth-quarter results underscored the challenges facing the hedge fund manager William A. Ackman, who is wagering on the retailer’s turnaround. “It’s hard to call J.C. Penney’s latest quarterly report anything but breathtakingly bad,” DealBook’s Michael J. de la Merced writes. “The retailer lost $552 million for the quarter, which at $1.95 a share on an adjusted basis far exceeded the 17-cent loss that analysts had been expecting. Same-store sales tumbled nearly 32 percent from the period a year earlier. Shares in the company were down nearly 9 percent in after-hours trading.”

The chief executive of J.C. Penney, Ronald B. Johnson, who was recruited from Apple, pointed to the changes he had made and asked investors for patience. “One might wonder whether Mr. Ackman, whose Pershing Square Capital Management owns a 17.8 percent stake in J.C. Penney, can wait that long. That said, a person familiar with his thinking said Mr. Ackman believed that the quarter had cleaned up the retailer’s legacy issues, including old and unattractive inventory and cutting out roughly hundreds of millions of dollars in costs.”

Mergers & Acquisitions »

Mylan Buys Drug Maker of Generic Injectables  |  Mylan is acquiring Agila Specialties Private, an Indian manufacturer, for $1.6 billion in a deal that doubles Mylan’s presence in the injectable-drug market. DealBook »

The Promise of a Higher Bid for REIT  |  The activist hedge fund Corvex Management and The Related Companies offered to raise their takeover bid for CommonWealth REIT on Wednesday to about $2.26 billion, aiming to put additional pressure on the real estate company. DealBook »

Activist Investors Ratchet Up Pressure on a Big REIT  |  Corvex Management, a hedge fund run by Keith Meister, and The Related Companies, led by Jeff T. Blau, have filed a lawsuit to block a proposed stock offering by CommonWealth REIT and reiterated a proposal to buy the real estate company. DealBook »

BCBG Said to Weigh a Sale  |  The fashion company BCBG Max Azria “is exploring a potential sale that could fetch around $1 billion, two people familiar with the matter said on Wednesday,” according to Reuters. REUTERS

Vivendi Said to Consider Putting GVT Sale on Hold  | 
REUTERS

Samsung Moves Onto BlackBerry’s Turf  |  Samsung Electronics is trying to challenge a market that traditionally was dominated by BlackBerry, “quietly beefing up the Google Android software that runs on its smartphones to give businesses a phone with more security,” The New York Times reports. NEW YORK TIMES

Private Equity’s Tax-Advantaged Rivals !  |  Master limited partnerships received a tax break decades ago when United States oil production was declining. Now, with oil output booming, Christopher Swann of Reuters Breakingviews asks, is this a wasteful subsidy DealBook »

Ellison, Oracle’s Chief, Buys Hawaiian Airline  | 
WALL STREET JOURNAL

Morgan Stanley Sells Stock Plan Services Unit in Europe  | 
BLOOMBERG NEWS

INVESTMENT BANKING »

R.B.S. Reports Wider Loss Than Expected  |  The Royal Bank of Scotland said on Thursday that it lost £5.97 billion ($9 billion) in 2012, much larger than the £2 billion loss recorded in 2011, underscoring the troubles the bank continues to face. Analysts surveyed by Bloomberg News had been expecting a loss of £5.1 billion. BLOOMBERG NEWS

Bankia Reports a Record Loss  |  Bankia of Spain reported a net loss of roughly $25.04 billion for 2012, “by far the largest in Spanish corporate history,” The Wall Street Journal reports. WALL STREET JOURNAL

Fighting Over the Future of Banking  |  Bank chief executives have to answer to regulators, investors and employees, groups that each want different things, Bloomberg Markets Magazine writes. BLOOMBERG MARKETS MAGAZINE

Goldman Hires Lobbyist From Citigroup  |  Amy Overton, a lobbyist who spent less than two years at Citigroup, is heading to Goldman Sachs, Reuters reports. REUTERS

Citigroup Executive Heads to Promontory  |  Joe Petro, the longtime head of Citigroup’s security and investigative services unit, has left for the consulting firm Promontory Financial Group, American Banker reports. AMERICAN BANKER

Bank of America Appoints Officers in Asia  | 
WALL STREET JOURNAL

PRIVATE EQUITY »

In t! he Hunt f! or Capital, Private Equity Executives Outnumber Investors  |  Networking at the SuperReturn conference in Berlin is an exhausting process, as private equity firms set up shop in private rooms, at tables and even at the bar in the conference hotel. DealBook »

Despite Uncertainty, Private Equity Remains Bullish on Europe  |  Speaking at an industry conference in Berlin, David M. Rubenstein and other private equity executives outlined investment opportunities in Europe, including sales related to bank bailouts by local governments. DealBook »

In India, Blackstone Turns to Commercial Real Estate  |  The Blackstone Group is among private equity firms shifting money into commercial real estate in India, Reuters writes. REUTERS

HEDGE FUNDS »

Argentina’s Bond Case Is Being Closely Watched for Ramifications  |  A federal appeals court on Wednesday heard impassioned arguments from two of the nation’s most prominent lawyers in a case that pits a group of bond investors in a long-running battle with the country of Argentina. DealBook »

Man Group Reports Decline in Assets  |  The Man Group said assets under management fell to $57 billion in the fourth quarter from $58.4 billion a year earlier, Bloomberg News reports. BLOOMBERG NEWS

Fortress Profit Doubles on Rising Investment Values  |  The Fortress Investment Group said its profit more than doubled in the fourth quarter, to $107 million, as the value of its investments showed solid growth. For the year, the firm reported earning $278 million. DealBook »

A Race Against Loeb That Left Ackman Breathless  |  In an excerpt from his article in the latest Vanity Fair, William D. Cohan recounts what was supposed to have been a friendly long-distance bike ride involving William A. Ackman and Daniel S. Loeb in the Hamptons. It didn’t end well for Mr. Ackman. DealBook »

I.P.O./OFFERINGS »

Groupon Shares Tumble on Disappointing Results  |  Reuters reports: “Groupon Inc. lost a quarter of its market value on Wednesday after the company revealed it began to take a smaller cut of revenue on! daily de! als during the holidays, sacrificing revenue and profits to attract and keep merchants.” REUTERS

VENTURE CAPITAL »

Intel to Invest in Research and Development in Brazil  |  Intel will invest $152 million in Brazil, which has made increasing the country’s software output a priority. DealBook »

LEGAL/REGULATORY »

Senate Confirms Lew as Treasury Secretary  |  The New York Times reports: “The Senate on Wednesday easily and, for the most part, affably confirmed President Obama’s pick for Treasury secretary, Jacob J. Lew, a day after the president’s nominee for defense secretary narrowly survived a highly politicized confirmation vote.” NEW YORK TIMES

Wal-Mart Executive Said to Be Stepping Down  |  Tom Mars, Wal-Mart’s chief administrative officer, “will leave the retailer on March 13 after more than a decade with the company,” according to The Wall Street Journal. WALL STREET JOURNAL

Milken’s Relationship With Guggenheim Said to Draw Scrutiny  |  The Securities and Exchange Commission is looking into whether Michael Milken, “the onetime king of junk bonds who agreed to a lifetime ban from the securities industry, is violating the terms of that ban in his dealings” with Guggenheim Partners, Fortune reports. FORTUNE

UBS Sued by Former Traders Over Dismissal  |  Two former UBS traders in Singapore “claimed they were fired in a bid by the bank to cover up its role in allegedly manipulating key reference rates,” Bloomberg News reports. BLOOMBERG NEWS



As Losses Mount, R.B.S. Unveils Plan to Sell Assets

LONDON - The Royal Bank of Scotland, hammered by losses, announced plans on Thursday to sell assets and pare back its investment banking business, in an effort to appease regulators and its biggest shareholder, the British government.

R.B.S. said it planned to sell a stake in the Citizens Financial Group, the American lender it bought in 1988, through an initial public offering in two years. The bank will also continue to reduce its investment banking operations, with plans to cut risky assets and eliminate jobs.

The moves are designed to help bolster the bank’s capital levels and refocus its operations, part of a multiyear turnaround effort initiated by its chief executive, Stephen Hester. In the end, R.B.S. will emerge a much smaller bank, largely focused on Britain.

“R.B.S. is four yars into its recovery plan,” Mr. Hester said in a statement, “and good progress has been made. We are a much smaller, more focused and stronger bank. Our target is for 2013 to be the last big year of restructuring.”

Like many rivals, R.B.S. is struggling with the legacy of the financial crisis and a spate of legal issues. On Thursday, it reported a bigger-than-expected loss, in part tied to its legal troubles.

The bank, in which the British government holds an 82 percent stake after a bailout in 2008, posted a net loss of £5.97 billion ($9 billion) in 2012, much larger than the £2 billion loss recorded in 2011. Analysts had been expecting a loss of £5.1 billion. For the last quarter of 2012, R.B.S. reported a £2.6 billion loss, up from a £1.8 billion loss in the period a year earlier.

The rising losses reflect the bank’s regulatory and legal problems.

R.B.S. said on Thursday that it had set aside an additional £1.1 billion to compensate clients to which it improp! erly sold insurance products, bringing the total provision to £2.2 billion. It also estimated it would have to pay £700 million to compensate small businesses to which it improperly sold some interest-rate hedging products.

The bank agreed this year to pay $612 million to British and American authorities to settle accusations of rate-rigging. Since then, Mr. Hester has promised to tighten controls at the bank to limit the risk of future rate manipulation.

The head of R.B.S.’s investment banking division, John Hourican, resigned at the beginning of February as a result of the scandal related to manipulating the London interbank offered rate, or Libor. The bank plans to pay its fine with money clawed back from bonuses.

‘‘Along with the rest of the banking industry we faced significant reputational challenges,’’ Mr. Hester said in the statement. ‘‘We are determined to overcome the cultural and reputational baggage of precrisis times with the same focus we have applied to the fnancial cleanup from that era.’’

Eager to get back some of the £45.5 billion it invested in R.B.S., the British government recently increased pressure on the bank’s management to speed up the reorganization.

Some analysts said the government could start selling parts of its investment in the bank, even at a loss, before the next general election, which is set for 2015. R.B.S.’s shares are still trading at about half what the government paid for them in 2008. Some lawmakers said they would favor handing out shares to the public instead of a possible sale of the stake on the open market.

Richard Hunter, head of equities at Hargreaves Lansdown Stockbrokers, said there were signs that Mr. Hester’s efforts to turn around the bank had started to pay off, but that “the ongoing absence of a dividend and overhang of the government stake are negatives which need to be resolved.”



Europe Moves to Cap Bankers Bonuses

European Union Moves Toward Bonus Cap for Bankers

BRUSSELS â€"   The European Union moved a step closer Thursday to imposing strict curbs on bonus pay for bankers, which has been blamed by many politicians for inciting the risk-taking behavior that set off the financial crisis.

 

A provisional agreement struck by the European Parliament, the European Commission and national representatives could mean that the coveted bonuses many bankers receive will be capped at the level of their annual salaries, starting next year. The proposal would allow bonuses of as much as double the salary if a sufficient number of a bank’s shareholders agreed.

 

 

The agreement, as it stands, is a blow to Britain, which partly relies on generous remuneration packages to ensure that the City of London remains the biggest financial center in Europe and the overseas home of banks from around the globe.

 

‘‘We need to make sure that regulation put in place in Brussels is flexible enough to allow those banks to continue competing and succeeding while being located in the U.K.,’’  David Cameron, the British prime minister, said in Riga, the Latvian capital.

 

 

The bonus restrictions were added to legislation enacting the Basel III bank regulations. The Basel rules, which were agreed to by global central bankers and the financial authorities, are meant to ensure that  lenders have the resources to weather crises.

 

‘‘We’ve achieved the most comprehensive banking reform in the European Union,’’ Othmar Karas, an Austrian member of the European Parliament and chief negotiator of the deal, said at a news conference.

 

The parliamentary vote reflects a global backlash against the outsized pay in the financial sector after the financial crisis and economic dislocation that followed. Voters in Switzerland, which is  not an E.U. member, will go to the polls this weekend for a referendum question that will decide whether shareholders gain more control over executive compensation.

 

‘‘This legislation was resisted tooth and nail by the industry,’’ said Philippe Lamberts, a member of the Parliament’s Green bloc from Belgium.

While the battle has often been portrayed as matching Britain against the Continent, the reality has been  that   ‘‘many in Paris, as well as Frankfurt and Berlin, were not too happy’’ about  what  was happening in Parliament,  he said,  but did not mind allowing London to take the leading role in opposing it.

 

 

 

 

A majority of E.U. states still must give their final approval for the legislation to take effect, and there are expected to be more discussions on the rules at the European Parliament and among governments. 

 

If the proposal goes through, the law on bonuses would take effect on Jan. 1, 2014.

 

Mr. Karas acknowledged that more work lay ahead, with a need for technical working groups to ‘‘put it into a text’’ that  ‘‘holds water legally.’’ Legislators said they would work to ensure that bankers did not get around the rules with so-called ‘‘golden handshakes’’ and ‘‘contract buyouts.’’

 

 

 

 

The goal of the proposed bonus cap is to balance many different interests, including ‘‘the desire to limit bankers’ pay while maintaining a competitive European banking sector,’’ Michael Noonan, the finance minister of Ireland, which holds the rotating E.U. presidency, said in a statement after the talks ended. Mr. Noonan said he would present the plan at a meeting of finance ministers next week.

 

David Jolly contributed reporting from Paris.



In Europe, Risks and Opportunities

BERLIN - Is Europe a risk or an opportunity

As the region’s economy struggles, private equity managers offer different views about the region.

Speaking at the Super Return conference in Berlin, Henry Kravis, co-founder of Kohlberg Kravis Roberts, said Europe was an attractive market, particularly in the Continent’s southern countries that have been hit by high unemployment and meager growth.

“I like Spain, they are doing a number of right things,” Mr. Kravis told a somewhat empty conference room in the early morning on Thursday after many private equity managers had attended late-night dinners the previous evening. “In Europe, there clearly are opportunities. I may be in the minority.”

Other private equity giants, including David M. Rubenstein of the Carlyle Group, also are scouting for opportunities from Italy to Ireland despite concerns that the Continent may fall back into recession.

Lionel Assant, European head of private equity at the Blackstone Group, liked pain because of its close ties to fast-growing Latin American markets and effort to reform its local labor market.

Not every manager is so bullish.

J. Christopher Flowers, whose private equity firm bought an insurance broker from the struggling Belgian bank KBC for 240 million euros ($310) in 2011, said the future of the euro zone remained a major risk.

Europe’s prospects of recovery were hit again this week after Italian national elections on Monday failed to provide a definitive winner. The political impasse prompted significant losses across the Continent’s stock markets as investors fretted about the future of one of Europe’s largest economies.

For Mr. Flowers, there are still some potential investment opportunities like the pending forced sale of bank branches in Britain from the nationalized Royal Bank of Scotland. America, however, still remains his preferred region in which to invest.

“If a major economy like Spain defaults, we would prefer to be in Germa! ny,” Mr. Flowers said on Thursday. “If I had to pick one region, I would pick the U.S.”



In Europe, Risks and Opportunities

BERLIN - Is Europe a risk or an opportunity

As the region’s economy struggles, private equity managers offer different views about the region.

Speaking at the Super Return conference in Berlin, Henry Kravis, co-founder of Kohlberg Kravis Roberts, said Europe was an attractive market, particularly in the Continent’s southern countries that have been hit by high unemployment and meager growth.

“I like Spain, they are doing a number of right things,” Mr. Kravis told a somewhat empty conference room in the early morning on Thursday after many private equity managers had attended late-night dinners the previous evening. “In Europe, there clearly are opportunities. I may be in the minority.”

Other private equity giants, including David M. Rubenstein of the Carlyle Group, also are scouting for opportunities from Italy to Ireland despite concerns that the Continent may fall back into recession.

Lionel Assant, European head of private equity at the Blackstone Group, liked pain because of its close ties to fast-growing Latin American markets and effort to reform its local labor market.

Not every manager is so bullish.

J. Christopher Flowers, whose private equity firm bought an insurance broker from the struggling Belgian bank KBC for 240 million euros ($310) in 2011, said the future of the euro zone remained a major risk.

Europe’s prospects of recovery were hit again this week after Italian national elections on Monday failed to provide a definitive winner. The political impasse prompted significant losses across the Continent’s stock markets as investors fretted about the future of one of Europe’s largest economies.

For Mr. Flowers, there are still some potential investment opportunities like the pending forced sale of bank branches in Britain from the nationalized Royal Bank of Scotland. America, however, still remains his preferred region in which to invest.

“If a major economy like Spain defaults, we would prefer to be in Germa! ny,” Mr. Flowers said on Thursday. “If I had to pick one region, I would pick the U.S.”