Total Pageviews

Kohlberg Declines to Raise Bid for Steinway

A contest to buy the maker of Steinway & Sons pianos is ending in a diminuendo.

The private equity firm Kohlberg & Company, which offered last month to buy Steinway Musical Instruments, said on Tuesday that it would not seek to raise its bid in the face of a rival offer. That puts Steinway in a position to complete a buyout deal with the rival bidder, which offered this week to buy the company for $38 a share, or about $475 million.

The rival bidder, which has not been publicly identified, is the hedge fund Paulson & Company, in a rare foray into private equity, according to a person briefed on the matter who was not authorized to speak publicly.

Kohlberg, which originally bid $35 a share, or $438 million, for Steinway, told the company that it waived its right to negotiate with the board about possibly increasing its bid, the private equity firm said on Tuesday in a regulatory filing.

Steinway’s stock price fell 3.33 percent on Tuesday to close at $38.27 a share. The slight premium above the price of the Paulson bid suggests investors may be expecting Steinway to receive additional offers.

A 45-day “go-shop” period, during which Steinway can invite rival bids, is ending on Wednesday.

Representatives for Steinway and Paulson declined to comment.

The company, which was founded in 1853 by Henry Engelhard Steinway and his three sons, makes pianos, horns and other instruments that are used by professionals and amateurs alike. It based in Waltham, Mass., and has factories in Hamburg, Germany and Astoria, Queens.

For piano aficionados in New York, this summer has been tinged with melancholy. Steinway closed on the sale of a well-known showroom on West 57th Street in Manhattan just days before announcing its intention to sell itself to a private equity firm.

A going-private transaction would give Steinway its fifth set of owners. The Steinway family sold the company in 1972 to CBS, and it changed hands several times thereafter before going public in 1996.

Fortunately for piano lovers, Steinway’s craftsmen have had relative autonomy over the years, said Richard K. Lieberman, a historian at LaGuardia Community College who wrote a book on Steinway.

“The owners have a commitment to making money. The commitment to quality, the commitment to the piano, is in the factory. It’s with the foremen, it’s with the workers,” Mr. Lieberman said. “I’m pretty comfortable, as a historian of Steinway, to say I trust those workers.”



Officials Broaden Inquiries Into Oversight of Bitcoin and Other Currencies

State and federal officials are starting broad investigations of shortcomings in the oversight of upstart virtual currencies like bitcoin.

The Senate’s committee on homeland security this week sent a letter to all the major financial regulators and law enforcement agencies asking about the “threats and risks related to virtual currency.” These currencies, which have grown in popularity in recent years, are often used in online transactions that are not monitored by traditional financial institutions.

“This is something that is clearly not going away and it demands a whole government response,” said a person involved in the Senate committee’s investigation, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because the inquiry is continuing.

The Senate letter went out the same day that New York’s top financial regulator, Benjamin Lawsky, sent subpoenas to 22 companies that have had some involvement with bitcoin, according to a person briefed on the investigation.

Previously, there have been isolated efforts to crack down those who took advantage of virtual currencies. But the two investigations made public this week appear to be the most wide ranging government efforts to exert more coordinated control over what has been a largely faceless and borderless phenomenon.

Bitcoin, the most well-known digital currency, was started by anonymous Japanese computer programmers in 2009 and was intended to serve as an alternative to national currencies. Only a limited number of new bitcoins can be created and an online community has bid up the price of an individual bitcoin, which are stored digitally on a decentralized network of computers. On Tuesday, a bitcoin was being sold for about $108 online.

Lawmakers are worried that bitcoin and other alternative forms of money can be used to evade taxes, defraud investors and facilitate trade in illegal products like drugs and pornography.

Last month, the Securities and Exchange Commission accused a Texas man of profiting from a bitcoin Ponzi scheme on the same day it issued a broader warning about the dangers of similar scams. Earlier this year, the operators of another virtual currency, Liberty Reserve, were accused of running a $6 billion money laundering ring.

The Senate committee began looking into virtual currency a few months ago, formally interviewing several regulators and industry participants. The committee recently stepped up its efforts because staff members heard “real concern” from law enforcement officials, and because it became clear that regulators did not have enough information about the technology, according to the person involved in the inquiry.

“The federal government must make sure that potential threats and risks are dealt with swiftly,” the letter said.

Both the Senate committee and Mr. Lawsky have emphasized that the technology could have good uses, and any new regulations would help protect those.

But Mr. Lawsky, in a formal notice released Monday, said that “if virtual currencies remain a virtual Wild West for narcotraffickers and other criminals, that would not only threaten our country’s national security, but also the very existence of the virtual currency industry as a legitimate business enterprise.”

Mr. Lawsky’s office sent subpoenas to most of the companies who have publicly discussed investing in bitcoin or creating software that allow for the transfer and exchange of bitcoins.

“It is in the common interest of both the public and the virtual currency industry to bring virtual currencies out of the darkness and into the light of day through enhanced transparency,” Mr. Lawsky’s notice said.



A Thriving Financial Product, Despite a Record of Failure

On Wall Street, strange financial products sometimes exist not because they are good for investors or companies, but because they offer their promoters a way to profit.

One of those products may be the Silver Eagle Acquisition Company, which just completed a $325 million initial public offering.

Silver Eagle is a special purpose acquisition company, or SPAC, which raises money through an I.P.O. and then casts a wide net in search of a private company to buy. Silver Eagle’s I.P.O. is the largest in the past seven years for a SPAC and sure to earn its promoters millions, but the outcome is not so clear for its investors or even the company itself.

A SPAC, also known as a blank check company, has been referred to as the poor man’s private equity because the promoters of the SPAC get up to 20 percent of the equity mostly for finding the target company. The fee is similar to that of a private equity firm, as is the idea of picking a company, but a SPAC is not as safe or rewarding as private equity. SPAC investors take all of the risk in one company instead of a portfolio of companies held by a private equity firm. And unlike a private equity firm, which hires the best and the brightest, there have been an assortment of SPAC promoters with varying expertise. Lou Holtz, the former football coach of Notre Dame, was part of one, as was former Vice President Dan Quayle. Even Stephen Wozniak, a founder of Apple Computer, was involved in one.

In the 1980s, they were rife with fraud, and briefly disappeared from Wall Street in the wake of stricter federal regulation. But, like zombies, they reappeared in the mid-2000s. Before the credit crisis, these vehicles accounted for nearly 25 percent of all I.P.O.’s. They are less scandalous, but they still have problems. The biggest peril may be that while a SPAC is formed to acquire a company, the target is unknown at the time of the I.P.O. The SPAC has a period â€" nowadays up to two years â€" to complete an acquisition or liquidate.

Two years may seem a long time, but time runs quickly in finance, and the promoters are often rushed to complete an acquisition.

That means the promoters can make bad choices. According to SPAC Analytics, of the 198 SPACs since 2004, 72 have liquidated, earning almost no returns for their investors. Even so, liquidation may be the better option. Of the 111 SPACs that acquired companies, their average return, according to SPAC Analytics, was minus 14.4 percent. By contrast, the Russell 3000-stock index in that same period had a positive return of 5.9 percent.

It’s not just that the returns are terrible. There have been some spectacular failures as SPACs have rushed into hot markets like energy, China and even water.

The worst was probably Chardan 2008 China Acquisition Corporation, formed to acquire a Chinese company. With its clock ticking, Chardan changed course and decided to enter another hot field, the Florida foreclosure market. Chardan acquired the foreclosure processing operations of the lawyer David J. Stern. Unfortunately, Chardan’s due diligence was less than stellar, and the firm got caught in the fraudulent paperwork scandal, better known as robo-signing. Chardan imploded in bankruptcy.

Another high-profile SPAC, Endeavor Acquisition, completed its $385 million purchase of 41 percent of American Apparel only three days before it was due to liquidate. Before American Apparel, Endeavor had considered buying a “branded restaurant chain with franchising opportunities,” and then a weight-loss company. Instead, T-shirts awaited, but it was a foolhardy purchase, and American Apparel is now trading around $2 a share with a market capitalization of about $214 million.

Then there is Heckmann Corporation, a SPAC that acquired the fifth-largest Chinese water bottler for $625 million in 2008. It seemed a winning proposition, combining water and billions of Chinese consumers. Heckmann renamed itself Nuveera. But it sold the business for almost nothing to a Hong Kong buyer in 2011. Heckmann, by the way, was the SPAC that Mr. Holtz and Mr. Quayle were involved in. (Mr. Wozniak’s SPAC was also a dud. It raised $150 million and acquired Jazz Semiconductor in 2006 for $260 million. Jazz was later sold for $40 million.)

SPACs have brought companies to market that do not appear to perform particularly well. There have been some successes, including Burger King, which went public through a London-based SPAC, but the failures appear to far outnumber the successes.

But Silver Eagle’s I.P.O. shows that these entities are thriving despite the record of failure. Silver Eagle is the fourth SPAC to go public this year.

Silver Eagle was formed by Harry E. Sloan, the former chief executive of Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer Studios, and Jeff Sagansky, the former president of CBS Entertainment. Silver Eagle will look to acquire a “media or entertainment businesses with high growth potential in the United States or internationally.”

Maybe. Silver Eagle still has many traits that have brought SPACs trouble.

Silver Eagle will have the two years to make an acquisition, but as the prospectus discloses, the promoters can also seek to acquire any other type of company.

The promoters are also experienced executives in the entertainment industry but not in private equity. Mr. Sloan and Mr. Sagansky’s first SPAC, Global Eagle, acquired Row 44 and Advanced Inflight Alliance in January. So far, it is up about 6 percent from the $10 a share I.P.O. price. That is no spectacular return.

Not only that, Silver Eagle has taken advantage of the JOBS Act to limit the disclosures made by the company. This loophole has been criticized for repeatedly being used by SPACs instead of the emerging growth companies it was intended for.

You’re probably wondering how Mr. Sloan and Mr. Sagansky could raise so much money. It is here that the magic of finance takes over.

A number of hedge funds are big buyers of SPAC shares. The reason, paradoxically, is the protections that SPACs have put in place over the years to protect shareholders.

To make sure that SPACs acquire an appropriate company, they have a feature that allows shareholders to redeem their shares if they do not approve of the acquisition. Prior iterations of SPACs also required a shareholder vote of 80 percent to approve the acquisition.

Intended to protect shareholders, the feature has provided hedge funds a nice investment payoff. The funds can buy I.P.O. shares at, say, $10 a share and then redeem them for the same price if they do not like the acquisition, giving them a safe place to hold cash. Alternatively, the funds have a nice potential upside if the stock price rises when the acquisition is announced.

The SPAC was thus a win-win for the funds and led them to actively invest, sometimes using their power of redemption or the vote to hold up the promoters and get better terms.

SPACs, then, are good for promoters and hedge funds. But the real question is whether they are good for the acquired companies.

After the acquisition, the companies often appear to perform poorly. The returns certainly show this. The stumbles of American Apparel and other SPAC acquisitions also show that these companies are sometimes being brought to market before they are ready.

In other words, SPACs may persist, not because they are good for investors or the companies themselves, but because they are a sought-after financial product. This may also be true for Silver Eagle, but for its sake, let’s hope that past performance is no indication of future results.



Icahn Says He Has Large Stake in Apple

For an old-school investor, Carl C. Icahn has quickly become a force in technology stocks.

Amid his battle against a proposed buyout of Dell, Mr. Icahn has found a tech giant he likes, announcing via Twitter that he has a “large” position in Apple’s stock.

His two tweets on Tuesday afternoon â€" only his 11th and 12th since joining the social media platform in late June â€" sent shares of Apple surging. In late trading, the stock price was up more than 4 percent, at $487.90

The latest disclosure comes a day after Icahn Enterprises said it would begin to make announcements through Twitter, as part of a new Securities and Exchange Commission filing procedure that has been created to allow companies to publish announcements through social media.

Mr. Icahn is not the first hedge fund manager to pressure Apple to do something with its large cash pile. Earlier this year David Einhorn, of Greenlight Capital accused Apple of “hoarding” cash in a move that eventually led the technology company to announce a $100 billion share buyback.

Steve Dowling, a representative for Apple said: “We appreciate the interest and investment of all our shareholders. Tim had a very positive conversation with Mr. Icahn today.”



Arrests Still Pending in JPMorgan Trading-Loss Case

Federal authorities, seeking to bring criminal charges against two former JPMorgan Chase employees at the center of the bank’s multibillion-dollar trading loss in London last year, are facing logistical hurdles in planning their arrests.

One of the employees remains on vacation while the other has moved back to his native France, complicating plans to extradite them under an agreement with British authorities. A third employee, Bruno Iksil, has reached a so-called nonprosecution deal with federal investigators in Manhattan that will shield him from charges as long as he cooperates against his two former colleagues, according to people briefed on the matter.

The colleagues include Javier Martin-Artajo, who oversaw the trading strategy from the bank’s London offices. Lawyers for Mr. Martin-Artajo broke their silence on Tuesday to say that he was “currently on a long-planned vacation and will be returning” to London “as scheduled.” The lawyers, from Norton Rose Fulbright, declined to say when he would return, adding that authorities did not instruct him to postpone his vacation.

The other colleague, Julien Grout, left London this year for for France, which typically does not extradite its citizens. Mr. Grout’s lawyer, Edward Little, explained that his client moved after losing his job with JPMorgan in December. Mr. Grout, his lawyer said, moved his belongings to France and spent a brief period in the United States, where his wife’s family resides. The move, his lawyer said, came long before media reports surfaced last week that the former trader could be arrested.

“He has absolutely no intention of fleeing,” Mr. Little said.

The authorities need not need to wait for the employees to return to London to bring charges. Even without arrests, people briefed on the matter said, prosecutors and the F.B.I. in Manhattan could announce the charges as early as this week.

Federal prosecutors and the F.B.I. in Manhattan spent more than a year investigating Mr. Martin-Artajo and Mr. Grout for their roles in the loss at JPMorgan. The authorities, according to people briefed on the matter, suspect Mr. Martin-Artajo instructed lower-level traders, including Mr. Grout and Mr. Iksil, to mask the size of the mounting losses last year.

Poring over internal e-mails and phone records, the authorities came to believe that the traders falsified internal bank records. JPMorgan eventually restated its first-quarter earnings for 2012, adjusting them down by $459 million last July amid concessions that the valuations were flawed.

Yet, Mr. Martin-Artajo’s lawyers said he “is confident that when a complete and fair reconstruction of these complex events is completed, he will be cleared of any wrongdoing.”

Some legal experts have noted that the prosecutors face challenges to proving their case. Traders have some wiggle room to value their trades on derivatives contracts because the actual prices might not be immediately available. That leeway could pose a challenge for prosecutors who will have to prove that the traders intentionally masked the losses.

The case stems from a bet the traders built over many months. Deploying derivatives â€" complex financial tools whose value is linked to an asset like a corporate bond â€" the traders made bets on the health of large corporations like American Airlines.

Those bets, which roiled the market and earned Mr. Iksil the moniker “the London Whale,” began to sour last year. The losses, which JPMorgan initially disclosed last May, has since swelled to more than $6 billion.

The investigation into the losses accelerated with help from Mr. Iksil. The trader, despite receiving public blame for the trade, gave multiple interviews to the United States authorities, both at a meeting in Brussels and later in New York. Before agreeing to visit New York, according to the people briefed on the matter, Mr. Iksil secured the nonprosecution agreement. Under the deal, Mr. Iksil will will not face criminal charges or a civil penalty from regulators as long as he cooperates with the case against the other traders.

Even as prosecutors prepare criminal charges against the other two traders, the United States attorney’s office and the F.B.I. in Manhattan are continuing a parallel investigation into JPMorgan’s failure to thwart the suspected misconduct. The bank could face a reprimand and a fine from the authorities.

Alongside the criminal case, the Securities and Exchange Commission is investigating the trade. In an unusually aggressive stance for the agency, the S.E.C. is looking to win an admission of wrongdoing from JPMorgan as a condition of any settlement. An admission would signal a pivot for the agency, which had allowed defendants for decades to “neither admit nor deny wrongdoing.”

Together, the cases swing an unwelcome spotlight back on the bank, just as the nation’s biggest bank is grappling with an array of regulatory woes.

At least eight federal agencies are investigating the bank. One area of particular focus, according to people close to the matter, is the bank’s financial crisis-era mortgage business. Last week, the bank disclosed that federal prosecutors in California were investigating whether JPMorgan sold shoddy mortgage securities to investors before the 2008 financial crisis.



The Future of American Airlines

And just like that, American Airlines’ easy path out of Chapter 11 has hit a dead end.

The Justice Department â€" along with the attorneys general of six states, interestingly, mostly from “red” states that often seem to have trouble working with the federal government â€" has sued to block the merger of American and US Airways.

The merger was the centerpiece of American’s reorganization plan. A federal bankruptcy judge had planned a hearing in two days related to the plan, in a step toward allowing a vote on the deal. I suspect that hearing will be either delayed or converted into a forum for explaining “what happens now.”

The department’s news release notes that American is operating in bankruptcy. “Absent the merger, American is likely to exit bankruptcy as a vigorous competitor, with strong incentives to grow to better compete with Delta and United,” the news release said. “American recently made the largest aircraft order in industry history, and its post-bankruptcy standalone plan called for increasing both the number of flights and the number of destinations served by those flights at each of its hubs.”

In short, Justice Department wants American to go back to its original idea of reorganizing on a stand-alone basis.

This is going to have real implications for the creditors and shareholders of American, who will now probably get less of their money back as American decides it needs a much stronger balance sheet to survive alone. Indeed, many of the American bondholders should probably expect to become involuntary shareholders in the reorganized airline.

After all, it seems doubtful that American can wait in Chapter 11 until this antitrust case is resolved. Unless the case is quickly settled, American is pretty much going to have to put off the merger for now.

And maybe American can reinvent itself as a kind of specialty carrier, or a largely domestic operation like JetBlue. But otherwise, one has to wonder if the carrier can survive as is in a world now of international behemoths like United Airlines, International Airlines Group (owner of British Airways and Iberia), Lufthansa Group and Emirates.

I’m not an antitrust expert, but imposing the antimonopoly norm on a market that is already somewhat warped by things like prohibitions on cross-border mergers strikes me as a bit suspect.

And the Justice Department has to worry that without the merger, American will be the kind of “vigorous competitor” that Eastern Airlines and Pan Am now are.



Ackman’s Plate-Spinning Act Gets Dangerous

The activist hedge fund boss William A. Ackman is always ready for a fight - just maybe not so many at once.

Mr. Ackman is embarking on a campaign at Air Products and Chemicals amid high-profile tussles with Procter & Gamble, Herbalife and beyond. Resigning from the J.C. Penney board is prudent for more reasons than one. Mr. Ackman’s plate-spinning act is getting dangerous.

J.C. Penney is a mess much of Mr. Ackman’s own making. His handpicked chief executive turned out to be a disaster. The retailer’s shares have tumbled 60 percent since Mr. Ackman’s Pershing Square Capital Management disclosed its nearly one-fifth stake in 2010. Frustrations boiled over last week when Mr. Ackman, a J.C. Penney director, went public with renewed calls for leadership change.

The drama seems to follow Mr. Ackman. He lobbied hard to oust P.&G.’s boss - and succeeded. The $220 billion consumer giant’s shares are up by a third since his arrival a year ago, only about 7 percentage points more than the Standard & Poor’s 500-stock index. Achieving his target of $125 a share, another 50 percent climb, will require considerably more effort.

Mr. Ackman, meanwhile, invited a war at Herbalife after contending the nutritional supplements company was a fraud. His $1 billion short position attracted vocal opposition from, among others, the billionaire investor Carl C. Icahn. The attention Mr. Ackman has brought to Herbalife hasn’t helped him yet; the shares have doubled this year.

Mr. Ackman’s performance is suffering as a result. Pershing Square is up just 3.8 percent in 2013, according to Reuters, compared with the 16 percent available from a broad stock index. The J.C. Penney situation also risks hurting future efforts. Companies generally invite uppity investors onto their boards to avoid unseemly public spats. If Mr. Ackman gets a reputation as a loose-cannon director, it will give him fewer options as an activist. Backing down so quickly may help avoid that fate.

Leaving the board also eases Mr. Ackman’s path to exit J.C. Penney. As a director, stock sales are restricted. If he decides there are losses to be cut, he can now spare Pershing Square investors - and refocus efforts elsewhere. There’s bound to be a big presentation soon to lay out the thesis for a multibillion-dollar bet on Air Products. Based on the muted response of the shares so far, Mr. Ackman may have another bruising battle on his hands.

Agnes T. Crane is a columnist and Jeffrey Goldfarb is an assistant editor at Reuters Breakingviews. For more independent commentary and analysis, visit breakingviews.com.



Major Overhaul of Company Audits Is Proposed

The federal regulator that polices accounting firms is proposing a major overhaul of how company audits are reported to the public, a move that could provide investors with deeper insights into the health of corporations.

For more than 70 years, auditors have had to provide only relatively undetailed opinions about what they see in companies’ financial statements. But that would change under new rules that the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board proposed on Tuesday.

The board is proposing that accounting firms include details of “critical audit matters” in the audit report that is attached to a company’s annual report. The overhaul does not do away with the current practice of requiring the auditors to give a simple pass or fail opinion in the reports.

In practice, under the new rules, an auditor would have to explain where it found it particularly difficult to form judgments about a company’s books. Reasons for that might include the complexity of the financial statements or a lack of evidence needed to reach an opinion. For instance, if a company recognized its revenue in way that was complicated, hard to track or insufficiently supported with reliable data, the auditor would be required to discuss that.

“The proposed standards to enhance the auditor’s reporting model mark a watershed moment for auditing in the United States,” James R. Doty, the chairman of the oversight board, said in a statement. He added the new rule “would make the audit report more relevant to investors.”
In another significant shift, the board is proposing that auditors broaden their oversight. While an auditor’s main focus would stay on financial statements, it would also have to cover other information in the annual report. Specifically, the proposal would require the auditor to evaluate the other information for material misstatements or inconsistencies.

The board is also proposing that accounting firms make public statements about their independence from the companies they audit and give details of how long they’ve been auditing the companies.

The proposals could be diluted in response to pressure from some accountants and their supporters, who may think the measures will be expensive and burdensome to implement. Other accounting specialists, however, don’t think they go far enough.

Steven B. Harris, a member of the oversight board, said the proposals may “improve communication of areas of high audit risk.” But he added, “The language in today’s proposals, however, does not appear to me to create a rule that will be sure to do that.”



Herbalife Safety Issue Draws Scrutiny

When Herbalife, the nutritional supplement company, first ramped up production of its best-selling drink mix at a plant in California, anxious executives were forced to scramble in early 2011 as they faced a potentially serious product safety threat.

The company detected fine shards of metal in its Formula 1 nutrition shake as it was coming off the production line. Over five weeks, the company fixed that problem and a second bout of metal contamination, it says, and there is no evidence that any contaminated product was shipped from the factory. Herbalife insists that none ever reached consumers, who often mix the powder with milk in a blender.

Still, after the factory was back up and running, questions lingered about compliance with overall regulations and industry standards at the plant.

“I get a very sick feeling in my stomach,” Gary Swanson, the senior vice president for global quality, said in a private conversation in February 2011, a week after production resumed, according to documents reviewed by The New York Times.

Referring to the rules of the dietary supplement industry for good manufacturing practices, which is enforced by the Food and Drug Administration, he added: “Quite honestly, if this place has a G.M.P. audit by the F.D.A. in the next month, they’re” in trouble, he said, using a vulgarity. “I don’t know how else to put it.”

The events surrounding those problems â€" and how Herbalife responded to them â€" are now drawing scrutiny. The reason has to do in part with an intense, and intensifying, battle that is unfolding on Wall Street.

Herbalife has been at the heart of a brawl between billionaire investors. William A. Ackman, manager of the hedge fund Pershing Square Capital Management, has made a $1 billion bet that the stock will drop, calling the business a pyramid scheme, an assertion that Herbalife has vigorously denied. Mr. Ackman has suffered about $400 million in losses as other big investors, including Carl C. Icahn and George Soros’s fund, have been piling into the stock, fueling its ascent.

Mr. Ackman, as part of his campaign against Herbalife, has been holding meetings with the New York State attorney general’s office and the Securities and Exchange Commission in hopes of persuading them to pursue an action against the company.

Now the attorney general has subpoenaed a former employee of Herbalife to produce internal documents about the potential safety problem, according to a person briefed on the matter who spoke on the condition of anonymity because the inquiry has not been publicly disclosed. The documents include internal e-mails, slide presentations and operations reports, according to the person briefed on the matter. The former employee, who was granted anonymity out of fear of retribution from the company, obtained the documents before leaving Herbalife in 2011, according to another person briefed on the matter.

The former employee, who is seeking whistle-blower status from the S.E.C., approached the F.D.A. first late last year before turning to Mr. Ackman, who offered to pay his legal fees.

Amid the various competing interests, the documents offer a rare window into a company’s actions as it faced a potential threat to a top-selling product.

When worries were first were raised about the metal contamination, Herbalife sought to fix the problem, the documents say. But much of the product made on the line that was suspect was not destroyed, the documents illustrate, which is the preferred practice recommended by some product safety experts. Instead, the company quarantined the product and sought to salvage the powder by running it through additional inspections to make sure it did not contain any metal shards. The company said that only the product that passed the inspection was released for sale.

“If you have reason to believe the product is contaminated, the correct thing to do is destroy the product,” said Bill Marler, a food safety lawyer who has brought a number of prominent food-related lawsuits. “I’ve been involved in a lot of manufacturing cases, but this doesn’t make any sense to me.”

However, “there’s not a requirement to destroy” potentially contaminated product, said Christopher S. D’Angelo, chairman of the product liability group at the law firm of Montgomery McCracken Walker & Rhoads. “If the product meets specs and standards, there’s no reason why it can’t be sold.”

A spokeswoman for the F.D.A. said that, in general, a company would not need to contact the agency if the company was confident it had quarantined its contaminated products. The F.D.A. declined to comment on Herbalife specifically.

At the core of Herbalife’s success is the notion that its products are safe and healthy. In its 2012 annual report, the company said its products led to “life-changing results.”

The metal contamination issue, concerning the cookies and cream flavor of Formula 1 made at the plant in Lake Forest, Calif., came into focus in early 2011.

“We have a serious problem with metal contamination that we discovered over the weekend,” Joseph Plunkett, the company’s senior vice president for worldwide manufacturing and engineering, said in a private meeting on Jan. 10 that included Richard P. Goudis, the company’s chief operating officer, according to the documents reviewed by The Times.

A stainless steel screen in the production line was apparently defective, throwing off small wires that were used to hold the mesh onto its frame, Mr. Plunkett said. Though a magnet was supposed to catch any shards of metal in the product, the stainless steel of the screens was “not magnetic,” Mr. Plunkett said on Jan. 10.

“Production was stopped temporarily and an investigation was conducted,” according to a statement provided by Herbalife summarizing the events.

In addition to replacing the screen, the company quarantined much of the contaminated powder. The powder that had already been packaged â€" a “small” amount â€" was disposed of, according to a person briefed on the matter. But even with the inspection plan in place, doubts lingered. “Maybe, in hindsight, we would have shut it down a little sooner,” one senior executive said in the Jan. 10 conversation.

Herbalife also moved to obtain X-ray equipment to inspect the potentially contaminated bottles, the documents show. In a Jan. 18 conversation, Mr. Plunkett said the inspection with the X-ray machine would start the following week and would likely take three weeks to complete. The company ultimately decided against using an X-ray machine because of concerns that the cookie crumbs in the formula would be difficult to distinguish from metal shards.

Before long, production on that line was restarted.

“We are getting up near 100 bottles a minute,” Mr. Plunkett said on Jan. 24, to which Mr. Goudis said, “Wow,” according to the documents.

But another concern soon arose: the monorail system for the “super sacks” that contained the raw ingredients had been shedding, with pieces of metal falling into the product, according to a person briefed on the matter.
The solution involved putting a pan beneath the equipment to catch the falling shards, this person said.

Production was halted on Jan. 25 to address this second issue, according to an internal operations report. As part of the investigation, the EAS Consulting Group, a consulting and auditing firm for the dietary supplements industry, was retained to advise on the cleanup, Herbalife said in the statement.

The inspection process involved opening sealed bottles and running them through a metal detector to “confirm the absence of metal contamination,” Herbalife said. The bottles and the bulk powder that made it through the process were cleared for release.

The production line was restarted on Feb. 16.

Herbalife said in a statement that the factory “operates at the highest quality and sanitary standards and its operating procedures are designed to comply with or exceed the appropriate current good manufacturing practices for foods and dietary supplements.”



Herbalife Safety Issue Draws Scrutiny

When Herbalife, the nutritional supplement company, first ramped up production of its best-selling drink mix at a plant in California, anxious executives were forced to scramble in early 2011 as they faced a potentially serious product safety threat.

The company detected fine shards of metal in its Formula 1 nutrition shake as it was coming off the production line. Over five weeks, the company fixed that problem and a second bout of metal contamination, it says, and there is no evidence that any contaminated product was shipped from the factory. Herbalife insists that none ever reached consumers, who often mix the powder with milk in a blender.

Still, after the factory was back up and running, questions lingered about compliance with overall regulations and industry standards at the plant.

“I get a very sick feeling in my stomach,” Gary Swanson, the senior vice president for global quality, said in a private conversation in February 2011, a week after production resumed, according to documents reviewed by The New York Times.

Referring to the rules of the dietary supplement industry for good manufacturing practices, which is enforced by the Food and Drug Administration, he added: “Quite honestly, if this place has a G.M.P. audit by the F.D.A. in the next month, they’re” in trouble, he said, using a vulgarity. “I don’t know how else to put it.”

The events surrounding those problems â€" and how Herbalife responded to them â€" are now drawing scrutiny. The reason has to do in part with an intense, and intensifying, battle that is unfolding on Wall Street.

Herbalife has been at the heart of a brawl between billionaire investors. William A. Ackman, manager of the hedge fund Pershing Square Capital Management, has made a $1 billion bet that the stock will drop, calling the business a pyramid scheme, an assertion that Herbalife has vigorously denied. Mr. Ackman has suffered about $400 million in losses as other big investors, including Carl C. Icahn and George Soros’s fund, have been piling into the stock, fueling its ascent.

Mr. Ackman, as part of his campaign against Herbalife, has been holding meetings with the New York State attorney general’s office and the Securities and Exchange Commission in hopes of persuading them to pursue an action against the company.

Now the attorney general has subpoenaed a former employee of Herbalife to produce internal documents about the potential safety problem, according to a person briefed on the matter who spoke on the condition of anonymity because the inquiry has not been publicly disclosed. The documents include internal e-mails, slide presentations and operations reports, according to the person briefed on the matter. The former employee, who was granted anonymity out of fear of retribution from the company, obtained the documents before leaving Herbalife in 2011, according to another person briefed on the matter.

The former employee, who is seeking whistle-blower status from the S.E.C., approached the F.D.A. first late last year before turning to Mr. Ackman, who offered to pay his legal fees.

Amid the various competing interests, the documents offer a rare window into a company’s actions as it faced a potential threat to a top-selling product.

When worries were first were raised about the metal contamination, Herbalife sought to fix the problem, the documents say. But much of the product made on the line that was suspect was not destroyed, the documents illustrate, which is the preferred practice recommended by some product safety experts. Instead, the company quarantined the product and sought to salvage the powder by running it through additional inspections to make sure it did not contain any metal shards. The company said that only the product that passed the inspection was released for sale.

“If you have reason to believe the product is contaminated, the correct thing to do is destroy the product,” said Bill Marler, a food safety lawyer who has brought a number of prominent food-related lawsuits. “I’ve been involved in a lot of manufacturing cases, but this doesn’t make any sense to me.”

However, “there’s not a requirement to destroy” potentially contaminated product, said Christopher S. D’Angelo, chairman of the product liability group at the law firm of Montgomery McCracken Walker & Rhoads. “If the product meets specs and standards, there’s no reason why it can’t be sold.”

A spokeswoman for the F.D.A. said that, in general, a company would not need to contact the agency if the company was confident it had quarantined its contaminated products. The F.D.A. declined to comment on Herbalife specifically.

At the core of Herbalife’s success is the notion that its products are safe and healthy. In its 2012 annual report, the company said its products led to “life-changing results.”

The metal contamination issue, concerning the cookies and cream flavor of Formula 1 made at the plant in Lake Forest, Calif., came into focus in early 2011.

“We have a serious problem with metal contamination that we discovered over the weekend,” Joseph Plunkett, the company’s senior vice president for worldwide manufacturing and engineering, said in a private meeting on Jan. 10 that included Richard P. Goudis, the company’s chief operating officer, according to the documents reviewed by The Times.

A stainless steel screen in the production line was apparently defective, throwing off small wires that were used to hold the mesh onto its frame, Mr. Plunkett said. Though a magnet was supposed to catch any shards of metal in the product, the stainless steel of the screens was “not magnetic,” Mr. Plunkett said on Jan. 10.

“Production was stopped temporarily and an investigation was conducted,” according to a statement provided by Herbalife summarizing the events.

In addition to replacing the screen, the company quarantined much of the contaminated powder. The powder that had already been packaged â€" a “small” amount â€" was disposed of, according to a person briefed on the matter. But even with the inspection plan in place, doubts lingered. “Maybe, in hindsight, we would have shut it down a little sooner,” one senior executive said in the Jan. 10 conversation.

Herbalife also moved to obtain X-ray equipment to inspect the potentially contaminated bottles, the documents show. In a Jan. 18 conversation, Mr. Plunkett said the inspection with the X-ray machine would start the following week and would likely take three weeks to complete. The company ultimately decided against using an X-ray machine because of concerns that the cookie crumbs in the formula would be difficult to distinguish from metal shards.

Before long, production on that line was restarted.

“We are getting up near 100 bottles a minute,” Mr. Plunkett said on Jan. 24, to which Mr. Goudis said, “Wow,” according to the documents.

But another concern soon arose: the monorail system for the “super sacks” that contained the raw ingredients had been shedding, with pieces of metal falling into the product, according to a person briefed on the matter.
The solution involved putting a pan beneath the equipment to catch the falling shards, this person said.

Production was halted on Jan. 25 to address this second issue, according to an internal operations report. As part of the investigation, the EAS Consulting Group, a consulting and auditing firm for the dietary supplements industry, was retained to advise on the cleanup, Herbalife said in the statement.

The inspection process involved opening sealed bottles and running them through a metal detector to “confirm the absence of metal contamination,” Herbalife said. The bottles and the bulk powder that made it through the process were cleared for release.

The production line was restarted on Feb. 16.

Herbalife said in a statement that the factory “operates at the highest quality and sanitary standards and its operating procedures are designed to comply with or exceed the appropriate current good manufacturing practices for foods and dietary supplements.”



Recounting Ackman’s Other Investing Misses

With his departure from the J.C. Penney board, William A. Ackman has another big whiff on his hands.

While Mr. Ackman, the head of Pershing Square Capital Management, is one of the most recognizable hedge fund managers in the world, he has had his fair share of duds. His career has been largely one of big swings and misses: for every home run investment like General Growth Properties and Fortune Brands there has been a strikeout like the Target Corporation.

Penney has proved to be one of Mr. Ackman’s bigger headaches. Having first bought up a big position in 2010, he became a big advocate for change. The biggest was bringing in Ron Johnson, who was celebrated as the head of Apple’s retail operations. But as the new chief executive, Mr. Johnson proved to be a disaster, unveiling sweeping changes that drove away customers.

Mr. Johnson was fired this year and replaced with the man whose job he had taken, Myron E. Ullman III. But Mr. Ackman began to feud with the old-new chief executive as well, including over a series of management changes.

Here are some of Mr. Ackman’s other notable missteps, many of which happen to be other retail companies:

Gotham Partners: Mr. Ackman’s first foray into professional investing came right out of Harvard, when he partnered with a classmate with just $3 million to start. The hedge fund, Gotham Partners, became a celebrated investor whose assets swelled to several hundred million dollars.

But a series of investments, notably an ill-fated golf company, began to sour, leading investors to withdraw money from Gotham. In 2003, the firm became the subject of an investigation by Eliot L. Spitzer, then New York’s attorney general, although he ultimately found no wrongdoing.

Still, Mr. Ackman was forced to wind down the firm. In 2004, he founded Pershing Square.

Target: Mr. Ackman took aim at the low-cost retailer, pushing it to try a number of moves aimed at raising value for shareholders. Among his suggestions were selling off its credit card receivables and instituting a stock buyback program.

So sure was his bet that he created a special investment fund dedicated to Target, and so ardent was his campaign that he spent millions of dollars in a lengthy proxy fight in 2009. But he lost, leading to a sometimes teary concession speech that quoted Martin Luther King Jr. and President John F. Kennedy in its defense of shareholder democracy.

Perhaps more important to his investors, Mr. Ackman apologized after having lost about 90 percent of the Target fund’s capital

The Borders Group: Pershing Square made a bold wager on the troubled bookseller, amassing a 17 percent stake in the company by late 2007.

But the main strategy Mr. Ackman articulated, a merger with the much larger Barnes & Noble, did not come to fruition. Borders filed for bankruptcy in late 2010 and later liquidated, saddling Pershing Square with a loss of at least $125 million.

Herbalife: Perhaps Mr. Ackman’s most notable current investment outside of J.C. Penney, the nutritional supplement maker Herbalife is among his most controversial. He took aim at Herbalife in late 2012, accusing the company of being an illegal pyramid scheme and betting $1 billion that its stock would fall to zero.

Herbalife has steadfastly denied Mr. Ackman’s charges and mounted a vocal defense of its business practices. But the company’s biggest allies happen to be its enemy’s foes, notably the septuagenarian activist investor Carl C. Icahn, who has had a long-running feud with his younger counterpart. Their goal has been simple: hurt Mr. Ackman’s bet by getting Herbalife’s stock to rise.

Mr. Icahn began with the equivalent of a schoolyard spat with his opponent, one televised on CNBC with millions of dollars at stake. He then announced a big stake in Herbalife - now about 16.5 percent of the company’s shares - and gained two seats on its board.

Other investors, including Mr. Ackman’s friend Daniel S. Loeb and the hedge fund founded by George Soros, also piled in. To date, Herbalife’s shares have risen more than 76 percent since the official debut of Mr. Ackman’s bet against the company.



U.S. Seeks to Block Airline Merger

The Justice Department, along with the attorneys general of six states and the District of Columbia, filed a lawsuit on Tuesday seeking to block the proposed merger of American Airlines and US Airways.

The Justice Department, in announcing the suit, said that if the deal went forward it would substantially reduce competition for “commercial air travel in local markets throughout the United States and result in passengers paying higher air fares and receiving less service.”

The $11 billion merger, announced in February, took American out of bankruptcy. The combination of the two carriers would create the nation’s biggest airline, a company with the size and breadth to compete against United Airlines and Delta Air Lines, which have grown through mergers of their own in recent years and are currently the biggest domestic carriers.

But in the complaint filed on Tuesday in Federal District Court in the District of Columbia, the Justice Department said the merger “will leave three very similar legacy airlines - Delta, United and the new American â€" that past experience shows increasingly prefer tacit coordination over full-throated competition.”

The complaint goes on, “By further reducing the number of legacy airlines and aligning the economic incentives of those that remain, the merger of US Airways and American would make it easier for the remaining airlines to cooperate, rather than compete, on price and service.”

US Airways stock was down 7 percent in trading after the suit was filed.

“Airline travel is vital to millions of American consumers who fly regularly for either business or pleasure,” Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr. said in a statement. “By challenging this merger, the Department of Justice is saying that the American people deserve better. This transaction would result in consumers paying the price â€" in higher airfares, higher fees and fewer choices. Today’s action proves our determination to fight for the best interests of consumers by ensuring robust competition in the marketplace.”

The action is the latest in a series of prominent antitrust moves by the Obama administration Justice Department. In January, the agency sought to block Anheuser-Busch InBev’s $20.1 billion acquisition of Grupo Modelo, the Mexican maker of Corona beer (that deal was later modified to win approval), and in 2011 it thwarted AT&T’s proposed $39 billion takeover of T-Mobile USA. (Those companies abandoned the merger.)

The Justice Department’s lawsuit against the merger of American Airlines and USAirways



Paulson Said to Be Steinway Player

Paulson & Company is the mystery rival bidder for Steinway Musical Instruments, Josh Kosman of The New York Post reports.

Paulson Said to Be Steinway Player

Paulson & Company is the mystery rival bidder for Steinway Musical Instruments, Josh Kosman of The New York Post reports.

Ackman Resigns From Penney’s Board

Updated, 7:32 a.m. | The activist investor William A. Ackman has resigned from the board of J.C. Penney, the retailer said on Tuesday, days after starting an unusually public rebellion against his fellow directors over the future of the company.

In a statement, Penney said it had appointed Ronald W. Tysoe, a former vice chairman of Federated Department Stores. It plans to name another director in the near future.

“During my time on the J.C. Penney board of directors, I have always advocated for what I believe to be in the best interests of the company â€" its stockholders, employees and others,” Mr. Ackman said in a statement. “At this time, I believe that the addition of two new directors and my stepping down from the board is the most constructive way forward for J.C. Penney and all other parties involved.”

The resignation of Mr. Ackman, whose Pershing Square Capital Management is the retailer’s biggest investor with a 17.7 percent stake, ends a surprising fight over the top leadership. The hedge fund manager publicly disclosed two letters that he had sent to fellow directors, ultimately calling for the departures of the interim chief executive, Myron E. Ullman III, and the chairman, Thomas J. Engibous.

Mr. Ackman was unhappy with a series of management changes that Mr. Ullman had made, purportedly outside of the normal managerial processes. And the hedge fund manager accused Mr. Engibous of freezing out some directors and running a dysfunctional board, ultimately suggesting that he be replaced with Allen Questrom, a former chief executive of Penney.

The board responded by essentially accusing Mr. Ackman of playing a role in the retailer’s ongoing woes, notably by bringing in Ron Johnson, Penney’s last chief. Though widely hailed as the head of Apple Inc.’s retail arm, Mr. Johnson introduced a sweeping set of changes that alienated the company’s core customers, including disposing of discounted sales.

The two sides then began extensive negotiations that culminated Monday night with Mr. Ackman’s resignation.

In its statement on Tuesday, the Penney board reiterated its support of both Mr. Ullman and Mr. Engibous. It also praised Mr. Tysoe as an experienced retail veteran with over 20 years of experience.

Penney had actually been interviewing Mr. Tysoe for several weeks, before Mr. Ackman began his insurrection at the board, according to a person briefed on the matter. Mr. Tysoe spoke with several retail directors at the company’s headquarters in Plano, Tex., on July 22, though Mr. Ackman had not expressed interest in meeting with him, this person added.

“The company is extremely fortunate to have the benefit of Ron Tysoe’s judgment and experience at this important time,” Mr. Engibous, the Penney chairman, said in a statement.

Mr. Engibous added, “I would like to thank Bill Ackman for his service on the board over the past two years.”

Even though he is off the board, Mr. Ackman cannot sell his shares immediately. Because he served as a director, he is privy to confidential information that prohibits him from selling stock until at least Penney’s next earnings release, scheduled for next week.



Morning Agenda: Ackman Parts Ways With Penney’s Directors

The hedge fund manager William A. Ackman has stepped down from the board of J.C. Penney, after a public clash with his fellow directors, the company announced on Tuesday morning. In its statement, Penney said that it had added Ronald W. Tysoe, a former vice chairman of Federated Department Stores, to its board, and said it planned to add another director in the near future.

“During my time on the J. C. Penney board of directors, I have always advocated for what I believe to be in the best interests of the company â€" its stockholders, employees and others,” Mr. Ackman said in a statement. “At this time, I believe that the addition of two new directors and my stepping down from the board is the most constructive way forward for J.C. Penney and all other parties involved.”

Mr. Ackman, the largest shareholder of Penney through his firm Pershing Square Capital Management, urged the board last week to hire a new, permanent chief executive to succeed Myron E. Ullman III. That prompted a forceful riposte from the company’s chairman, and the ensuing feud became the latest problem at Penney, which is struggling to revive sales.

DEBATING WHO SHOULD PAY LEGAL BILLS  |  With the current spate of prominent Wall Street white-collar cases, the question of who should foot the legal bill has become an increasingly common one, Andrew Ross Sorkin writes in the DealBook column. “The implication of who is â€" or who is not â€" paying legal fees could have a large effect on the defense’s strategies for defendants.”

Goldman Sachs paid several million dollars to defend, unsuccessfully, its former trader, Fabrice Tourre, in his civil fraud case. Even though he lost, the firm is not seeking reimbursement, Mr. Sorkin reports. In contrast, Goldman, after spending more than $35 million on the legal fees for a former director, Rajat K. Gupta, who was convicted in criminal court of insider trading, is seeking to be repaid.

SAC Capital Advisors is paying for some of its traders ensnared in the continuing criminal insider trading investigation surrounding the firm, but not others, Mr. Sorkin writes.

“There is no absolute rule or law that says a company must pay defense fees for its employees,” Mr. Sorkin writes, “but Delaware law â€" where most companies are incorporated â€" allows legal fees to be paid and in certain cases has required it on the theory that it is good public policy to protect employees from lawsuits that result from work that advances the interests of the employer.”

A SUBPRIME MORTGAGE BOND’S STORY  | Six years after the peak of the housing boom, when Wall Street packaged subprime mortgages and sold them to investors, hundreds of thousands of subprime borrowers continue to struggle. DealBook’s Peter Eavis traces the story of one mortgage bond in particular, GSAMP Trust 2007 NC1.

This bond, created by Goldman Sachs, “became toxic as soon as it was completed. The mortgages slid into default at a speed that was staggering even for that era,” Mr. Eavis writes. “Despite those losses, that bond still lives. It has undoubtedly left its mark on ordinary borrowers. But the impact of the deal spread ever further. It touched the bankers who sold the deal. It even landed on taxpayers, who ended up owning a large slice of the Goldman bond.”

ON THE AGENDA  |  Data on retail sales in July is out at 8:30 a.m. SeaWorld Entertainment reports earnings after the market closes. David Kostin, Goldman Sachs’s chief United States equity strategist, is on Bloomberg TV at 10:05 a.m.

BLACKBERRY’S DWINDLING OPTIONS  |  BlackBerry Ltd. said on Monday it was seriously considering selling itself. “But it is not clear that anyone will want to pay up,” Michael J. de la Merced and Ian Austen write in DealBook. “Analysts and industry executives said that a sale of the entire smartphone maker was increasingly unlikely, and almost certainly at least a year too late.”

“Investors have speculated that an embattled BlackBerry may prove attractive to a private equity firm. The company’s financial state is fairly clean: it has nearly $3 billion in cash and short-term investments. And it carries no debt, suggesting that it can support the financing that a leveraged buyout would require,” DealBook writes. “But that assumes a financial firm would be willing to shoulder the enormous risk that fixing a fading smartphone maker â€" one that competes with the iPhone and an army of Android-based devices â€" would entail.”

Mergers & Acquisitions »

Hospital Mergers May Lead to Bigger Bills for Patients  |  After holding steady through much of the 2000s, deal-making has picked up in health care, raising concerns about the power of large hospital systems, Julie Creswell and Reed Abelson write in The New York Times. NEW YORK TIMES

Blackstone Is Said to Buy Apartments From G.E.  |  The investment firm has agreed to buy control of 80 apartment complexes from General Electric, valuing the properties at about $2.7 billion, a person briefed on the matter said on Monday. DealBook »

Dole’s Chief to Buy Out Company for $13.50 a Share  |  The chief executive of the Dole Food Company has agreed to buy full control of the fruit and vegetable producer, valuing the company at about $1.6 billion, including debt. DealBook »

Steinway Says It Has Received a Higher Bid  |  The maker of Steinway & Sons pianos says it has received an offer of $38 a share - nearly 9 percent higher than an earlier bid - from an unidentified affiliate of a large investment firm. DealBook »

Mystery Steinway Bidder Identified as Paulson  |  Paulson & Company is the firm behind the $38-a-share bid for Steinway, The New York Post reports. NEW YORK POST

Extreme Reach to Buy Digital Generation’s TV Business  |  Extreme Reach is paying $485 million for the TV business of Digital Generation, an advertising distribution company, Reuters reports. REUTERS

INVESTMENT BANKING »

Barclays Said to Consider Sale of U.A.E. Banking Business  |  Barclays is “is conducting a strategic review of its retail banking operations in the United Arab Emirates,” which could lead to a sale of the business, Reuters reports, citing unidentified people familiar with the matter. REUTERS

Rise of the ‘Boring’ Bank Chief  |  “Large banks, burned by years of scandal, often with swashbuckling C.E.O.’s at the helm, are turning to new bosses who sport well-polished veneers of boringness,” The Wall Street Journal writes. “The goal is to avoid further controversy.” WALL STREET JOURNAL

Icahn Enterprises Suggests Following Carl Icahn on Twitter  |  “We encourage investors, the media, and others interested in our company to review the information that Mr. Icahn posts on Twitter,” Carl C. Icahn’s firm said in a statement on Monday. NEWS RELEASE

PRIVATE EQUITY »

CVC Capital to Buy Extended Warranty Company  |  Advent International, a European private equity firm, agreed to sell Domestic and General, an extended warranty company, to CVC Capital Partners for about $1.2 billion. DealBook »

Campbell Soup to Sell Some European Operations  |  CVC Capital Partners is in talks to buy the Campbell Soup Company’s operations in France, Germany, Sweden and Belgium. DealBook »

Goldman Buys Into Spanish Real Estate  |  The private equity arm of Goldman Sachs, along with the investment group Azora, bought a portfolio of residential apartments from the regional government of Madrid for 201 million euros, or about $267.6 million, The Financial Times reports. FINANCIAL TIMES

HEDGE FUNDS »

Co-Founders of Diamondback Return to Hedge Fund Business  |  Two principals of Diamondback Capital Management, which was closed last year after large redemption requests, are each planning new hedge funds focused on equities, Absolute Return reports. ABSOLUTE RETURN

Former Goldman Managing Directors Plan Hedge Fund in Asia  | 
BLOOMBERG NEWS

I.P.O./OFFERINGS »

M&G Chemicals Said to Plan Hong Kong I.P.O.  |  M&G Chemicals, an Italian company that makes polyethylene terephthalate, is aiming to raise about $500 million in an initial public offering in Hong Kong, The Wall Street Journal reports, citing two unidentified people with knowledge of the deal. WALL STREET JOURNAL

VENTURE CAPITAL »

Personnel Changes at U.S. Venture Partners  |  Winston Fu, a longtime general partner at U.S. Venture Partners, has left the firm, along with the partner Chris Rust and the venture partner Emily Melton, Fortune reports. FORTUNE

LEGAL/REGULATORY »

SAC Capital Closes a Trading Unit as It Starts to RetrenchSAC Capital Closes a Trading Unit as It Starts to Retrench  |  The closure is the latest setback for SAC Capital, the once-powerful hedge fund run by the billionaire Steven A. Cohen that has been hobbled by a criminal indictment. DealBook »

U.S. Subpoenas Goldman in Inquiry of Aluminum Warehouses  |  The investigation is focused on the storage of aluminum by Goldman Sachs and other companies, which beverage makers say is distorting the market, David Kocieniewski reports in The New York Times. NEW YORK TIMES

Suit Accuses Online Lender of Violating New York Rate Caps  |  The New York attorney general sued Western Sky Financial and its affiliates, which claim ties to American Indian tribes that exempt them from state restrictions on interest rates. DealBook »

For S.E.C., Any JPMorgan Settlement Could Serve as a Template  |  Requiring the bank to admit to violations of the securities laws in the case of the so-called London Whale could be a guide for how to handle such Wall Street cases, Peter J. Henning writes in the White Collar Watch column. White Collar Watch »



CVC Capital to Buy Extended Warranty Company for $1.2 Billion

LONDON - The European private equity firm Advent International agreed on Tuesday to sell Domestic & General, an extended warranty company, to CVC Capital Partners, a rival private equity firm.

The terms of the deal were not disclosed, but CVC Capital is understood to have paid around £750 million, or $1.2 billion, for Domestic & General, according to a person with direct knowledge of the matter.

The deal marks the latest acquisition of a private equity-owned company by a rival financial player, as other potential options like initial public offerings and disposals to corporate buyers remain difficult because of the financial crisis.

Under the terms of the latest deal, CVC Capital will acquire Domestic & General, which Advent bought for £524 million in 2007 at the beginning of the financial crisis.

Domestic & General has been expanding internationally into Continental Europe, Australia and New Zealand, and currently generates around one-quarter of its 600 million pounds in yearly revenue from its operations outside of Britain.

The company was founded in 1912 and started trading on the London Stock Exchange in 1988 before being taken private. It reported pretax earnings of £83 million in the 12 months through March 31, according to a statement by Advent.

The deal for Domestic & General is expected to close by the end of the year.

Goldman Sachs, Marlborough Partners and the law firm Freshfields advised Advent on the deal.