Total Pageviews

After a Dazzling Early Career, a Star Trader Settles Down

When Paul Tudor Jones II began his career as a Wall Street trader in the 1980s, some colleagues spoke admiringly of his ability to “shoot the lights out” by scoring huge profits on big market swings.

A Memphis native who cut his teeth trading cotton in New Orleans, Mr. Jones delivered gains of 125.9 percent after fees in his main hedge fund in 1987 by betting on a big downturn in the United States stock market, then 87.4 percent in 1990 as the market plunged in Japan. As late as 2001-02, he gained 48.1 percent over two years during the sell-off in technology stocks.

Lately, however, people are just as likely to talk about the dazzling four-and-a-half-minute Christmas light show at Mr. Jones’s 13,000-square-foot mansion in Greenwich, Conn., as they are about his big market scores.

Over the last decade, Mr. Jones’s trading results have dimmed. His investors say the reasons include a deliberate move to trade more conservatively, fewer big interest-rate and currency moves as central banks kept short-term rates near zero and more competition as the hedge fund universe has mushroomed.

While Mr. Jones can still claim long-term annual returns of close to 19.5 percent in his $10.3 billion flagship fund, Tudor BVI Global, it has been 11 years since he last hit that level, according to material provided to potential investors late last year.

From 2010 to 2012, he had his worst three-year stretch ever, averaging just 5 percent annually. Last year, gains hit 14.3 percent, investors say, helped by winning bets on Japan’s stock market and against its currency.

But two smaller funds managed by other traders have been unprofitable since 2011. One of them, Tudor Tensor, which had a 35 percent gain in 2008, has shrunk to $700 million from $1.4 billion in 2010.

On Wall Street, Mr. Jones retains an outsize persona, based on the fame he first won in earning an estimated $100 million in the United States market crash of 1987, his longer-term trading success and his philanthropic efforts as a co-founder of the Robin Hood Foundation, dedicated to fighting poverty in New York City, a favorite Wall Street cause.

“He is a superb risk taker and a genius risk manager. He is really plugged into decision-makers around the world, from finance ministers to central bank officials to think tanks,” said J. Tomilson Hill, head of alternative investing at the Blackstone Group, the world’s largest hedge-fund investor. Mr. Hill says investors rely on fund managers like Mr. Jones as a counterweight to more volatile stock markets.

Unlike stock pickers who focus on individual companies or sectors, Mr. Jones is a so-called macro trader who aims to ride moves in interest rates and currencies based on changes in different nations’ economies. Over the last five years, efforts by monetary authorities to revive the global economy by keeping rates low has “reduced the opportunity set available to those guys,” said Kenneth J. Heinz, president of HFR, which tracks hedge fund returns.

But other money managers say it is often difficult for market celebrities like Mr. Jones or John Paulson, who scored outsize gains on the subprime housing bust of 2007, to avoid disappointing investors down the road. “The bigger they get, the harder it is to repeat” the first big score, said Jeff Spears, chief executive of Sanctuary Wealth Services in San Francisco, which provides services for wealth advisers.

Other top macro traders have also hit bumps recently. Bridgewater Associates’ $80 billion Pure Alpha fund returned 5.3 percent last year, below its 13.5 percent average since 1991. And Brevan Howard Asset Management’s $28 billion Master Fund returned 2.6 percent, also well below its long-term average.

The type of market-trend trading practiced by Mr. Jones requires “concentration, stamina and quick thinking,” said Mark Yusko, chief executive of Morgan Creek Capital Management, a longtime Tudor investor. He said Mr. Jones, who is 59, has been able to keep his head in the game in part by hiring “a lot of young guys” to help trade his funds.

Over the last two decades, Tudor has moved from a firm built around Mr. Jones’s own trading prowess to a diversified partnership, with Mr. Jones accounting for only 20 percent of the positions in Tudor BVI, investors say. In the process, Tudor, based in Greenwich, has opened offices in London, Sydney and Singapore. Tudor lists 35 portfolio managers for four Tudor funds totaling $13.6 billion. Mr. Jones declined to comment.

An executive of a firm that has invested in Tudor’s main fund for more than 20 years said that in his earlier years, Mr. Jones managed money mainly on behalf of wealthy individuals but over time expanded by accepting much larger sums from pension funds and other institutions. Institutions’ concern with limiting losses has prompted Mr. Jones to invest more conservatively, added this investor, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because company policy prohibits comments about managers.

Although Mr. Jones sidestepped most of the 2008 stock market plunge, Tudor BVI did find itself with too many illiquid positions tied to volatile emerging-markets debt, mortgage assets, corporate debt and private equity, and reported a 4.9 percent loss, its only down year. That year, he also parted ways with his longtime partner, James Pallotta, a successful Boston-based stock picker, after Mr. Jones imposed tighter liquidity limits.

In a messy aftermath of restricting redemptions and coping with the illiquid positions, Mr. Jones restructured his main fund to bolster its liquidity. He also reduced individual traders’ loss limits, cutting risk, according to a 2010 account by Institutional Investor magazine.

Amid his recent cold streak of 2010-12, Mr. Jones expressed unhappiness about the fund’s results, Mr. Hill of Blackstone said. But Mr. Hill said investors had to lower their expectations in a “zero interest-rate environment” because they calculate their returns over risk-free rates, which fell to zero from 5 percent after the 2008 financial crisis. Heightened competition as the hedge fund universe has expanded to $2.5 trillion from $460 billion in 2000 has also limited trading opportunities, Mr. Hill added.

In 2012, Mr. Jones cut the management fee for a new share class of Tudor BVI, reflecting investor concern about performance. The new shares cut the management fee to 2.75 percent from 4 percent while increasing the firm’s share of profits to 27 percent from 23 percent. Many hedge funds charge a 2 percent management fee and 20 percent of profits.

William Spitz, the former vice chancellor for investments at Vanderbilt University, which has been a Tudor investor, said the firm’s fees were “quite high.” He said the firm responded to questions about the fees by arguing they were needed to pay for “a lot of highly compensated people, a large infrastructure to control risk, with a lot of back-office support and systems.”

Even the lower fee level of 2.75 percent is enough to bring the firm $283 million annually on the main fund alone.

But one investor noted that the accumulation of wealth could be distracting. “Your life becomes more complicated, and a little part of your brain has to deal with that,” this investor said. With a reported net worth of $3.7 billion, Mr. Jones ranks No. 130 on the Forbes 400.

Beyond Robin Hood, Mr. Jones has also been chairman of the National Fish and Wildlife Foundation and the Everglades Foundation, two conservation groups. He owns a $30 million hunting and fishing lodge in Maryland, another home in the Florida Keys and since 2002 he has leased a 350,000-acre eco-reserve in Tanzania, where he co-owns four high-end lodges.

A top donor to the University of Virginia, his alma mater, he gave $44 million for a sports and concert arena there named after his father, and in 2012 he and his wife, Sonia, a yoga enthusiast, gave more than $12 million for a center there for “meditation, yoga and mindfulness training.” Later that year, he was embroiled in an unsuccessful attempt to oust the college’s president. Last year, he was featured on “60 Minutes” on CBS and on the cover of a Forbes issue for his Robin Hood work.

“I guess as we’ve all grown older, we’ve become a little more erudite and a little more conservative,” said William Dunavant Jr., 81, a Memphis cousin of Mr. Jones and one of his earliest investors, who still has a substantial amount of his personal investments with him.



Top Former Dewey & LeBoeuf Executives Said to Face Charges

Three former top executives of Dewey & LeBoeuf, the giant law firm that filed for bankruptcy protection in 2012, are expected to be charged on Thursday with misleading other lawyers and lenders about the financial health of the firm.

The Manhattan district attorney, Cyrus Vance Jr., is expected to announce the filing of criminal charges against the three, Steven H. Davis, the firm’s former chairman; Stephen DiCarmine, the former chief executive; and Joel Sanders, the former chief financial officer, two people briefed on the matter said.

The details of the charges are still unclear. However, one of those people, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because the charges have not been made public yet, said that Mr. Vance would possibly accuse the lawyers of grand larceny.

The filing of charges against the three lawyers would be the most significant event yet in the collapse of a once mighty firm that was created by the 2007 merger of Dewey Ballantine and LeBoeuf, Lamb, Greene & MacRae, two of New York City’s most prestigious law firms. The collapse of the firm, which once had 26 offices around the globe and employed 1,300 people, was closely followed in the New York legal community as large groups of lawyers at the firm left to join other practices.

New York prosecutors have been investigating accusations that Dewey’s leadership committee misled other lawyers about the firm’s financial health, along with investors in a private sale of debt to raise financing for the firm. A grand jury has been reviewing evidence in the investigation since the fall.

The Securities and Exchange Commission is also expected to file a civil action related to apparent misrepresentations in the firm’s 2010 sale of $125 million in debt notes to refinance some of its bank debt, another person briefed on the matter said.

Civil and criminal charges could also be filed against others who once worked for the firm, these people said.

Erin Duggan Kramer, a spokeswoman for Mr. Vance, declined to comment. An S.E.C. spokesman also declined to comment.

Lawyers for the three former Dewey executives either declined to comment or could not be reached for comment.

A series of off-color emails about Dewey’s health â€" messages that emerged in the wake of the firm’s collapse â€" are likely to underpin the indictment, a person close to the matter said. In turn, defense lawyers will most likely argue that the emails are being taken out of context.

Prosecutors are expected to home in on the aftermath of the merger between the two firms.

On paper, the merger seemed a brilliant way to bring together the talents of two top law firms. But soon after the merger was completed, the firm began experiencing financial difficulty because of long-term commitments it made to pay multimillion-dollar salaries to some of its star lawyers. The law firm agreed to those contracts just as the financial crisis hit and took a big bite out of legal work at top firms, including Dewey.

Law firm consultants, however, said the financial crisis hurt Dewey more than most firms because of the large debts it owed to its star lawyers and lenders.

The autopsy of Dewey’s wreckage during its bankruptcy proceeding showed a classic case of mismanagement and borrowing to try to stay afloat. After piling up tens of millions of dollars in I.O.U’s to its partners, the firm tried to make up for lost revenue by hiring new lawyers so it could increase its billings. But the plan failed as expenses continued to rise and the sour economy depressed the firm’s ability to sharply increase its revenues.

In the bankruptcy case, the largest ever involving a law firm, the former Dewey partners agreed to return some of their pay to meet some of the creditors’ claims, which totaled about $550 million. They contributed about $72 million to paying down those debts.

The collapse of the firm led to much second-guessing by lawyers at Dewey. Some partners accused the firm’s executive committee of not keeping a closer eye on three men who were responsible for running the firm’s daily affairs. Other lawyers privately conceded that should have been paying closer attention to the firm’s finances and not relying on the leadership team to make all the decisions.



K.K.R. Raises $2 Billion Energy Fund


The private equity giant Kohlberg Kravis Roberts is making a bigger push into the North American energy business, with a fresh $2 billion fund to invest in oil and gas assets.

The investment firm announced on Wednesday that it had finished raising the energy fund from new and existing investors, underscoring the demand for K.K.R.’s strategy of trying to capitalize on the North American oil and gas boom.

Though it is better known for its leveraged buyouts of companies, K.K.R. also has a growing business in energy and infrastructure assets. The firm, with a total $94.3 billion in assets under management as of Dec. 31, now manages $8.7 billion dedicated to energy and infrastructure.

The new energy fund, which had its first close last September with $1.4 billion in commitments, has already been using its capital. To date, it has invested more than $350 million of equity in eight investments.

A big rival, the Blackstone Group, raised its first energy-focused private equity fund in 2012, with $2.5 billion in commitments.

At K.K.R., the energy fund will focus on joint venture drilling investments, acquisitions of minerals and royalties and other deals related to oil and gas resources, the firm said.

Beyond energy, K.K.R. has been getting involved in other new businesses recently, including maritime finance. The firm also operates in areas like credit and hedge funds.

“The energy revolution has created an unprecedented opportunity set, and we are seeing many ways to partner with companies to help develop these important resources,” Marc Lipschultz, the global head of energy and infrastructure at K.K.R., said in a statement.



Obama Budget Seeks to Eliminate Inversions

Buried in the $3.9 trillion budget request that President Obama sent to Congress on Tuesday is a clause that has Wall Street tax advisers on edge.

The proposal would essentially forbid so-called inversions, an increasingly popular maneuver that allows United States companies to legally reincorporate in a new country when they buy a smaller foreign corporation, thereby avoiding paying the Treasury Department millions or even billions of dollars in taxes.

Outlined in an appendix to the budget known as the Green Book, which describes the administration’s revenue proposals, the new language would make inversions all but impossible to pull off.

“This will essentially eliminate inversions as we know them,” said Robert Willens, a corporate tax adviser who has helped companies accomplish such transactions.

Though the Obama budget has little chance of passing in its current form, the proposed crackdown on inversions signals the administration’s willingness to confront a somewhat obscure tax loophole that has become a favorite technique for investment bankers looking to save their clients money.

“Inversion transactions raise significant policy concerns because they facilitate the erosion of the U.S. tax base,” the Green Book reads.

Inclusion of the proposal in the budget comes after several months of mounting scrutiny of the technique.

In October, Max Baucus, who was a senator from Montana at the time and is now ambassador to China, spoke out against deals that took tax dollars offshore.

“Mergers resulting in U.S. companies being owned by companies in tax-haven jurisdictions â€" like Ireland, Bermuda, or the Cayman Islands â€" are a new spin on the old ‘inversion’ problem,” Mr. Baucus said. “And it’s becoming an increasingly popular practice.”

Weeks later, Mr. Baucus proposed an overhaul to the corporate tax code that took aim at inversions by lowering the overall corporate tax rate and introducing a tax holiday.

But the Obama budget goes much further. Under current rules, United States companies may reincorporate elsewhere â€" essentially renouncing their domestic citizenship â€" if they acquire a foreign company in a deal that transfers more than 20 percent of the shares to foreign owners. The Obama proposal would raise the foreign ownership threshold to more than 50 percent, essentially requiring a United States company to buy a foreign entity larger than itself.

It would also disallow inversions if the combined company has substantial business activities or is physically based in the United States.

“There is no policy reason to permit a domestic entity to engage in an inversion transaction when its owners retain a controlling interest in the resulting entity, only minimal operational changes are expected, and there is significant potential for substantial erosion of the U.S. tax base,” the proposal reads.

Inversions have been on the rise in recent years as United States companies seek to cut their tax bills by reincorporating in countries with lower corporate tax rates.

Among the most recent companies to invert was Endo Health Solutions, a drug maker based in Malvern, Pa., which said it would pay $1.6 billion for Paladin Labs, a smaller Canadian pharmaceutical company. The combined corporation will be based in Ireland, saving at least $50 million a year in taxes.

Other larger companies have also used the technique.

Last year, Omnicom, the big New York advertising group, announced it would merge with the Publicis Groupe, its French rival, in a deal worth $35 billion. The combined company will be based in the Netherlands, delivering tax savings of $80 million a year.

Mr. Willens estimates there have been about 50 inversions in recent decades, with 20 taking place over the last two years.

And the Treasury Department is feeling the effects of those lost tax dollars at a time when the government remains starved for cash.

Tax Analysts, a research firm, said that four oil services companies that inverted saved as much as $4 billion in taxes over a decade.

Even if the Obama budget does not pass, it appears that inversions are squarely in regulators’ cross hairs.

“If you’re a fan of inversions, and a lot of investors are, you don’t like to see them on the radar screen,” Mr. Willens said. “Even if this budget doesn’t pass, members of congress might take note of this provision and stick it on to some other piece of legislation.”

If passed, the proposal would apply to deals that close after the last day of this year.



Obama Budget Seeks to Eliminate Inversions

Buried in the $3.9 trillion budget request that President Obama sent to Congress on Tuesday is a clause that has Wall Street tax advisers on edge.

The proposal would essentially forbid so-called inversions, an increasingly popular maneuver that allows United States companies to legally reincorporate in a new country when they buy a smaller foreign corporation, thereby avoiding paying the Treasury Department millions or even billions of dollars in taxes.

Outlined in an appendix to the budget known as the Green Book, which describes the administration’s revenue proposals, the new language would make inversions all but impossible to pull off.

“This will essentially eliminate inversions as we know them,” said Robert Willens, a corporate tax adviser who has helped companies accomplish such transactions.

Though the Obama budget has little chance of passing in its current form, the proposed crackdown on inversions signals the administration’s willingness to confront a somewhat obscure tax loophole that has become a favorite technique for investment bankers looking to save their clients money.

“Inversion transactions raise significant policy concerns because they facilitate the erosion of the U.S. tax base,” the Green Book reads.

Inclusion of the proposal in the budget comes after several months of mounting scrutiny of the technique.

In October, Max Baucus, who was a senator from Montana at the time and is now ambassador to China, spoke out against deals that took tax dollars offshore.

“Mergers resulting in U.S. companies being owned by companies in tax-haven jurisdictions â€" like Ireland, Bermuda, or the Cayman Islands â€" are a new spin on the old ‘inversion’ problem,” Mr. Baucus said. “And it’s becoming an increasingly popular practice.”

Weeks later, Mr. Baucus proposed an overhaul to the corporate tax code that took aim at inversions by lowering the overall corporate tax rate and introducing a tax holiday.

But the Obama budget goes much further. Under current rules, United States companies may reincorporate elsewhere â€" essentially renouncing their domestic citizenship â€" if they acquire a foreign company in a deal that transfers more than 20 percent of the shares to foreign owners. The Obama proposal would raise the foreign ownership threshold to more than 50 percent, essentially requiring a United States company to buy a foreign entity larger than itself.

It would also disallow inversions if the combined company has substantial business activities or is physically based in the United States.

“There is no policy reason to permit a domestic entity to engage in an inversion transaction when its owners retain a controlling interest in the resulting entity, only minimal operational changes are expected, and there is significant potential for substantial erosion of the U.S. tax base,” the proposal reads.

Inversions have been on the rise in recent years as United States companies seek to cut their tax bills by reincorporating in countries with lower corporate tax rates.

Among the most recent companies to invert was Endo Health Solutions, a drug maker based in Malvern, Pa., which said it would pay $1.6 billion for Paladin Labs, a smaller Canadian pharmaceutical company. The combined corporation will be based in Ireland, saving at least $50 million a year in taxes.

Other larger companies have also used the technique.

Last year, Omnicom, the big New York advertising group, announced it would merge with the Publicis Groupe, its French rival, in a deal worth $35 billion. The combined company will be based in the Netherlands, delivering tax savings of $80 million a year.

Mr. Willens estimates there have been about 50 inversions in recent decades, with 20 taking place over the last two years.

And the Treasury Department is feeling the effects of those lost tax dollars at a time when the government remains starved for cash.

Tax Analysts, a research firm, said that four oil services companies that inverted saved as much as $4 billion in taxes over a decade.

Even if the Obama budget does not pass, it appears that inversions are squarely in regulators’ cross hairs.

“If you’re a fan of inversions, and a lot of investors are, you don’t like to see them on the radar screen,” Mr. Willens said. “Even if this budget doesn’t pass, members of congress might take note of this provision and stick it on to some other piece of legislation.”

If passed, the proposal would apply to deals that close after the last day of this year.



Barclays Chief Defends Contentious Increase in Bonus Pay


Barclays’ chief executive, Antony Jenkins, told the Telegraph newspaper in Britain that he decided to increase bankers’ pay last year in spite of falling profits to avoid a “death spiral” in the investment bank unit, where the rate of attrition among senior bankers last year doubled.

The paper said that about 700 people had left the American bank. About 10 percent of its senior directors had jumped ship last year after pay was cut in 2012. The bank’s annual report, released on Wednesday, confirmed worrisome attrition levels.

“We were faced with a very difficult decision for me personally as chief executive and for the board because we are absolutely committed to driving the level of compensation down in the investment bank,” Mr. Jenkins said in a Telegraph article published Wednesday.

In early February, Barclays announced that it was increasing its bonus pool even though it was cutting jobs and other expenses.

In its latest annual report, the bank said it said aside £2.5 billion for 2013 bonuses, but tried to present the numbers to show how that the pool was actually down 18 percent from the previous year.

That’s because in 2013, Barclays clawed back or made other adjustments totaling £290 million, for inquires related to payment protection insurance and interest rate hedging products.

In 2012, however, the claw back and other adjustments were much bigger - totaling £860 million â€" mostly related to “conduct” issues related to settlements involving the rigging of Libor.

In essence, the bank is arguing that because people behaved a bit better â€" or not as bad â€" in 2013 when compared with the previous year, the bonus pool grew.

The bank was also quick to point out that 2013 bonus levels were down 32 percent compared with 2010 levels, when the bank started to examine its pay policies. Investment banking bonuses are down 41 percent from 2010, Barclays said.

Mr. Jenkins has been welcomed as a reformer, but the interview appears to undermine his tough talk about changing Wall Street culture, which many critics have long-argued originates from disproportionately high pay levels (they are not inventing the internet or curing cancer, the argument goes).

At the same time, Mr. Jenkins says that the bonus decision was “the hardest” one he has had to make, even though he has had to fire tens of thousands of people and confront investigations into rigging interest rates, allegedly manipulating foreign exchange rates, and inappropriately selling insurance products.

He seemed willing to wade into the hornet’s nest about how long bonuses should be awarded over long periods of time: Mr. Jenkins told The Telegraph that he disagreed with deferring payments longer than three years.

Policy makers in Britain have been hammering the idea that longer deferrals will incentivize better conduct.

“There comes a point where the deferral levels for an individual become almost meaningless,” Mr. Jenkins said. “If you say to somebody I am going to give you a bonus but you don’t get it for 10 years, that person is going to say: ‘That is not worth anything to me and so it won’t change behavior at all.’ ”

About 68 percent of total bonuses were deferred at Barclays’ investment bank, down slightly from 69 percent the year before. The closely watched compensation to net income ratio rose to 44.1 percent, from 40.3 percent the prior year.

Top pay in investment banking, however, is still significantly less than some of the payouts in private equity. For instance, Leon Black and two of his co-founders at Apollo Management made more than $1 billion collectively last year.



Convicted SAC Trader Loses His Business School Degree


Mathew Martoma, the former SAC Capital Advisors trader convicted of insider trading in February, can no longer say he has a degree from Stanford Graduate School of Business.

In January, just as Mr. Martoma’s insider trial was getting underway, Stanford had confirmed that Mr. Martoma graduated from university with a master’s degree in business administration in 2003. But on Wednesday, a Stanford official said that Mr. Martoma no longer had a degree from the university.

Barbara Buell, a Stanford spokeswoman, said she could not discuss the change in degree status for Mr. Martoma, citing federal privacy laws. But Ms. Buell said that as a general policy, Stanford is vigilant in policing the integrity of its admission procedures.

“Stanford’s policy provides it can revoke an offer of acceptance and a degree, if it was found that an individual gained admission through false pretenses,” she said.

Mr. Martoma’s admission to Stanford in 2001 became an issue after it was revealed in court filings that the former hedge fund trader had been expelled from Harvard Law School in 1999 for forging his transcript. Stanford’s application for the graduate business program asks prospective students to provide information about any academic disciplinary actions taken against them, including suspensions or expulsions.

In January, a person familiar with Stanford’s admission process but not authorized to discuss it publicly said the expulsion of an applicant from another university, if it was disclosed on an application or otherwise known, would create a “serious impediment” to a candidate’s admission.

Lou Colasuonno, a spokesman for Mr. Martoma, declined to comment. The Wall Street Journal first reported that Stanford had stripped Mr. Martoma of his business degree.

Of course, the issue of whether Mr. Martoma can put a degree from Stanford on his résumé is not his biggest concern at the moment. Legal experts have said that the former trader is facing the prospect of being sentenced to as much as 10 years in prison after being convicted a month ago of taking part in the biggest insider trading scheme ever charged in the United States.

Last week, Mr. Martoma’s lawyers asked Judge Paul G. Gardephe of Federal District Court in Manhattan to either overturn the jury’s verdict or order a new trial. The lawyers argued that news coverage of the Harvard expulsion may have influenced some of the jurors, even though the matter was never introduced into evidence at the trial.

Jurors, as is customary, were instructed by Judge Gardephe not to read any news accounts of the trial. Mr. Martoma is scheduled to be sentenced in June.



Behind Closed Doors, Microsoft’s Board Reportedly Battled Chief Over Nokia Deal

When Microsoft announced last fall that it would buy Nokia’s handset business for $7.2 billion, jaws dropped across Wall Street.

And according to a new article in Bloomberg Businessweek, they did inside the technology giant’s boardroom as well.

In its latest issue, the magazine details how Steven A. Ballmer, then Microsoft’s chief executive, chafed when fellow directors questioned the wisdom of buying any part of Nokia’s hardware operations. At times, Mr. Ballmer even displayed some of his famous temper, including when his eventual replacement as chief executive, Satya Nadella, initially failed to support the proposed transaction.

From Businessweek’s piece:

Ballmer’s relations with the board hit a low when he shouted at a June meeting that if he didn’t get his way he couldn’t be CEO, people briefed on the meeting said. The flare-up was over his proposed purchase of most of Nokia Oyj, and part of an ongoing debate: Should Microsoft be a software company or a hardware company too?

Several directors and co-founder and then-Chairman Bill Gates â€" Ballmer’s longtime friend and advocate â€" initially balked at the move into making smartphones, according to people familiar with the situation. So, at first, did Nadella, signaling his position in a straw poll to gauge executives’ reaction to the deal. Nadella later changed his mind. …

Ballmer was so loud that day in June his shouts could be heard outside the conference room, people with knowledge of the matter said. He’d just been told the board didn’t back his plan to acquire two Nokia units, according to people with knowledge of the meeting. He later got most of what he wanted, with the board signing off on a $7.2 billion purchase of Nokia’s mobile-phone business, but by then the damage was done.

Businessweek also uncovered an interesting detail about Microsoft’s dealings with ValueAct, the activist hedge fund that eventually won a seat on the company’s board.

[In the last week of last August], the board engaged in a stare-down with activist shareholder ValueAct Holdings LP. The fund was demanding a board seat and threatening a proxy contest. On the final day for proxy matters, the board negotiated with ValueAct executives while a ValueAct messenger in a hoodie lingered in the lobby with the proxy fight paperwork, just in case.



Plaintiffs in Suit Seek to Freeze Mt. Gox’s U.S. Assets

Customers of Mt. Gox are trying to freeze assets in the United States of the bankrupt Bitcoin exchange and its chief executive, Mark Karpeles.

There’s just one problem: They don’t know where those assets are.

Plaintiffs in a class-action lawsuit filed a motion on Tuesday seeking a temporary injunction to keep Mr. Karpeles or his company from moving any money outside of the United States. They also want a full accounting of any assets Mt. Gox has left.

Mr. Gox, a Japan-based virtual currency marketplace, filed for bankruptcy on Friday, and Mr. Karpeles said it had lost all 750,000 customer Bitcoins, as well as 100,000 of its own â€" or more than $450 million worth. Although the company has a subsidiary incorporated in Delaware, it’s unclear what accounts, if any, the company held in the United States.

“There were weaknesses in the system,” Mr. Karpeles said during a news conference in Tokyo on Friday to discuss the bankruptcy. “I’m truly sorry to have caused inconvenience.”

Mr. Karpeles has blamed the loss on hackers, but it’s not yet clear what happened to the money.

Gregory Greene, an Illinois man who claims to have eventually acquired more than $25,000 worth of Bitcoins on Mt. Gox, filed his class-action lawsuit on Thursday, three days after the company’s website went offline, charging “systematic misuse and misappropriation of its users’ property.”

Mt. Gox halted all customer withdrawals in early February after months of technical glitches. Users had long complained that they could deposit money into their accounts, but often had trouble taking money out.

In a company crisis strategy document that leaked online last week, Mt. Gox said that its customer deposits had been stolen over years and “went unnoticed.”

But lawyers for Mr. Greene say that Mt. Gox knew it was in trouble long before it went offline, and deliberately misled customers about what it was doing to fix its problems.

A representative for Mt. Gox could not be reached for comment.

In court documents, lawyers for the plaintiffs argue that Mt. Gox misled customers by promising quick and secure trading, and for giving the impression that it was busy trying to solve any glitches in the system.

“Defendants in this case have engaged in a series of deceptive and unfair practices designed to lull consumers into depositing and keeping their money on the exchange while Mt. Gox KK readied itself for bankruptcy,” the suit claims, referring to the Japanese entity.

Bitcoin, a virtual currency that isn’t backed by any central bank, first appeared in 2009. It appealed to technology buffs and anti-establishment libertarians, many of whom had grown frustrated with a global banking system that had crippled many of the world’s biggest economies.

Users can buy or “unlock” Bitcoins by solving mathematical riddles. But Bitcoin is not regulated, leaving users few options when things go sour.

Mt. Gox was at one point the dominant online marketplace for buying, selling and storing Bitcoins, and its shuttering last week sent many users scrambling to figure out what could be done to recover their money.

“The idea that they have no money is not credible,” said Jay Edelson, a lawyer for the plaintiffs. “They were taking deposits up until the day before they shut down.”



N.Y. Regulator Raises Questions on Mortgage Firm Nationstar

New York State’s top banking regulator is raising questions about the capabilities of the mortgage servicing firm Nationstar Mortgage Holdings, demanding details about the company’s staffing levels, modification procedures and affiliated businesses.

In a letter to Nationstar on Wednesday, Benjamin M. Lawsky, New York’s superintendent of financial services, said his office had received “hundreds of complaints from New York consumers” about problems related to the company’s mortgage modifications, improper fees and lost paperwork.

“Our department has significant concerns that the explosive growth at Nationstar and other nonbank mortgage servicers may create capacity issues that put homeowners at risk,’’ Mr. Lawsky said in the letter.

Nonbank servicers like Nationstar have been growing rapidly in recent years, as traditional banks seek to exit the business of servicing subprime mortgages. The nonbank firms say they can service the loan more efficiently and with better customer service than the large banks. Their growth has produced big returns for the companies’ investors, among them Fortress Investments, which is Nationstar’s largest investor. Nationstar is among the largest nonbank servicing companies.

Last month, Mr. Lawsky halted the transfer of $39 billion of mortgage servicing rights to the biggest nonbank servicer, the Ocwen Financial Corporation, citing concerns about its capacity to handle the increased loan volume. Mr. Lawsky has also asked Ocwen for details about the company’s affiliated businesses, which he said could pose multiple conflicts of interest and could put homeowners at greater risk of foreclosure.

Ocwen’s chairman, William C. Erbey, for example, is also chairman of a company that seeks to profit by renting out foreclosed homes.

Mr. Lawsky is asking Nationstar about similar issues, demanding a list of its third-party vendors, including its affiliates, and the procedures that the company takes to prevent potential conflicts.

Mr. Lawsky said Nationstar’s growth has been particularly explosive in New York, where loans serviced by the Texas company have nearly tripled in the last year, to 73,489 at the end of 2013 from 26,111 a year earlier.

The regulator has asked Nationstar for a detailed breakdown of New York loans in foreclosure that it handles.



A Deal Maker’s Deal of a Lifetime

Ken Moelis has engineered the transaction of his lifetime. The veteran investment banker is taking his eponymous seven-year-old advisory firm public.

Revenue and net income have grown at a fast enough clip to potentially justify a valuation of $2 billion or more. But investors will be granting the founder an exceptional degree of control for the opportunity to ride his coattails.

Moelis & Company brought in $411 million in revenue last year, putting it right in between the smaller Greenhill and larger Evercore. The firm’s $70 million profit is flattered by an almost nonexistent tax rate. Replacing that with a 35 percent levy and then using Evercore’s multiple of almost 40 times 2013’s earnings puts the company worth around $2 billion.

That’s just above the $1.9 billion valuation set when Sumitomo took a 5 percent stake in Moelis two years ago. And that may look conservative if the top line continues growing and management can keep costs under control - the pretax margin improved from under 10 percent in 2012 to 17 percent last year, in line with Evercore’s.

Unlike his rivals, Mr. Moelis is stretching the limits of corporate governance to a degree that could even make Silicon Valley blush. As a baseline, he is issuing two classes of shares, with the Class B stock carrying a turbocharged 10 votes a share. Only partners will own these shares, which will be placed into an entity called Partners Holding. Mr. Moelis will control that, leaving him holding easily more than half the voting rights to the entire company.

That means that Moelis & Company does not have to bother meeting some of the disclosure and other governance standards that its rivals do. The firm does not need a majority of its board to be independent, nor does it need to put any independent directors on its compensation, nominating and corporate governance committees. It does at least intend to appoint three independent directors in the next year or so, but their power will be limited.

And there is more. If Mr. Moelis leaves the firm bearing his name, he only has to wait on the sidelines for a mere 90 days before being allowed to set up a rival advisory service.

Over the course of his career, from Drexel Burnham Lambert to Donaldson, Lufkin & Jenrette to UBS and now his own shop, Mr. Moelis has displayed an exceptional ability to advocate for his clients’ interests. With his firm’s I.P.O., he is showing he’s capable of negotiating in extraordinary ways for his own benefit, too.


Antony Currie is an associate editor at Reuters Breakingviews. For more independent commentary and analysis, visit breakingviews.com.



A Banking Ruckus Not Many Follow or Even Understand

First, there was the TruPs crisis, as everyone surely recalls.

No?

Well, after the Volcker Rule was finalized, some banks suddenly realized that they might have to sell some obscure holdings to conform to the rule â€" bundles of investments in banks, called trust-preferred securities, or TruPs. The American Bankers Association reacted immediately, warning that the nation’s community banks faced an avalanche of losses. Legislators readied bills to fix the problem that was supposedly facing banking’s little guys. Regulators felt embattled.

Then, the watchdogs tweaked the rule modestly, and the squall dissipated as quickly as it had arisen.

No sooner had that issue been resolved when Washington convulsed with a new crisis, now upon us: the C.L.O. panic. Haven’t heard of this one, either? What, are you paying attention to something like the standoff in Ukraine when the fate of bank profits is at stake?

The House held a hearing last week to examine the issue. American Banker, a trade publication, ran an article with a headline that succinctly summarized the industry’s view: “How Dodd-Frank Might Kill the C.L.O. Market.”

So, what is this market and will Dodd-Frank indeed kill it? Should ordinary citizens don mourning garb if it dies? And what is really going on here?

Collateralized loan obligations, as the acronym is known, are bundles of loans, usually made to junk-rated companies. They use the same techniques as collateralized debt obligations, which were often made up of subprime mortgage investments and were the rotten core of the financial crisis. C.L.O.’s caused billions in losses for banks during the market panic of 2008, but most recovered strongly and memories faded. Junk-rated companies rallied, and C.L.O.’s roared back.

Under the Volcker Rule, which prevents banks from making speculative investments or owning large pieces of hedge funds or private equity firms, some C.L.O. holdings might be prohibited. Some C.L.O.’s own securities or bonds, and those are considered more speculative. (In a regulatory quirk, bonds and loans get different regulatory treatments.) Some C.L.O.’s give certain investors the ability to remove the manager that makes the C.L.O.’s investment decisions. That could be construed as a form of ownership control, which would bar banks from participating under a strict construction of the Volcker Rule.

The banking industry has been making loud noises about how the uncertainty could have dire consequences. As with the TruPs ruckus, the big banks have defended their interests in the name of smaller and more sympathetic entities. According to the banking lobby and its friends in Congress, any threat to the C.L.O. market is actually a dagger pointed at midsize businesses, which will have trouble finding capital as a result. In written testimony to the House subcommittee, a United States Chamber of Commerce representative expressed “serious concerns that the regulators had failed to take into account the impact of the Volcker Rule upon the capital formation of Main Street businesses,” adding ominously that “it may only be the first wave of capital formation problemsthat may crop up as a result of the Volcker Rule.”

Like the TruPs fight, and countless other similar Washington showdowns, this skirmish is largely about preserving a market for the largest banks. Just three “too big to fail” banks â€" JPMorgan Chase, Citigroup and Wells Fargo â€" account for 71 percent of bank C.L.O. holdings, according to Better Markets, the banking reform group. And the large banks get fees from creating the deals.

And so banking interests have massed their forces to preserve this business. At the House subcommittee hearing last week, four industry representatives counterbalanced a lone professor from Georgetown Law School, Adam J. Levitin, who was tasked with defending Dodd-Frank.

Professor Levitin’s testimony made clear what the central public concern is here: The C.L.O. market hides embedded systemic risk. When banks sponsor C.L.O.’s by creating and marketing them, they imply that they back them without actually doing so. Investors rely on this implied guarantee because banks have bailed out comparable affiliated entities in the past. Ultimately, Professor Levitin argued, taxpayer-funded deposit insurance backstops the banks making these potentially speculative investments â€" exactly the thing the Volcker Rule is supposed to end.

Will the Volcker Rule kill the C.L.O. market? Hardly seems likely. Other asset-backed securities markets, like the one for bundles of credit card loans, have survived despite recent international regulations that have made them safer and less profitable. If they can’t prevail in Congress, banks will simply alter the contracts so that C.L.O.’s conform to the requirements of the Volcker Rule.

Even for those who don’t know a C.L.O. from the Electric Light Orchestra, there is nevertheless a larger point here. Reforming the banking system is a fight that will never end. Banks and their political allies fought financial reform before it was passed. To paraphrase a famous orator: They shall fight it in the courts, they shall fight it with the regulators, they shall fight it in the halls of Congress. They will search ceaselessly vulnerabilities and loopholes. They will sow doubt about the rules.

Even when they lose, their harassing tactics will have benefits. A distracted Securities and Exchange Commission has failed to complete many important Dodd-Frank rules covering securitization. The agency still has not finalized rules banning conflicts of interests in securitizations to prevent the kind of misrepresentations that banks engaged in with the infamous Abacus and Magnetar transactions. The agency has also yet to figure out how issuers of securitizations should retain enough equity so they have “skin in the game” that aligns their interests with that of investors. And the agency hasn’t finished rules for overseeing credit rating agencies, which rate securitizations.

In today’s fights over financial reform, the advantage goes to those who hold the low ground, the underground, the dark room where a rule can be modified in ways only a small handful of experts can follow. These are the battles the banks can win.



Morgan Stanley Is Said to Weigh Sale of Its Swiss Private Bank

LONDON - Morgan Stanley is in the early stages of a strategic review of its Swiss private banking business, according to a person familiar with the matter.

The investment bank is examining several options, including a possible sale of the private bank in Switzerland, which has about 10 billion Swiss francs, or $11.3 billion, in assets under management, said the person, who was not authorized to discuss the review publicly.

Morgan Stanley declined to comment on Wednesday.

The Swiss financial news website finews.ch reported the sale talks on Wednesday.

Morgan Stanley has been realigning its wealth management business more closely with its institutional business in Asia, where the Swiss private bank also has operations. Asia accounts for about 80 percent of the assets under management in its wealth management operations.

Last year, Morgan Stanley sold the bulk of its wealth management business in Europe, the Middle East and Africa to Credit Suisse. That business had about $13 billion in assets under management at the time.

In February, Standard Chartered, the British bank that earns most of its profit in Asia, confirmed that it was preparing its Swiss private bank for a sale in a similar move as part of an effort to reduce noncore operations.



Peek Raises $5 Million in New Round of Financing

Start-ups like Uber and Airbnb have succeeded in moving traditionally offline businesses like taxis and apartment subletting to the Internet.

Now Peek.com, which is aiming to do the same for planning travel itineraries, has gotten a little more help in reaching that goal.

The start-up plans to announce on Wednesday that it has raised $5 million in a new round of fund-raising, taking money from the likes of Brad Gerstner of Altimeter Capital and Jeff Fluhr, a cofounder of StubHub.

They are joining a group that already includes prominent tech veterans like Eric Schmidt of Google and Jack Dorsey of Twitter and Square, many of whom reinvested in the round.

Behind their investments is their belief that a company can both make it easier for travelers to find attractions like wine tours quickly and easily and for merchants, especially those without websites, to reach potential customers much more quickly.

In essence, Peek.com is playing both travel agent and tour guide.

The model, according to chief executive Ruzwana Bashir, is Opentable, which has focused as much on providing restaurants with backend systems as it has with helping diners book reservations.

“What we saw is that the industry was really offline and fragmented,” Ms. Bashir said in a telephone interview. “What we wanted to do is invest in a bunch of tours and bring the industry online.”

She declined to give specifics about the company’s financial performance or valuation, but noted that the company reported double-digit month-on-month growth last year.

Peek.com has grown to 17 cities in the United States, as well as London and Paris, over the past two years. Now it plans to use its latest fund-raising round to expand into at least 10 more locations this year, including Mexico, Ms. Bashir said.

To help finance that growth, management spent about six weeks talking to prospective investors â€" many of whom had wanted to get into the company’s $1.25 million seed round, but couldn’t â€" and closing the fund-raising round.

“There were quite a few investors that had been reaching out to us,” Ms. Bashir said. “The whole process was pretty swift for us.”



Morning Agenda: A Standoff Over Madoff’s Ties to JPMorgan

Even after five years, it is still unclear what exactly JPMorgan Chase bankers knew about Bernard L. Madoff’s huge Ponzi scheme. A newly obtained government document does not provide the answer, but does shed some light on why the mystery remains, Ben Protess and Jessica Silver-Greenberg write in DealBook. The document reveals that JPMorgan and federal regulators fought over access to bank employee interviews, eventually pitting the Justice Department against the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency.

The document shows that, around the time of Mr. Madoff’s arrest in December 2008, JPMorgan’s lawyers interviewed dozens of bank employees who might have crossed paths with Mr. Madoff’s company. Federal regulators at the comptroller’s office sought copies of the lawyers’ interview notes in the hopes that they would provide a glimpse into the bank’s actions, but JPMorgan refused to hand over the notes, citing confidentiality requirements like the attorney-client privilege.

The Treasury Department’s inspector general sided with the regulators, invoking a rare exception to attorney-client privilege and arguing that the lawyers’ interviews were essentially “made for the purpose of getting advice for the commission of a fraud or crime.” A debate ensued over how hard to press JPMorgan to hand over the interview notes, given that the bank was sure to fight and a judge would be free to set a harmful precedent for future cases. The Justice Department rejected the calls for JPMorgan to turn over the interview notes, saying there was no basis to suggest that the interview notes had been made for the purpose of facilitating crime or fraud.

Mr. Protess and Ms. Silver-Greenberg write: “While the ruling applied to the Madoff case alone, it could have broader implications as regulators weigh the costs of future fights and the likelihood of passing muster with the Justice Department. And despite being an exceptional case â€" banks and their regulators typically settle disputes over attorney-client privilege without the Justice Department getting involved â€" the ruling illustrated a persistent tension over the privilege that continues to shape the government’s pursuit of financial fraud.”

MOELIS & COMPANY FILES FOR AN I.P.O.  |  Moelis & Company filed on Tuesday for an initial public offering, highlighting the rise of so-called independent or boutique investment banks. The move would make it one of a handful of such banks to trade on the public markets, Michael J. de la Merced writes in DealBook.

These specialty banks have long extolled their business plans, which focus on advising clients, saying the plans give them an advantage over giants like Goldman Sachs and JPMorgan Chase. And lately, investors have appeared to agree, pushing the shares of other public boutique banks like Lazard and Evercore up by double digits in the last year. By going public, Moelis hopes to tap into this investor interest.

Still, much remains unknown about the offering. The firm provided a fund-raising target of $100 million, but the number was meant only to calculate registration fees, and Moelis could seek significantly more. It did not disclose how many shares it planned to sell.

A NEW FORM OF SHAREHOLDER ACTIVISM  |  The latest thing on Wall Street may be appraisal rights, which were in play in the management buyout of Dell as well as that of Dole Foods. So what exactly are appraisal rights? In a way, they are a kind of protection for shareholders: If the company they own stock in is acquired, and they think the price was too low, they can seek a better price in court, Steven M. Davidoff writes in the Deal Professor column.

Appraisal rights are risky and expensive â€" shareholders have to pay their own legal fees â€" but they also have benefits for a hedge fund with a lot of money. For one, shareholders are entitled to statutory interest, which can result in a good return, especially given today’s market.

Mr. Davidoff writes: “Not all shareholders are going to exercise their appraisal rights, but this is the way to make sure that the future management buyouts are not the Doles of the world, paying an underwhelming price. In other words, this may be the way that shareholders finally assert their power. You can thank the hedge funds for that.”

ON THE AGENDA  |  The Mortgage Bankers’ Association purchase applications index is out at 7 a.m. February’s ADP private payroll report is out at 8:15 a.m. The purchasing managers’ index is out at 8:58 a.m. The ISM nonmanufacturing index for February is out at 10 a.m. The Fed’s regular report on economic activity across the country, a report known as the beige book, is out at 2 p.m. The House Financial Institutions and Consumer Credit Committee holds a hearing on data security at 10 a.m. The House Oversight and Investigations Committee holds hearing on the effect of financial regulation on international competitiveness at 2 p.m. Carl C. Icahn is on CNBC at 6 a.m. Peter R. Orszag, the vice chairman of Citigroup, is on CNBC at 6:40 a.m. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu of Israel is on Fox Business Network at 5:45 p.m.

THE END MAY BE NEAR FOR SECURITIES FRAUD CASES  |  The Supreme Court will hear arguments on Wednesday that could drive a stake through the heart of securities fraud cases, Steven M. Davidoff writes in a Deal Professor column. In Halliburton v. Erica P. John Fund, a group of shareholders contends that Halliburton (yes, that Halliburton) falsified results and lied to the public about its asbestos liabilities, which ultimately caused share values to plunge. In its argument, Halliburton is asking the Supreme Court to strike down a fundamental tenet in securities fraud litigation, known as “fraud on the market,” arguing that its standad should never have been adopted.

The “fraud on the market” doctrine has its origins in the 1986 Supreme Court case Basic v. Levinson, in which the Supreme Court reasoned, based on the efficient market hypothesis, that all publicly available information about a company was incorporated into its stock price.

FOLLOWING THE WINDING SILK ROAD  |  The last few months have not been easy for Bitcoin. One Bitcoin exchange filed for bankruptcy on Friday after it lost more than $450 million in a theft. And before that, a prominent Bitcoin proponent, Charlie Shrem, was arrested on money-laundering charges. Now, Bitcoin’s continuing tale seems to have come full circle, with the latest development involving the website Silk Road, whose shutdown last fall was one of the first indications that everything was not rosy in Bitcoin land.

In a somewhat bizarre twist, a staff member in the electrical engineering department at Lafayette College in eastern Pennsylvania appears to have played a small role in the investigation that resulted in the shutdown of Silk Road, an online marketplace where drugs and weapons could be bought with Bitcoin, Matthew Goldstein writes in DealBook. The staff member owned a company, JTAN.com, that provided Silk Road with a backup server for its website. A search warrant reveals that JTAN potentially provided the authorities with a wealth of information about Silk Road and Ross William Ulbricht, the man authorities say founded the site.

 

Mergers & Acquisitions »

Facebook in Talks to Buy Drone Maker for $60 Million  |  Facebook is in discussions to acquire a manufacturer of high-altitude drones for about $60 million. The purchase would allow Facebook to advance its ambitions of connecting everyone in the world to the Internet, the Bits blog reports. NEW YORK TIMES BITS

Inside Facebook’s Megadeal for WhatsApp  |  Forbes provides an inside look at the courtship, secret meetings and other events that led to Facebook’s deal for WhatsApp, which could be worth as much as $19 billion. FORBES

Imerys Revises Offer for Amcol International, Again  |  The French group Imerys said it would now pay $45.25 a share in cash for Amcol International, valuing the Illinois company at $1.7 billion, including the assumption of debt. DealBook »

Morgan Stanley Considering Sale of Swiss Private Bank  |  Morgan Stanley is exploring a sale of its private bank in Switzerland, which has about $11 billion in assets under management, Reuters reports, citing an unidentified person familiar with the situation. REUTERS

Comcast Extols Its Low-Cost Web Program  |  Comcast said on Tuesday that it would extend indefinitely its Internet Essentials program, which allows low-income families to gain access to the Internet, Bloomberg News writes. The announcement came on the same day as top executives began meeting with United States regulators who will review the company’s $45.2 billion bid for Time Warner Cable. BLOOMBERG NEWS

Blockchain to Expand Bitcoin App ZeroBlock  |  In a move to build a comprehensive Bitcoin trading platform, Blockchain.info has acquired the trading platform website RTBTC.com, which it plans to combine with its Bitcoin mobile application ZeroBlock, The Wall Street Journal writes. The purchase price was not disclosed. WALL STREET JOURNAL

INVESTMENT BANKING »

Apple’s Departing Finance Chief Is Goldman’s Newest DirectorApple’s Departing Finance Chief Is Goldman’s Newest Director  |  With his newly announced role at Goldman Sachs, Peter Oppenheimer, who plans to retire as Apple’s finance chief in September, deepens the longstanding ties between the investment bank and the technology giant. DealBook »

The Writer Behind @GSElevator Speaks OutThe Writer Behind @GSElevator Speaks Out  |  Remaining anonymous as he posted on Twitter under the handle @GSElevator was simply a “device” that allowed him to paint a broader picture of life on Wall Street, John Lefevre said on Tuesday. DealBook »

Guggenheim Lures a Tech Banker From Evercore  |  Eric Mandl, who specialized in cloud computing and big data deals at Evercore, jumped to Guggenheim Securities on Tuesday. DealBook »

JPMorgan Takes Top Spot on List of the Best-Paid Investment Banks  |  JPMorgan Chase, Goldman Sachs and Morgan Stanley generated an estimated $3.77 billion in total fees last year, Bloomberg Markets magazine writes. The three banks ranked the highest on a list of the best-paid investment banks. BLOOMBERG MARKETS

Final Rules, and a Warning, on Banker Bonuses in EuropeFinal Rules, and a Warning, on Banker Bonuses in Europe  |  The European Commission has adopted final rules for limits on banker bonuses, and a top official warned banks against pushing too far in trying to “circumvent remuneration rules.” DealBook »

PRIVATE EQUITY »

Market and Rates Helped Private Equity Chiefs Thrive Last YearMarket and Rates Helped Private Equity Chiefs Thrive Last Year  |  Lucrative payouts were helped greatly by the combination of low interest rates and high stock prices, which was ideal for selling investments. DealBook »

Football Star’s Private Equity Firm Raising $1 Billion  |  The private equity firm HGGC, which was co-founded by Steve Young, the hall-of-fame National Football League quarterback who won three Super Bowls with the San Francisco 49ers, is raising $1 billion for its second fund, Fortune reports. FORTUNE

Private Equity Recruiting Begins Earlier  |  Private equity firms and hedge funds have begun this year’s hiring of Wall Street’s most junior bankers, beginning the process earlier than usual, Bloomberg Businessweek writes. BLOOMBERG BUSINESSWEEK

HEDGE FUNDS »

Cevian Capital Increases Its Stake in ThyssenKruppCevian Capital Increases Its Stake in ThyssenKrupp  |  The activist investment firm Cevian Capital has been gradually increasing its position in the troubled German conglomerate ThyssenKrupp. DealBook »

Church of England Increases Exposure to Alternative Assets  |  The Church of England is ramping up the exposure of its 6 billion pound endowment to alternative investments like hedge funds and private equity, The Financial Times writes. The move will solidify the church’s position as one of Britain’s largest single investors in these types of assets. FINANCIAL TIMES

Sherborne Raises Stake in Electra Private Equity  |  The hedge fund Sherborne of New York has increased its stake in Electra Private Equity to 13.7 percent of the trust’s voting rights, The Financial Times reports. FINANCIAL TIMES

I.P.O./OFFERINGS »

Brit Insurance Joins I.P.O. Flurry Among Private Equity Holdings  |  Brit Insurance is the latest company owned by private equity to announce an initial public offering in London. The insurer was taken private by Apollo Global Management and CVC Capital Partners in 2010. DealBook »

ONO Looks to I.P.O. After Takeover Approach Stalls  |  An initial public offering of the Spanish cable operator ONO seems increasingly likely after the Vodafone Group’s attempts to buy ONO appear to have been rebuffed, The Wall Street Journal writes, citing unidentified people familiar with the situation. WALL STREET JOURNAL

VENTURE CAPITAL »

Bitcoin Bank Flexcoin Shuts Down After Theft  |  Flexcoin, a Bitcoin wallet and banking service, announced it was shutting down, saying it had lost 896 Bitcoins, worth about $600,000, in a theft, The Verge writes. THE VERGE

Overstock Passes $1 Million in Sales Made in Bitcoin  |  The online retailer Overstock, which started accepting Bitcoin as payment in January, said on Tuesday that purchases made with the virtual currency have topped $1 million, ReCode reports. RECODE

DocuSign Collects $85 Million  |  DocuSign, a digital signature software company, has raised $85 million in new funding from institutional investors, valuing the company at $1.6 billion, The Wall Street Journal reports, citing unidentified people familiar with the situation. WALL STREET JOURNAL

ServiceMax Secures $71 Million in Funding Round  |  ServiceMax, which has a cloud-based application that helps companies manage industrial services, announced on Tuesday that it had raised $71 million in a Series E funding round, ReCode writes. The new funding brings ServiceMax’s total capital raised to $120 million. RECODE

LEGAL/REGULATORY »

Bank of England Suspends Employee Amid Currency Manipulation Inquiry  |  The central bank said an “extensive review” had found no evidence that staff members colluded to manipulate currency markets, but it suspended an employee as it continued to investigate whether its internal control processes were followed. DealBook »

Japan Said to Be Ready to Impose Bitcoin Rules  |  The new guidelines, which ban banks and securities firms from handling Bitcoins, will reportedly treat Bitcoin as a commodity rather than a currency. DealBook »

Bond Market in China May See First Local Default  |  A small solar company in Shanghai has said it is unlikely to meet a Friday deadline for an annual interest payment owed to investors. DealBook »

Financial Regulator Calls Obama Budget ‘Woefully Insufficient’Budget for Trading Commission Called ‘Woefully Insufficient’  |  Bart Chilton, a commissioner on the Commodity Futures Trading Commission, said President Obama’s $280 million request for the agency in the next fiscal year was inadequate for the agency’s expanded mission. DealBook »

In Change, Tourre Won’t Be Teaching University of Chicago CourseIn Change, Tourre Won’t Be Teaching University of Chicago Course  |  The former Goldman Sachs trader Fabrice Tourre had been scheduled to teach an undergraduate course on economic analysis beginning March 31. But a University of Chicago spokesman said on Tuesday that he would no longer be an instructor. DealBook »

Where There’s Smoke, There’s ScrutinyWhere There’s Smoke, There’s Scrutiny  |  While a combination of Reynolds American and Lorillard may make strategic and financial sense, antitrust and other watchdogs could still act as spoilers, Kevin Allison writes for Reuters Breakingviews. DealBook »



Bank of England Suspends Employee Amid Currency Manipulation Inquiry


LONDON - The Bank of England said on Wednesday that it had suspended an employee as it conducts its own internal review into whether bank officials were informed of or condoned potential manipulation of the currency markets.

The suspension comes as regulators in Britain, the United States and other countries are conducting a series of investigations into whether traders colluded to manipulate foreign exchange benchmark rates.

The Bank of England has faced scrutiny in recent weeks over communications between its staff members and traders who were part of an industry committee that discussed issues affecting the currency markets.

Several traders who served on the committee are among more than a dozen traders who have been placed on leave or fired amid internal investigations at some of the world’s largest banks, including Citigroup and UBS.

“The Bank of England does not condone any form of market manipulation in any context whatsoever,” the bank said in a statement. “The bank has today reiterated its guidance to staff regarding management of records and escalation of important information.”

The central bank said it had conducted an “extensive review” of documents, emails and other records and found no evidence that Bank of England staff members colluded in any way in manipulating the currency market or in sharing of confidential client information.

“The bank requires its staff to follow rigorous internal control processes and has today suspended a member of staff, pending investigation by the bank into compliance with those processes,” the bank said. The staff member was not identified.

The central bank said that it had examined about 15,000 emails, 21,000 chat room records and more than 40 hours of telephone call recordings as part of its internal review.

The Bank of England said on Wednesday that its oversight committee would lead an investigation to determine whether bank officials were involved in or knew about attempted or actual manipulation of the currency markets or any other improper behavior in the foreign exchange markets.

The law firm Travers Smith has been appointed as legal counsel to the committee and will prepare a report on the investigation. The report “will be published in due course,” the central bank said.

“No decision has been taken on disciplinary action against any member of Bank staff,” the bank said.

Many of the world’s largest banks, including JPMorgan Chase, Barclays and Royal Bank of Scotland, have acknowledged that they are facing inquiries from regulators into potential manipulation of the currency markets.

Deutsche Bank, the largest player in the currency trading market, with a share of about 15.2 percent, and Citigroup have both fired employees as they conduct their own investigations in the matter.

Neither the banks nor any of the traders who have been suspended or fired have been accused of wrongdoing.

In February, the New York State’s Department of Financial Services became the latest regulator to join the investigation, requesting documents from a number of banks, including Credit Suisse, R.B.S. and Deutsche Bank, according to a person briefed on the matter.

The Department of Financial Services, headed by Benjamin M. Lawsky, is the first state regulator to scrutinize currency trading. Its jurisdiction covers any bank operating with a New York State charter.

Martin Wheatley, the chief executive of Britain’s Financial Conduct Authority, has said that the currency manipulation allegations are “every bit as bad as they have been with Libor,” referring to the London interbank offered rate. His agency is one of the regulators examining practices in the foreign exchange markets, which are lightly regulated.

The Bank of England was previously criticized for its response to complaints about potential manipulation of Libor.

The Financial Stability Board, a task force set up by the Group of 20 last year and headed by Mark Carney, the Bank of England governor, said in February that it would examine the process for how foreign exchange rates are calculated and analyze market practices surrounding those currency rates.

The task force has been working to ensure the transparency and reliability of global benchmark exchange rates following a series of scandals involving Libor and other rates.



Bank of England Suspends Employee Amid Currency Manipulation Inquiry


LONDON - The Bank of England said on Wednesday that it had suspended an employee as it conducts its own internal review into whether bank officials were informed of or condoned potential manipulation of the currency markets.

The suspension comes as regulators in Britain, the United States and other countries are conducting a series of investigations into whether traders colluded to manipulate foreign exchange benchmark rates.

The Bank of England has faced scrutiny in recent weeks over communications between its staff members and traders who were part of an industry committee that discussed issues affecting the currency markets.

Several traders who served on the committee are among more than a dozen traders who have been placed on leave or fired amid internal investigations at some of the world’s largest banks, including Citigroup and UBS.

“The Bank of England does not condone any form of market manipulation in any context whatsoever,” the bank said in a statement. “The bank has today reiterated its guidance to staff regarding management of records and escalation of important information.”

The central bank said it had conducted an “extensive review” of documents, emails and other records and found no evidence that Bank of England staff members colluded in any way in manipulating the currency market or in sharing of confidential client information.

“The bank requires its staff to follow rigorous internal control processes and has today suspended a member of staff, pending investigation by the bank into compliance with those processes,” the bank said. The staff member was not identified.

The central bank said that it had examined about 15,000 emails, 21,000 chat room records and more than 40 hours of telephone call recordings as part of its internal review.

The Bank of England said on Wednesday that its oversight committee would lead an investigation to determine whether bank officials were involved in or knew about attempted or actual manipulation of the currency markets or any other improper behavior in the foreign exchange markets.

The law firm Travers Smith has been appointed as legal counsel to the committee and will prepare a report on the investigation. The report “will be published in due course,” the central bank said.

“No decision has been taken on disciplinary action against any member of Bank staff,” the bank said.

Many of the world’s largest banks, including JPMorgan Chase, Barclays and Royal Bank of Scotland, have acknowledged that they are facing inquiries from regulators into potential manipulation of the currency markets.

Deutsche Bank, the largest player in the currency trading market, with a share of about 15.2 percent, and Citigroup have both fired employees as they conduct their own investigations in the matter.

Neither the banks nor any of the traders who have been suspended or fired have been accused of wrongdoing.

In February, the New York State’s Department of Financial Services became the latest regulator to join the investigation, requesting documents from a number of banks, including Credit Suisse, R.B.S. and Deutsche Bank, according to a person briefed on the matter.

The Department of Financial Services, headed by Benjamin M. Lawsky, is the first state regulator to scrutinize currency trading. Its jurisdiction covers any bank operating with a New York State charter.

Martin Wheatley, the chief executive of Britain’s Financial Conduct Authority, has said that the currency manipulation allegations are “every bit as bad as they have been with Libor,” referring to the London interbank offered rate. His agency is one of the regulators examining practices in the foreign exchange markets, which are lightly regulated.

The Bank of England was previously criticized for its response to complaints about potential manipulation of Libor.

The Financial Stability Board, a task force set up by the Group of 20 last year and headed by Mark Carney, the Bank of England governor, said in February that it would examine the process for how foreign exchange rates are calculated and analyze market practices surrounding those currency rates.

The task force has been working to ensure the transparency and reliability of global benchmark exchange rates following a series of scandals involving Libor and other rates.