David Frum on the
challenge for Mitt Romney in explaining his involvement with Bain Capital:
Romney's core problem is
this: He heads a party that must win two-thirds of the white
working-class vote in presidential elections to compensate for its
weakness in almost every demographic category. The white working class
is
the most pessimistic and alienated group in the electorate, and it especially fears and dislikes the kind of financial methods that gained Romney his fortune.
Romney has a strong
potential defense: Bain was in the business of making companies more
efficient and profitable. Downsizing and outsourcing were necessary --
and often indispensable -- means to that end. In a growing economy, the
workers who lost their jobs should find new jobs elsewhere, and it's
precisely the relentless search for profitability that causes economies
to grow in the first place.
That's an argument that,
to borrow an old joke of Henry Kissinger's, is not only convincing but
has the additional merit of being true. However, it's not an argument
that appeals much to the voters Romney most intensely needs to win.
Hence his unleashing of the war room -- but in the end, there's only so
much a war room can do. And this time, by trying to do too much, the
Romney war room may have blasted its own side with lethal friendly fire.
I'm not sure how strong that potential defense is.
Looting the economy might not be everyone's idea of necessary and indispensible:
Thanks to leverage, 10 of roughly 67 major deals by Bain
Capital during Romney’s watch produced about 70 percent of the
firm’s profits. Four of those 10 deals, as well as others, later
wound up in bankruptcy. It’s worth examining some of them to
understand Romney’s investment style at Bain Capital.
In 1986, in one of its earliest deals, Bain Capital
acquired Accuride Corp., a manufacturer of aluminum truck
wheels. The purchase was 97.5 percent financed by debt, a high
level of leverage under any circumstances. It was especially
burdensome for a company that was exposed to aluminum-price
volatility and cyclical automotive production.
Forty-to-one leverage is casino capitalism that hugely
magnifies gains and losses. Bain Capital wisely chose to flip
the company fast: After 18 months, it sold Accuride, converting
its $2.6 million sliver of equity into a $61 million capital
gain. That deal, which yielded a 1,123 percent annualized
return, was critical to Bain Capital’s early success and led the
firm to keep maximizing the use of leverage.
In 1992, Bain Capital bought American Pad & Paper by
financing 87 percent of the purchase price. In the next three
years, Ampad borrowed to make acquisitions, repay existing debt
and pay Bain Capital and its investors $60 million in dividends.
As a result, the company’s debt swelled from $11 million in
1993 to $444 million by 1995. The $14 million in annual interest
expense on this debt dwarfed the company’s $4.7 million
operating cash flow. The proceeds of an initial public offering
in July 1996 were used to pay Bain Capital $48 million for part
of its stake and to reduce the company’s debt to $270 million.
From 1993 to 1999, Bain Capital charged Ampad about $18
million in various fees. By 1999, the company’s debt was back up
to $400 million. Unable to pay the interest costs and drained of
cash paid to Bain Capital in fees and dividends, Ampad filed for
bankruptcy the following year. Senior secured lenders got less
than 50 cents on the dollar, unsecured lenders received two-
tenths of a cent on the dollar, and several hundred jobs were
lost. Bain Capital had reaped capital gains of $107 million on
its $5.1 million investment.
I'm not sure how necessary and indispensible charging $18 million in fees for running up tremendous debt to cash out all of your investment is in strengthening our economy. That seems to me like calling leeches necessary and indispensible in medicine.
No comments:
Post a Comment