Dollars

Money Wealth Finance


Billionaires say ‘I do’ to dating agency

A. Craig Copetas

January 20, 2011

PARIS: Billionaires need love, too. Inside a very elegant townhouse in Berkeley Square, London, eight executive matchmakers have spent the past 23 years quietly making a fortune coupling romance-starved millionaires and billionaires.

For fees that start at £10,000 ($16,000) and go to many times that, Virginia Sweetingham and her luxury love advisers at Gray & Farrar International will vet suitable partners for clients prepared to abandon the raunchier applications of money and love.

”There are a lot of wealthy single people out there ready to commit, looking for loyalty,” Ms Sweetingham, 53, says of her client base of 750 men and 750 women.

The median age is about 40 years old. The firm’s youngest client is an ”ambitious and focused” 22-year-old man, the oldest a gent ”over 70 with a great sense of intelligent humour”.

Even a private-banking house, Coutts & Co, hails Ms Sweetingham’s service as a splendid way ”to find love”, according to the British bank’s website.

”The pressure of work is the top barrier for them in finding a partner,” says Ms Sweetingham, a single mother of four, in her firm’s homey interview salon.

”Our clients want to meet new people, enter new social circles in a dignified way.”

The client requests are often daunting. ”We have one male client who has a particular look in mind, right down to the precise length of her cheekbones,” Ms Sweetingham says. ”That’s a specific brief that requires our bespoke service. Some of the tools we employ are the world’s lists of the most beautiful and available men and women.”

A computerised client database is forbidden for security reasons. Almost everything is done by hand.

”The men get blue folders, the women pink,” says Ms Sweetingham. As for the annual fee, Ms Sweetingham says ”the price is indicative of our clients’ commitment to find the right person and settle into a relationship; they’re individuals who wouldn’t think twice about paying even more to an executive headhunter to locate the right job candidate.”

Ms Sweetingham’s statistics over the past decade show a 20 per cent drop in divorced clients. ”Fewer than 40 per cent of our clients are divorced and the number continues to decline,” Ms Sweetingham says.

”The majority of our new clients have always been single and that’s a significant global generational statement.”

Bloomberg

Sourced & published by Henry Sapiecha


Cadadas pension funds splurge

$12bn on real estate in Australia

CANADA’S biggest pension fund has made investments worth about $6.7 billion in Australia in the past 1.5years.

The $137bn Canadian Pension Plan Investment Board is also committed to investing another $900 million with Goodman Group, including $595m for its share in the proposed takeover of the ING Industrial Fund (IIF) in a Goodman-led consortium.

It is the largest investor in Australia among global pensions, which have collectively put more than $12bn in Australian companies or assets in recent months.

Commenting on the IIF deal, Graeme Eadie, CPPIB senior vice-president, real estate investment, said the transaction was an opportunity to invest in a high-quality industrial property portfolio.

“It represents our largest real estate investment in Australia,” Mr Eadie said.

Related Coverage

This deal came within four weeks of CPPIB buying a 25 per cent stake in Westfield Stratford City for $700m. This is its second investment with the Australian shopping centre giant Westfield Group.

Its largest deal in Australia to date is toll road company Intoll, which it took over and delisted last month after shareholders approved its $3.5bn offer.

Intoll, the former Macquarie Infrastructure Group, was the second former Macquarie vehicle that CPPIB had acquired.

Its first acquisition was the former Macquarie Communications Infrastructure Group, for which it paid $2.2bn.

CPPIB, based in Toronto, is a professional investment management organisation that invests the funds not needed to pay current benefits. It has also invested with groups such as Dexus Property Group and Macquarie Global Property Advisers, a private equity group, and Colonial First State Global Asset Management.

It is thought to be close to acquiring an office tower in Lend Lease’s Barangaroo project, on Sydney’s waterfront.

CPPIB regularly co-invests with The Netherlands’ APG (Algemene Pensioen Groep, or “all pensions group”) such as in the Goodman consortium in which APG has a 25.2 per cent stake.

APG is also a 25 per cent owner of Westfield Stratford City in Britain and also has a third interest in the Westfield UK Shopping Centre Fund. One of APG’s first investments in Australia is a 40 per cent stake in a Valad fund, which owns Goldfields House, in addition to also owning an undisclosed stake in the unlisted Valad Core Plus Fund.

APG also has an investment in an unlisted GPT fund.

While APG declines to comment on specific investments, its head of strategic real estate in Asia, Daan van Aert, said Australia was an attractive area for real estate primarily due to the stable economic growth, strong regulatory framework and because it is a transparent market. “We are at our target exposure for Australia,” Mr van Aert said. “As such, we are currently more focused on asset management and recapitalisations of our existing portfolio.”

He said APG’s strategy was to set up local partnerships with the strongest real estate managers in the world, such as Westfield and Goodman Group from Australia.

Another Dutch pension fund, PGGM, last month invested $262m in the new Lend Lease Social Infrastructure Fund in Britain. PGGM holds $1bn in Westfield notes, secured on six shopping centres.

Global pension funds including those from Malaysia, Korea, Canada and Sweden have recently stepped up investment as they seek out countries with solid economic growth to invest in search of a stable future income stream.

While some chose to partner with the likes of Goodman Group, Colonial First State Global Asset Management, Westfield, Lend Lease or GPT Group, others opt for direct investment.

Korea’s National Pension Scheme, Malaysia’s Permodolan Nasional, Switzerland’s Swiss pension group AFIAA and Germany’s Deka Immobilien have all bought Australian office blocks.

Additionally, an unknown number of pension funds invest through global fund managers, like the Chicago-based LaSalle Investment Management; the Hong Kong-based CLSA Capital Partners; CBRE Investors; or Sweden’s SEB Asset Management.

As members’ contributions pile up around the world — just as in Australia — international property consultant DTZ recently estimated that $US281bn of new capital would be available for investments this year, up 22 per cent from a year ago.

China, Australia and India would attract about 15 per cent of that capital, said a recent DTZ report.

Jonathan Thompson, KPMG’s head of global real estate, who was in Sydney recently, said more pension funds would start to put their money in real estate. For instance, he said Norway changed its laws in March last year to allow the Norwegian Government Pension Fund, which manages $US520bn, to invest in real estate.

Alistair Meadows, regional director of international capital group Jones Lang LaSalle, said the next wave of investment would come from Asian pension funds.

By 2020, he said Asian pension funds were expected to have assets totalling $4.3 trillion.

Since 2009, South Korea’s National Pension Scheme, which invests the pension contributions of about 18 million people, had acquired $3.6bn of prime real estate in London; Tokyo, Berlin and Sydney, he said.

In Australia, NPS bought Aurora Place, a blue-chip CBD tower, for $635m.

On his recent visit to Seoul, Mr Meadows met several second-tier Korean pension funds — the equivalent to industry funds in Australia — that were keen to follow NPS’s footsteps overseas.

“We believe that most pension funds are underweight to real estate, especially in Japan and Korea,” Mr Meadows said.

“In 2011, we expect to see them in Australia looking for direct acquisitions; co-investment with an Australian partner or indirectly through unlisted Australian property funds.”

While the established pension funds will have between 5 per cent and 10 per cent of their investment in property, Mr Meadows said most Asian pension funds had no allocation or less than 5 per cent of their assets in property.

DTZ associate director Aurelo Dinapoli said pension funds were keen to deploy their capital in key Australian cities — Sydney and Melbourne.

“We represented Chinese pension funds looking for Australian assets,” Mr Dinapoli said.

“Money is not an issue for this group. They have  lots of money to invest.”

He said that typically a pension fund looked to invest between $200m and $300m on its first investment in Australia.

Rick Butler, senior managing director of CB Richard Ellis, has facilitated several sales, including most recently the $113m purchase of 737 Bourke Street by Malaysian pension group KWAP.

Mr Butler said these buyers were interested in direct assets or in “club” deals with small numbers of like-minded investors.

Some consultants believe that the high Australian dollar may reduce the flow into Australia.

APG’s Mr van Aert said: “The general policy is hedging currency exposures, and as such the hedging cost is factored into our investment returns and decisions.”

Sourced & published by Henry Sapiecha

Tower insurance shares soar 42%

on directors’ Dai-ichi nod

December 29, 2010

Australia Tower Group shares surged 42 per cent to a record high as investors supported an all-cash takeover offer from the company’s Japanese cornerstone investor Dai-ichi Life Insurance.

Tower said today its directors recommended shareholders accepted Dai-ichi’s $4 per share, or $1.2 billion, offer to buy all shares it does not already own in the specialist life insurer.

The stock touched $3.88 – Tower’s highest-ever share price since splitting from New Zealand-based Tower in December 2006 – before closing up $1.14, or 41.8 per cent, at $3.87.

Over 20 million shares were traded during the day, Tower’s best daily turnover since October 2008.

IG Markets strategist Ben Potter said the hefty 46.5 per centage  premium to the Christmas Eve closing share price of $2.73 would have ruled out a competing offer.

‘‘I’d be expecting no other bidders around that price,’’ Mr Potter said.‘‘I don’t think people wouls have to think too long and hard about selling their shares at $4.’’

Dai-ichi’s offer to buy the remaining 71.04 per cent of Tower, made yesterday, valued all of Tower at $1.76 billion.

Dai-ichi general manager of international business management department, Takayuki Kotani, said the deal allowed Japan’s number two life insurer to increase its geographic diversification in the Asia Pacific region.

Mr Kotani described Tower as a profitable, growing company with good management and he flagged having a greater presence in Australia in the time ahead.

‘‘Beginning with this investment, Dai-ichi will strengthen its commitment to Australian marketplace over a period of time,’’ Mr Kotani said in a statement.

Dai-ichi, which bought its stake in Tower in August 2008 for $376.3 million and also holds insurance interests in Vietnam, Thailand and India, indicated it wished to keep the Australian insurer’s current management and independent directors in place.

Tower chairman Rob Thomas said the independent directors believed that the offer represented a ‘‘compelling premium and a highly attractive outcome’’ for shareholders.

Managing director Jim Minto said having Dai-ichi as a cornerstone shareholder for the past two years had been of great benefit to Tower’s business partners and customers.

‘‘Dai-ichi is a major life company and there is a strong natural fit that will allow continued benefits to flow for Tower’s customers, staff and business partners,’’ Mr Minto said in his statement.

Dai-ichi listed on the Tokyo stock exchange in April this year, after an initial public offering that raised $US11 billion ($10.92 billion).

Tower’s yearly results, released last month, showed the specialist life insurer’s net profit rose 88 per cent to $87.4 million in fiscal 2010 and a return on capital of 10.3 per cent.

The company did not release earnings guidlines, but said at the time it was targeting an 11 per cent return on capital in fiscal 2011 and a 13 per cent return in three years.

The directors’ recommendation of the Dai-ichi bid, which would be via a scheme of arrangement, is subject to the absence of a superior proposal and the outcome of an independent expert’s report.

It also requires court approval, the go-ahead of Tower shareholders, as well as the go ahead from Australian and Japanese authorities.

Sourced & published by Henry Sapiecha

Groupon rejects $6b bid from Google

December 6, 2010 – 10:45AM
Andrew Mason, founder and chief executive officer of Groupon.Andrew Mason, founder and chief executive officer of Groupon. Photo: Bloomberg

You might think anyone would jump at a $6 billion offer from Google, but Andrew Mason, founder of Groupon, amazingly rejected such a bid from the search giant to buy his online coupon business.

The 30-year-old founder and chief executive officer of Groupon, a Chicago-based internet-coupon service with more than 35 million users, walked away from an acquisition offer from Google, said a person with knowledge of the matter.

The proposed acquisition fell through amid hesitation by Groupon’s founding team, said the person, who requested anonymity because the talks are private.

Advertisement: Story continues below

The start-up will decide next year whether to sell shares in an initial public offering instead, the person said. The discussions could resume if both sides overcome their differences.

It prompted CNNMoney.com to publish a video interview recorded two months ago with Mason that was cut from the final version. In it, Mason was asked if the company had ever had any buy-out offers.

“I’m hoping that McDonald’s or Exxon tries to buy us – like someone totally weird,” he responded.

Asked if he would sell to Google, he said: “No, I want to be part of someone like GE or something.”

Google had offered $US6 billion, including incentives that would be paid to Groupon’s managers if performance targets were met, people familiar with the matter had said.

Groupon would have helped its new owner expand in the $US133 billion local-ad market and lessen its reliance on internet-search advertising.

“Clearly Google wants to get into the local space and Groupon was one way,” said Aaron Kessler, an analyst at ThinkEquity in San Francisco, who has a “buy” rating on Google and does not own shares in it.

“I don’t think from a Google perspective that if they miss out, that there’s not other ways to get into local.”

Mason had the biggest say in the decision as the largest shareholder, said another person familiar with the talks. He had concerns about the strategic direction the company would take under new management, the person said.

Mason was also concerned about what could happen to merchant relationships and his employees, the person said.

Google’s biggest deal

Google chief executive officer Eric Schmidt was willing to pay almost twice the $US3.2 billion he spent on DoubleClick, his next-most expensive target, to add features and repel a threat from such rivals as Facebook.

Jill Hazelbaker, a spokeswoman for Google, said the company did not comment on rumours or speculation.

Julie Mossler, a Groupon spokeswoman, also declined to comment.

Google, which boasts $US33.4 billion in cash and marketable securities, had initially offered between $US3.5 billion and $US4 billion to buy Groupon, a person familiar with the matter has said. The start-up, which was also contemplating raising new venture funding, held out, eliciting a sweetened offer from Google, the person said.

The Chicago Tribune initially reported Groupon’s rejection.

Groupon’s growth

Groupon’s allure has rubbed off on lookalike coupon sites. Amazon.com said on December 2 it invested $US175 million in LivingSocial.com, another provider of daily online deals.

Founded by Mason in 2008, Groupon has attracted 35 million users in more than 300 global markets by offering steep discounts on such items as pedicures, hotel stays and bike tune-ups. The company makes money by keeping part of the revenue raised by the coupons. Groupon’s sales may top $US500 million this year, two people familiar with the matter have said.

Groupon had a valuation of about $US1.3 billion in April, after Digital Sky Technologies led a group that invested in the company. It has raised $US170 million from investors, including Facebook backer Accel Partners and New Enterprise Associates.

Google could have used Groupon to gather data on consumers as they interact around the time of a purchase, and then use that information to hone other products, including ads, said Ben Schachter, an analyst at Macquarie Securities Group.

Local focus

“Locally focused e-commerce transaction data tied to one’s Google account could be used to improve personalisation of other Google features as well as improve ad targeting,” Schachter, who rates the stock an “outperform”, wrote in a research note.

Google could also have incorporated Groupon coupons into the location-based services of its Android mobile operating system, said Yun Kim, an analyst at Gleacher & Co in New York, who rates the stock “neutral” and doesn’t own it. For example, as an Android user passes by a mall, Google could deliver coupons for nearby stores.

Still, Groupon was an unusual acquisition target for Google, which tends to buy companies that boast a technological advantage, such as online video, as was the case with YouTube.

To distinguish itself from lookalikes, Groupon plans to test new features that let businesses easily create deals through an online service called Groupon Stores. The company is also testing a feature called Deal Feed that lets users track favourite businesses as they might on blogging site Twitter.

Regulators would probably have scrutinised the planned acquisition of Groupon to ensure it doesn’t harm consumers.

“People are going to be concerned about what happens when you link Groupon’s daily-deal services to Google search,” said Dan Wall, an antitrust lawyer and partner at Latham & Watkins in San Francisco.

Sourced & published by Henry Sapiecha

« Previous PageNext Page »