More palace intrigue: Nissan ousts 2nd in command

Nissan was dealt another blow last week when word leaked out to the Financial Times that Ashwani Gupta, its chief operating officer and number two in command, was being pushed out in what appears to be another palace coup.

Gupta, 52, will officially step down on June 27 after a short and undistinguished career at the automaker. Previously serving in executive capacities at Renault and Mitsubishi Motors, Gupta was named COO on November 1, 2019, replacing Yasuhiro Yamauchi in a management shakeup that took effect on December 1 and also elevated Makoto Uchida to president and CEO.

Nissan had been forced to make changes after losing its top three executives — first Carlos Ghosn and Greg Kelly as part of a management coup in November of the previous year, 2018, to block the merger with Renault, and then CEO Hiroto Saikawa at the September 2019 board meeting for receiving a 47 million yen windfall from a backdated shareholder appreciation rights (SARs) bonus.

Another recent twist in the ongoing Nissan saga: Ghosn has sued the company for $1 billion in a Lebanese court. Lebanon is where he has lived since fleeing Japan while out on bail awaiting trial on criminal charges, which he and his lawyers say (with strong evidence to back them up) were part of a Nissan management faction’s coup d’etat aided and abetted by elements of the Japanese government.

Carlos Ghosn’s home in a wealthy neighborhood of the Lebanese capital Beirut. Photo: Asia Times files / AFP / Anwar Amro

Ghosn, Kelly and Saikawa were all representative directors at the time of Ghosn’s and Kelly’s arrests on November 19, 2018. Nissan had three representative directors (daihyo torishimayaku in Japanese) on its then nine-member board. In June 2019, the automaker expanded the board to 12, with a majority coming from outside the industry, as the board shifted focus to governance.

Only three directors, including Gupta and Uchida, came from the industry. Now, there will be two. The current frontrunners to replace Gupta, according to our sources, are Guillaume Cartier, who chairs the management committee running Nissan’s business in Europe, India, the Middle East, Africa and Oceana, and Jeremie Papin, president of Nissan North America Inc. and chair of the management committee for the Americas region.

Guillaume Cartier. Photo: Nissan

Cartier is believed to be the top choice.

To elevate one of them to the board will require an extraordinary shareholders’ meeting since the agenda for the June 27 meeting has already been set and includes the addition of one new outside director and the retirements of two, bringing the total down to 10.

Moreover, market share fell to 5.5% in the US and 2.1% in Europe. 

In fiscal 2017, the last full year Ghosn was in management, Nissan’s share in the two markets (including Infiniti sales). Meaning: The automaker has lost ground to the competition.

Globally, market share fell to a 50-year low, to 4.1%. And while Nissan is profitable again, posting a 3.6% operating profit margin, its margin is lower than every major automaker outside China except Honda and, in Honda’s case, only if one excludes its profitable motorcycle business.

Thus, it is hard to grade Gupta’s tenure because the company, in addition to being profitable again, is generating positive cash flow, with an estimated 1 trillion yen in the bank.

For that reason, there remain questions about why Gupta is being removed. We reached out to Nissan and didn’t receive a response.

However, the FT reported that Gupta was vying for the CEO’s job. We have been told that Gupta wasn’t shy about promoting himself, but have never interviewed him. On the other hand, Nissan had co-CEOs (Saikawa and Ghosn) from October 2016 through March 2017; Ghosn moved up to chairman in April. So there is some precedent for sharing the title and dividing responsibilities.

The FT also reported without offering details that there had been “complaints” against Gupta. Given Nissan’s history of leaking negative information about Ghosn, we believe that one should take such reports with skepticism.

It was on May 18 (first reported Tuesday of this week by Blooomberg) that Ghosn filed a $1 billion damages suit in Lebanon against Nissan and 12 executives including Hari Nada, Masakazu Toyoda and Motoo Nagai. 

All three, the latter two as outside directors, were involved with planning the coup and/or the coverup that followed.

Nagai, who chairs the board’s audit committee, shut down the internal investigation when Christina Murray and Ravinder Passi, Nissan’s global compliance chief and global general counsel, turned their attention to Nada, who had entered an immunity agreement with the Tokyo prosecutors’ office several weeks before Ghosn’s arrest and never informed the board.

Nada is still a corporate officer with the title of senior vice president. Nagai, who reportedly was involved with Gupta’s ouster, will remain on the board. Toyoda, a former government bureaucrat, will retire.

A more likely reason for Gupta’s removal, according to our sources, is that Renault wanted him out. According to our sources, Gupta wasn’t acceding to Renault’s demands following changes made to the alliance structure in February whereby all decisions must be consensual.

Although considered to be the most talented auto executive on Nissan’s board, he was taking a hard line with his former employer. Gupta joined Renault in 2006, then switched to Mitsubishi Motors (the third member of the alliance) in 2019 before joining Nissan.

Among the issues in dispute: Nissan’s extensive intellectual property, to which Renault wants greater access, and Nissan’s active involvement in Renault’s Ampere EV project including taking a minority 15% equity stake.

Concept of the Renault Ampere. Photo: Motor.es

Renault is moving forward with the project, having announced this week (June 19) that its CEO, Luca de Meo, will be the future chairman and CEO of Ampere. De Meo will hold both positions, while Renault’s chairman, Jean-Dominique Senard, has been tasked with setting up a committee to oversee the initial public offering. Senard, a former tire industry executive, serves concurrently as vice-chair of Nissan’s board.

According to one of our sources, Uchida is perceived to be “more pliant” than Gupta. 

Not clear, looking at the market, is how Ampere will benefit Nissan. The Japanese automaker’s main markets outside Japan are China and the US, not Europe. And both automakers have seen their EV shares fall globally to less than 2%, according to EV Volumes.

CLSA analyst Chris Richter warns:

If Gupta’s misgivings about investing in Ampere and keeping Nissan’s IP secure were truly behind his departure — granted, the FT article cites other issues as well — we would note that many of Nissan’s minority shareholders share the same concerns and wonder how strongly independent board members who were allegedly behind his removal are serving Nissan’s minority shareholders….

Optics of the Gupta situation are really terrible because they focus on the wrong things — palace intrigue, investigations and backstabbing. They also ignore the fact that Nissan has potent competitors. While the industry is undergoing the biggest change in a century —  it is going to be difficult for anybody in industry to survive — Nissan is wasting time.

I worry that they’re not going to be able to hire somebody of equal competence. Nissan’s got a lot of work to do and the competition isn’t waiting for them. Gupta was the point man driving forward Nissan’s advancement on profits, new products and electrification….

Cash flow has been getting consistently better. That’s been good news. It means their transformation plan is working and they appear to be on a road to recovery [but] Nissan doesn’t benefit from this kind of instability. The loss of Gupta is significant.

Roger Schreffler is a veteran of nearly four decades as a Japan automotive correspondent and is a former president of the Foreign Correspondents’ Club of Japan.

ReplyForward

Continue Reading

Tsai holds the key to a China tech revival

There’s a certain logic to Alibaba Group bringing back Joseph Tsai following his foray into owning the Brooklyn Nets basketball team.

The future of China’s most-watched tech player presents one of the most tantalizing jump-ball moments in global finance. Looked at one way, putting Tsai back into the game is a savvy move by Alibaba’s board.

The company’s leadership team seemed to decide that Daniel Zhang wasn’t the right chairman and CEO to execute a sweeping restructuring to split Alibaba into six separate units.

So who better to turn around the struggling e-commerce giant than Tsai as chairman and fellow co-founder Eddie Wu as chief executive officer?

Of course, only time will tell if pulling Tsai off the bench is the right decision. Some argue that Alibaba might do better with a new generation of leaders, not members of the old guard so close to founder Jack Ma.

Yet Alibaba’s ability to return to strong profitability looms in the background as Chinese Premier Li Qiang takes his first shots on the world stage.

This week, Chinese leader Xi Jinping’s No 2 is visiting Germany and France. The ostensible goal of Li’s first official foray abroad is to sell his China-is-back-in-business campaign and to stabilize ties with Europe’s top economic powers.

Looming in the background of every meeting, though, is Beijing’s perceived inhospitality toward multinational companies keen to harness China’s rise. The same goes for the Xi era’s tolerance for tech disruption at home.

This latter question has complicated foreign direct investment decisions since late 2020, when Team Xi pounced on Alibaba’s Ma.

Days after Ma criticized Beijing regulators for antiquated thinking in a Shanghai speech, the regulatory empire struck back. A planned November 2020 initial public offering by Ma’s Ant Group was scrapped.

Jack Ma has been in Chinese regulators’ crosshairs. Photo: AFP / Philippe Lopez

Xi’s move shocked global finance circles. Ma had long been the face of Chinese innovation, a regular presence on the Davos set whose spectacular success heralded the nation’s global tech ambitions. Ant’s IPO, which would have been the globe’s biggest ever, aimed to supersize the point.

Six years earlier, Alibaba’s splashy IPO in New York set the stage for China Inc’s internationalization. Only this time, Ma’s fintech outfit planned to sell about $37 billion in shares in Shanghai and Hong Kong. It would’ve signaled China’s arrival as a tech and finance titan.

The crackdown that followed was the ultimate economic buzzkill. After sidelining Ma, regulators turned their sights on Baidu, Didi Global, Tencent and others.

At the time, Xi’s government went after Alibaba for what it argued was monopolistic behavior. Since that period, Alibaba shares lost roughly 70%, killing more than half a trillion dollars of value.

China’s most watched company never quite got its groove back. Competition from companies like ByteDance Ltd and PDD Holdings didn’t help. Now, Alibaba also must work to regain market share in cloud services, which will now be Zhang’s focus.

The good news here is that the “transition enables Zhang to dedicate fully to cloud, as it is in the best position to embrace AI opportunities ahead,” says Jefferies analyst Thomas Chong. “We expect AI is a priority for all business lines of Alibaba.”

In a broader sense, though, Tsai taking the reins at Alibaba could play into Premier Li’s pitch that China is re-prioritizing private sector innovation while Beijing claims it wants to tame trade tensions with the US.

Here, Vey-Sern Ling, managing director at Union Bancaire Privee, speaks for many when he calls Alibaba “a China proxy” that can be “dragged down by geopolitics and China’s economy.”

As such, the board’s move to put Tsai in charge is a very big deal says analyst Rui Ma, founder of advisory Tech Buzz China. “Alibaba is constantly reshuffling its leadership, but rarely at the topmost level,” Rui says.

Adds Yale University law and history professor Taisu Zhang: “I suspect I’m not the only person surprised by Joe Tsai’s re-ascendancy at Alibaba in such uncertain times.”

Alibaba could become a global investor darling again. Image: Agencies

The biggest previous shakeup was in 2019, when Ma formally stepped away from Alibaba’s management. Tsai’s ascension suggests that Ma’s vision for where the company plans to head next is once again guiding Alibaba.

As such, says analyst Fawne Jiang at Benchmark Co, there’s reason to “believe that Joe’s takeover as the chairman should help to boost investors’ confidence.”

Brian Wong, an early Alibaba employee and former special assistant to Ma, told Bloomberg that Tsai’s rise is “exactly what an organization as big as Alibaba needs, and one that has international aspirations. He’s in a very good position, given his background and skills, to kind of play that role and really help bridge the company from China to the world, and vice versa, the world to China.”

Tsai will need to be all this and more as he tries to execute Alibaba’s plans to split its business into six separate units, the most radical restructuring in the company’s quarter-century history.

Each business group will have separate lines of management and will be empowered to raise outside funding and go public.

In March, when the plan was first announced, Alibaba said the shakeup is “designed to unlock shareholder value and foster market competitiveness.”

At the same time, analysts at S&P Global Rating argue that Alibaba’s earlier payment of a fine over alleged monopolistic behavior removes “a significant overhang” for Alibaba shares. The settlement, S&P concludes, “removes the possibility of more serious consequences.”

Analyst Zerlina Zeng at CreditSights notes that “we think that the corporate reorganization reduces the risk of cash burn for Alibaba to fund unprofitable business lines.”

Apart from Taobao & Tmall, most other Alibaba business units “are loss-making,” Zeng says. They include cloud services, food delivery arm Ele.ma, logistics arm Ampa and overseas e-commerce platforms like Lazada and AliExpress.

“We estimate that a large chunk of Alibaba’s capex and investments over the past few years were used to expand these business units,” Zeng says. “We expect the potential separate equity fund-raising (including IPOs) of these business units to help ease the cash burn for Alibaba, a credit positive in our view.”

All this gives Tsai space to reboot a corporate behemoth that’s had a decidedly rough few years. The stakes are even higher than that considering that Alibaba’s “split-up could also serve as a template for Alibaba’s peers” over time, notes Evercore ISI analyst Neo Wang.

Tsai, 59, is a Taiwan-born, US-educated innovator with a uniquely eclectic background. Along with buying a NBA basketball empire, Tsai was a key player in Manhattan commercial real estate, Hong Kong finance at Reorient Group Limited and more recently a blockchain and cryptocurrency enthusiast.

Premier Li’s inner circle was almost certainly consulted on Tsai’s taking over at Alibaba. Given Li’s own background with Alibaba, this could prove to be an intriguing partnership of sorts.

China’s newly-elected Premier Li Qiang takes an oath after being elected during the fourth plenary session of the National People’s Congress (NPC) at the Great Hall of the People in Beijing, China on March 11, 2023. Image: Pool / Twitter / Screengrab

In the 2010s, Li served as governor of Zhejiang province, where Alibaba is headquartered. Reportedly, Li was close to Ma. Hence the reasons why many observers think Li’s rise to the top of Beijing’s power pyramid augurs well for the high-tech sector’s return to economic prominence.

This is expected to be a key talking point that Li will advance in Europe. In Berlin on Monday, Li told German business executives that increased cooperation between China and Europe is vital to global prosperity.

Li and Chancellor Olaf Scholz voiced support for binding their economies more closely together and working to reduce climate change risks.

Li told reporters that “China and Germany, as two influential major powers in the world, should join hands to cooperate closely.” Beijing, he said, is keen on cooperating in sectors including manufacturing, electric vehicles and green finance.

Still, much of Li’s sales pitch in Europe is that, today’s economic challenges and Sino-US trade tensions aside, the future is bright for Chinese growth, innovation and foreign investment.

For a case in point, all Li needs to do is point to how Alibaba is raising its game – and, perhaps, offering pointers to other China Inc disrupters.

Follow William Pesek on Twitter at @WilliamPesek

Continue Reading

CARSOME raises undisclosed funding round, emphasises its US0mil liquidity position

Mostly existing investors with new investor, EvolutionX Debt, a SG based debt fund
Claims independent biz units have hit profitability with over 30% revenue growth

CARSOME Group announced the closing of its latest fundraising round yesterday, without disclosing the amount raised, but shared that the funding has brought its current liquidity to approximately US$200 million (RM927.9 million).
Highlighting its liquidity position is a response…Continue Reading

MITI and the United Nations launch Malaysia SDG Investor Map

15 Investment Opportunity Areas identified, with information on indicative returns
Serves as market intelligence for investors seeking SDG-aligned opportunities

The Ministry of Investment, Trade and Industry (MITI) and the United Nations (UN) in Malaysia has launched an online market intelligence tool called the Malaysia SDG Investor Map to help private investors find investment…Continue Reading

Why Japan’s stock market boom won’t last

TOKYO — Japanese stocks are having quite a moment as waves of foreign capital drive the benchmark Nikkei index to 30-year highs.

The common explanation for this year’s 30% gain is that a decade of efforts to tighten corporate governance are finally gaining traction.

There are signs indeed that companies from Canon to Toshiba to Citizen Watch are showing signs of actually listening to shareholders’ demands.

Add the fact that Japan Inc has been comparatively cheap valuation-wise during that decade and it’s not hard to understand why Tokyo shares are on a winning streak. Just ask Warren Buffett, whose 2020 bet in five Japanese trading houses is paying off handsomely.

Yet some sobriety is warranted, lest punters allow irrational exuberance to get the better of them once again. The question is whether government reforms are keeping sufficient pace with the bulls racing around Tokyo. The answer: not by a long shot.

An argument can be made that Japan Inc’s return to favor is as much a reflection of global events and domestic liquidity levels as bets on a renaissance in corporate attitudes.

Take the Bank of Japan, which is the ultimate outlier among top monetary authorities. As the US Federal Reserve, European Central Bank and Bank of England hit the brakes, the BOJ continues to gun the monetary engine.

For now, “the economic backdrop remains fragile,” says Stefan Angrick, senior economist at Moody’s Analytics. “Although Japan’s belated recovery has found some better footing, GDP is still below its pre-pandemic peak. Industrial production and exports have struggled as the global economy has flirted with recession.”

From a liquidity-differential standpoint, Japanese stocks — long undervalued by global investors — are gaining converts. Japan, meantime, looks like a welcome haven from the US-China trade tensions that are unnerving global markets.

Trouble is, it’s highly unclear that the underlying state of Japan’s economy warrants continued rapid stock gains. It follows that Japan, circa 2023, is a more complicated calculation than meets the eye.

In a nutshell, the market remains vulnerable to a macroeconomic backdrop less conducive to surging shares than many punters might realize.

Not to dismiss the ways in which corporate boardrooms are modernizing. They are indeed. The common analysis — and frankly the lazy one — is that the supposed reform Big Bang that then-prime Minister Shinzo Abe launched in 2013 deserves all the credit.

The late Abe deserves certain kudos, of course. In 2014, his Liberal Democratic Party enacted a UK-like stewardship code to encourage companies to give shareholders a bigger voice. The LDP prodded companies to add more outside directors, increase returns on equity and boost dividends.

Former prime minister Shinzo Abe was a so-so economic reformer. File Photo: The Yomiuri Shimbun / Kunihiko Miura via AFP

Credit where it’s due, those upgrades are playing a role in today’s Nikkei rally. But the bigger catalyst here is China.

It was just before Abe took power in 2013 that China surpassed Japan in gross domestic product (GDP) terms. And it was around that time that Japan Inc chieftains realized that circling the wagons was no longer an option.

A similar pattern played out a decade earlier, when Japanese banks finally addressed the bad loan hangover from the 1990s.

Pundits rushed to credit then-prime minister Junichiro Koizumi for fixing the mess. In reality, it was the realization that China was remaking the financial playing field in Asia that sparked reform — and the urgency for Japan to get back in shape.

In both the early 2000s and early 2010s, there was nothing new or innovative about policy shifts under Koizumi and Abe. Other than Koizumi’s bold privatization of Japan Post, most steps by their governments were obvious ones Tokyo should’ve taken decades earlier.

This gets us back to today’s stock surge. At some point, stocks long deemed as “cheap” will cease to be considered as such.

As the market becomes less cheap, investors will begin scrutinizing a macroeconomic backdrop that’s far less vibrant than to be expected after 10 years of so-called “Abenomics.”

Already, “the gains of the past month have taken Japanese equities from cheap to neutral,” says strategist Luca Paolini at Pictet Asset Management.

When Fumio Kishida rose to the premiership in October 2021, a year after Abe resigned, he called for a “new capitalism.” Kishida did so cautiously, knowing that the still-powerful Abe was looking over his shoulder.

The thrust of Kishida’s plan was to increase innovation and do a better job of spreading the benefits of growth. It was, at its core, an admission that Abenomics was less a Big Bang than a series of modest pops.

The more Kishida talked of plans to loosen labor markets, reduce bureaucracy, increase innovation and productivity, empower women and restore Tokyo’s status as a global financial center, the more he was admitting that Abe hadn’t got the job done during his nearly eight-year reign.

It was the worst-kept secret in Nagatacho, Japan’s Capitol Hill, that Abe was seething at the implication — and mulling a return to power for a third time (he was assassinated in July 2022). Now, Kishida is mulling calling an early snap election to consolidate power.

Chatter that Kishida might announce an election this week didn’t pan out. But with his approval rating in the mid-40s, Kishida could call an election at any moment.

Pundits agree Kishida’s sudden rediscovery of economic reform buttresses the early election talk. In recent days, Kishida’s government unveiled a wide-ranging package of measures to reverse a falling birthrate in the developed nation with the globe’s worst debt burden. The plan is to double childcare expenditures.

A busy shopping area in the center of Osaka. Japan’s demographics are in terminal decline. Photo: AFP / Kazuhiro Nogi

Here, too, when Kishida says “the low birthrate is a massive problem that concerns our country’s society and entire economy and can’t be put off,” it’s a tacit reminder of the to-do lost Abe’s 2012-2022 reign ignored.

This burst in childcare spending comes as Kishida is also angling to hike military spending by more than 50% over five years to around 43 trillion yen ($307 billion) to keep pace with China. The daunting bill for all these outlays will entail tax increases, including on Japan’s biggest corporations.

Another complicating factor for Nikkei bulls is that the BOJ’s decades-long quantitative easing (QE) policy is on borrowed time. Though new BOJ governor Kazuo Ueda’s team demurred this week, the clock is ticking as the worst inflation in decades becomes more ingrained.

At just over 4%, Japan’s inflation rate has been well above the 2% target. The BOJ hasn’t ended QE in part because upward price pressures reflect rising import costs of energy and raw materials, not strong demand trends. These supply-side price pressures are best addressed with steps to increase competitiveness.

Ueda’s team is in do-no-harm mode with regard to the macroeconomic scene and corporate profits. In the past, premature BOJ tightening derailed economic recoveries. One example: two rate hikes in the 2006-2007 period that had to be reversed when national growth faltered.

The legacy of such episodes might prevent Ueda from taking steps to keep inflation from embedding itself in the economy. At the same time, this year’s 3.8% average wage gain — the highest since the early 1990s — is less than the inflation rate.

“This,” argues economist Carlos Casanova at Union Bancaire Privée, “puts a damper on domestic consumption via negative real wage growth. Therefore, the BOJ will be in no rush to tweak settings.”

Of course, it’s more complicated than that. As Casanova explains, Ueda’s team at the BOJ has “flagged that a shift in corporate price-setting behavior was showing changes that could work to push up inflation, suggesting the economy was making steady progress toward hitting” preferred pace of price gains.

Yet the US Fed’s failure to act quicker to tame prices is a cautionary tale — and a warning against BOJ complacency.

As Kelvin Wong, analyst at Oanda, sees it, “overall, the improving economic backdrop in Japan with accelerating sticky inflation coupled with a buoyant stock market that is supported by foreign net inflows has opened a window of opportunity for BOJ to normalize its ultra-easy monetary policy.”

Wong notes that it would mean “at least via a further widening of the yield curve control band in the first step, perhaps in July when it publishes its latest quarterly outlook report that comes with its latest projections of inflation and economic growth trend.”

For now, though, the BOJ’s ultra-loose policies are a giant tailwind for stocks.

New Bank of Japan Governor Kazuo Ueda hasn’t touched QE yet. Image: Twitter / Screengrab

Strategist Yunosuke Ikeda at Nomura Holdings adds that “we see the recent strength of Japanese equities as arising from a combination of an accumulation of longer-term bullish stories, the evaporation of some short-term worries, and buying by nonresident investors.”

Goldman Sachs strategist Kazunori Tatebe notes that recent corporate earnings trends provide “additional fuel for investors’ bullish stance on Japanese stocks, providing some reassurance on the earnings outlook.”

Low price-to-book ratios continue to turn heads Tokyo’s way, Tatebe argues. “If progress is made in accordance with investor expectations,” Tatebe says, “Japanese stocks could see a prolonged advance over the medium term, and we continue to see risk to the upside.”

Nicholas Smith, strategist at CLSA Japan, agrees. “Japan went from bubble to anti-bubble. Its superior earnings-per-share growth and bargain-basement valuations over the last decade went unnoticed” into earlier this year.

That, Smith notes, “prompted massive buybacks that cash-bloated Japan can easily afford. That, in turn, woke up foreign investors who remain heavily underweight.”

Yet there is a risk that the BOJ might stop acting like a 24/7 no-limit ATM for global investors, which would be a devastating blow to Nikkei bulls.

“Japan is in its own virtuous economic cycle, with GDP growing solidly thanks to healthy domestic demand,” says Paolini at Pictet Asset Management. But, he adds, “the Bank of Japan might, however, start to temper this if, as we expect, it winds up its ultra-accommodative monetary stance.”

As such, “Japan is the only developed government bond market in which we hold an underweight,” Paolini says.

Stocks are another story, of course, as the bulls run Tokyo’s way from all directions. For now, at least, as the BOJ keeps filling the proverbial punchbowl as peers drain liquidity. The question is whether government upgrades catch up with enthusiasm about Japanese shares – and that’s anyone’s guess.

Follow William Pesek on Twitter at @WilliamPesek

Continue Reading

Private equity drives industrial efficiency

Recent decades have witnessed extraordinary economic progress owing to enormous innovations in technologies. Well known is the important role of private venture capital in financing early-stage companies that grew into many of giant corporations that dominate many new industries.

Less well known is the role of the much larger private equity funds that finance the growth and modernization of established companies in many industries.   

From their beginning in the early 1980s, private equity (PE) funds now manage US$7.6 trillion in assets globally, of which US funds comprise two-thirds, according to a McKinsey and Company estimate.

They had $496 million available for investment in 1983. By 2021 that number rose to $242 billion. Private equity attracts investment because in most years during the past four decades, the mean return on investment in private equity funds exceeded that of money invested in publicly traded companies. 

What explains this success? 

The answer is that these funds have successfully provided growth capital to many established companies while actively working with management to use this capital effectively to increase the value of the business. The emergence of new technologies and markets creates demand for capital which cannot be funded out of operating profit cash flow. That’s where PE steps in.

For the management of many private companies, PE funding is a good alternative to raising capital through an initial public offering (IPO) on the stock markets, which requires public disclosure of corporate activities, and subjects the firm to fluctuations in publicly traded share prices. 

Major private equity funds that started in the 1980s were dubbed “buy-out funds” because an early strategy involved buying public companies and selling the component divisions to increase the firm’s value. Such transactions were financed by a combination of debt and private equity. But buy-out strategies now represent a minority of PE investments. 

Over time, PE funds have expanded to investments in private companies aimed at providing capital to finance acquisitions, technology roll-out, marketing expansion, or improved manufacturing. 

As their investment strategies broadened, PE funds expanded their staff to include experienced operating experts. In effect, the PE firms went from being a source of financing to a multi-tiered, transformational capital partner, with staffs of experts able to help portfolio companies.

In general, an acquired company will remain in a private equity portfolio for a few years during which it is expected to grow in value to allow a profitable sale to a corporate acquirer, or to the public through a stock-market listing. 

The private equity industry has its share of critics. A recent example is Brendan Ballou’s book Plunder: Private Equity’s Plan to Pillage America. But Ballou’s tirades miss the point. Private equity on the whole has done so well because it has made businesses more efficient and better able to meet the needs of their customers.

A common complaint is that the transformation of portfolio companies under PE investment is sometimes unsuccessful, leaving a damaged company with substantial job losses. This sometimes happens. But transforming businesses is never easy or predictable. Poorly managed businesses fail sooner or later, and it is unlikely that the laggards would have succeeded without PE involvement.

Evidence of benefits

With many years of experience in the industry, I believe that the PE industry enhances industrial productivity through the beneficial transformation of companies that need to evolve to meet new technological or competitive situations that threaten their future. Some examples from my experience may be helpful.  

Zilog was a unit of Exxon Enterprises that designed and manufactured semiconductor chips but proved unable to grow, as it competed with large companies with obsolete products and production plant. We bought the company and, with fresh capital, its capable chief executive officer transformed the company into the world’s leading supplier of low-cost controller chips for consumer products such as appliances and TV remote controllers.

Production was modernized and marketing expanded globally. Employment grew, as did revenues and profitability. The company had an IPO on Nasdaq. 

A second example of transformation is a spun-out unit of AT&T, Telcordia, that had developed much of the software used to operate American telephony. We acquired the company in partnership with another private equity firm.

The business had to be transformed from its roots in the old AT&T monopoly into a free-standing, competitive, and profitable business. This transformation took some years and involved some acquisitions, staff reductions in unproductive areas, and management changes. The company was eventually acquired by Ericsson, one of the three leading suppliers of telecommunications technology in the world. 

A third example involves the leading information-technology service company in Israel. Working with a local investment banker, Raviv Zoller, we became aware that while Israel was emerging as a leading venue for IT development, it lacked a company scaled up to exploit that capability globally. We funded the acquisition of several small but excellent Israeli software companies that became the foundation of Ness Technologies.

Under the leadership of Zoller, the firm acquired several companies in Europe and India and grew to the point that Ness became the largest IT service company in Israel along with IBM. The company had an IPO on Nasdaq and was profitable. 

These examples from three industries were chosen from many that illustrate what can be accomplished with focused private equity operating in open markets. In all cases, a combination of factors explained the success of the investments, but the selection of exceptional management was uppermost. All success stories start there. 

Henry Kressel is a technologist, inventor, author, and long-term private equity investor at Warburg Pincus. 

Continue Reading

Will George Goh qualify to run for President? It’s a matter of discretion, say lawyers

S$500 MILLION: A “HARD RULE?” Mr Ben Chester Cheong, a law lecturer at the Singapore University of Social Sciences, similarly said it was “not immediately clear” whether Mr Goh meets the shareholders’ equity requirement. He pointed out that in the past three financial years, Ossia International made profit after tax,Continue Reading

Commentary: Too early to assume Presidential Election will be contested

SHOWING COMPARABLE EXPERIENCE AND ABILITY

Before Mr Goh continues further on the campaign trail, it would be helpful if he could put out all relevant facts and also explain to voters how he intends to make his case, to enable the PEC to exercise its discretion to issue the much-coveted Certificate of Eligibility to him.

Thus far, Mr Goh has indicated that he will rely on this track record based on the number of companies he founded or incorporated, or of which he is a shareholder or original subscriber.

The Constitution places a premium on a prospective candidate’s “experience and ability” in running a large company. Acquiring and founding several much smaller companies, while reflecting a keen business acumen and also a function of wealth, is quite different from having the competence and expertise in running a profitable company of a significant size for at least three years.

It is for Mr Goh to show that his ownership of a stable of companies and being on numerous boards of directors is comparable to that of running a profitable company with S$500 million shareholder equity.

Parliament had accepted the recommendation of the Constitutional Commission of 2016, which was headed by Chief Justice Sundaresh Menon, to use shareholder equity instead of the previous market capitalisation criteria (understood as the total value of all shares of a company) as the assessment metric.

Simply put, shareholder equity refers to a company’s assets minus its liabilities and indicates the net profit that would remain if the company was sold or liquidated at fair value. It is considered a more accurate estimate of a company’s net worth, as it does not fluctuate day to day based on the stock price, unlike market capitalisation.

In other words, shareholder equity is a better indicator of a company’s size and complexity.

DON’T RAISE FALSE HOPES

While there is hope yet for a spirited and contested Presidential Election, it might be too early to assume that every presidential hopeful is eligible to contest.

The stringent criteria, as explained in my earlier CNA commentary, ensure the president has, minimally, a track record demonstrating technical competence and expertise to discharge the functions and exercise the powers of the presidency appropriately and effectively.

This pre-qualification approach was established since 1991 to ensure that voters choose from a slate of qualified and suitable candidates. The act of casting a ballot is significant for a citizen’s expression of democratic choice and the electoral process enables candidates to gain a fair hearing from voters.

The PEC cannot be expected to bend the rules just so that there is a contest. Given the role and functions of the presidency, any presidential poll must have suitably qualified candidates. This ensures that the non-partisan head of state has exacting standards of ability, experience and integrity.

And though presidential hopefuls put themselves forward with the best intentions of serving Singapore and Singaporeans, they also have a moral responsibility not to raise false hopes among voters.

Eugene K B Tan is associate professor of law at the Singapore Management University and a former Nominated Member of Parliament.

Continue Reading

Businessman George Goh ‘confident’ of meeting criteria to run for President in Singapore

To stand in the election, Mr Goh has to first satisfy the criteria set out in the Constitution. For private sector candidates, they must have been, for three years or more, the chief executive of a company with shareholder equity of S$500 million or more.

A reporter also asked if Mr Goh was concerned that Ossia International was on the SGX watchlist. Companies are put on the list if they record pre-tax losses for the three most recently completed consecutive financial years and have an average daily market capitalisation of less than S$40 million over the last six months.

According to an Ossia announcement to SGX in December last year, the company had a pre-tax profit for the last three financial years, following “concerted efforts to increase its profitability”.

This fulfilled one of the requirements to be removed from the watchlist, the company said. However, the company did not have an average daily market capitalisation of S$40 million or more over the previous six months and had applied for an extension to meet the criteria for exiting the watchlist.

When asked if he was worried that Ossia International was on the SGX watchlist, Mr Goh said that he was not as Ossia was just one of his companies.

“This is only one of the companies, it’s not going to affect (my) eligibility,” he said.

Ossia International was trading at 0.18 cents on SGX at around noon on Tuesday.

Mr Goh was born in Negeri Sembilan, according to an interview with Chinese daily Lianhe Zaobao.

He has been living and working in Singapore since 1975, and became a Singapore citizen in 1990.

Married with four children, Mr Goh also co-founded the charity Border Mission and is a council member at the Red Cross Society, among other roles.

His wife, Madam Lysa Sumali, and his four children were at the ELD along with his supporters, who were mostly dressed in red. There were about 50 supporters present, Mr Goh’s media team said.

Mr Goh is the second person to declare his intention to run in the upcoming Presidential Election, after Senior Minister Tharman Shanmugaratnam.

Mr Tharman said on Sunday that he welcomes a contest, adding: “My whole approach is not to shy away from competition. It’s always been that way. It’s how I prove myself.” 

Continue Reading