David Stowell

Stowell, David and Vishwas Setia. 2014. Quintiles IPO. Case 5-413-756 (KEL843).

Quintiles Transnational Holdings Inc., the largest global provider of biopharmaceutical development and commercial outsourcing services, grew its revenue at a CAGR of 7.3% and EBITDA at 13.9% between 2008 and 2012.

The case is set in December 2012–April 2013, when the majority of the firm was owned by founder Dennis Gillings and four private equity firms (Bain Capital, TPG Capital, 3i Capital and Temasek Life Sciences) after it was taken private in a management-led buyout in 2003 and a subsequent buyout in 2008. Five years after the second buyout, the private equity firm owners were looking to monetize their positions and considered different strategic alternatives: M&A sale to strategic or financial buyers, IPO, or capital restructuring through special dividends.

Students will step into the role of an associate at the lead investment bank working with Quintiles. They must consider the case information and determine an IPO strategy, process, potential conflicts, and valuation.

Stowell, David and Evan Meagher. 2008. Investment Banking in 2008 (A): Rise and Fall of the Bear. Case 5-308-507(A) (KEL378).

Gary Parr, deputy chairman of Lazard Frères & Co. and Kellogg class of 1980, could not believe his ears. “You can’t mean that,” he said, reacting to the lowered bid given by Doug Braunstein, JP Morgan head of investment banking, for Parr’s client, legendary investment bank Bear Stearns. Less than eighteen months after trading at an all-time high of $172.61 a share, Bear now had little choice but to accept Morgan’s humiliating $2-per-share, Federal Reserve-sanctioned bailout offer. “I’ll have to get back to you.”

Hanging up the phone, Parr leaned back and gave an exhausted sigh. Rumors had swirled around Bear ever since two of its hedge funds imploded as a result of the subprime housing crisis, but time and again, the scrappy Bear appeared to have weathered the storm. Parr’s efforts to find a capital infusion for the bank had resulted in lengthy discussions and marathon due diligence sessions, but one after another, potential investors had backed away, scared off in part by Bear’s sizable mortgage holdings at a time when every bank on Wall Street was reducing its positions and taking massive write-downs in the asset class. In the past week, those rumors had reached a fever pitch, with financial analysts openly questioning Bear’s ability to continue operations and its clients running for the exits. Now Sunday afternoon, it had already been a long weekend, and it would almost certainly be a long night, as the Fed-backed bailout of Bear would require onerous negotiations before Monday’s market open. By morning, the eighty-five-year-old investment bank, which had survived the Great Depression, the savings and loan crisis, and the dot-com implosion, would cease to exist as an independent firm. Pausing briefly before calling CEO Alan Schwartz and the rest of Bear’s board, Parr allowed himself a moment of reflection. How had it all happened?

Stowell, David and Stephen Carlson. 2009. A Tale of Two Hedge Funds: Magnetar and Peloton. Case 5-308-508 (KEL402).

Hedge fund Magnetar Capital had returned 25 percent in 2007 with a strategy that posed significantly lower risk to investors than the S&P 500. Magnetar had made more than $1 billion in profit by noticing that the equity tranche of CDOs and CDO-derivative instruments were relatively mispriced. It took advantage of this anomaly by purchasing CDO equity and buying credit default swap (CDS) protection on tranches that were considered less risky. Now it was the job of Alec Litowitz, chairman and chief investment officer, to provide guidance to his team as they planned next year’s strategy, evaluate and prioritize their ideas, and generate new ideas of his own. An ocean away, Ron Beller was contemplating some very different issues. Beller’s firm, Peloton Partners LLP, had been one of the top-performing hedge funds in 2007, returning in excess of 80 percent. In late January 2008 Beller accepted two prestigious awards at a black-tie EuroHedge ceremony. A month later, his firm was bankrupt. Beller shorted the U.S. housing market before the subprime crisis hit, and was paid handsomely for his bet. After the crisis began, however, he believed that prices for highly rated mortgage securities were being unfairly punished, so he decided to go long AAA-rated securities backed by Alt-A mortgage loans (between prime and subprime), levered 9x. The trade moved against Peloton in a big way on February 14, 2008, causing $17 billion in losses and closure of the firm.

Stowell, David and Tim Moore. 2007. McDonald's, Wendy's, and Hedge Funds: Hamburger Hedging. Case 5-106-006 (KEL181).

Are hedge funds heroes or villains? Management of Blockbuster, Time Warner, Six Flags, Knight-Ridder, and Bally Total Fitness might prefer the “villain” appellation, but Enron, WorldCom, Tyco, and HealthSouth shareholders might view management as the real villains and hedge funds as vehicles to oust incompetent corporate managers before they run companies into the ground or steal them through fraudulent transactions. Could the pressure exerted by activist hedge funds on targeted companies result in increased share prices, management accountability, and better communication with shareholders? Or does it distract management from its primary goal of enhancing long-term shareholder value?

Stowell, David and Matthew Raino. 2007. The Toys “R” Us LBO. Case 5-107-002 (KEL168).

The case simulates the experience of a private equity investor evaluating a potential investment, requiring the student to: (1) determine the risks and merits of an investment in Toys “R” Us, (2) evaluate the spectrum of returns using multiple operating model scenarios, and (3) identify strategic actions that might be undertaken to improve the risk/return profile of the investment. The case also discusses trends and participants in the private equity industry.

Stowell, David and Theron McLarty. 2009. Porsche, Volkswagen, and CSX: Cars, Trains, and Derivatives. Case 5-209-250 (KEL417).

Family members knew something was very wrong when Adolf Merckle, who had guided the family holding company, VEM Vermögensverwaltung GmbH, through dozens of successful investments, left the house one afternoon in January 2009 and failed to return. That night their fears were confirmed when a German railway worker located Merckle’s body near a commuter train line near his hometown of Blaubeuren, about a hundred miles west of Munich.

It was no secret that the recent financial crisis had taken a toll on Merckle’s investments. He was known in Germany as a savvy investor, but had lost hundreds of millions of Euros after being caught on the wrong side of a short squeeze of epic proportions involving Volkswagen stock. This was not the only large bet against that company’s stock. A number of hedge funds, including Greenlight Capital, SAC Capital, Glenview Capital, Tiger Asia, and Perry Capital, lost billions of Euros in a few hours based on their large short positions in Volkswagen’s stock following the news on October 26, 2008, that Porsche AG had obtained a large long synthetic position in Volkswagen stock through cash-settled options. In the next two days, this short squeeze produced a fivefold increase in Volkswagen’s share price, as demand for shares from hedge funds exceeded the supply of borrowable shares.

Stowell, David and Peter Rossmann. 2007. Freeport-McMoRan: Financing an Acquisition. Case 5-407-751 (KEL345).

Freeport-McMoRan’s acquisition of Phelps Dodge created the world’s largest publicly traded copper company. JPMorgan and Merrill Lynch advised the acquirer and arranged $17.5 billion in debt financing and $1.5 billion in credit facilities. In addition, these two firms underwrote $5 billion in equity capital through simultaneous offerings of Freeport-McMoRan common shares and mandatory convertible preferred shares. These financings created an optimal capital structure for the company that resulted in stronger credit ratings. The activities of the equity capital markets and sales groups at the underwriting firms are explored and the structure and benefits of mandatory convertible preferred shares is explained.

Stowell, David, Evan Meagher and Rebecca Frazzano. 2008. Investment Banking in 2008 (B): A Brave New World. Case 5-308-507(B) (KEL380).

In recent years Lehman Brothers, one of the five largest investment banks in the United States, had grown increasingly reliant on its fixed income trading and underwriting division, which served as the primary engine for its strong profit growth. The bank had also significantly increased its leverage over the same timeframe, going from a debt-to-equity ratio of 23.7x in 2003 to 35.2x in 2007. As leverage increased, the ongoing erosion of the mortgage-backed industry began to impact Lehman significantly and its stock price plummeted.

Unfortunately, public outcry over taxpayer assumption of $29 billion in potential Bear losses made repeating such a move politically untenable. The surreal scene of potential buyers traipsing into an investment bank’s headquarters over the weekend to consider various merger or spin-out scenarios repeated itself once again. This time, the Fed refused to back the failing bank’s liabilities, attempting instead to play last-minute suitors Bank of America, HSBC, Nomura Securities, and Barclay’s off each other, jawboning them by arguing that failing to step up to save Lehman would cause devastating counterparty runs on their own capital positions.

The Fed’s desperate attempts to arrange its second rescue of a major U.S. investment bank in six months failed when it refused to backstop losses from Lehman’s toxic mortgage holdings. Complicating matters was Lehman’s reliance on short-term repo loans to finance its balance sheet. Unfortunately, such loans required constant renewal by counterparties, who had grown increasingly nervous that Lehman would lose the ability to make good on its trades. With this sentiment swirling around Wall Street, Lehman was forced to announce the largest Chapter 11 filing in U.S. history, listing assets of $639 billion and liabilities of $768 billion. The second domino had fallen. It would not be the last.

Stowell, David and Jeremy Hartman. 2007. Cerberus and the U.S. Auto Industry. Case 5-107-009 (KEL315).

This case explores how and why GM became a major user of private equity and hedge fund capital, as well as the risks and rewards of these new relationships. The Cerberus transaction, audacious in both its size and complexity, is explored in detail. What were the alternatives for GM, and what risks and opportunities lay ahead for both parties? This case further investigates the benefits, disadvantages, and potential conflicts of interest that evolved as GM’s many suppliers increasingly embraced low-cost, nontraditional financing from hedge funds.

Stowell, David and Deepa Pai. 2009. Technical Note: No Assets, No Products, No Business Plan: Risks Associated with Special Purpose Acquisition Companies. Case 7-209-252 (KEL455).

A special purpose acquisition company (SPAC) is a blank check company that becomes incorporated and goes public with the intention of merging with or acquiring an undetermined company with the proceeds from an initial public offering (IPO). This process is often referred to as a “reverse IPO,” as the company collects investor capital before acquiring, merging, or even selecting a target company. Because there are no assets or operations at the time of investment, investors are essentially wagering on the potential future performance of a management team. The optionality embedded within a SPAC allows public investors to enter into a unique and sometimes profitable investment vehicle that appears to have limited downside risk. However, SPACs actually pose numerous risks that may not be self-evident to all but the sophisticated investor. With a total of 228 SPACs raising $35.8 billion of capital since 2003, this increasingly popular investment vehicle warrants further discussion of these underlying risks.

Stowell, David and Nicholas Kawar. 2014. H. J. Heinz M&A. Case 5-413-757 (KEL848).

During December 2012, Jorge Paulo Lemann, a co-founder and partner at 3G, proposed to Warren Buffett that 3G and Berkshire Hathaway acquire H. J. Heinz Company. Lemann and Buffett, who had known each other for years, jointly decided that the Heinz turnaround had been successful and that there was significant potential for continued global growth. 3G informed Heinz CEO William Johnson that it and Berkshire Hathaway were interested in jointly acquiring his company. Johnson then presented the investors’ offer of $70.00 per share of outstanding common stock to the Heinz board.

After much discussion, the Heinz board and its advisors informed 3G that without better financial terms they would not continue to discuss the possibility of an acquisition. Two days later, 3G and Berkshire Hathaway returned with a revised proposal of $72.50 per share, for a total transaction value of $28 billion (including Heinz’s outstanding debt).

Following a forty-day “go-shop” period, Heinz, 3G, and Berkshire Hathaway agreed to sign the deal. But was this, in fact, a fair deal? And what might be the future consequences for shareholders, management, employees, and citizens of Pittsburgh, the location of the company’s headquarters? Last, what was the role of activist investors in bringing Heinz to this deal stage?

Stowell, David and Paul Stowell. 2005. Kmart, Sears, and ESL: How a Hedge Fund Became One of the World's Largest Retailers. Case 5-205-250 (KEL133).

Within eighteen months of exiting bankruptcy, Kmart’s position was sufficiently strong to launch an acquisition of Sears, once the nation’s largest retailer, and also a core holding of ESL. This case touches on a number of compelling issues related to Kmart’s bankruptcy, restructuring, and rebirth under the control of ESL, a large hedge fund. The case can be used to outline the explosive growth in assets and influence of alternative investment managers, particularly LBO funds and hedge funds and the transition of some larger hedge funds from shorter-term trading strategies to longer-term plays on distressed debt, restructurings, and turn-arounds. The case lays out some of the key metrics that Eddie Lampert, head of ESL, had available to him as he made two decisions: first, in 2002, to amass a controlling stake in Kmart’s defaulted debt during the restructuring; and second, in 2004, to launch a takeover of Sears. The first deal illustrates the decision-making process for a financial buyer, including the downside protection of Kmart’s real estate holdings, while the second deal represents a traditional strategic acquisition, as Lampert in his new role as chairman and majority holder of Kmart sought out synergies in everything from the supply chain to human resources to cross-selling. The case illustrates the innovative use of real estate as a “hedge” for ESL in the event that the retail combination does not produce the required financial results. It also focuses on the role of investment bankers and the increasingly important position that hedge funds and LBO funds have carved out in the M&A market.

Stowell, David and Christopher D Grogan. 2006. The Best Deal Gillette Could Get? Proctor & Gamble’s Acquisition of Gillette. Case 5-206-251 (KEL183).

January 27, 2005, was an extraordinary day for Gillette’s James Kilts, the show-stopping turnaround expert known as the “Razor Boss of Boston.” Kilts, along with Proctor & Gamble chairman Alan Lafley, had just orchestrated a $57 billion acquisition of Gillette by P&G. The creation of the world’s largest consumer products company would end Kilts’s four-year tenure as CEO of Gillette and bring to a close Gillette’s 104-year history as an independent corporate titan in the Boston area. The deal also capped a series of courtships between Gillette and other companies that had waxed and waned at various points throughout Kilts’s stewardship of Gillette. But almost immediately after the transaction was announced, P&G and Gillette drew criticism from the media and the state of Massachusetts concerning the terms of the sale. Would this merger actually benefit shareholders, or was it principally a wealth creation vehicle for Kilts?