RPHYX / RSIVX: New commentary explains mistakes that resulted in credit losses I’ve a different take on the Riverpark commentary. I’ve had an unwanted degree of familiarity for some time, with Verso, Newpage and the now-merged entity, due to my ‘day-job’. (and please excuse me, a lot of this is based on recollection). Riverpark’s explanation of the problems at Verso are incongruous with my perception/experience with them.
(Old-) Verso and the merged Verso have been bleeding cash perpetually. Without the merger, Verso would probably likely have had a “corporate event” already. Newpage itself, had entered, then emerged from BK a few years ago. Its trip through BK, allowed Newpage to de-lever somewhat. So along comes Verso, somewhat like a parasitic organism to extract Newpage’s cash to prolong its own existence.
Riverpark’s commentary states that Verso has “exceeded expectations with respect to achieving synergies (of the merger)”. I can tell you with certainty that is a (Verso-) management talking point they put out when their horrific Q2-2015 results came out. – Trying to seduce investors to have faith in a management team, DESPITE the poor results. Riverpark is just parroting Verso’s earnings release/presentation materials, presumably taking it at face value. I viewed the “exceeding expectations” comment from Verso as an indictment --- if they were ahead of the curve in terms of slashing costs, and STILL their reported results were so poor, then they must REALLY be in trouble – and presumably the low-hanging fruit of the synergies has been done. (So not much more to be done to help them.)
As part of the merger (which, I believe closed in January) they did some type of bond exchange. Seem to recall the effect of it was to cram down a principal haircut on some bondholders. In return, the bondholders got a token lump-sum cash-out payment (further draining the merged entity of needed liquidity!!), and higher interest rates on the “new” bonds, some/much of it PIK, not cash. Possibly also a lightening of covenants. Why would you want to lend to a borrower who is doing a principal haircut of its debt? Isn’t that a major red-flag?
A key problem is ownership – Verso is controlled by private-equity firm Apollo. If memory serves, Apollo had large (likely controlling) stakes in both Newpage and Verso. Apollo has a particularly ugly history of asset-stripping companies which it controls, leaving them debt-hobbled to such a degree that servicing the debts eventually becomes impossible. The (predictable-) outcome occurs frequently enough with Apollo, that I view it as a standard Apollo business model. I’ve seen them play this game time and again. Verso, like Apollo’s prior ‘projects’ need not face bankruptcy – all that needs to happen is for Apollo to a)buy a substantial amount of Verso’s bonds at the steep discount provided by Mr. Market, then b) surrender it to Verso in return for equity. In this way, Verso could de-lever. It’s remaining bonds would no doubt substantially rebound in price, lowering its cost of capital.
But doing so, is not in Apollo’s playbook. They extract cash, they don’t contribute cash. I could readily cite other ‘red flags’ over the past year on Verso, but am running long. Attributing Verso’s problems to the regulators is diverting blame. By the way, why didn’t Riverpark mention Apollo, its control of Verso, and its sordid history with other investments?
I’ve a small ‘stub’ holding in RPHYX, having sold most of it earlier in the year as junk spreads kept widening. At that time, also sold a ‘starter position’ in RSIVX which was doing nothing. I was contemplating adding to my RPHYX position shortly, as I suspect junk may continue to be buoyed. Frankly, I’d no idea Verso was a significant holding of Riverpark’s. That it was (is ?) is troubling to me, given my familiarity with Verso -- Verso was never (in the past 3 years) a credit that a prudent portfolio manager would own – at least not without hedging it (possibly by shorting the equity).
After reading the Riverpark commentary, I am rather dis-inclined to add to my Riverpark position at this time. Their explanation of Verso is absent some critical understanding of what they invested my money in. Verso should have been a VERY EASY problem to keep out of the portfolio.
Sequoia Defends Valeant + Valeant's Pharmacy Dropped by Express Scripts and CVS Investor Ackman defends Valeant in 4-hour conference call
By Dean Starkman latimes.com
The brash billionaire activist investor, best known in California for his scorched-earth campaigns against Herbalife Ltd. and the management of drugmaker Allergan Inc., staged a high-stakes conference call to defend his latest cause: his huge investment in Valeant Pharmaceuticals International Inc.
Early last year, Ackman teamed up with Valeant in a bid to buy Allergan, the Irvine maker of Botox and other skin care products.
The bitter fight — including short-lived lawsuits — eventually sent Allergan into the arms of Irish firm Activis. Pershing Square walked away with a reported gain of more than $2 billion.
On Friday, Herbalife offered mock sympathy to Ackman over Valeant's woes.
"Unfortunately we have a great amount of experience in dealing with activist short-sellers," said Alan Hoffman, an Herbalife executive vice president. "We're happy to give Ackman some advice if he needs it."
In his long talk, Ackman answered nearly 200 questions sent by email from investors and reporters. But even as he talked, shares continued to fall. The stock has lost 63% of its value in the past three months, 48% of it this month. It lost $17.73, or 17.7% Friday, to $93.77 in U.S. trading.
Pershing Square's roughly 6% stake in Valeant represents one the largest positions in the $16-billion New York hedge fund operation.
Longtime Ackman-watchers said the conference call — so mobbed by investors and financial reporters that the call-in system suffered technical snafus — was emblematic of a high-risk, high-wire career made up of big bets punctuated by a series of dramatic public confrontations.
Ackman's investing style, while often riveting, is also source of frustration for his investors, said Erik Gordon, a professor at the University of Michigan's Ross School of Business.
"There are two Bill Ackmans," he said. "The public sees him as a guy who's obstinate to the point of ridiculous. Investors see him as a guy who can make them a lot of money. Their aggravation comes when they think about whether he could make them a lot more money if he wasn't so obstinate."
http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-ackman-investments-20151031-story.htmlhttps://www.google.com/finance?q=OTCMKTS:PSHZF&ei=fSI0VsjcA6W3iAKw_pDAAg
Oppenheimer International Small Company Fund is changing its name @The Shadow: Thanks for posting, did not know this. I have this fund, my best performing fund ytd, I can certainly see why it changed its name and focus to include mid caps. It is a low turnover fund, which means many of its holding outgrow the small cap range over time , and with assets over $
5B they run out of small caps to buy. Its a keeper :)
Mutual Fund Ladder (vs a CD Ladder) I asked a question as part of a different thread, but thought it worthy of its own limelight.
Here's part of that thread:
rphyx-rsivx-new-commentary-explains-mistakes-that-resulted-in-credit-losses@David_Snowball commented on a possible alternative to RPHYX or RSIVX :
"...the best bogey I've got is Osterweis Strategic Income (OSTIX), which Mr. Sherman considers a legitimate peer. In their worst stretch, it took them nine months to recover from a drawdown. Since OSTIX is still below its previous high, the drawdown underway now might last longer. So maybe this is your "in a year or two" money, which implies judging performance over a couple year cycle."This got me thinking and I commented back to David:
"Just picking up on your thoughts for OSTIX as part of someone's "in a year or two" money. I went a bit further and added other time frames as well as other fund considerations to create kind of a "fund ladder"."For Less than 1 year money - PSHDX, BSBSX, FOSIX,
For 1 year money - RPHYX or RSIVX...or instead, maybe FIRJX or DLSNX
For 1-2 year money - OSTIX,
For 3-5 year money - PONDX, FAGIXAnyone have thoughts on what your "fund ladder" might consist of?"
