You're now on the archive server. Commenting has been disabled.
And, Subliminally, Here Come The LBOs
It is that time again: the latest version of the Goldman LBO model is circulating (the primer is below). The last time this was popular was April of 2007, right before the LBO bubble went "pop." Maybe this is the subliminal way for Goldman to advise their clients that PE deals are back. After all, as disclosed earlier, there is a lot of dry powder out there. Yet what is missing? A catalyst, in the form of Goldman screaming Ready, Steady, Go.
The primer is enclosed, and, as one can imagine, there is an associated excel model too, full of highly irrelevant EV and Debt/EBITDA multiples - relax, all of them are too high, yet somehow there are 100%+ IRR cases, although the companies likely have any financing already long locked up with GS in the case of a buyout.
»
- 3088 reads
- Printer-friendly version
- Send to friend
no mention of PICs; sadly this is innovation in america
When I was a boy scout, we learned not to put too much fuel (wood and leaves) on a new camp fire for fear of smothering it.
Is that even possible in the new normal stock, bond and private equity market?
You know what's great for the American economy? When corporate raiders buy perfectly functional companies that offer real jobs to real people, and then piledrive them into ground with debt so that a few guys in Manhatten can have some more money. And then laugh at the corpse as they walk away lighting cigars with $1000 bills.
What's a few thousand more people on the breadline, when you've got that third house, huh?
You should focus your ire where it is deserved. In the few situations where PE buys a firm and effectively "kills" it, its because management was, and had been so completely horrible, let the firm get so bloated, that the opportunity existed in the first place. There are, and have been many firms in America and elsewhere that employ WAY too many people, cutting jobs isn't exactly difficult. PE is not the devil, on the contrary, many (dare I say most) PE deals focus on increasing efficiency, nimbleness, etc at the target company, actions that incumbent/existing management could have done themselves with largely the same effects.
Great. Disco balls for everybody.
Hey Goldman, in case you don't remember - the 80's sucked.
While you are in fee generation mode, why not dig up Asher Edelman and the rest of the 80's corporate raiders just to get the hostile takeover juices flowing?
Here's a quick "What if?" I like to play.
We have some great documents being provided to ZH that give insight into economic research by various firms. It gives a glimpse into strategies at various firms and sparks further discussion on the investment topic.
Here we have a big ticket item from a firm with dubious connections into many state and federal branches of the U.S. government (maybe EMEA, but I havent researched that). GS has also made considerable daily profit during a timeframe when most firms are exiting markets, if existing at all.
With that being said, how do we know that the documents ZH receives with the GS letterhead is genuine? Not that I am looking to establish identifying the source, which could be as valid as they come. The eyes of the financial world are casting a shrewd eye on Goldman's connections, it's trading practices, and reputation during this economic market.
How do we know this is not disinformation let loose on purpose, knowing it will be posted anonymously on an underground blog and probably printed out and passed along to even more folks for a nice read over the weekend. Monday should be an interesting day.
Merely asking, "What if?"
Did you run out of tin foil?
This piece in and of itself is unremarkable and doesn't really present any views at all. In fact, what few are presented are relatively conservative and not "that" unreal, if at all.
are you posting the excel?
To zartan: this is just a primer on how to use an excel model to value a buyout, it isn't rocket science and no one would take even a minute out of their day to make a fake document like this, I think your jumping the gun here.
+1...better use of fakery would be using GS (other) letterhead to spout a positive analyst outlook on XYZ / penny stock. generic looking info
Another +1
I'm curious what one would have to smoke to think this is some big deal.
I'm looking forward to reading the WSJ's weekend edition featuring Lloyd Blankfein (judging from the report, perhaps it is lloyd.blankfein at gs dot com) and "why it's a good time to be at GS"
LB...the puppy dog ain't gonna let go. it. just. ain't. gonna.
Why not...marked the top last time!
Whatever happened to Lloyd Blankenstein's comment that some of what they do there has no economic or social value?! That feeling didn't last very long.
F'n a. Did the underpants gnomes write this?
Step 1. Steal Underpants
Step 2. ???
Step 3. Profit!
Actually, I believe that Step 2 was elucidated in passing by a more recent episode, viz: "Step 2. Wait for Baby Fark McGee-Zax's Space Cash to stoke inflation; underpants are a store of value."
I have watched LBO from the 70's Not pretty when I was a victom in 1978. Borderline evil sucking sound of capital since some have watched these cannibals for over 30 years. Difficult topic in any decade and you will never get me to admit there good 95 percent or more of the time. Working Corporate as I do we find synergys in our market to keep the bastards away and make there atempts as difficult as possible. I have seen and know many who had to survive this and for them people are thrown under the bus since avarice is just a game for there level of educational arrogated self worth.