iPhone app iPad app Android phone app Android tablet app More

Jeffrey Feldman

Jeffrey Feldman

Posted: April 30, 2009 05:49 PM

The Hedge Fund Smack Down in the Chrysler Bankruptcy


On the 101st day of his Presidency, Barack Obama finally slapped the hedge funds across the face like they deserved. 

In his statement about the Chrysler bankruptcy and subsequent restructuring into a "Chrysler-Fiat Alliance," President Obama made it perfectly clear that not all the stakeholders at the table stepped up in good faith for the good of the company or the good of the nation.  Some stakeholders were simply in it for themselves.   

Framing his statement about Chrysler in terms of "shared sacrifice," President Obama elaborated on "substantial financial contribution" of the Canadian government, the massive debtor-in-possession financing offered by the U.S. taxpayer, and the significant sacrifices made by the UAW to guarantee that Chrysler could emerge from bankruptcy a stronger more viable company in alliance with Italian automaker Fiat. 

But there were some parties, according to the President, who deserved mention only for their unwillingness to join the effort (emphasis added):

While many stakeholders made sacrifices and worked constructively in this process, some did not. In particular, a group of investment firms and hedge funds failed to accept reasonable offers to settle on their debt. In order to effectuate this alliance without rewarding those who refused to sacrifice, the U.S. government will stand behind Chrysler's efforts to use our bankruptcy code to clear away remaining obligations and emerge stronger and more competitive. (link) (video)

Yes, America. What we read in that statement is the first, high profile, no nonsense, slap across the face, ouch that hurts, there's plenty more where that came from, the law and the nation is on our side, Commander in Chief hedge fund smack down. 

May it be the first of many, many more to come.

When faced with the refusal of the hedge fund bond holders to accept 'reasonable offers'--most likely of a percentage-on-the-dollar equity swap in exchange for their debt portfolios--the Obama administration turned to the bankruptcy code to 'clear away remaining obligations,' thereby allowing the Chrysler deal to go through.  By Jove!  I think he's got it.

The beauty of the American bankruptcy courts is that these massive financial decisions will not take place in backrooms, but under the watchful eye of the courts. 

Already, though, there is griping.

Free Press reporter Tom Walsh sums up what the reactionary view of President Obama's facilitating the Chrysler deal will be:

By forcing Chrysler LLC to file for bankruptcy, President Barack Obama fired an unmistakable warning shot today toward General Motors Corp., its bondholders, its dealers, its suppliers, its unions and anyone else who didn't think Obama had the resolve to impose his will on the domestic automobile industry.

The message was this:

This president is not bluffing about bankruptcy. If he's willing to use the big stick on Chrysler, there's no reason to think he'll balk at forcing GM there too.

He's serious about sacrifice. Whether you're a labor unionist who thinks Obama owes you for supporting his election campaign, or a Wall Street sharpie who thinks you can cut a better deal by holding out and maneuvering in court, you've got to swallow hard and cough up more than you'd like. (link)

Actually, the President's message was this:  when labor, management, and taxpayers of multiple nations have stepped up to bat, the American public will not be held hostage by hedge fund managers stalling for profits.

That is the message.  And it is a message Americans have been waiting patiently to hear.

Anyone who reads the public details of the Chrysler restructuring sees a plan that will ultimately benefit those who sacrificed for and believed in the company.  While bankruptcy is sobering, and symbolically frightening for such a large corporation, news that the President faced down the hedge funds in favor of working families and communities should help beleaguered states like Michigan feel better about the bumpy road they are facing.

While they reap profits obscene enough to make Nineteenth Century robber barons pound their fists, a remarkable number of Americans still do not know how much financial power has been concentrated into a few hands as a result of the hedge funds.

Of course, the bigger issue is not the potential of large investment firms and hedge fund bond holders to hold up the GM restructuring, but their problematic role in the banking crisis.  The Obama administration has structured a bank recovery plan that depends very heavily on hedge funds doing the right thing--on their stepping up to make shared sacrifice.  Even though these hedge funds would reap huge, government subsidized profits for doing so in the long run, the bank recovery plan has not yet taken off.  Shared sacrifice there has not been.

Will Obama face down these same parties to move other industries forward and, most importantly, to get the bank recovery rolling? 

So stand strong, Mr. President!  Rest assured that millions of Americans are hoping for a lot more hedge fund smack downs.

(cross posted from Frameshop)

Follow Jeffrey Feldman on Twitter: www.twitter.com/JeffreyFeldman

On the 101st day of his Presidency, Barack Obama finally slapped the hedge funds across the face like they deserved.  In his statement about the Chrysler bankruptcy and subsequent restructuring ...
On the 101st day of his Presidency, Barack Obama finally slapped the hedge funds across the face like they deserved.  In his statement about the Chrysler bankruptcy and subsequent restructuring ...
 
 
  • Comments
  • 120
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2 3 4  Next ›  Last »  (4 total)
07:07 AM on 05/02/2009
The Contracts Clause, the constitutional prohibition against laws "impairing the obligation of contracts" is in Section 10 of Article I, but it applies to the states, not the federal government.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Shavano
01:23 PM on 05/02/2009
The Contracts Clause has been one of the most litigated clauses of the Constitution. For the first 140 years of our country, it pretty well limited what states could do to impair contracts both public and private, but during the 1930s the Supreme Court began to take a more pragmatic look at the clause and it lost much of the power it once held.

Probably the best explanation of what the Contracts Clause means in modern day was written in an opinion by Justice John Paul Stevens in Keystone Bituminous Coal Association v. DeBenedictis (1987), Stevens stated, “It is well‐settled that the prohibition against impairing the obligation of contracts is not to be read literally”.
02:27 PM on 05/02/2009
All you have to do is prove fraud, and all related contracts are invalidated. The Corporate Vail is pierced.
01:20 AM on 05/02/2009
Try telling your car lender that you want to pay only 10% of your loan and claim that they shouldnt be able to repo your car !!

Hedge funds and others who refused to bend over, own SECURED DEBT. take a lesson in contract law and then speak.

If this were a nation of laws, Chrysler should be made to sell assets to pay off secured lenders first. UAW has unsecured obligations. they should be back in the line not first.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Shavano
01:40 PM on 05/02/2009
This IS a nation of laws and the only way Chrysler would be made to sell off it's assets would be through a voluntary or involuntary Chapter 7 bankruptcy. If that were the case, the hedge funds would be seriously marginalized because they normally hold derivatives and leveraged combinations of debt and equity.

Since this is a voluntary Chapter 11, the hedge funds simply felt they could do better in bankruptcy than they were getting at the negotiating table. It's a gamble on their part, but it doesn't really matter unless they hold a strong debt position. The terms of their debt agreements, in terms of interest, length of return and other terms could be drastically altered. When the newly organize company re-emerges from Bankruptcy, all debt and equity holders will have quote "taken a bath" on their unrealized value. But, if the new company is strong and profitable, all invested parties stand to make money. In actuality, the equity holders can come out of this much better off than the secured lenders.

The outrage directed to the hedge funds is that a) they are a special group of investors allowed to do things regulated groups cannot; b) they are aggressive short-sellers and have caused much of the current problems, and c) they forced the lay offs of thousands of people much sooner than would otherwise be necessary, thereby helping to prolong and inflame the recession.
01:59 PM on 05/02/2009
short sellers dont bring down a company. They cant !! A company gets in bad shape by making bad choices. Short sellers just profit from it. Just like longs do when a company does well.

layoffs in the chrysler INEVITABLE. One of the biggest problems in airline sector is overcapacity. The companies make too much cars, employ too many people, have too many brands, have too many plants.

Contract the industry by 50%, reduce the number of viable players by 30%, industry profits will return.
09:41 PM on 05/01/2009
Hedge funds make more from TARP if companies fail.

AIG swaps guarantee them.

really.
08:47 PM on 05/01/2009
The small hedge funds were obeying the law that requires they meet their fiduciary duty to their investors.
The only reason the bigger banks took the bad deal is because they are TARP recipients, and had to do what CEO Obama told them.

That Obama pilloried them for this is appalling. Seriously, it's really bad. It goes against the rule of law, and it discourages investors from investing--the opposite of what we need to be doing in a recession.

I repeat--what Obama said is extremely appalling.
09:02 PM on 05/01/2009
Sorry, but I'm just flabbergasted. Why would anyone want to invest in anything that Obama gets his hands on, when he could arbitrarily force them to take a bad deal?

Discouraging investment is the road to depression. I'm starting to think that Obama really WANTS the economy to do worse. That's what his actions say. Is this some kind of warped nostalgia for the 30s, or what? it's inexplicable.
photo
CCverve
And where are those Iraqi Oil Revenues again?
01:22 PM on 05/02/2009
Your Argument is absolute garbage and evidence of the very self serving reasons we are in the mess we are in today. Risk /reward is the name of the game. If the secured debt holders of Chrysler Bonds wanted the full backing of the US government they should have brought T bills and taken the lesser yield . Otherwise you are only 1st to be saved on a sinking ship. The operative word being sinking...Restructuring of debt is done every day. The Unions complied, stockholder common and preferred complied,Fiduciarys are responsible to prevent the lesser of evil. Why would the bondholders seek to holdout and salvo the ship? OR is it that the Hedge funds you cry for are holding Chrysler Credit Default swaps?
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Shavano
01:57 PM on 05/02/2009
This demonstrates a fundamental misunderstanding of the rule of law, contract law, corporate law and bankruptcy law. While the hedge fund managers, as well as every other party at the table, has a fiduciary duty to their investors is irrelevant to the discussion. One would assume that everyone there was acting in such a way.

That being said, there are many ways to do the "best thing" for your investors. In this case, the hedge fund managers are gambling that they'll do better in bankruptcy than what they were going to get at the negotiating table, while others were less willing to take that risk.

Berating the hedge funds may be deserved because, they are unregulated groups of very wealthy investors whose tactics are thought by many to have been a major cause of the economic problems we're suffering today and they were willing to force the lay off of more than 20,000 people much sooner than necessary, thereby deepening and prolonging the current crisis.

When all is said and done, the hedge funds may have done a great disservice to their shareholders as it will be because of actions like this that they will be saddled with extremely strong regulations or forced out of existence all together when new regulatory laws are enacted.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
02:09 PM on 05/04/2009
Do you really think that a judge would put junior debt ahead of senior debt the way Obama is trying to do? "because of actions like this that they will be saddled with extremely strong regulations or forced out of existence all together when new regulatory laws are enacted."
Apparently you think the hedge funds should let their investors who own senior debt be ripped off so that they won't be punished by Obama for refusing to pay to his extortion racket. What happened to rule of law? You must be a lobbyist. The law is what I pay the politicians to say it is.
06:34 PM on 05/01/2009
anyone who thinks the bondholders will do worse under the bankruptcy court simply doesn't understand basic bankruptcy law.And,yes,I suppose the President can try to exert pressure on who ever oversees this.I don't know what he'd do.But I do know what would happen to the bond markets if the POTUS does try something like this.
I read a comment the two things the President didn't understand or learn in college were economics and history.But I think even Joe Biden is smart enough to avoid this.
04:56 PM on 05/01/2009
I just read this article again and realized my first comment wasn't nearly pithy enough - you are dead wrong on just about everything you say. While the President may feel the offer to bondholders was "reasonable", that was simply not the case. In bankrupcty court, the bondholders will do better because they will be out from under the heavy-handed political wrangling that has been driving the whole auto industry restructuring. The rule of law will prevail, as it should, and the bondholders will do better in bankruptcy court because they are "secured" creditors.
04:47 PM on 05/01/2009
With all due respect to you and the President of the United States, neither of you understands the capitalist system and our laws regarding priority of claims on companies both private and public. So let me lay it our for you. If a company goes through financial restructuring, the shareholders get wiped out. Secured creditors are at the top of the food chain since they have company assets to them. All other unsecured creditors (including the UAW in this case) have to settle for cents on the dollar. The hedge funds and other creditors refused to be bullied out of their position of strength and thought bankruptcy was a better option to recover more money. They have a fiduciary responsiblity (your probably don't understand what that means) to maximize their return to the holders of the debt. To do otherwise would open themselves up to a lawsuit. President Obama wants to use his position to reward workers and unsecured creditors for political purposes, contrary to how the way these claims are usually sorted out. If you don't like this, you will have to change our securities laws.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Clayton139
GOP-R's Are 4Rich, Corporations NOT People!
05:25 PM on 05/01/2009
Well Said !

I still think we need Regulation, Regulation, Regulation,
of Hedge Funds and all of Wall Street !
They need Regulation Restructuring of Wall Street just like the Auto Industry !

We do need to start seeing it Mr. Obama ! ! ! Transparency also !
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Shavano
01:13 PM on 05/02/2009
Secured creditors are at the top of the food chain. However, there are many different types of secured creditors. At the top of the so-called food chain are those secured by the actual assets of the company, those lenders made concessions because they want to see the emerging company survive and they have no interest in owning inventory, machinery and buildings and want the company to avoid Chapter 7. In Chapter 11, concessions are made by all equity and debt holders in a move to keep the company solvent. Nobody wants to end up with "cents on the dollar" which is what would happen in Chapter 7. While the value of their investments will definitely decline, the equity holders can actually come out better than the debt holders in the long run (assuming a successful turn around).
We have no understanding of the position of the hedge funds with regard to Chrysler, but I'd be surprised if they are lenders secured by the hard assets of the corporation. Since they would normally be bond, derivative or preferred shareholders, an equity position with more security than a simple shareholder, they stand to be smacked down in bankruptcy as well as everyone else. They're gambling they would get a better deal in bankruptcy than they were able to negotiate, and because hedge funds are most notably aggressive short sellers, figured this would give the time to hedge their bets on Chrysler and pick up some short-term bucks.
03:03 PM on 05/01/2009
The hedge funds and individual investors will be a lot better off in bankruptcy court unless the federal government exerts undue pressure on the judge and other participants. How come the UAW gets 55% of the restructured company when they are the one most responsible for Chrysler's downfall? How come the rule of law means so much in the overhyped torture memo case and does not mean crap in the Chrysler bankruptcy? Just more selective liberal outrage.
11:53 PM on 05/01/2009
enochsmoky:
"How come the UAW...when they are the one most responsible "
Typical pure (R) bu11ch1t.

Chrysler management is almost solely responsible for the fate of the corporation. Unions have almost no voice in either the tactical or strategic operations of the company at any time.
Long range and day to day engineering and production management, material provision, future planning and marketing strategy, financial decisions (short and long), debt ratios, et al., any and all of it is strictly a management function in most corporations.
A union has little to nothing to do with any of that, they bear some responsibilty for production quantity and quality, little more, and of course they bargain for a good deal for their members within the parameters set largely by management. The average worker bee just comes in and does as guided and instructed. Mid to upper management on the other hand set virtually all policies that guide the path of the almighty corporation.

Y'all (R party goposaurs, true believers) always remind me of that currently popular cockatoo, Snowball. The RW media Wurlitzer fires up a tune and y'all start shuckin' an' jivin'. Birdbrains.
02:31 PM on 05/01/2009
Hedge funds are a big part of the auto industry problems..It isnt the little guy ,its the CEOs
01:58 PM on 05/01/2009
STOP SWAPS!

What do swaps have to do with this?

Hedge funds stand to make more money from TARP money

via AIG Credit Default Swaps,

they took out to protect their Bonds,

than the current value of the bonds themselves.

Really.

http://www.businessweek.com/lifestyle/content/apr2009/bw20090424_731357.htm?chan=top+news_top+news+index+-+temp_top+story

our money used to destroy main street

so Banksters can gamble.

The link is about GM, but you be sure Chrysler is getting the same treatment from Hedge gamblers.
01:34 PM on 05/01/2009
A smack down? Are you kidding? A verbal comment instead of taking control? Chrysler is now in bankruptcy court, far removed from federal intervention.

The hedgies will make out like the banksters they are in bed with. The rising unemployed, un-insured, newly homeless, newly penalised, will lose more and more.
01:02 PM on 05/01/2009
Good post. For some good (and sad) reading, see the latest issue of The Atlantic.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
FogBelter
Illegitimis non carborundum
12:57 PM on 05/01/2009
Frankly, Mr. Feldman, I think the Hedge Funds didn't help with Chrysler because they can't help with Chrysler. The Financial System is a closed system and the toxic assets were floating between Wall Street, the Banks, and ... the Hedge Funds. The only difference is the health of Hedge Funds, thanks to deregulation and lack of transparency, is difficult to ascertain. The Hedge Funds claim they are healthy, but they are counterparties to all this CDS garbage too. In addition their assets are likely as toxic as those that are vexing the Banks. So, I don't necessarily see this snub of the Chrysler deal as an act of hubris, more a case of the Hedge Funds tryng to save their own hides with a little kickback from the government. I'm sure we will see the truth behind the Hedge Funds soon enough, for the economy is still heading south and there is really no reason for that to change.
12:25 PM on 05/01/2009
News flash - hedge funds and other investors exist to make a profit. Why should they step up to the plate to take a multi-billion dollar haircut? Bankruptcy or not, Chrysler and GM are doomed. At least the private investment community has the good sense to know when to cut their losses.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Nomccain
12:21 PM on 05/01/2009
We are looking down upon the possible end of capitalism as we have known it IF this nation's greedy citizens and manipulative investors don't begin to think of their country first and put an end to all dishonest and greedy trading and investing. The system will only work for all of us so long as there's some form of integrity and honesty and that seems to have given way to unbridled greed and corruption. Personally, I have my doubts whether this industry can control and regulate itself and if not, then the only option left is government intervention and controls. We cannot simply set on our butts any longer and let these greedy peoplel destroy our country. We'd better pass and resurrect some effective controls and laws N OW to deal with these people which demands some respect and caution on their part if not honesty. If we're not careful, all of us are going to wind up with NOTHING!
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
vippy
Carpe Diem!
01:31 PM on 05/01/2009
I don't agree. They will continue with the speculation on oil and food - necessities we need for life!