Bloomberg Buying Bloomberg?
Blind trusts are popular with politicians: the idea is that the politician in question can't have any conflicts of interest with respect to his investments if he doesn't know what his investments are. As a result, you're not going to find blind trusts ever making the headlines: if everybody knows what the trust is investing in, then that defeats the purpose.
Yet:
A blind trust run by Mayor Bloomberg is willing to pay between $4.5 billion and $5 billion to buy Merrill Lynch's 20 percent stake in Bloomberg LP, sources tell The Post.
Bloomberg's job is mayor of New York, he's not a fund manager: the blind trust is run on his behalf, it's not run by him. But since the whole point of a blind trust is that the politician in question can't tell it what to invest in, what's going on here? I simply can't believe that the people actually running the trust would spend $5 billion on buying a 20% stake in Bloomberg LP without Bloomberg himself being involved in the decision.
It makes sense that decisions related to Bloomberg's ownership stake in Bloomberg LP might be exempt from the other blind trust rules. After all, since Bloomberg already owns 80% of the company, he's plenty conflicted on that front already.
But it also makes sense that the amount of money Bloomberg's willing to pay for the 20% of Bloomberg LP he doesn't already own would be affected by the amount of money he has at his disposal, the ease with which he can liquidate his assets, and the discount to fair value that he'd have to accept if he wanted to raise $5 billion in cash in a hurry. After all, even if you're a billionaire, coming up with that kind of money is non-trivial.
The numbers being bandied about by the Post would value Bloomberg LP (and, therefore, Bloomberg himself, if he owns all the company and has no debt to speak of) at somewhere between $22.5 billion and $25 billion. Forbes pegged Bloomberg's wealth at $11.5 billion this year, up from $5.5 billion last year. Next year, is that number going to double again?
(Of course, Bloomberg could, if he wanted, try to borrow the $5 billion, rather than pay in cash. Hey - maybe he could ask Merrill Lynch for a loan!)
- Finance Salaries: A Reply
- Dec 2 2008 8:07PM EST
- The Failed Subprime Clampdown
- Dec 2 2008 4:29PM EST
- Blame Citigroup's woes on the Citi-Travelers Merger
- Dec 2 2008 2:30PM EST
- Greenberg's Chutzpah
- Dec 2 2008 12:26PM EST
- Super-Seniors: The Last Word
- Dec 2 2008 12:04PM EST
- Pay Bankers Much Less
- Dec 2 2008 10:58AM EST
- Great Moments in Politics, California Edition
- Dec 2 2008 10:35AM EST
- Super-Seniors: Your Questions Answered
- Dec 2 2008 9:52AM EST
- What's a Super-Senior Tranche?
- Dec 1 2008 9:25PM EST
- Extra Credit, Monday Edition
- Dec 1 2008 6:29PM EST
- Zimbabwe: When Even the Central Bank Can't Keep Up
- Dec 1 2008 5:07PM EST
- Genius
- Dec 1 2008 4:14PM EST
- Adventures in Shopping, Black Friday Edition
- Dec 1 2008 3:55PM EST
- Endowments Dump Private Equity Stakes
- Dec 1 2008 3:22PM EST
- Ignoring the Stock Market
- Dec 1 2008 1:06PM EST
Categories
Links
- Email Felix Salmon
- Alphaville

- Marginal Revolution

- The Panelist

- FP Passport

- Overcoming Bias

- Andrew Leonard

- Barry Ritholtz

- Brad Setser

- Carbon Tax Center

- Calculated Risk

- Greg Mankiw

- Free Exchange

- Dean Baker

- Alexander Campbell

- Kash Mansori

- The Bayesian Heresy

- A Fistful of Euros

- John Quiggin

- Michael Mandel

- Lance Knobel

- Mark Thoma

- Dan Gross

- Curbed

- Streetsblog

- Chris Anderson

- Deal Journal

- MarketBeat

- DealBook

- DealBreaker

- Carl Bialik

- Michelle Leder

- Brad DeLong

- The Epicurean Dealmaker

- Naked Capitalism

- Ultimi Barbarorum

- Econospeak

- Fortune: Daily Briefing

- Financial Crookery










