Share This

Sunday, October 2, 2011

Hedge fund management, Value Partners; Malaysian a Hye Achiever in HK, eyes Penang projects

Image representing Value Partners as depicted ...Image via CrunchBase


Former The Star journalist Cheah makes it big in hedge fund management

By LIM AI LEE  sunday@thestar.com.my

PETALING JAYA: He is one of Asia’s most influential men in hedge funds but former journalist turned maverick investor Cheah Cheng Hye (pic below) has not forgotten his humble roots.

As a 12-year-old, he sold pineapples at a wholesale market in George Town after school, worked at a hawker stall and gave tuition to younger children to help support his siblings after his father died.

Today, Cheah runs Hong Kong’s largest investment powerhouse, managing US$9bil (RM28.7bil) worth of funds from investors worldwide. Last year, he became the first Asian to be invited to speak at the prestigious Graham and Dodd Breakfast event at Columbia University in New York.

The Penang-born businessman, who has been dubbed the Warren Buffett of the East, attributed part of his success to being “at the right place at the right time” and the other part, to his strong will to succeed due to his poor childhood.

Cheah, 57, said life was hard in his younger days.

“We never felt sorry for ourselves. We never expected the Government or anyone to help us. We accepted that the only way to improve was through self-help and luck,” he said in an e-mail interview from Hong Kong.

Despite excelling in his studies, the former Penang Free School student knew he could not afford to further his studies after Form Five.

So, he headed to The Star office in Weld Quay and landed a job – folding newspapers.

“We started work at 11pm and finished at 5am. Fortunately, after three weeks, I was recruited as a reporter,” he said, adding that he became a sub-editor and editorial writer within two years.

Cheah quit in 1974 and left for Hong Kong after receiving an offer from the Hong Kong Standard. He quickly adapted to his new environment and went on to become a financial journalist with the Asian Wall Street Journal and later, the Far Eastern Economic Review.

Cheah subsequently joined an investment company and in 1993, co-founded Value Partners Limited with his business partner Yeh V-nee, a Columbia University graduate.

The father of two said he would always appreciate Hong Kong for giving him numerous opportunities but admitted to feeling homesick for Malaysia. “I miss the good-natured people and the food.”



 Value Partners eyes Penang projects

By DAVID TAN  davidtan@thestar.com.my

GEORGE TOWN: Value Partners Ltd, a Hong-Kong based investment company founded by former The Star journalist Cheah Cheng Hye, is exploring investment opportunities in tourism and health-related projects in Penang.

Cheah, the chairman of Value Partners, told StarBiz that Penang could do more to attract tourists from Southern China.

“There exists a strong historical relationship between Southern China and Penang, which can be tapped to boost tourist arrivals from China to Penang.

Cheah: ‘We are now exploring tourism and healthcare-related projects.’ 
“We are now exploring tourism and healthcare-related projects that can attract Southern China tourists to come over.

“These would be sizeable projects, as we would not be interested in small undertakings,” he said.

Founded by Cheah in 1993, Value Partners manages about US$8bil worth of funds, with investments in China, the Asia-Pacific, Japan and Australia.

Cheah, 57, a former student of Penang Free School, worked as a journalist for The Star in Penang from 1971-1974.

He was speaking at the investPenang one-day seminar jointly organised by investPenang and ECM Libra Financial Group Bhd.

Also present was Penang Chief Minister Lim Guan Eng who delivered the keynote address.

ECM Libra chairman Datuk Seri Kalimullah Hassan said the seminar had attracted fund managers from India, the Philippines and Hong Kong, among other countries, who managed funds worth US$2bil (RM6.2bil) and above.

“They are exploring investment (opportunities) in healthcare, business process outsourcing (BPO), infrastructure, and tourism sectors.

“BPO (which) supports the legal and medical care business has the potential to grow in Penang, as the state has a pool of educated workforce to support BPO enterprises,” he said.

The companies that took part in investPenang included Religare Enterprises Ltd, an India-based financial services company with operations around the globe; Alliance Global, which is involved in the food and beverage, real estate, and quick service restaurants in the Philippines; and local companies such as YTL Corp Bhd, Multi-Purpose Holdings Bhd and SP Setia Bhd

Gamble that paid off

By LIM AI LEE  sunday@thestar.com.my

He took a chance leaving one island for another to seek his fortune but the dividends are paying off handsomely for Cheah Cheng Hye, one of Asia’s top fund managers.

WHEN he arrived at the Hong Kong harbour on a cargo steamship 37 years ago, Cheah Cheng Hye was almost broke, having scraped all his savings to pay for space to sleep in the cargo compartment.

He did not anticipate a long stay – all he wanted was to work, save money and return home to Penang. But the 20-year-old soon found a world of opportunities in the then British colony.

Today, Cheah, 57, is chairman and co-chief investment officer of Value Partners Limited, an investment company he co-founded in Hong Kong that manages global funds worth RM28.7bil. Last year, the company launched its Value Gold ETF (exchange-traded fund), the first and only gold ETF backed by physical gold bullion stored in Hong Kong.

In an exclusive interview with Sunday Star, Cheah talks about the turbulent global money market, growing up in old George Town and his affinity for two islands – one where he was born and the other where he now resides.

Q: You have been dubbed the Warren Buffet of the East. How do you feel about the tag? 

A: It is actually not an appropriate tag. Warren Buffett is much, much bigger than me. Anyway, the opportunities and challenges we have here in Asia are so different.

> Given the current global economic climate, what is your advice for fund investors? 

I think global financial markets have entered a very turbulent and difficult time. This difficulty may drag on for years. There is no easy solution because if you put money in the bank on deposit, you suffer from a negative real interest rate (i.e. inflation higher than the deposit rate).

My own solution is to have a highly diversified investment portfolio that is, however, over-weighted in certain sectors like China stocks, precious metals, energy, agriculture and companies with major brands or franchises.

>What made you decide to launch a gold ETF on the Hong Kong Stock Exchange? How is Value Gold ETF faring today?

I’ve been recommending gold and investing in it since the 1990s, because of my fear that governments around the world would end up printing too much money. After a year in operation, our gold ETF is now US$135mil (RM430mil) in size.

This is considered a huge success for a new fund. Our clients are from all over the world. We think inflows from clients in mainland China will grow significantly.

> How did you get into hedge funds? Do you have sleepless nights worrying about whether your funds are performing?

I was a financial journalist in Far East Economic Review and The Asian Wall Street Journal. In the late 1980s, I was offered a research position in a stock brokerage firm in Hong Kong and made a successful transition to investment analyst through self-learning.

Even during good times, my job is extremely stressful and I’ve been doing meditation for many years to reduce stress. I believe successful people must have a strong commitment to being mentally and physically fit, otherwise they would let down their clients and partners.

In the near future, the whole financial industry, including hedge funds, will face a difficult period. But over the mid- to long-term, the better quality funds will emerge stronger and bigger than now because there are lots of savings in the world to be managed.

It should be noted that people are less willing to leave their savings as simple bank deposits and are actually quite keen to try out high-performance investment products provided by fund management companies as an alternative.

> What do you hope to achieve?

We hope to transform Value Partners Group into a leading world-class asset management company. We don’t want people to think that Asian firms will always occupy a lower position than Western ones. Over the next 20 years, several world-class Asian fund managers will emerge because of the superior growth in our region.

> How do you maintain staff loyalty?

Value Partners has about 120 employees. During good years, we pay generous bonuses but we try to keep our fixed overheads low. Basically, our formula is to keep fixed salaries low and bonuses high. We find that younger people like the formula, because they share the profits of the business. In Hong Kong, we have a reputation for being a generous but demanding employer. Our firm has a strong corporate culture.

> What makes you successful?

To this day, I believe half my success is simply being in the right place at the right time. I consider myself a beneficiary of the Asian Economic Miracle and the opening of mainland China. Like everyone else, I make professional mistakes now and then, but each time the remarkable opportunities brought along by the two phenomena have allowed me to find the resources to overcome my errors and start again.

The other half of being successful comes from several factors. I believe one has to be diligent, humble and willing to learn. I sign my name “Learn” rather than my actual name, so that I always remind myself to keep on learning.

> How has your past shaped your future?

My strong will to succeed is probably due to my poverty-stricken childhood. When I look at pictures of myself taken in the 1960s and early 1970s, I realise I was so skinny because we never had enough food to eat.

My father died of illness when I was 12 and from then until I was 15, I sold pineapples seven days a week at my uncle’s store at the Sia Boey Market (now closed) in Penang. During weekdays, I went to the store after school finished at 1pm.

Our family house was sold after my father died and we lived in rented housing. The condition was very bad, so I avoided staying at home unless I was sick. My family had to keep moving because we couldn’t afford to pay the rent and faced eviction constantly. Our longest stay was in the Carnarvon Street area in old George Town. In the neighbourhood I lived in, drug addiction was a very big problem, but fortunately I stayed away from drugs.

When I was in Form Three, my bicycle was stolen at the Penang Library. It was a big disaster for me – the loss meant I could not go to school which was a 45-minute ride away. Luckily, my uncle gave me an old bicycle. Otherwise, I would have had to stop schooling.

In those days, modern medical care was a luxury that few could afford and people relied on religious charms, herbal medicines and folk remedies, which included eating dead cockroaches and drinking the urine of young boys.

In the 1967 “hartal” race riots in Penang, mobs armed with knives and bamboo poles killed people passing through our streets, and I witnessed those bloody scenes, which remain in my memory.

> What was your childhood ambition?

Find a job, which would allow me to sit in an office and avoid manual work. My mother wanted me to work as a chai hoo (Hokkien for clerk).

>What was it like reporting in the days before computers, mobile phones and traffic jams?
I joined The Star (Penang) in December 1971 right after finishing my last (MCE) exam paper. My first job, however, was not reporting but folding newspapers. Fortunately after three weeks, I was offered a reporter’s job that paid RM120 monthly.

In the early 1970s, every reporter had to own a motorcycle. Mine was a second-hand Honda S90, with a 90cc engine. Since I was a crime reporter, I relied on monitoring the police radio and various other means for news leads. A lot of initiative was required. Almost half our stories were based on self-generated ideas.

Within two years, I was promoted to sub-editor and editorial writer, so it became an office job. The Star’s office, originally in Weld Quay, Penang had moved to Pitt Street by the time I quit to leave for Hong Kong in August 1974.

> What would you have done if you had not become a journalist?

I have never really done any long-term planning for my career development. I just drifted from one situation to another, so I don’t know what might be a possible outcome if I had done things differently. I just responded to each opportunity as it came up.

But I think if I had had the opportunity to go to university, I would have ended up as an academic. My biggest hobby is reading and when I was young, I was very interested in politics and history. My interest in finance and investment was non-existent. I didn’t even bother to open an account in a bank until I lived in Hong Kong from 1974.

> How would you compare Penang and Hong Kong? 

The lifestyles are very different. In Penang, I am very comfortable in my hometown. Unfortunately, there has been a shortage of good career opportunities.

Hong Kong’s efficiency and high-opportunity environment suits me. I find Hong Kong people open-minded, with an admirable “can do” spirit towards life.

But I must admit, sometimes I’m still homesick for Malaysia. I miss the easy-going and good-natured friendliness of Malaysians and, of course, I think the food in Malaysia is the best in the world.

> Do you take time off for holidays?

I’m a workaholic and I work seven days a week.

>Is there anything else you wish for in life? 

I believe that the most basic human right is the right to be free from poverty. The fight against poverty deserves support from all of us. It is very painful for me when I come across children deprived of shelter and education because they come from poor families.

What’s PNB up to a takeover bid on Setia ? Leave it to the real businessmen!



A QUESTION OF BUSINESS By P. GUNASEGARAM  p.guna@thestar.com.my

Permodalan Nasional Bhd's surprise bid for SP Setia raises more questions than answers

IT must be great to have so much firepower at your fingertips. But it is also a huge responsibility. How do you get your target and keep it intact at the same time? It's the old question of having your cake and eating it too.

That's a dilemma that not just Permodalan Nasional Bhd (PNB) but many government-linked companies (GLCs) face. They have the money to buy over property companies but if they don't do it right, they stand the risk of losing the people behind these companies.

If the worst happens the staff leave, the company is unable to undertake its projects, quality of houses and other developments drop, launches get less imaginative, public perception deteriorates, and, ultimately, value gets destroyed.

By seeking to own the golden goose body and soul, it is sometimes killed. Occasionally, there is in the corporate world a very thin line between protecting and enhancing your investments and making a wrong move which may send their value plummeting down, if not immediately, in time.

The latest episode (see our cover story this issue) has raised eyebrows not least because of the manner in which PNB has made its bid for one of most respected and admired property companies in Malaysia, SP Setia.

PNB already has about a 33% stake in SP Setia but is seeking to raise this stake to over 50% by offering RM3.90 a share, about an 11% premium over the closing price before the announcement of its notice of takeover. It offered 91 sen per warrant, a premium of nearly 100%.

It has had its stake of just under 33%, the point at which a general takeover offer is triggered under the takeover code, since 2008 but pushed this to just over trigger point on Tuesday and announced its intention for a takeover the following morning.

The offer is conditional upon PNB getting control of SP Setia. PNB also announced its intention of keeping SP Setia listed by ensuring a shareholding spread even if it got more than 90% of the offer shares.



Initial calculations based on 75% control and acquisition of all warrants indicate that the takeover could cost PNB over RM3 billion, a lot of money for most private investors in Malaysia but a mere drop in the ocean for PNB which has over RM150 billion under management.

It's the second largest fund manager in the country after EPF which is twice as big with over RM300 billion in funds. But PNB is probably the largest equity investor in the country because of a much higher proportion of funds invested in equity. There is hardly a major listed company in Malaysia in which PNB does not have a stake.

The big puzzle is why has PNB launched this takeover offer which could potentially affect adversely the value of its quarry? What was PNB fearing? Was it just a matter of increasing its stake in a depressed market which undervalued SP Setia's assets or was there something else? And why did it not consult with senior management and shareholders even after its notice of takeover?

At this stage one can only conjecture on the answers and make educated guesses.

But first, what's wrong if PNB took a majority stake? Previously SP Setia had PNB as a major but not a majority shareholder. PNB did not intervene in management and had two board representatives. If the SP Setia board put up a proposal for shareholder approval, PNB cannot by itself stop it if other shareholders supported it. They include the Employees Provident Fund (EPF) with 13.4%, SP Setia president and CEO Tan Sri Liew Kee Sin with 11.26% and Kumpulan Wang Amanah Persaraan or KWAP with five per cent.

One must still note that the government-linked funds or GLFs already control over 51% of SP Setia. But with PNB alone poised to take over a 50% stake, feathers are being ruffled and questions are being asked as to what that means.

What would have been the ideal situation for SP Setia? Four factors would have contributed. An independent management, a good board which represented all parties, strong minority shareholders, and a diversified institutional base so that no shareholder dominated. The first three are pretty much in place but the fourth was not achieved because PNB had since 2008 been holding a stake of just under 33% and with two other GLFs, the stake came to over 50%. But was there a way of dispersing shareholding?

One deal being negotiated, it was reported, was for Sime Daby, a PNB company, to take a 20% stake through the issue of new shares in exchange for land banks. If it had come through, it would have helped to dilute PNB's shareholding. Still, Sime is related.

The underlying problem is this. GLFs and GLCs have lots of money and not many places to put them in. Good companies attract their attention but if they take control, and especially if they take management control as well, the move can destroy value.

Some of PNB's property purchase and privatisation acts in the past have not been particularly successful, if at all. The major reason is key staff leave after GLCs take control. That's a phenomenon that's happened quite a few times.

So far, PNB's stake in SP Setia had not been a problem. PNB had its two board representatives and it was quite satisfied with its stake. A balance seemed to have been reached with senior management, especially Liew who is also a major shareholder.

But that has been thrown askew with PNB's latest move. Part of the solution will be to convince the market that there will not be management interference unless things go wrong. But the only assurance of that is if stakes are far below 50%, perhaps not more than 30%.

PNB is primarily a passive investor. Thus its motivation should not be to stop dilution of its shareholding or moves to widen shareholding among companies it owns. Control should not be its primary aim.

Instead, it must focus on getting best value for its current stake, which may well be achieved by continuing to be clearly a passive investor. That's better than having a bigger stake in a less valuable company.  Perhaps it could have put its RM3bil in other investments. But it looks like it's a bit too late for that.

l Managing editor P Gunasegaram is plainly perplexed by PNB's bid to take over SP Setia. Any explanations?


Leave it to the real businessmen !

ON THE BEAT WITH WONG CHUN WAI

Questions are being raised as to why Permodalan Nasional Bhd is making a takeover bid on SP Setia, a reputable housing developer.

IT may not have caught the attention of ordinary Malaysians but it is a big story that is now the hottest topic among the business community.

Housing developer SP Setia is a reputable name that many Malaysians are familiar with because of the quality homes it builds.

It has also ventured outside Malaysia and made its presence felt in Vietnam, Australia, Singapore and even Britain.

The man at the helm of SP Setia is 52-year-old Tan Sri Liew Kee Sin, a down-to-earth bank officer-turned-developer.

Some would even say SP Setia is Liew Kee Sin and Liew Kee Sin is SP Setia.

Fiercely proud of his humble beginnings in Johor – his father was a lorry driver – the Universiti Malaya graduate wanted to study law but was offered economics instead.

SP Setia started off as a construction company – a syarikat pembinaan as conveyed in its initials SP.

Liew turned it into a big-time property developer when he injected two projects – Pusat Bandar Puchong and Bukit Indah Ampang – into the company in 1996.

Liew has faced many challenges but he is now looking at the biggest fight of his career – one that is heavily staked against him.

Permodalan Nasional Bhd (PNB), the country’s largest asset manager and owner of 33% of SP Setia, is making a bid to take over the company.

On Friday, PNB bought an additional 23.5 million shares in the open market for RM3.868 a share, just 3.2 sen shy of its proposed takeover price of RM3.90.

PNB, with a RM150bil cash chest, is seeking to raise its stake to over 50% with its RM3.90 offer, which is about an 11% premium over the closing price before the announcement of its notice of takeover.

Such a takeover bid is not unusual in the corporate world, and more so when Liew only has an 11.3% stake in the company.

Other major shareholders of SP Setia include the Employees Provident Fund (EPF) with 13.4%, Kumpulan Wang Amanah Persaraan with 5% and over 40% are in the hands of minority shareholders.
But the manner in which it was done has led to much unhappiness.

Despite having two PNB directors on the board, there was no courtesy of a verbal notification prior to the takeover move.

The general offer notice only reached the company on Wednesday at 8.30am, just before the market opened.

Some may argue that the element of surprise was for strategic reasons but there was still no call even after news broke out of the takeover bid.

In a nutshell, relations have been strained.

PNB has issued a statement saying it wishes to maintain the management team, which is known to be fiercely loyal to Liew, but no one is sure how events will unfold in the coming days.

However, questions have been raised as to why PNB is wanting to take over a company that is being run competently instead of remaining as a passive investor that is satisfied with good investment returns.

If the Government is actively pushing for the private sector to be the engine of growth, we have the right to ask why the GLCs are competing with the private sector.

Widening its shareholding base is one thing but controlling private companies will lead to speculation over its agenda, cause unnecessary concerns as well as send the wrong signals.

The whole exercise will cost PNB RM3bil, which is chicken feed to them, but there are political and economic ramifications that the country’s leaders should take note of.

It may not be such a grand scheme in the end for PNB if Liew decides to leave SP Setia and set up his own venture, and gets his senior management team to join him.

PNB may then find itself in a spot even after gaining control of the company.

No one would believe that there would not be interference from PNB, so let’s not kid Malaysian investors.

Civil servants who manage public funds should leave the business of running businesses and making money to the real businessmen.

Saturday, October 1, 2011

CEO, the Least Popular Job in Silicon Valley





Potential CEOs are opting for quicker dollars at startups and investment firms

 
Illustration by Sophia Martineck
By

Dave DeWalt is known within Silicon Valley for his technical chops, his charisma, and his business accomplishments, which include reinvigorating security software maker McAfee and selling it to Intel (INTC) in 2010 for $7.7 billion. At 47, he now has bigger ambitions. “Running a big-cap company is considered the crowning achievement in many people’s careers, and I feel that way as well,” says DeWalt.

Such talk makes DeWalt an anomaly. In tech circles, the C-suite at a publicly traded company is no longer the be-all and end-all. Just look at the troubles Yahoo! (YHOO) and Hewlett-Packard (HPQ) have recently had finding new leaders. HP canned former SAP (SAP) Chief Executive Officer Léo Apotheker after just 11 months—then faced a barrage of criticism for replacing him with HP director and former EBay (EBAY) CEO Meg Whitman without bothering to look beyond its own boardroom.

Industry consolidation has created a small number of very large technology companies such as HP, Cisco (CSCO), and Microsoft (MSFT). They’ve stumbled in recent years as disruptive developments like the mobile revolution and the dash to the cloud shake the entire sector. As the job of leading these companies gets tougher, there are fewer talented leaders with the skills—and inclination—to do it. Rather than wait for high-profile CEOs such as Cisco’s John Chambers, Microsoft’s Steve Ballmer, and Research In Motion’s (RIMM) Mike Lazaridis and Jim Balsillie to step down, many potential replacements have decamped for more exciting, and potentially more lucrative, gigs at startups or as investors. “This is the first time in tech history that you have this many companies with CEOs approaching 60 that don’t have any obvious successors,” says John Thompson, vice-chairman of recruiting firm Heidrick & Struggles (HSII).



Consider Cisco. With 62-year-old Chambers now in his 16th year as CEO, many of his most capable lieutenants have given up waiting for their chance to succeed him. The list of departures since 2007 includes former Chief Development Officer Charles Giancarlo (now a private equity partner at Silver Lake), longtime general manager Tony Bates (who jumped to Skype just before it was purchased by Microsoft in May), and former head of the data center business Jayshree Ullal (now CEO of Arista Networks). While the accomplishments of Chambers and other longtime CEOs including Ballmer are undeniable, their long tenure has sapped the strength of the back bench, says Heidrick’s Thompson. Now a common belief is that both companies will need to go outside for their next CEO—not an easy task when the competition for talent includes hot pre-IPO companies such as Facebook. “The people who could possibly do these jobs realize it would be easier to create a new company rather than try to get an old stodgy one to adopt new ideas,” says Trip Hawkins, CEO of game developer Digital Chocolate.

Boards of directors get low marks on recruitment and retention, too. Few give much attention to succession planning until crisis hits, says Jeffrey A. Sonnenfeld, senior associate dean of the Yale University School of Management. New hires such as Bartz and Apotheker are set up for failure as boards prioritize near-term earnings over long-term risk-taking. “We’ve been weeding the qualified people out of the system for the past 15 years,” says Roger McNamee, a longtime technology investor and co-founder of private equity firm Elevation Partners.

Nor have tech companies excelled at developing CEOs. Once executives prove themselves in a given area—say, software engineering—they rarely go through General Electric (GE) -style development programs to get exposure to a business’s full breadth. There are exceptions: Intel and IBM (IBM) are both organized so that top executives get to run multibillion-dollar business units. IBM Senior Vice-President Michael E. Daniels, for instance, runs the $56 billion services business. At Intel, young executives have an apprentice system where they shadow top executives (current CEO Paul S. Otellini spent years carrying Andy Grove’s bags). As a result, both companies have succeeded at finding internal candidates for the top job. But this is not the norm in Silicon Valley, where most companies are organized along strictly functional lines such as marketing. “The tech industry is great at producing technology, but it’s not producing leaders,” says Rosabeth Moss Kanter, a professor of administration at Harvard.

To break the cycle, some tech industry veterans say it’s time for a new approach to choosing CEOs. Forget the old idea of finding an older, well-known operations or sales executive to maximize earnings and soothe nervous shareholders. Too often, those experiments—Dell’s (DELL) Kevin Rollins, Apple’s (AAPL) John Sculley, Yahoo’s Carol Bartz—have failed, says McNamee. Now Old Guard tech companies need to find risk-takers willing to bet big on new visions. That’s hard enough for entrepreneurs such as Amazon.com’s (AMZN) Jeff Bezos. It may be even harder at companies settling into middle age.“Somebody is going to have to take some risks, and bring in younger CEOs for a while,” says McNamee.

To find them, some boards are taking a larger role in succession planning. Egon Zehnder International has been testing a new approach for two years, in which board members use a number of techniques such as mentorship programs to groom internal candidates, says Karena Strella, managing director of the firm’s U.S. unit. The goal is to take some focus off past accomplishments and identify impassioned, adaptable people. Then it’s up to the board to back them, says Thompson. “People forget that it took Steve Jobs seven years to really move the needle at Apple,” he says. “If you used that standard today, he would have been fired long ago.”

The bottom line: Shortsighted boards and the long tenure of some CEOs have led to a succession crisis at big-cap tech companies.

Burrows is a senior writer for Bloomberg Businessweek, based in San Francisco.

 Newscribe : get free news in real time