IBJNews

Simon biding its time after failed bid for rival

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrint

Simon Property Group Inc. withdrew separate offers to either acquire General Growth Properties or finance its exit from bankruptcy after a New York judge endorsed a rival plan that allows the nation’s No. 2 mall owner to stay independent.

So where does that leave Simon and the $6.8 billion war chest it has amassed to make a run at its nearest shopping mall rival?

The Indianapolis-based company probably will pay off debt and wait patiently for the next opportunity, which could include buying a handful of individual General Growth malls after it emerges from bankruptcy, said analyst Rich Moore, who follows Simon from the Cleveland office of RBC Capital Markets.

Simon couldn’t be much better positioned, with $3.6 billion in cash and $3.2 billion more available through a line of credit. But now that a wholesale acquisition of General Growth appears off the table, Simon probably will look to opportunistic smaller deals and to make a meaningful dent in almost $2 billion of upcoming debt maturities.

“There’s this notion going around that they have to do something very quickly but that is absolutely incorrect,” Moore said. “I would be more leery if they went to do something else right away.”
 

Simon Simon

CEO David Simon has offered few hints so far about what he might do next. He said in a statement after the bid withdrawal on May 7 that the company will find other ways to grow.

“We will continue to focus on our business and evaluate other opportunities in the marketplace as we always have: prudently, in a disciplined manner, and in the best interests of our shareholders,” he wrote.

The real estate investment trust has grown rapidly since Simon took over as CEO in 1995, primarily through acquisitions. But General Growth is not the first deal that hit a wall. The Taubman family in 2002 used a special class of stock to fight off Simon’s $1.5 billion offer for Michigan-based Taubman Centers Inc.

If the situation with General Growth were a straight-up bidding process, Simon would have won hands-down, Moore said. The company put together a superior offer, but General Growth’s Bucksbaum family snubbed it.

“If they thought bidding at a higher level would get them the assets, they probably would,” Moore said. “In REIT land, if you don’t want to sell you don’t have to—there’s not much Simon can do with the Bucksbaum family wanting control and having the ear of the court.”

It isn’t yet clear how much Simon spent in its pursuit of General Growth, but the number will be minor considering the company’s size and likely will be offset in part by gains in General Growth bonds Simon acquired as it was exploring a bid, Moore said.

If Simon were to acquire select GGP properties, that company’s Las Vegas portfolio including Fashion Show would make sense. Simon already owns the top-performing mall on the Strip, The Forum Shops at Caesars Palace.

Simon’s strategy ultimately will depend on whether a retail turnaround continues to take hold. But even if it doesn’t, Simon could get a second shot at picking up distressed mall assets.

“I wouldn’t say Simon is under significant pressure to use their capital, but it is expected that it will deploy it, sooner rather than later, and definitely within the next year,” Jason Lail, a senior real estate analyst for Charlottesville, Va.-based SNL Financial, told the magazine Retail Traffic.

Technically, Simon could still make another bid for General Growth. But it had promised to walk away if the bankruptcy court approved the issuance of warrants worth more than $500 million to an investment group led by Canadian property manager Brookfield Asset Management Inc.—a move that would have made a Simon acquisition pricier.

simonThat deal, approved May 7 by U.S. bankruptcy court Judge Allan Gropper in New York, cleared the way for General Growth to emerge from Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection as a stand-alone company. Simon’s final cash offer was for $6.5 billion, or $20 a share.

David Simon blasted the General Growth board, saying it “hastily decided in less than 24 hours to accept substantially less value.”

Simon said the Brookfield-led deal values General Growth at least $5 a share less than its own offer when one accounts for the warrants.

General Growth CEO Adam Metz said the Brookfield-led plan serves as an “insurance policy” for General Growth because it gives the company the funds it needs to exit bankruptcy while at the same time allowing it to pursue other potential offers.

Securities analysts including Richard Milligan of St. Petersburg, Fla.-based Raymond James & Associates Inc. had anticipated General Growth might attempt to block a Simon takeover, even if such a deal offered more value for shareholders.

“Although Simon’s current offer is economically superior on paper, it is difficult to predict how much weight will be placed on anti-trust and independence issues,” Milligan wrote in a May 3 report. Simon had proposed to limit its voting power to address concerns that the purchase would give it too much control over the shopping mall industry.

“We believe Simon has mitigated those issues with voting restrictions, but General Growth will certainly look to use those issues as a justification for not taking the highest offer—with the argument the highest isn’t necessarily the best.”

Milligan believes Simon will be fine without General Growth.

“We consider Simon the ‘best in class’ and expect the company to outperform its REIT peers in the next several quarters,” he wrote.•

ADVERTISEMENT

  • CIB Solution
    How about purchasing the Circle Center Mall in Indianapolis and take the insolvent CIB off the hook for the debt they cant afford to pay back.

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in IBJ editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ on Facebook:
Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ's Tweets on these topics:
 
Subscribe to IBJ
  1. liek the rest of America

  2. These quaint,obsessed musings by the stalkers are certainly entertaining, but I'm trying to figure out what, if anything, all the yelping below has to do with Zak Brown.

  3. It's evident that Moffett was pushing the right buttons and corporate America is now trying to squash him. He just wanted to withdraw the free pilot services provided to the company by the pilots to try and put some pressure on a company that has not been interested in negotiating a contract in over 5 years. The company does not provide a contract because not having one has saved them a bundle of money. Shame on any Republic pilots not standing behind their union leader just because things are getting tough, can you not see such strategic moves by the company as putting the last union president in a corporate position and into THEIR pocket. Do you really believe the last union president is so appalled at the attempts by Moffett, do you not remember his oppositions to the company? We stood behind him. It has been proven over and over again for thousands of years without fail, a man cannot serve two masters. Anyone that believes people vote contrary to their paycheck and livelihood deserve to be taken advantage of, the recent statements by the former union president are laughable as he denounces the current union president from his new corporate position. Have you ever seen a drafted sports player score points for his previous team, it cannot be done, he is not on the pilots side anymore, he gets his money a different way now than you and I do, and he should not be allowed to remain on the seniority list. A drafted player brings strength, credibility, tactical knowledge, and a strategic advantage to his NEW team, he would not be drafted or paid were it otherwise. We are all forced to choose only one side to play for and support, not doing so has many references in life such as insider trading and shaving points, all illegal for good reason. This basic fact is why corporate moguls, scientist, and engineers all sign non-discloser agreements and non-compete clauses, as protection in case they are lured into switching sides as our former union president has done. No NFL coach ever drafted a player so that both teams could benefit and better understand each other, they are recruited to win the game against that former team, period. Likewise the company does not recruit the former union president by accident or mutual understanding, its strategy. Don't confuse playing the game with good sportsman-like conduct in support of common business and prosperity goals, with the requirement to only play for one side. Good men we all love and favor fall subject to this manipulation, often without their knowledge, and it is not a betrayal of their friendship to oppose them when they switch sides. If we did not love and trust them, they would not have been chosen and lured to the other side in the first place. The deception by the drafted player is not made at a conscious level, it's just human nature and it's all about money and power which corrupts our ability to be objective and loyal to two masters. This is why our court system created the defense attorney, and why our military created counter intelligence. Its strategy and its propaganda, and it works, and that's why the "powers to be" manipulate the chess pieces by sometimes changing their colors. Some players know they are being manipulated when their color is changed, but it brings them more money and power so they do not care. The rest have good intentions but do not even realize they are being manipulated. This tactic is also known by another name, Divide and Conquer. In battle sending an imperfect message with an imperfect team is obviously not ideal, but it's still being sent by YOUR team, your union leader, a leader that has common goals and common rewards with you, they are the best, because we have elected them to do a job for us. If you are not backing Moffett but believing the spin by those that have recently switched sides, you are taking food out of your own mouth. Showing unity and backing an imperfect situation still results in taking just as much ground, it's about unity and bargaining power. It's not necessary to wait around for that perfect attack because it will never come, the company will spin and attempt to destroy anyone that gets in their way. Ultimately it's not about any specific attack anyway, ASAP or whatever it makes no difference, it is and always has been only about power. If this company cared about safety it would not build pairings with 8 hour overnights, come on, are you that naive? Besides, do you really think Hoffa cares, no, he got a call from corporate America and was squeezed into denouncing Moffett. If he didn't they would spin the safety card against him and the Teamsters National with implication for truckers, future contracts, insurance rates etc...saying something like the Teamsters use safety as a bargaining chip, blah blah blah... Do you really think any pilot is going to do something unsafe for the contract, absolutely not, the only ones threatening safety here is the company with reduced rest, fatigue, and poverty. Do you not find it odd that Hoffa and the Teamsters are opposing a Teamster president publicly? Would the Teamsters National not normally support and work with one of their own? Why did they not sit down and help him strategize, correct any mistakes, and charge ahead? Would the Teamsters National not normally support and leverage a contract for all those pilots that have been paying Teamster dues, isn't that why we have all been paying Teamster dues in the first place? I sure haven't been paying dues so that the Teamsters National could come along and write this kind of an article undercutting our union leader and our unity. Whose side is the Teamsters National really on, it's obviously not the Republic pilots side.

  4. No matter what Moffatt does the company is going to spin it like he is the terrorist and brainwash people like you into believing it, wake up, back your players that are trying to change things for you and your livelihood. Where has Hoffa been for the last 6 years, except collecting our dues. Seriously, do you really think an FO going for upgrade, signed off by a checkairman ready for the upgrade, who then fails, is not even capable of returning as a First Officer.

  5. whoa!

ADVERTISEMENT