IBJNews

Potential for Simon-General Growth deal appears to dim

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

General Growth Properties Inc.’s largest shareholder said it won’t pursue a takeover of the company and has no interest in unloading its stake after investor Bill Ackman urged the mall owner to consider a sale.

Brookfield Asset Management Inc., which owns about 40 percent of General Growth, “is not taking any steps to acquire GGP,” the Toronto-based investor said in a statement late Thursday. Ackman, founder of Pershing Square Capital Management LP, the No. 2 shareholder, said he’s discussed an acquisition of the Chicago-based company with Simon Property Group Inc., and that Brookfield planned to pursue a purchase of its own.

Ackman’s discussions with Indianapolis-based Simon, the only U.S. mall owner larger than General Growth, represent a turnaround from two years ago, when Pershing Square said a combination of the two retail landlords raised antitrust concerns. General Growth left bankruptcy protection in November 2010 following a takeover battle between Simon and an investor group that included Brookfield and Pershing Square.

“We place a small possibility on a sale scenario, especially in light of Brookfield’s response that it is not exploring an acquisition of the whole company, nor is it interested in selling its stake,” UBS AG analysts including Ross Nussbaum wrote in a note Saturday. “We see a much greater likelihood that GGP remains as a standalone entity.”

The analysts lowered their rating on General Growth to neutral from buy after a jump in the shares yesterday left the stock near their target price of $21.

General Growth shares fell 2.8 percent, to $19.76 each, at the close of trading Friday. The stock climbed 9.7 percent Thursday, to $20.32, a four-year high, after Ackman filed the letter with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission detailing his discussions with Simon and Brookfield.

Pershing Square and Simon Property discussed a deal in which Simon would acquire its competitor for 0.1765 of a Simon share for each General Growth share, according to Ackman’s letter. Were that ratio used with Simon’s Aug. 22 closing stock price, General Growth would be valued at about $28 a share.

Simon has been “effectively handcuffed and gagged” from pursuing a deal because of Brookfield’s influence over General Growth, Ackman wrote in his letter to General Growth’s board. Brookfield increased its stake in the company after owning about 29 percent, including warrants, in its initial investment.

“Our goals are to ensure that a level playing field exists so that Simon, Brookfield and potentially other parties can compete to acquire the company,” Ackman said in his letter.

Les Morris, a Simon Property spokesman, declined to comment on Ackman’s letter. Ackman didn’t respond Thursday to a request for comment.

General Growth’s board and management team “will carefully review Pershing Square’s letter,” the company said in a statement Thursday.

“Brookfield is not taking any steps to acquire GGP nor is it having any discussions with third parties in that regard,” the Toronto-based real estate investment company said in its statement. “Brookfield has no interest in selling its stake in GGP. We are 100-percent supportive of the current management team of GGP.”

Brookfield said in its statement that it considered “a variety of possible transactions which would facilitate Pershing Square’s desire to maximize the value of and create liquidity for its interest in GGP,” Brookfield said. Those discussions “are not continuing,” according to the statement.

Simon is unlikely to try to buy General Growth without Brookfield’s cooperation, the UBS analysts wrote Friday. Simon never officially made an offer to acquire its rival or Pershing’s stake, they said, citing conversations with the company.

Simon would be a logical buyer for General Growth partly because of cost savings it could achieve by purchasing its competitor, Craig Guttenplan, an analyst at CreditSights Inc. in London, said in a telephone interview Thursday.

Pershing met with David Simon, chief executive officer of Simon Property, last October to talk about the potential stock deal, according to Ackman’s letter. Based on the share ratio discussed, Simon would have paid a 65-percent premium over General Growth’s closing share price the previous day.

In November, Pershing met with Brookfield officials including CEO Bruce Flatt to discuss the proposed Simon deal, according to Ackman’s letter. They indicated that Brookfield didn’t support the transaction, and instead was interested in buying General Growth itself, possibly in partnership with Simon, Ackman wrote.

Brookfield in April proposed buying General Growth and paying for the purchase with proceeds from the sale of 68 of the company’s malls to Simon, according to the letter. Simon rejected the proposal because it didn’t like the selection of malls and believed “the price was too high,” Brookfield told Pershing Square.

Brookfield then decided to try to acquire General Growth without Simon, according to the Ackman’s letter. As part of the proposed deal, Brookfield would consider selling 14 of General Growth’s best malls to Simon or other buyers to raise money.

In July, Brookfield officials including Flatt met with Pershing Square and said they needed more time to prepare a purchase, including a series of securities sales and a purchase of Pershing Square’s General Growth shares. Pershing Square “expressed concern” about the proposed transactions, Ackman said in yesterday’s letter.

“We also explained that Pershing Square was not interested in selling GGP stock other than at a substantial premium,” he wrote.

Ackman is “an activist investor,” Guttenplan said. “He’s looking for ways to maximize value.”

The hedge-fund manager may be using the letter “as a wedge to get out of General Growth,” having made a large enough profit in the investment and wanting to place the money elsewhere, said Rich Moore, an analyst with RBC Capital Markets in Solon, Ohio.
 

ADVERTISEMENT

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. Only half a million TV Viewers? And thats an increase? I knew Indycar was struggling but I didn't know it was that bad. Hell, if NASCAR hits 5 Million viewers everyone starts freaking out saying its going down hill. It has a long way to before Indycar even hits NASCAR's bad days.

  2. IU has been talking that line for years with no real progress even with the last Dean, Dr. Brater. Why will an outsider, Dr. Hess, make a difference? With no proof of additional resources (cash in the bank), and a concrete plan to move an academic model that has been outdated for decades with a faculty complacent with tenure and inertia, I can count on IU to remain the same during the tenure of Dr. Hess. One ought to look to Purdue and Notre Dame for change and innovation. It is just too bad that both of those schools do not have their own medical school. Competition might wake up IU. My guess is, that even with those additions to our State, IU will remain in its own little world squandering our State's tax dollars. Why would any donor want to contribute to IU with its track record? What is its strategy to deal with the physician shortage for our State? New leadership will not be enough for us to expect any change.

  3. How do you think the Bridges got approved? I spent a couple days researching PAC's and individual contributions to some city council members during that time. My printouts were inches thick on the two I concentrated on. Finally gave up. Was disgusted with all the donations, and who they were from. Would have taken me days and days to compile a complete list. Tried to give it to the Star reporter, but he thought it was all just fine. (and apparently he was treated well himself) He ended up being laid off or fired though. And then of course, there was land donated to the dad's club, or city, as a partial payoff. All done in the shining example of "charity." No, none of these contributions are a coincidence.

  4. I agree what kind of help or if any will be there for Dr. Ley's patients. I was a patient myself.

  5. What about the hundreds of patients who sought this doctor for the right reasons, to quit drugs. what option do these patients now have, experience horrible withdrawl or return to heroin?? those are the choices. what about the children of these former addicts who's parent(s) WILL not b able to maintain their job, for @ least 2 weeks.. There needs to b an emergency clinic opened for these patients.

ADVERTISEMENT