IBJNews

Simon exploring bid to purchase rival General Growth

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Simon Property Group Inc. has hired a financial adviser and a law firm to help it explore making a bid for some or all of the assets of bankrupt rival General Growth Properties Inc.

Les Morris, spokesman for the Indianapolis-based mall owner, confirmed to Bloomberg News on Tuesday the decision to hire Lazard Ltd. and Wachtell, Lipton Rosen & Katz, both based in New York.

Morris declined to elaborate to Bloomberg on Simon’s plans, and he could not be reached for comment by IBJ Wednesday morning.

General Growth is the second-largest U.S. mall owner, trailing only Simon, with more than 200 regional malls in 44 states. Indianapolis-based Simon owns or has stakes in 387 properties worldwide and seems poised to grow its portfolio.

Simon this year conserved cash by paying most of its dividend in stock. At the same time, it’s used its clout to launch a capital-raising spree, rolling out stock and debt offerings at a time many real estate companies are begging for money.

The result: Simon now has $6 billion in “dry powder” it can use for acquisitions, according to a report by J.P. Morgan.

Simon executives have said malls owned by Chicago-based General Growth, which filed for bankruptcy protection in April, would be a good fit, according to Bloomberg.

“We’re a logical buyer,” Chairman and CEO David Simon said in a Sept. 15 interview on Bloomberg Television. “There’s a lot we could do with those properties.”

General Growth’s prized properties include Water Tower Place and Fashion Show, both in Chicago. The company filed for bankruptcy protection after failing to refinance debt accumulated to pay for acquisitions.

General Growth listed $29.5 billion in assets and about $27.3 billion of debts in its Chapter 11 filing.

ADVERTISEMENT

  • Companies by Annual Revenue
    Does IBJ have a listing of Companies in the Indianapolis Market with Annual revenue between $10M and $30M ?

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. Liberals do not understand that marriage is not about a law or a right ... it is a rite of religous faith. Liberals want "legal" recognition of their homosexual relationship ... which is OK by me ... but it will never be classified as a marriage because marriage is a relationship between a man and a woman. You can gain / obtain legal recognition / status ... but most people will not acknowledge that 2 people of the same sex are married. It's not really possible as long as marriage is defined as one man and one woman.

  2. That second phrase, "...nor make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunitites of citizens..." is the one. If you can't understand that you lack a fundamental understanding of the Constitution and I can't help you. You're blind with prejudice.

  3. Why do you conservatives always go to the marrying father/daughter, man/animal thing? And why should I keep my sexuality to myself? I see straights kissy facing in public all the time.

  4. I just read the XIV Amendment ... I read where no State shall deprive any person of life, liberty, or property ... nor make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunitites of citizens ... I didn't see anything in it regarding the re-definition of marriage.

  5. I worked for Community Health Network and the reason that senior leadership left is because they were not in agreement with the way the hospital was being ran, how employees were being treated, and most of all how the focus on patient care was nothing more than a poster to stand behind. Hiring these analyst to come out and tell people who have done the job for years that it is all being done wrong now...hint, hint, get rid of employees by calling it "restructuring" is a cheap and easy way out of taking ownership. Indiana is an "at-will" state, so there doesn't have to be a "reason" for dismissal of employment. I have seen former employees that went through this process lose their homes, cars, faith...it is very disturbing. The patient's as well have seen less than disireable care. It all comes full circle.

ADVERTISEMENT