'Whale' Watching: What Does Soros' Latest Mean?

By Eric Jackson, Senior Contributor to TheStreet , On Tuesday July 26, 2011, 10:04 am EDT

NEW YORK (TheStreet) -- George Soros announced that he's returning outside capital yesterday. That makes him the third first-generation hedge fund manager to do this this year, joining the ranks of Carl Icahn and -- former Soros protege Stan Druckenmiller.

Don't feel too bad for George though. He'll still be overseeing an estimated $24 billion of his family's money.

Are there any conclusions to draw from this action?

The media and perhaps some smaller investors spend too much time tracking the moves of these "whales." There have probably been no other hedge fund manager moves that the media has spent more time reporting than those of George Soros.

These reports all imply, "If this is what George is doing, well, maybe you should be doing this too, you poor slob."

There are even Web sites that have been set up with names such as "Whale Watching" that report on the holdings of these big hedge fund names as they change quarter to quarter.

The reality is that these "big name" hedge fund managers get it wrong just like the rest of us do. Global Macro printed money as a strategy four years ago but has been a dog's breakfast this year.

The media breathlessly reported over the last couple of months that Soros had "gone to cash." If you mimicked those moves, yesterday's announcement of his returning outside capital now puts that move into perspective.

He isn't necessarily expecting the market to collapse soon. He simply needs an extra billion in cash to redeem his outside investors. Whale watching would have caused you to ape a move that's for a reason very different than you think.

And remember when Icahn returned his $1.76 billion in outside capital to investors last March? The reason cited by Icahn was specifically an imminent market downturn.

"While we are not forecasting renewed market dislocation, this possibility cannot be dismissed," Icahn said at the time in his letter. That's a nice hedge, Carl. If the market tanks, you can say you didn't dismiss the possibility. If it zooms up, you can say you didn't forecast a downturn.

In any case, the Nasdaq is up 3% since Icahn's ominous letter.

The truth is that Soros has been one step removed from the day-to-day activities of his fund management for a while. The 80-year-old essentially has been doing marketing for the fund for some time.

I watched him doing a sit-down with Thomson Reuters global editor Chrystia Freeland a few months ago. Soros does these kinds of events all the time. Davos, New York, London, Shanghai. He could spend all the days of the year traveling around and talking about his macro views on Greece, China, the U.S., and Europe.

To be fair, Soros is good at it. However, at this particular conference during the Q&A, someone rose to ask him about a midmarket U.K. mortgage lender that his fund owned. "Huh?," Soros responded. "I didn't hear it." When the guy repeated the question, Soros waved his hands. "I don't know about that. You'll have to ask the guys that work at my fund."

The media will keep interviewing Soros and other "whales" because it will generate page views, but they should be a little more honest that the "Soros" circa 2011 is not the same "Soros" circa 1992.

What's really behind these moves of returning capital? In all likelihood, these guys don't need the hassle of more reporting requirements to the Securities and Exchange Commission , thanks to new postcrisis rules.

For a guy like Soros, with his family's assets of an estimated $24.5 billion, why keep the extra billion if, by getting rid of the outside capital, you'll avoid more regulatory scrutiny? Same thing for Icahn. Even after getting rid of almost $2 billion from outsiders, it's still believed he has more than $5 billion of his own money that he'll still manage.

The money management game has also certainly changed over their careers. Today, limited partners are more impatient than ever and wanting a steady stream of updates.

If you can manage your own money, without the hassle, why not? Maybe Soros will start trading his billions out of his Ameritrade account in his pajamas and bunny slippers.

Sphere: Related Content

Soros' Opinions Given Too Much Weight

By Eric Jackson, Senior Contributor11/17/10 - 06:00 AM EST

George Soros is arguably the most famous first generation hedge fund manager in the world.

A quick search of the 80-year-old's name yields 2.5 million hits on Google. Julian Robertson, 78, yields 740,000 hits. Carl Icahn, 74, generates 400,000 hits. (If you want to characterize Warren Buffett as also a first- generation hedge fund manager, the 80-year-old wins the popularity contest with 3.6 million Google hits.)

Of the current set of modern hedge fund managers, only John Paulson yields more Google hits than Soros, with 2.6 million hits. Soros has about 10 times the number of hits as the man David Rosenberg calls the best money manager in the world: Paul Tudor Jones. David Einhorn has only 225,000 hits and Bill Ackman generates only 84,000 hits. Eddie Lampert, who was once declared the next Warren Buffett, has only 32,000 hits.

Of course, past performance -- and hits on Google -- by no means indicate future performance. Yet, these hits indicate how often the broader media pay attention to the views of these managers as a part of the public discourse on our financial markets.

Popularity of these managers is why CNBC and other media outlets pay so much attention to their 13-F filings, which disclose how their portfolios change each quarter. For example, earlier this week, we found out that John Paulson trimmed his Bank of America(BAC_) stake last quarter and sold his entireGoldman Sachs(GS_) stake. David Einhorn bought more Apple(AAPL_).

In a Wall Street Journal story yesterday, we also learned that Soros "reduced his direct ownership stake in the SPDR Gold Trust(GLD_)" and he "reported no stake in Best Buy(BBY_)."

To the Journal's credit, it also referenced that it was Soros' hedge fund -- Soros Fund Management -- which made other moves. In one paragraph, the Journal uses Soros and his fund interchangeably: "The value of Mr. Soros's stockholdings was $6.7 billion at the end of the third quarter. The fund reported stockholdings worth $5.1 billion at the end of the second quarter."

However, in an hour long discussion with Reuters' Chrystia Freeland in September, where he discussed his macro views on gold, the U.S. deficit, and Europe's debt problems, Soros admitted during a Q&A session afterwards when asked about one of his fund's stock positions that he wasn't involved in the day-to-day decisions of the fund. Therefore, he couldn't discuss a specific stock.

........

[** This post is an excerpt of the full article, which is available on TheStreet.com by clicking here. Free Site.**]

Sphere: Related Content

Reasons to Like Citigroup Again $C

By Eric Jackson

RealMoney Contributor

3/11/2010 8:00 AM EST

Click here for more stories by Eric Jackson

Over the past year, I've been very critical of Citigroup (C - commentary - Trade Now) CEO Vikram Pandit and of the company's improved but still-deficient board of directors. Perhaps there's no greater example of a once-great company laid low by the financial tsunami of 2008 than Citi.

Yet, the company, which has been plagued by persistent bad press for the better part of two years now, seems to have turned the corner, with investors taking particular notice in the last week. Yesterday, the stock touched $4 for the first time in three months.

It's time to give Citi its due, and it's time to get long the stock. Here's why.

Vikram Pandit has been abysmal CEO, but he is actually learning from the massive criticism he's received. Pandit has done himself no favors since taking the top spot from Chuck Prince. He told a reporter after his ascension that he called his father in India to tell him of the good news by saying, "The Prince has gone and the King has come." Last week's performance of Pandit in front of the TARP oversight committee and with media afterwards was beyond reproach. He struck just the right tone of modesty and wanting to do what's right for Citi shareholders and the country. If he can be coached here by his PR team, it gives me hope that he can also be coached in improving some of the other parts of Citi that need work.

....

[This post is an excerpt of the full article, available by clicking here to go to RealMoney.com. Note: subscription required.]

Sphere: Related Content

The Lessons of John Paulson & The Greatest Trade Ever

By Eric Jackson, Senior Contributor 11/18/09 - 06:00 AM EST

Stock quotes in this article: C , GS

If it wasn't clear already that John Paulson had reached the zenith of his hedge fund profession, one only had to watch how fervently the media and blogosphere digested the news of Paulson & Co.'s quarterly holdings which was released last Friday.

Market commentators immediately pounced on how the one-time housing bear had loaded up on 300 million shares in Citigroup(C Quote) during the quarter, while dumping his entire holdings in Goldman Sachs(GS Quote).

Similar 13-F holdings of other hedge fund managers like David Einhorn and George Soros filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission in recent days have been summarily ignored compared to the reaction to Paulson's. (Citi shares jumped 3.2% the day after Paulson's announcement, far outpacing the S&P and Financial index that day.)

As far as hedge fund managers go today, John Paulson is the man. Ken Griffin, Stevie Cohen, and Eddie Lampert and others are afterthoughts.

In Gregory Zuckerman's new book, The Greatest Trade Ever, the Wall Street Journal reporter chronicles how Paulson mounted his ascent from nobody to this industry's seer of the moment.

Seven years ago, Paulson was relatively unknown. He was a merger-arbitrage guy running $300 million dollars. The former Baker Scholar from Harvard Business School couldn't help but feel that - in his mid-40s - he had under-achieved his career potential.

A key analyst alongside Paulson was Paolo Pellegrini. A failed Lazard banker with two divorces and zero net worth at the time he joined Paulson, Pellegrini had to make this last career chance work.

He lived in a one bedroom apartment up in Westchester and would arrive at work at 6:30 am in order to get the cheapest parking lot rate nearby. No one seemed to like him at first. He was a bit of a hot-head and talked too much. Yet, eventually he helped identify the housing bubble that Paulson would turn into a $16 billion winning trade for his firm and $4 billion for Paulson.

Beyond the interesting outsider-type characters working at Paulson, Zuckerman's book offers many lessons for small and large investors. One is the risk, but potential reward, that comes from breaking away from the herd mentality that surrounds Wall Street.

Nobody on Wall Street gave these guys a chance, when they started betting against housing. In fact, Paulson was routinely laughed at. Because the banking infrastructure was making so much money off of housing in 2004 - 2006, there was no reason for so many people to imagine it would end.

Even among hedge funds -- who are paid handsomely to anticipate and invest in where the puck is going, not where it's been -- precious few made this bearish trade. At the time, wise managers saw only the obstacles to the trade working out (like the federal government bailing out sub-prime borrowers and "containing" the problem from other parts of housing) and they clung to a misplaced blind trust in "their models" which showed housing couldn't decrease in value.

Even after he makes the bet, Zuckerman points out how there are so many times that people tell Paulson to take the bet off or cash in his profits too early. His own investors complained. Complaints also came from brokers from Bear Stearns and others who helped sell him the credit default swaps on the toxic tranches of mortgage bonds, as well as the most troubled sub-prime lenders and banks holding the troubled securities.

Even his own staff complained that he wasn't taking money off the table. They told him to sell when he was down in his trade and they told him to sell when he was up on the trade after New Century reported its first blown quarter in early 2007. Through it all, Paulson stuck to his guns because he foresaw even bigger profits ahead - and he was proved right.

As a fund manager, I often ponder the challenge of balancing between (1) trusting yourself and your investment thesis completely even when no one else does and (2) being aware enough to know when you're being too stubborn and "not seeing the facts" or when the trade is going against you.

In Paulson's case, every new bit of data which came to light and possibly contradicted his investment thesis was always scrutinized by him and his team to see if they had "missed something." He always stuck with the trade because he felt confident in the depth of research they had invested in understanding the problem/investment opportunity.

For Paulson, it all boiled down to one chart which Pellegrini produced showing the inflation-adjusted growth in housing prices over time divided by wage growth. The data clearly showed a rapid explosion upward away from the general trend starting in 2000. He assumed this trend would not continue indefinitely and revert (even overshoot). He was right.

The Greatest Trade Ever isn't just about John Paulson. It describes some smaller players who also bet against housing. Their stories are also very interesting and some of the characters are really colorful and interesting. Some run into the problem of not having enough capital to implement the trade to the degree they want to. Some wait too long.

One investor, Michael Burry, got his break as a fund manager when well-known value investor Joel Greenblatt made a big investment in him. Later, after taking a big bet against housing early on, Burry faced Greenblatt's wrath. In no uncertain terms, Greenblatt told him to get out of the trade. Burry didn't but not without taking a huge mental and physical toll on himself. Put yourself in Burry's shoes. What must it have felt like to tell your maker to take a hike?

There are several lessons in The Greatest Trade Ever for investors: believe in yourself (assuming you've done your homework), be skeptical of others' free opinions and assumptions, persist, and take the long view and don't take profits too early.

Every investor involved in this bearish housing trade early on referred to it as their potential "Soros trade" - referring to the famous 1992 bet against the British pound which netted Soros' fund $1 billion.

Paulson used this line himself, but he also remembered another Soros comment that stuck in his mind as he executed his trade. When you see the perfect trade set-up in front of you, Soros advised to "go for the jugular." Paulson did and it paid off big-time. Some of us will never see a trade like that for the rest of our lives. When opportunity knocks, you have to answer.

At the time of publication, Jackson's Fund had no holdings in any of the equities mentioned.

Eric Jackson is founder and president of Ironfire Capital and the general partner and investment manager of Ironfire Capital US Fund LP and Ironfire Capital International Fund, Ltd.

Sphere: Related Content

Icahn't Should Hang It Up

By Eric Jackson 10/28/09 - 06:01 AM EDT

Stock quotes in this article: YHOO , MSFT , MOT , CIT , BBI , TELK , GFGFQ , CSCO

NEW YORK (TheStreet) -- After a string of disastrous investments and his departure from Yahoo!'s(YHOO Quote) board last Friday, it's time for Carl Icahn to hang it up running other people's money. Here's why.

Icahn's decision to leave the Yahoo! board comes a year after mounting a costly and distracting proxy contest to get elected. That's his right, of course. After all, investors in his Icahn Partners hedge fund were the ones who footed the bill for his efforts.

Those same investors -- including Icahn himself -- are also sitting on a loss on their Yahoo! investment. We don't know the exact magnitude of the loss but it appears, based on a review of the SEC filings, to be on the order of -23% or roughly $320 million on 60 million shares held at the end of June. Icahn's stated reasons for stepping down from the board were that he no longer had the time and Yahoo! no longer needed an activist.

If he's right, then someone should inform Icahn's buddies John Chapple and Frank Biondi, who came on Yahoo!'s board last year with Icahn. Their whole legitimacy for serving on this board is now in question based on Icahn's comments. They should make like their buddy and head home to Manhattan. And with Yahoo!'s stock at less than $17, far less than Microsoft's(MSFT Quote) offer of last year, it seems incorrect and premature to declare the company a success and not in need of further changes.

Yahoo! investors might correctly wonder: Why the heck did we elect you to represent our interests in the first place, if you're now leaving?

It's true that Icahn's busy tending to other investments in his portfolio with the aim to turn around the performance of Icahn Partners. The fund, which had a three-year positive run starting in 2004, reportedly showed its first loss in the third quarter of 2007, due to poor bets on Florida condo developer WCI and auto parts maker Lear(LEARQ Quote). Since then, WCI and Lear have gone bankrupt, costing Icahn's fund at least a couple of hundred million dollars.

Icahn's hedge fund performance continued to drop in 2008 (down 22% in Q4 alone) and 2009 (down 33% in January). His 60 million Motorola(MOT Quote) shares -- owned since at least December 2007 -- look to be down about $660 million. Motorola's decline came despite Icahn having fought for and winning board seat representation last year.

Icahn Partners was hit by $1 billion in redemption requests at the end of last year and Icahn injected $250 millionof his own money earlier this year. Even today, Icahn Partners' long positions total $2.7 billion through the end of June . That's significantly less than the $4.9 billion in long positions he heldone year earlier .

Icahn's strategy is to take large long concentrated equity positions without using options or pair trading to manage the additional risk, as well as buying up cheap debt. You can ride that train up when markets are good, but get crushed in a down year like last year.

The biggest thing taking up Icahn's time these days is an investment in CIT(CIT Quote). Some are reporting that he will become the biggest shareholder of the company under reorganization. Creditors will decide by Oct. 29 whether to push the company into bankruptcy or accept an offer to refinance its debt. Icahn wants the company to refinance its debt through him, saying the fees he'd collect from the company would be less than the other offer on the table.

Icahn likes buying up debt and bringing companies through the bankruptcy process. He followed a similar path to the one he's on with CIT at XO Holdings(XOHO Quote). In that instance, he effectively gained control of the company as a large debt-to-equity owner.

But he's being sued right now by R2 Investments, an 8.8% holder in XO. R2 contends Icahn turned down at least one buyout bid for the company higher than its then share price in favor of refinancing its debt by purchasing $780 million of preferred stock. In doing so and gaining 80% control of XO, R2 alleges Icahn was able to use the company's losses to offset taxes he would have otherwise had to pay on other businesses he owned. XO, which was trading at $1.27 at the time of the buyout offer that R2 says Icahn turned down, is now trading at $0.77 - a 39% decline.

Besides recent poor investments in Blockbuster(BBI Quote), Telik(TELK Quote), and Guaranty Financial(GFGFQ Quote), his entire Yahoo! foray since last year has been an unqualified failure. It will make future activist campaigns he launches more difficult to execute.

From the moment he launched his proxy fight last year, after Yahoo! turned down Microsoft's $34 a share verbal offer, investors were skeptical of Icahn. They perceived him as a quick flip artist wanting to juice the stock from $23 to over $30, without technology experience to effectively advise the company as a director.

Because he lacked support from institutional investors, Icahn knew his proxy fight might fail to get any of his nominees elected when put to a vote. Therefore, he accepted three seats on the board as a compromise. If you can't win against the wildly unpopular Yahoo! board after making a mess of the Microsoft negotiations last year, what does that say?

Icahn says he helped select Carol Bartz for the top job. Really? Wouldn't Jerry Yang have done it anyway? After all, it was Jerry who offered Terry Semel the top job in 2001. It was Jerry who got to be CEO in 2007, when he told his board he wanted it. And, it was Jerry who knew Carol from Cisco's(CSCO Quote) board and, by Carol's account, offered her the job.

Icahn's friend, Frank Biondi, got to hitch a ride on to Yahoo!'s board on Icahn's coattails. Biondi also joined Yahoo!'s compensation committee and approved Bartz's employment contract. This is the contract that will pay Carol $187 million for four years of work, if she hangs around that long, maxes out her possible annual bonuses, and if Yahoo!'s stock price rises above $25 for 20 consecutive trading days before 2016. That's a good deal for Carol -- not so great for Yahoo! shareholders.

We know that Icahn Partners' investors didn't get a great deal on Carl's involvement with Yahoo! over the last year. However, Icahn, Biondi, and Chapple seem to have done pretty well. According to Yahoo!'s proxy filing, the day these three men were elected to the Yahoo! board, Yahoo! gave each an option to purchase common stock with a grant data fair value of about $250,000 and restricted stock units with a grant date fair value of about $200,000.

This half-a-million-dollar payment went to them personally. Nowhere in the filing does it say that this money went back to Icahn Partners, which funded the expenses related to the proxy contest -- which most estimate cost at least $1 million.

In that same proxy filing, Yahoo! disclosed that, last year, "transactions in the ordinary course of business between the Company and entities for which the following directors served as an executive officer, employee or substantial owner, or an immediate family member of an executive officer of such entity" included "Mr. Icahn". No more information is given, but it would be interesting to know just what transactions were conducted, with whom, for how much, and for what services.

To most outsiders, it appears as though Icahn was summarily ignored by the parties around Yahoo! before and after he was elected to the board. He assumed that he could force a shotgun marriage between Microsoft and Yahoo! He assumed his initial $23-a-share investment could be quickly goosed to $32 or higher. He was wrong.

Steve Ballmer politely listened to him and then apparently stopped taking his calls. Carol Bartz has dissed him from the get-go of her tenure as CEO. She proclaimed to Forbes last year : "Icahn is just another shareholder. What's he going to do, fire me?"

Whether he realizes it or not, this attitude is probably the most damaging thing to Icahn going forward as an activist investor. CEOs and corporate boards will no longer see him as "Carl Icahn: Corporate Raider of the 80s" but "Carl Icahn: Has Been." In their eyes, he'll be Icahn't, not Icahn.

Carl Icahn will always have a reputation as a successful investor. Forbes recently pegged his net worth at $9 billion. Yet, it's unclear whether his hedge fund, Icahn Partners, will continue after his death.

While George Soros, 79, and Julian Robertson, 77, have repeatedly developed talented managers (like Stanley Druckenmiller, Lee Ainslie, and John Griffin) who go on to successful careers, Icahn, 73, has not. If Icahn was hit by the proverbial bus tomorrow, it's unclear that Icahn Partners could or would continue.

Icahn will always be able to grab the headlines with some outrageous comment about a CEO because he's become the "poster boy" for activist investing. He could keep running money and probably will. However, as he takes his leave from Yahoo!, it appears as though his most influential days as an activist investor are behind him and not in front of him.

-- Written by Eric Jackson in Naples, Fla.

At the time of publication, Jackson's fund was long Microsoft.

Eric Jackson is founder and president of Ironfire Capital and the general partner and investment manager of Ironfire Capital US Fund LP and Ironfire Capital International Fund, Ltd.

Sphere: Related Content