Thoughts on Carl Icahn?
Hey monkeys,
I don't usually like bringing politics into WSO, however, I felt as if I could make an exception on Carl Icahn.
Just recently, Carl Icahn resigned as a special adviser to President Donald Trump. This was largely due to ...
Mr. Icahn said he felt the need to step down after Mr. Trump named Neomi Rao as Administrator of the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, an official administration role as opposed to Mr. Icahn’s unusual spot advising the president from outside.“I sincerely regret that because of your extremely busy schedule, as well as my own, I have not had the opportunity to spend nearly as much time as I’d hoped on regulatory issues,” Mr. Icahn wrote in a letter to Mr. Trump. “I truly appreciate the confidence you have in me and sincerely hope that the limited insights I shared have been helpful to you.”
It seems as if Carl Icahn was not able to accomplish what he wanted within the White House and has resigned.
I'm sure most of you have heard of the various opinions regarding Carl Icahn's obsession with closing deals and "corporate raiding". Carl Icahn often argues that he is supporting the shareholder but many times neither the shareholders nor management end up on top.
I'm curious as to what WSO's opinion of Carl Icahn is. Do you monkeys respect his work ethic and his self-made nature? Perhaps you guys believe that he embodies everything wrong with Wall Street.
Please discuss.
bump
Can you Icahn? (Originally Posted: 08/15/2010)
March: Icahn offers $6/share for 30% of shares, Lions Gate rejected. At the time owns 19%. Launched hostile bid of $6/share for the whole studio, rejected.
April: 2nd offer at $7/share, rejected. Poison pill enacted and then voided by regulators.
June: Icahn halts Lions Gate merger with debt ridden MGM. Owns 38% by month’s end with large shareholders like Mark Cuban tendering to him.
July: 3rd offer at $6.50/share, rejected. 2nd poison pill - debt to equity swap with management-friendly former Icahn advisor, who now owns 29%. Icahn’s position diluted to 33%.
August: Lions Gate announced $64 million 1st qtr net loss, blaming Icahn due to takeover defense expenses and the lousy showing of “Killers”. Icahn extends offer to October 22. Management, along with Icahn’s former advisor Mark Rachesky, now controls 34%.
C5. The man is persistent, very persistent. This thing is one big pissing match and so far little has gone Icahn's way. Management seems to be very very opposed to him, and I get the feeling that they will do just about anything to keep him from taking over. I don't see Icahn liquidating his position completely though unless the company really starts to go south. Based on the animosity between him and management+allies, I think there will be a large push against his board nominees as well.
True, they really don't want him there and with his buddy on their side its just going to get worse for him. I may be giving him too much credit here but he's done this a lot of times before and as you said, he's persistent. He'll be on them like white on rice until he gets a seat on the board. What happens next is anybody's guess, but odds are it won't be in his favor. That's why I chose 1, that way he could get out before it gets even worse.
HLF - Icahn files 13D citing 12.98%/14m share stake (includes options) (Originally Posted: 02/14/2013)
Intends to discuss strategic alternatives w/ mgmt such as a recap or going private transaction.
He'll be on CNBC tomorrow from 12-1.
And the saga continues.
Blackhat, I look forward to collecting that drink :) http://edgar.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/921669/000092846413000023/hlfs…
This is going to get interesting. That's a pretty big position (actually, given Carl's worth, it's not very that big to him) to not have a good idea about what you're talking about. I'm curious to hear where he bought in at...
I'll start shopping around eBay for an Herbalife protein shaker to send you. OR... maybe I can sign up for Herbalife and get it at a discount that way!
Just be sure to include a single malt beverage in there to spice up the flavor as discussed.
I had a gut feeling at 3:53 today and bought a bunch of herbalife. I'm so happy right now. Ackman is totally wrong on this. Every single thing that comes out of his mouth these days is bullshit
You just can't appreciate Ackman's brilliance - you're not on his level. For example: JCP is like retail inception, maan. Just imagine: a mall... within a mall. The brand is going to improve and people will change shopping habits overnight! How can it not be worth $40, 80, 100 billion???? It's worth more than all other major dept stores combined!
-Ackman logic
Icahn kind of reminds me of somebody I know that did 3 tours in Vietnam and then was a cop in a city for 30+ years that had mafia and urban gang problems. When I was a kid I asked him if he was ever worried about bad guys coming after him. He said "Men have been trying to kill me for 35 years. They're all dead and gone and I am still here." Icahn may be senile and a dick, but he has been at this game for a long ass time and Ackman is probably going to get his ass handed to him
I really, really hope he does. Ackman's ego needs a dramatic readjustment.
Still havent seen anyone address the details laid out in Ackman's presentation that would imply that there is anywhere near 50% of sales out of network...
Ackman may lose on this short term, but if you're long HLF long term, good luck. did you not see the sales pattern when they enter new markets?
SirTrades, Ron Johnson not Tim Cook?
So Icahn didn't even own HLF when he went off on Ackman... wtf
Looks like a personal attack / market manipulation.
ding ding din, we have a winner. For full disclosure, I own some puts ....and Icahn's stake in HLF doesn't surprise me... he clearly hates Ackman's guts because of their previous legal history and has been waiting for an opportunity like this.
All I know is that when one side is spitting facts and numbers (factsaboutherbalife.com) and the other side is backing a sleezy business and keeps waving thier hands in the air, throwing insults and generalities, I tend to go with the side that is giving the more thoughtful argument.
If what Ackman laid out in his three hour presentation is even remotely true, HLF is one of the largest pyramid schemes we've seen in history (based on the definition of more than 50% of the sales being IN network on the promise of a "business opportunity')...whether you want to call is a pyramid scheme or not, the reality is that 97%+ of all distributors never make it out of the first level so by definition, most people lose hundreds or worse, thousands of dollars by "reaching for the dream" they sell hard....
If you look at the pattern of spike and rapid fall in sales in each region they enter, you will see that they will eventually run out of fools. The runway may just be longer than Ackman can stay solvent and I wouldnt short 20 million shares hoping the FTC comes to the rescue. All he can hope is that the cracks start to show (in more mature markets) before he's forced to cover his position...
I admire both Ackman and Icahn. Both are arrogant as hell though. However, I kind of want Ackman to beat this old geezer down. I looked up the information that Ackman and Icahn were fighting about regarding the lawsuit and its clear Icahn was trying to screw over Ackman. While Ackman may be arrogant, he makes a sound thesis and his slideshow presentation is more than reasonable. I hope Icahn gets his ass handed to him.
Ackman's presentation is simply breathtaking. The level of detail in the analysis is game changing. The pro-HLF side is literally a bunch of bullshit ad hominem attacks based on nothing. I hope Ackman wins this even though he comes off like a prick and his whole vision for JCP is completely insane.
Maybee Icahn wants to promote HLF supplements in the checkouts of his Blockbuster Video stores.
TOO SOON???
Ichan missing out on Lions Gate was pretty lulzy. He's still a boss though.
I went through the entire slide deck that morning Ackman put it up and the first thing that came to my mind was 'this presentation is the biggest load of crap I've ever seen.' I think both the retail sales and the pop/drops are non-issues. More to the point, Ackman's core thesis is really - since I'm super rich and have never heard of this thing, clearly nobody must use it.
HLF was originally bought out of the Hughes estate and LBO'ed in the early 2000s by Golden Gate Capital and JH Whitney - they made a killing on it and tried to re-LBO in '07 but were rebuffed. Do you really think that they were too stupid to hire a law firm to diligence the issue? Or that during all those years on the Board including as Chairman (with new management that they brought in) they managed to miss the whole pyramid scheme thing? It's an MLM - you can't not look into it if you have half a brain. Another thing - check out the bio of HLF's general counsel. He joined the firm 10 years ago - prior to that he was the General Counsel of Walt Disney Intl and a SVP of Disney overall; 15 year career at Disney. This guy is a top corporate lawyer, clearly able to get a GC job elsewhere (or a lucrative partnership at a white shoe firm), but he chooses to stay at an illegal pyramid scheme for 10 years...why exactly?
Finally, I'd point out that HLF has been tossed around the HF community for years; there are a LOT of very smart funds that know this business well and have diligenced it, and a lot of them made a ton on the way up. 13F's came out today - check out who some of the buyers were in the last quarter after Ackman came out short - a lot of really smart funds...not just Third Point and Icahn, but also Lone Pine, Tiger Consumer, Coatue, Seneca, Hoplite, Bridger, Chilton, Wellington, Capital Group.
I can't wait to watch Ackman get hosed on this. My money is this thing goes private in the next 6 months, $60 or better.
Of course there was a ton of smart people in the business and still are, because the key to the thesis and argument is how sustainable it is and WHEN it will run out...and it doesnt mean that when the company was smaller (or if you still believe it has more poor people to take advantage of) that it didn't present an awesome opportunity for growth. The products, confusing tiers/rules and cult culture make it very easy to obfuscate what is actually being sold and the % of people that ever make money with the company.
I think the key to Ackman's thesis is not that he has never heard of it, but that the majority of people lose money and are buying into a business oppportunity -- and that the majority of the product sales are coming from recruitment, not out of network to retail customers. In other words, 90+% of the sales are coming from selling to other distributors down the line -- the real question is how long the runway is before they run out of markets to take advantage of poor/uneducated people...also, several courts have already found HLF to be a pyrmaid scheme, so are we supposed to be shocked when someone accepts a job where they can be compensated handsomely because they previously worked at Disney?
It's not the typical simple pyramid scheme where money is just passed from new recruits to people higher up in a rolling cycle and more recruits are needed to keep it going. In this case they happen to use a commodity product as their cover. They are "Selling" the products...but do you really think that is what they are selling? No, they are selling a business opportunity and are misrepresenting the opportunity blatantly to all potential distributors. Don't believe me, read some of these: http://factsaboutherbalife.com/category/compensation-scheme/recruiting-…
It may go private and Ackman may get hosed, but that doesn't mean what he highlighted about this business is not true.
I do think there is something to be said about Ackman being an insanely out of touch rich guy...just look at his entire plan for JCP. The dude probably hasn't bought his own groceries in a decade.
That said, just because a lot of smart people run HLF, doesn't mean it isn't simply an illegal money making scheme. Lots of really smart dudes worked at Enron before everything came to light.
I don't know that Enron and HLF are necessarily comparable. From a senior perspective, I'd imagine that HLF's business model is far more translucent and easy to understand. At Enron, on the other hand, you had to be able to comprehend labyrinthine energy accounting concepts... and few people had both the knowledge and access to the pertinent information to be able to do so. Furthermore, HLF prints cash... Enron did not.
That invalidates his entire pitch. As an investor, I don't care if his thesis is correct. The underlying assumption behind his investment is that the government will act as a catalyst. Given the amount of cash HLF throws off, Ackman's time is limited, and it doesn't seem like the government is doing much. I can't remember a time when this government has gone out of its way to help minorities without an ulterior motive. They don't get anything from dismantling HLF.
Can we at least agree that this is the worst interview of all time by Carl here...
"Having my people go to HLF & look at the company is relatively meaningless. Some of the best investments I’ve made are in companies I’ve never seen."
Ummm ok. Yeah... that, errr, logic makes a lot of... sense? Well, at least Icahn and Ackman are on a level playing field: neither has actually stepped foot inside an actual shop.
HLF is gonna end the day almost flat... Unreal after starting the day up 23%, but it looks like the Wall Street consensus is that HLF is fucked.
I guarantee Loeb got out today.
On the analysts sourcing ideas thing, well of course they fucking do, that's their job. There's a gazillion trade ideas out there, its about committing capital to the right one and most importantly get the timing right, that's why PM's get the credit... (this is a bit of a simplistic way of looking at things admittedly, some ideas are just simply brilliant)
I'd probably short half the companies in Ackman's book but this one seems like a lose-lose situation for any investor who isn't already in on it. It hasn't been about the company's fundamentals since Icahn stepped in. Goddamnit Carl.
100% true, but I'll put my money (and have put a little) on the side that is trying to give MORE detail, not less -- the side that doesn't resort to namecalling and wave their hands to brush aside very serious allegations.
If ever there was a time for HLF to make up some juicy fake #s, now would be the time. It demonstrates all the signs of a pyramid, just brilliantly executed and one that will likely touch a huge % of the poor population on this earth before it's eventual collapse.
I think for Ackman to win in this trade, he will need some help from the FTC....I think for Ackman's thesis to be proven right, all he needs is time.
Icahn Getting 2 Board Seats at HLF, Can Buy Up to 25% (Originally Posted: 02/28/2013)
Stock was halted about 10 minutes ago before the news. The main takeaway here is that Icahn has the threat of pushing at Ackman even harder now if he does get up to a 25% stake. Thought the timing given JCP's atrocious quarter would have made this a little more hardcore (like, say, if Carl already got the 25%) but still another shot at poor lil' Bill. Stock up to about $40 now, though the announcement really only added about 2% to the 4% gain HLF had beforehand.
Press release below:
Herbalife (NYSE: HLF) today announced that it has reached an agreement with Carl C. Icahn, Icahn Enterprises Holdings L.P. and certain related entities (collectively the “Icahn Parties”), which beneficially own, in the aggregate 14,015,151 shares of Herbalife common stock, representing approximately 13.6% of the Company’s outstanding shares. As part of the agreement, Herbalife will increase the size of its Board of Directors from nine to eleven members immediately before the 2013 Annual General Meeting of Shareholders (“the Annual Meeting”). Herbalife’s Board of Directors will nominate two individuals to the Company’s Board of Directors, designated by the Icahn Parties and approved by the Company’s Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee.
Under the terms of the agreement, the Icahn Parties have agreed to, among other things, abide by certain standstill provisions and vote their shares in support of all of the Board’s director nominees. The Icahn Parties have the right to increase the size of their ownership position in Herbalife up to 25% of the outstanding common stock. A copy of the agreement with further detail will be attached to a Current Report on Form 8-k to be filed by Herbalife with the Securities and Exchange Commission.
“We are pleased to have reached this agreement and look forward to working with the Icahn representatives as members of our Board of Directors,” said Michael O. Johnson, chairman and chief executive officer of Herbalife. “We appreciate the Icahn Parties’ shared views on the inherent value of Herbalife’s operations, products and future prospects.”
“Over its long history, Herbalife has proven its ability to increase revenues and returns, and we will work with the Company to build on its results,” said Mr. Icahn. “We conducted considerable research on Herbalife and its business before making our investment in the Company, and have great respect for its Board and management team, and believe in the Company's great potential. We expect our shareholder representatives to provide positive input into Board decisions affecting the future of the Company.”
Do you monkeys think this is big news or not? Thoughts on if Ackman may be forced to cover if other holdings like JCP end up obliterating his year?
Adding two Icahn reps to their Board of Directors allowing them to have 25% ownership in stock
This isn't big news. Just a validation of the intention to do something, whether that means take it private I don't know (Private is my guess.) We will see the stock increase if Icahn continues to buy up to 25% for sure. I'm getting in small again.
I can't wait on the Vanity Fair article on Ackman/Loeb that claims that a bunch of people in the HF world think Ackman is a little bitch (Or something like that)
I want to be just like Ichan when I grow up
Icahn is an opportunist and this guy can smell one even in a vacuum. I mean we all know if you can come off as the victim a sympathetic perception usually follows. So given the current situation that is exactly what has happened. We have the bully and we have the big brother that used the unfolding events to appoint 2 board members. It's a lot easier to pass on optimism vs pessimism, its just human nature.
13D appears to roughly say that Ichan cannot sell his HLF stake until Feb. 28th 2014 (i.e. 1 year from today) unless HLF trades >$73/share.
http://www.insidermonkey.com/blog/why-bill-ackmans-key-argument-is-flaw…
I give up... The market is bullshit, fundamentals don't matter, only psychology. It's been this way for a long time, and now's not the time to make the same mistake twice. HLF is one of the worst companies in existence, and it deserves to go under. Clear example of irrationality and insolvency right here.
I'm getting long HLF to ride the squeeze. God help whoever is still short this stock; I hope you have a rainy day fund.
herbalife is a sketchy company, even if it's legal.
Just like Blackhat I tend to stay away from these public battles between “high level” activists investors. Cases like this always make me wonder, how much of this public scenery is actually really?
Let us assume that there is a place on earth where all the ego tripping hedge fund managers reside during the weekends, a place where they can host one of their many bunga bunga parties and, if they want to, occasionally participate in bike rides. Let us assume that this place is called the Beeftomps.
Let us also assume that several of these guys meet in the weekend during dinner, drinking 1907 Heidsieck out of their crystal champagne glasses whilst (or before) enjoying a nice steak. After drinking one or two glasses, one of the guests, let us call him Lil’ Backman, has an ephiphany: “Guys you know what would be funny? We select a healthy company, use our guru status to trash the stock and subsequently acquire a cheap stake. And maybe, as an extra, and just for the “lols”, we get some people on the board of directors??”
The initial reaction is, of course, laughter. However, the seed has been planted and slowly grows with each glass of Heidsieck that the attendees gubble down. The seed evolves into a plan and the guys decide to target a certain company, Harbelefi.
They commence their plan, starting with a short selling thesis (released by the originator of the plan), massive media coverage (own web sites, 300+ pgs presentations, live debates), the white knight who comes to the rescue (who was seated across the originator), several other attendees that pick a side (you are short/long depending on whether you vomited on the hosts Persian carpet that night) until they eventually receive both the stake at a discount, as well as some people on the board. Once achieved, the shorter publicly announces the closure of his stake (but still makes money) and the acquirer keeps his stake as he has a very favorable entry point. It goes without saying that throughout the entire period biweekly celebrations were held at the ""humble"" estate of one of the participants.
It just for humorous purposes but still, when I look at the relationships between all these HF big shots it often makes me wonder. Let us assume that Ackman started his stake 8-9 months ago, isn’t he still in the money? And is Icanhn not also in the money?
If they are both in the money, who are the real losers here?
Here's what I don't get about this entire situation. Why won't the FTC choose to investigate Herbalife so this debate can be settled once and for all? Instead of speculating on who is right, I feel as though it would give all investors some sense of relief that there is a legitimate 3rd party trying to figure out if this company is an illegal pyramid scheme or not. Since enormous sums of money are being wagered on this company, an investigation would not be unreasonable.
http://www.vanityfair.com/business/2013/04/bill-ackman-dan-loeb-herbali…
I thought I would bump this up as its such an interesting issue.
Has anyone been swayed one way or the other on Herbalife? The more research I read the more I am starting to agree with Ackman that it is a scam... But I don't have the legal background to say whether its illegal. Views welcome!
http://www.businessforhome.org/2013/02/the-fall-of-fortune-hi-tech-mark…
For anyone who has been looking at the FHTM scandal this article can help to clear things up. A lot of people have been scared by it. Article written by a lawyer, helps to clear things up. Very much worth the read. I am still maintaining a long position on HLF, may buy a bit on the dip we had from the FHTM scare here. The companies are comparable in industry but not in how they conduct business if you look at the marketing details.
That's just my opinion
I think I read somewhere that Ackman has done a side by side comparison of Herbalife and fhtm.
I'm curious, what catalyst are you waiting for on your long? Icahn taking it private?
http://www.marketfolly.com/2013/03/bill-ackmans-latest-herbalife.html?u…)
Here's the side by side Fortune Hi tech vs Herbalife
There's a lot of complete bullshit in this slideshow. It seems really desperate to me. But we won't know till we know.
When Ackman says Financial damage he (seems to) totally forget that people actually consume this shit. It's not like they are just stealing money here and no one is getting shit from it.
If the issue is strictly the pay structure, I'm guessing that HLF will resume disclosing the ratio of recruitment vs commission income. Personally, I think HLF had a couple of rough quarters where recruitment bought in a higher percent of income so they stopped disclosing in order to stay off the radar until things went back to normal. In reality, people DO make money as distributors and just because the top 1% out earn everyone else doesn't make the company a criminal conspiracy. If so, then our very society is given the same pay structure LOL. Could it be more uniform, sure. But that's no reason to shut it down. Just because Bill Ackman doesn't want to be a HLF salesman doesn't mean the company should be shut down. I'm no huge fan of Icahn, but I'm glad he's putting this snot nosed brat in his place. If Ackman wants to raise money for charity, then START A CHARITY, don't try and justify a crummy investment thesis by grandstanding humanitarianism
HLF Halted!
Icahn responds to Dell. (Originally Posted: 07/12/2013)
Icahn, as you all know, is on his latest crusade. This morning, he sent back an offer to Dell shareholders for a deal to tender their shares for 14$ a pop and then be given a warrant to buy Dell shares at 20$ for every four shares tendered.
Dealbreaker does a pretty good job of tearing this apart: http://dealbreaker.com/2013/07/carl-Icahn-throws-some-warrants-into-his…
This offer makes no sense to me compared to a 13.65 offer per share. Can anyone explain the contrary to me other than the view that dell could somehow trade at above 20$ to make your warrant worth something to anyone?
Though, it is fairly badass that Icahn, who is 77 years old..., can still romp around churning up companies in his age. Not too shabby.
Haven't read Dealbreaker in a while, but that analysis is probably the best I've read from Matt Levine. Rehashing Matt's point, if you think the warrant has value (ie. Dell can reach >$20), you shouldn't tender, but if you think the warrant is useless, you should tender. One point he misses, though, is an addendum to the first statement. This should be split into two parts: - Do you think Dell can reach $20 without substantial leverage, Icahn control - Do you think Dell can only reach $20 with leverage/Icahn
You shouldn't tender if you believe the former and should tender if you believe the latter. Icahn wants shareholders to believe that Dell can only reach $20 under his control, and shareholders would get $14 + warrant value. Personally, I think the warrant is useless because Icahn is basically handicapping himself at $20 a share and has no incentive to go past that. He can exit at $20/share and not deal with any of the implications of the warrants, using the warrants as a sweetener that the company will have to back down the line.
However, if I were a shareholder, would I pick $13.65/share or $14/share? Probably $14
iCahn Rally: Saving Apple from an imminent disaster? (Originally Posted: 09/12/2013)
Okay so it's 2am and I'm just taking a break from hitting the books.
Some of us were probably following Apple's stock movements recently, especially after Carl Icahn announced his large position in Apple with his gamechanger tweet. Even more recently, with Apple's launch of the long awaited iPhone 5S and 5C, it's been somewhat disappointing to learn of the supposed "upgrades".
But what I was really wondering about was, with Wall Street analysts denouncing Apple's status remaining as a premium priced smartphone manufacturer, how is it that Icahn (persistently acting against market sentiments?), would step in and buy into "undervalued" Apple stock?
AAPL is on a rally, and I wasn't really expecting so (no position). Would love to hear comments!
Analysts are always right duh. Of course Icahn is doomed to fail, it's not like he doesn't have one of the best investing track records short of Buffet.
Icahn Lowers the Boom on eBay (Originally Posted: 02/26/2014)
Does anyone else get the impression that Carl Icahn is just an angry dude? Maybe, like me, he just longs for the 80's when we were both much cooler. Be that as it may, Carl has been a mite cranky of late. First, he was very publicly dissatisfied with the way Apple was handling their massive pile of cash, and now he's taking the eBay board to task for being...well...idiots. In his defense, there does appear to be some fairly egregious conflicts of interest here. His delivery is acerbic and classic Icahn. I can almost picture Icahn as Rust Cohle, whispering to the eBay board, "If you get the opportunity you should kill yourself." It's anyone's guess whether he'll be able to seed the eBay board with his people at the next election, but it appears he's determined to make the interim entertaining at least. Enjoy:
Now this is the Icahn we all know. A bore, poking up everyone's ass, sanctimoniously spouting 'shareholder value' like it's a fucking religion, and very likely damaging the long term health of a wildly successful company in order to squeeze a buck out of them.
If I were a CEO, I'd stongly considering paying someone to whack the prick, his tough ghetto Queens gangsta persona not withstanding.
For a short time, I liked the guy for sticking it to his younger, wannabe protege Bill Ackman. And activist investors have a place for sure. Many an idiot CEO has been called out by a minority stakeholder, and said stakeholder rewarded with higher share prices. But do we really need this asshole to tell us that AAPL should be doing more with its cash? My mom could have told you that.
Aside from a few lucky shots, I'd like to see the breakdown of companies these two yokels have actually successfully restructured in any useful capacity VS a list of the companies they've merely harassed and fucked over. Let's be real: if you take a multibillion dollar position in a company and then go to the press, the price is going to move....if you're not drinking the koolade, this looks a whole lot more like market manipulation than any useful type of 'activism'. Pissed off, rich old guys with lots of money tend to the the ultimate idiot armchair general.
I know I'm a pretty harsh critic lately, but these jackasses keep doing stuff. And frankly, I'm enjoying speaking my mind. Given my days are pretty much numbered on Wall Street, I'm not inclined to give a shit anymore if anyone agrees with me.
I was actually rooting against him on HLF, not so much for Ackman's sake, but he does just seem like an angry dude.
@UFO preach on
Total jaw drop moment. It was kind of beautiful.
I find it hilarious when Wall Street guys go into companies and try to tell them how to better run their companies. Especially companies that are being bought by PE groups or going public for the first time. Its ironic when a Harvard MBA with about 2 weeks experience in an industry is trying to tell a guy or company that has been in that industry for 30 years how the company should be run. That would be like the owner of XYZ company buying a stake in Goldman and then telling Goldman they need to make home loans. Can investors add insight? Sure, however most of the time they think they know way more than they really do.
I didn't know Icahn recently graduated from Harvard Business School.
I didn't know PE guys take a hands off approach to their investments. I also didn't know that filing for an IPO is a strong signal of business acumen per se.
As much as you may dislike the activist approach (for whatever reason), you might consider the malpractice some of these so called seasoned sector veterans conduct due to the complete misalignment of incentives and greed on their part. I'll be the first to say that shareholder activism isn't an end-all solution to value destruction (again misalignment of incentives plays its part), but to fully side with corporate boards and to imply that PE guys are the only ones who know what they're doing... That just shows a severe lack of understanding of the landscape and context in which these situations unfold.
Agreed. You know when some old people hit a certain age and don't care what comes out of their mouths anymore and just become generally cranky - that's Carl Icahn. The only difference is that he's an investing legend and has $20B+. So rather than just ruining Thanksgiving he has the ability to disrupt huge and successful companies.
Was thinking the exact same thing...you could also insert Tom Perkins' name in there, just change the 20 to 8.
Exactly. Some influential men develop seriously psychotic/attention-whoring powertrips as they reach old age. It's as if they sense their imminent demise in the near future and want to leave some markings ASAP with their self-perceived BSDs. Stalin committed human rights atrocities past his 60s, Mao initiated the cultural revolution in his 70s. Icahn's is "meeeeeeh-ing" all over media like an attention starved sheep.
Buffett is just a beast of an outlier in comparison.
It's always entertaining to watch Icahn as he is the best actor on Wall Street.
To paraphrase Mr. Icahn, "it would be a fair commentary" this is not Motorola.
I liked how Icahn called Andreessen a "value driven leader for himself".
Often they may be annoying but, all things equal, activists improve shareholder results for the long term. That's the data.
Here's a study: http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=948907
Here's Damodaran making some nice points on it: http://aswathdamodaran.blogspot.com.br/2013/03/marty-lipton-shareholder…
Today I've just had access to a bunch of proprietary data on activists, and the results were the same.
I've never seen a single study showing activism as something negative for shareholders on the long term.
It is always wise to remember that, since the corporate raiders of the 80s, most of the targeted companies are mismanaged companies. Even the threat of activism usually puts some discipline on lazy entrenched management. I haven't seen many activitists targeting very efficient companies with huge ROC, vigilant boards and proper capital struture.
loling at the 30 year old picture of Icahn CNBC used
Carl Icahn closes shop (Originally Posted: 03/08/2011)
http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/03/08/us-hedgefunds-icahn-idUSTRE72…
Returning money to outside investors doesn't mean he's completely closing up shop.
From the article:
Icahn takes aim at Netflix (Originally Posted: 11/12/2012)
As was recently announced, Carl Icahn has acquired just under 10% of Netflix. The stake cost Icahn $168.9 MM, his 13-D filings disclose. Shares of Netflix have gained almost 25% since.
Dee Gill's charts show clearly how Netflix has fallen over the last few years from a high of $300 in mid-2011 to the $50s recently.
It didn't take long and Netflix adopted a costly poison pill (the plan would see the market flooded with new shares should an investor buy a stake of more than 10%). As noted by the Deal Professor in Dealbook. Netflix's pill has a threshold of 10% for activist investors while having a threshold of 20% for passive (institutional) investors. Effectively, Netflix's Hastings is trying to keep activists like Icahn out.Is Icahn ready for a takeover of Netflix ? That's very hard to believe. Icahn likely doesn't have the financing in place to buy it. What he is trying to do is "put the company into play"-get somebody else to buy it.
Netflix, based out of Los Gatos, CA, has been the occasional subject of acquisition speculation, with Microsoft and Amazon among those named to be interested. The company has 30 million subscribers worldwide, though it faces challenges including rising content costs and a costly overseas expansion.
Icahn's record is mixed as far as getting buyers in. His 2011 effort to put Clorox in play with a takeover bid was unsuccessful. I see another a redo of Clorox with Netflix now.
don't think Amzn will buy them. They already got their own licenses for contents. MSFT might be down since Ballmer is an idiot and likes to acquire shit for big premium and then write them off 5 years later for 80% loss on the investment.
I'm still waiting for Carl to do something about Chesapeake, which he sunk about 2B into.
If I had $10B lying around, would the following proposal be ridiculous?
MSFT takeover of both NFLX and RIMM. Would the combination of NFLX and RIMM help lift MSFT from its mediocrity?
RIMM does not want to be bought, but if BB10 turns out to be shit, they might not have a choice.
NFLX can stand on its own, but would MSFTs cash pile and clout help secure more deals with distributors to improve NFLXs offerings?
iPhone is the phone of choice for the masses, but do F500 IT departments really trust Apple's security?
Looking forward to comments.
How would the acquisition of both Netflix and RIM be advantageous to Microsoft? I feel like realistically it would be one way or the other.
Netflix makes much more sense.... RIM would only complicate matters for Microsoft as they're trying to get their own-brand mobile hardware out there now. RIM wouldn't be beneficial.
iPhone is going down. Good riddance, I say. Apple does not, and will never, have the functionality and capabilities needed to catapult them to make them the F500 go to tech. http://www.wallstreetoasis.com/blog/dear-apple-i%E2%80%99m-leaving-you
Carl Icahn Makes Things Interesting with Dell (Originally Posted: 03/12/2013)
Back in February, Dell announced that it had reached an agreement in principle to be taken private by its founder, Michael Dell, and Silver Lake, the Silicon Valley based technology private equity firm. Microsoft would also be investing in the deal, but would have no equity ownership or board representation post-close. Under the terms of the agreement, shareholders would receive $13.65 a share, a 25% premium over the share price on January 11th, the last day the stock traded before rumors of a buyout started running rampant.
Dell, the world's number three PC manufacturer, is in the middle of an ongoing effort to transform the company into an enterprise solutions business for small and medium size businesses. A mini-IBM of sorts. Over the last three years, the company has made a number of acquisitions to bolster its enterprise credentials, though its lower-margin PC business still accounts for about half of the company's total revenue.
Taking the company private would enable the company to accelerate its transformation without the scrutiny of the public markets. Unfortunately for Mike and his Silver Lake pals, Carl Icahn has other plans for the business.
Icahn, who is a large investor in Dell through his holding company, believes the current buyout offer significantly undervalues the business. Shareholders get taken out on the cheap while Michael Dell and Silver Lake take control of the firm's $14 billion cash pile and get a potentially lucrative second bite of the apple down the road.
Instead of the buyout, Icahn proposes that Dell undergoes a leveraged recap and pays a out a special dividend of $15.4 billion, or $9 per share, to its stockholders. He's signed off on a confidentiality agreement and is digging into the company's books to learn more, showing that he's in this for the long haul. Furthermore, he's urged the board of directors to go forward with his special dividend proposal should shareholders reject the go-private transaction. Otherwise, he'll look to swap out members of the board with hand picked replacements.
There are several potential outcomes here, including:
1.) Shareholders vote in favor of Michael Dell and Silver Lake's buyout and Carl's proposal goes by the wayside
2.) Icahn's proposal forces Michael Dell and Silver Lake to up their offer and make Carl and other shareholders happy with the deal
3.) A new buyer enters the picture with a competing buyout offer
4.) The buyout deal is rejected and Icahn's proposal is implemented
5.) The buyout deal is rejected, Icahn's proposal is ignored, and things get interesting...
Regardless of what you predict, one thing is for sure. Carl Icahn makes things interesting. While I don't really care for what he's doing with Herbalife, I can certainly appreciate what he's doing here. He's throwing his weight around on behalf of all of Dell's shareholders.
What do you guys think will happen? Personally, I think Michael Dell and Silver Lake will be forced to up their bid. If another group swoops in with a better offer, chances are that they won't keep Dell on as CEO, and it seems as though Michael Dell wants to keep control of the company he built out of his college dorm room. So, I expect that he and Silver Lake will do what it takes to make a deal happen. Anyone agree or disagree?
I'd like to see MSFT come in hot with an offer... make things REALLY interesting.
I honestly can't decide if this is legit or if Icahn has just decided to be that guy for the rest of his life. He's sure been pulling a lot of dick moves lately.
To answer OP's question, I think that Icahn is going to get his way on this one. The larger part is psychological intimidation given his public ass kicking of Ackman. That kind of thing actually affects people's decision making process on some level, even if they don't want to admit it. On a technical level, I don't know but this is exactly Icahn's MO: he's dismantled opposition with mere basis points worth of ownership and this time around he's holding a lot of cards...this is kind of his thing and he's got the home court advantage.
My best guess is that Microsoft will probably jump in just because they're so closely linked: these two firms came up together on the hardware/software side of things as partial symbiotes, I'm pretty sure they're going to want to keep an eye on this to get a pulse for things to come in the personal computing space.
I'm totally shooting from the hip in idle speculation, so I absolve myself of any requirement to be right.
If I was a Dell shareholder, which thank god I am not, I would appreciate Icahn's move here. As an outsider, kinda seems like he is just trying to get his nose in anything and everything.
(•_•)
( •_•)>⌐■-■
(⌐■_■)
I am completely with him on this one. I agree That MD will have to raise his offer, but i can't see him going high enough to appease the major shareholders... $20+ a share is a punchy price to pay for a company that needs to undertake a major transition to remain competitive....
I wonder what an MD resignation threat would throw in to the mix..... I doubt ICahn would bat an eyelid but others might.
In a Corporate Governance class at school we did a fair bit on whether the likes of Icahn are good for this world. Personally, I get the the whole shareholder activism to keep management in check but, I think he abuses his fame purely for arbitrage purposes and has no interest in the company or its other stakeholders.
He buys a chunk of stock and goes on CNBC saying how its undervalued and it moves a few points. He jumps on transactions like this just to force a higher price and some risk free money (like the Arabs on the Xstrata/Glencore deal). I'm not sure why the SEC doesn't investigate him for this king of behaviour.
It reminds me of RJR Nabisco and the first low ball management offer. I'm not sure Icahn is a suitable Kravis replacement though...
I was thinking along those lines. Lets say management's bid is rejected in favor of recap or higher offer. Just like Kravis, MD has to re-offer atleast once because as OP said, it means something to him. For Kravis it was KKR's standing in PE at the time. For MD, its his fricking company. He can't be the guy left with nothing at the end of all of this. As a partner in Deloitte working with KKR for 20 years said, PE is half brains and half personality/ego. At some point I think silverlake will be the voice of reason, but I think that current situation is unacceptable to many stakeholders.
Mr. Icahn is a good poker player, that's what he is.
He is sorts of dog that shouts out like he's a wolf.
At this time, I give the deal a better than average chance of getting done, albeit at a higher price. The price however, will be nowhere as high as Southeastern (a shareholder opposed to it) would want.- They valued Dell at $23 or around that using sum-of-parts.- That's just out of question. Maybe $14 to $15 ?
It appears Dell's Board has already considered leveraged recapitalizations in the past and decided to pass.
the thing is that MD is a key part because he holds so much of the companies stock, without him the cash/financing to complete the deal would be significantly higher.
these dudes are only huge market movers because assholes dont have any other easy shit to make a quick buck off in this zirp environment
I've thought the same way before. That's how it was 10000 years ago. Cave man beat up everyone else, became king, and to protect himself, made the rules. Modern man is the finished product of all those rules. No point taking it back there, since we will reach same stage eventually.
Icahn's Tweets Are Worth $124M a Character? (Originally Posted: 08/17/2013)
I'm surprised that there hasn't been a thread on WSO about Carl Icahn's Apple tweet earlier this week. I am honestly baffled by the market's reaction to his tweet. I mean, did they need Icahn to take the leap of faith before riding on his coattails? I know that he's an advocate for increasing shareholder value, and that Apple isn't the most shareholder-friendly company. But with that much cash, upcoming product releases, etc., it almost seems silly that people needed the validation of "smart money" before buying the stock.
Some journalists are even suggesting that tracking Twitter could be a profitable trading strategy (good article discussing just that: Does Twitter Level the Playing Field For Retail Investors?). Let's hear your thoughts on the tweet and whether or not you believe Twitter will become an effective source of information for traders.
I'm off to follow Warren Buffett and David Einhorn.
Pretty cool. It reminds me a lot about what 50 Cent did like 3 years ago, when he just twittered the symbol of some stock and that soared like 300% or something...
This quote aptly describes the situation:
"If everyone is thinking alike, then somebody isn't thinking." - George S. Patton
Without Steve Jobs APPL is a sinking ship full of cash. Judging by the insider activity Captain Cook and Co. are not willing to go down with the ship. I would not be surprised if Icahn and Co. launch a quick raid before the ships sinks.
Icahn has one of the biggest dicks in this industry and if anyone is gonna be able to get AAPL to hand over their cash, it's him. It was delicious at $400 and I've got a $550 PT on it. Not sure where Icahn got his numbers from, but it's exciting the hell out of some people.
Larry Ellison calls Steve Jobs "irreplaceable:"
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-505263_162-57598257/oracle-ceo-larry-elliso…
Musk's tweets are worth more.
It's not the means by which he said it... it's what he said that made the stock move. It's literally no different than Loeb announcing a big stake in CF or YHOO, Ackman saying he's short HLF, Einhorn calling out CMG, etc. It's not revolutionary at all.
He was also really good friends with Steve and Steve did a really shitty job in the 80's
Then the company nearly went bankrupt without him. When he returned the stock skyrocketed.
Will Twitter become an effective source of information for traders? Sure. So as Bloomberg or WSJ. Like Blackhat said, nothing revolutionary here.
So if a research analyst at Company X Tweets important info on an organization (and he's not famous so only his 60-70 friends see it), is it still considered insider info?
Icahn gives up to Dell (Originally Posted: 09/09/2013)
http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/826083/000092166913000029/dellex…
Carl Icahn gave up his fight against Dell's LBO today. He released the above letter on his thoughts regarding the deal.
Dell should now move forward with becoming a private company and we'll see how the private life shapes Dell, particularly with the amount of debt on the company now.
A strange bit of a shout out to following him on Twitter at the bottom of the letter, haha.
Thoughts on how Dell will move forward as a private company and whether it can truly compete?
Well, the smart money clearly isn't too confident. Blackstone, KKR, et al had opportunities to get in on the deal but passed. Think there are two crucial questions: A) How long will it take for desktop to be replaced by mobile computing, and B) How quickly (and cheaply) do you think Dell can pivot to enterprise storage and (potentially) mobile devices?
Given that Silver Lake is on-board, I think that it will probably turn out to be a successful privatization in the future. Silver Lake has unmatched expertise in investing in mature tech companies and if you take a look at what they did to Skype, I am sure, that they will do just as good for Dell.
Silver Lake is solid, but they aren't some almighty group of beings. There is much work to be done.
I'm not saying they won't turn it around, but the new company will look much different than the current Dell (I'm envisioning IBM selling off its hardware units).
Icahn sees Apple as undervalued - expects shares to double? (Originally Posted: 10/09/2014)
Carl Icahn just released his letter to Tim Cook asking him to repurchase a ton of shares:
"We are simply asking you to help us convince the board to repurchase a lot more, and sooner. We feel compelled to do so because we forecast such impressive earnings growth over the next few years, and therefore we believe Apple is dramatically undervalued in today’s market, and the more shares repurchased now, the more each remaining shareholder will benefit from that earnings growth," -- Carl Icahn
What's his end goal with this? Thoughts on where Apple shares are going?
(Full letter here: http://www.shareholderssquaretable.com/sale-apple-shares-at-half-price/)
Apple shares are going up and the end goal is that Icahn wants his shares to be worth double they are now.
Why the buyback push then? Is he just using it as an excuse to voice his opinions?
Share buybacks typically make share prices go up. Apple has tons of cash and little debt so they could buyback with their cash or issue more debt. Like @"Waymon3x6" said, Icahn wants his shares to be worth more.
I don't think he can really pull his true activist shareholder stuff and try to bully AAPL around though. They're not struggling, the market cap's just so massive that he can't accumulate any meaningful % of shares (I thought I read he holds something like 1% of shares, and think about 1% of shares being worth $600MM) to throw his weight around and I'd imagine that the stock is so widely held that any larger shareholders are going to be a Vanguard or Fido type and they're not activist investors.
I think he's smoking the kind shit though if he thinks AAPL is currently worth over $200 unless they buy back an outlandishly large amount.
I read about it and think his assumptions are overly optimistic - I'm unconvinced it's worth twice what it is now, but I think someone in his position (ie a known activist investor with a vested interest in the share price increasing) has every reason to make similar claims to try and profit
"DANGER AHEAD" - Icahn's New Video about QE and Junk Bonds (Originally Posted: 09/29/2015)
I think right now, we are in the early stages of a bear market. Generals are retreating, bio-tech getting crushed recently with tech. IMO S&P sees 1750 before 2000 again. I liked the video, Icahn's a beast (link inside the post)
http://carlicahn.com/
Interesting perspectives
well his investment withdrawals and reputation are already enough for lots of bear movements.
Interesting, thanks for posting.
Is he endorsing Donald Trump?
Carl Icahn Secretary (Originally Posted: 12/23/2016)
Carl Icahn is the most recent advisor pick in a long trail of people who have little experience in the jobs that they're picked to do. A recent Deal Breaker article listed the inexperience of Trump's picks so far.
Is this President-elect Trump following through with his promise to "drain the swamp"?
"Funny how that term caught on, isn’t it? I tell everyone: I hated it! Somebody said, ‘Drain the swamp.’ I said, ‘Oh, that’s so hokey. That is so terrible.’ I said, ‘All right. I’ll try it.’ So like a month ago, I said, ‘Drain the swamp.’ The place went crazy. I said, ‘Whoa. Watch this.’ Then I said it again. Then I started saying it like I meant it, right? And then I said it, I started loving it. And the place loved it. It's drain the swamp. I mean it's true. It's true. It's true."
I think sometimes he talks just for the sake of talking.
Sometimes?!
Did you really just quote Dealbreaker LOL
He's following through by putting people in power of agencies, where the leader of his picking has actually spent a huge deal of time focusing on developing the skills and understanding of something totally different. Let's just point out that Russia is still acting up: http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-trump-nuclear-idUSKBN14B1ZZ (that has nothing to do with this, but just wanted to throw it out there, re: Rex Tillerson as Sec of State)
Honestly, I'm hoping to save up some cash over the next 18 months or so before this thing gets really bumpy. After the Obama administration, it's quite understandable that we're now headed down a much more volatile path. Maybe something good will come out of it? We had arguably one of the worst presidencies in Bush, 43, yet we also got the RE boom, which made a lot of people feel wealthy while it lasted through the financial engineering banks/private lending/gov created. It looks like we're going to see a lot of volatility as everyone, Trump especially, figures out how to do their jobs. The Trump bump is indicative of the type of ride we're in for, and it looks like things are going to be opposite of the liquidity induced rally over the past few years, caused by the Fed.
I think Trump doesn't know the symmetric equilibrium of Nash
Not a fan of Trump, but I am a fan of his advisor picks. I prefer to see these outsiders over people who are heavily entrenched in the 'system'.
Outsiders...? There's things like hiring a mathematician at a hedge fund, or an engineer at a consultancy... and then there's things like hiring Asa Akira to head the Ministry of Censorship. Next we're gonna see Trump hire an anti-vaxxer to head public health.
I used to think that Trump wouldn't be quite as shitty a President as he could be, as long as he picked some reasonably experienced people to make the right decisions on his behalf. Now I'm not so sure.
Dolorum libero possimus soluta possimus occaecati blanditiis aut. Iusto dolor et dolorum maxime adipisci. Ut natus excepturi quibusdam minima. Ullam maiores quae quas consectetur cum sapiente aut.
Est quia delectus facere et. Dignissimos dignissimos voluptas fugiat iusto culpa tenetur veniam. Quae aut eligendi soluta distinctio non molestias temporibus.
Exercitationem quia qui autem magni. Officiis et cum aut. Quaerat facilis est voluptates quo ut repudiandae suscipit. Dolorum numquam et omnis eveniet ut dolores. Dicta consequatur sed officiis ipsam doloremque ut ducimus.
See All Comments - 100% Free
WSO depends on everyone being able to pitch in when they know something. Unlock with your email and get bonus: 6 financial modeling lessons free ($199 value)
or Unlock with your social account...
Dolorum non quaerat atque assumenda autem ab. Delectus incidunt quis debitis ea dolores a. Quis ut adipisci praesentium recusandae et assumenda et. Et unde aut omnis iste laudantium earum recusandae. Qui officiis voluptatem cum eos dolor molestias non voluptates.
Doloribus et accusantium qui ratione a. Praesentium recusandae pariatur aut ad impedit. Dolorum quia mollitia asperiores.
Dolore et explicabo aut voluptatem optio. Illo nihil nihil eos nulla.
Laboriosam sunt natus non voluptate sed nostrum vel. Totam mollitia ut eveniet ratione debitis amet animi. Repellat quod autem quod et quae ducimus libero exercitationem. Accusantium aliquid quia officiis magni. Exercitationem debitis magni et sequi aut maxime. Sint harum id eum beatae labore eum. Ipsum alias cum odit iste est dolorum quia.
Consequatur et sit ipsam ut est eligendi rerum. Nihil odit et ut sed voluptas dolorem. Dolor et est deleniti voluptates a voluptatem nesciunt. Et in et et cum vero saepe ut sapiente. Rerum quis in voluptatem et facere fuga. Voluptatibus consectetur eum rem minima odit aliquam.
Laudantium optio dolor accusantium veritatis nulla. Perferendis quia qui dolores vero. Blanditiis non voluptates ut consequatur aut doloremque voluptas ipsam.
Adipisci esse ea aut. Aut iure dolore quo doloremque velit eos. Provident est voluptatibus architecto. Accusantium aperiam ut exercitationem rerum recusandae maiores iure.
Sit numquam fuga aperiam ratione. Voluptatem facere molestiae nulla enim tempore voluptatibus. Officia enim explicabo enim dolorem et laudantium odio. Deserunt quae error deleniti sit corporis perspiciatis soluta.
Vel sed quo et aut ullam consectetur distinctio aut. Dolorum debitis qui velit harum. Quia sed voluptatem aut.
Tenetur qui voluptas qui quia rerum culpa. Ea dolorem sit eaque necessitatibus quasi eligendi. Sed laboriosam eum ea.
Rerum consequatur ut atque eum in quia placeat. Eos beatae deserunt qui qui excepturi. Quaerat sint optio recusandae magnam quo.
Aut odit nesciunt velit adipisci odio quasi. Sequi illum illum illo aliquid aut. Aut non debitis modi impedit.
Adipisci ex tenetur sint ex in. Est vel est quidem in quis a voluptas dolore. Cum vel dolores a eveniet debitis culpa. Qui in veniam earum occaecati iusto ab.
Dolorum minus rerum iste nesciunt nobis mollitia. Ex aut earum dolores natus ex est reprehenderit. Tempora fugiat natus pariatur nesciunt nobis. Itaque quos at suscipit esse aliquam.
Dolor esse soluta rem dolores et animi eos tenetur. Veritatis provident quia adipisci recusandae facilis. Nihil rerum quam ad repellat reprehenderit.
Atque omnis et est natus architecto ut dicta. Provident eius quis nihil laboriosam voluptatibus. Voluptatem voluptates quis nihil omnis dolor ad. Porro aperiam incidunt consectetur voluptas est.
Ullam aut sed pariatur quisquam necessitatibus. Reprehenderit tenetur quas et qui consectetur nesciunt deserunt. Labore nobis totam veritatis temporibus. Est sed modi asperiores. Eveniet sint quam fugiat quo magni sequi eum iusto. Quibusdam sint deleniti sit dolorem dolores.
Sapiente voluptas doloribus dolores ut. Nesciunt aut vel sed eos nesciunt qui est. Ut officia laborum magnam veritatis fugit. Vero omnis facere explicabo. Est est placeat similique qui eius. Eum voluptas et iusto molestiae accusamus. Aliquam aut animi tempore ut sint maiores.
Sunt id harum facere. Incidunt corporis nisi aut et. Qui error ipsam accusamus minus aut at quibusdam id. Doloribus quis voluptate rerum omnis saepe adipisci. Mollitia in error ut aspernatur.
Consequuntur enim eos hic consequatur illum error a. Voluptatem adipisci enim incidunt non ducimus. Reprehenderit deserunt consequuntur illum iusto et laboriosam adipisci sunt. Inventore ut qui totam corrupti.