Where is Goldman Sachs?
The AT&T and T-Mobile deal is no doubt the biggest deal of the year, with two prominent boutiques (to my surprise) being leading book runners. However, I was quite surprised not to see GS involved in the deal in some way or the other, after all they're the leaders in M&A especially in the tech area. If you had any concerns about Evercore and Greenhill being top shops this might change your mind. Here's the link to the article.
GS TMT IS ON THE DECLINE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!11111one!oneone!!!11
This is technically telecom, not tech.
i see wachu did dere
200 west street...
they probably knew 6 months ago that the deal isn't going to close.
LOL
You're probably right. As long as it involves the government GS is always right.
amiright?
They were advising Sprint
Government Sachs is going to drop the hammer
OMFG BLACK SWAN! THE SKY IS FALLING!!! MARKETS WILL CRASH!!!!!1111!!!
More like their client Sprint lost this fight...
.
JPM advised BECAUSE they could provide $20b in finance
and they will be in good position to reap the majority of the fees on the bridge-to-bonds, any follow-up issuances, and other future related transactions.
x
I'm assuming GS still was able to get advisory fee from Sprint even though they didn't win the deal, is this correct?
God get a fuckin life. You guys are idiots.
It really doesn't mean anything in terms of GS' stature on Wall Street. They weren't involved because they're conflicted in that they were advising Sprint, the other bidder in this transaction. They could have been advising Sprint instead of AT&T for a variety of reasons... maybe Sprint got involved in this process before AT&T, maybe the Sr. Banker at GS has a much tighter relationship with Sprint's management vs. AT&T's... maybe GS made a strategic decision to advise Sprint for whatever reason. Maybe they've been working with Sprint for the last 18 months looking for strategic acquisitions and this one was one of the half dozen they've been kicking around... it really doesn't mean anything at all. So all you GS first round rejects getting a hard-on because "the mighty have fallen" don't get too excited.
Its not very hard to "win" an auction, you simply pay more than everyone else is willing to pay. Just because you didn't advise your client to pay more than everyone else doesn't equate to somehow having been on a disadvantaged platform.... and "losing".
Also... and I'm no expert in the space here, but from what I understand TMobile was a losing proposition. Deutsche Telecom was bleeding red in TMobile USA, so its not exactly a crown jewel AT&T got their paws on. There's way too many factors involved here to be able to say AT&T won and Sprint lost... even 5 years from now, it'll be nearly impossible to make that statement.
First off, i rejected Goldman and not the other way round. If you have a little bit of foresight you kniw that no company stays at the top forever and things are looking terrible for GS. Just look at their past profits and the next quarter will suck again, because they have to repay Buffett. They are trailing JPM in advisory league tables and gave up their best asset, the prop trading team. And their reputation is somewhat on par with Gaddhafi and Tepco. Sprint was considered to be the only possible company to close this deal. They fucked up. 39 billion is not a lot of money for a branch with so many customers. And Gs also fucked up the Facebook capital raise, Mark is said to be really pissed off. Now guess who's not going to have a shot at the IPO? Rejecting Goldman, who called me like 5 times after I had rejected them, begging, was the best decision.
cool story bro
lol
Riiiiiiiight. So you applied for M&A at GS (which doesn't exist) and got an interview for both M&A (which doesn't exist) and CRM? Then you went to your CRM interview, got an offer and rejected it? And then went to your M&A interview (which doesn't exist), got an offer (which doesn't exist) and rejected it?
You're a class A idiot. Nothing you said is even half intelligible. Redemption of preferred shares doesn't hit your P&L, so it has no impact on profitability. If you're talking cash flow, than Goldman's repayment of the preferred is still Accretive since they're paying a 10% dividend on the $5 billion preferred and their cost of capital is a fraction of 10%... they can easily refin that $5 billion at a minimal interest rate (if they don't feel like using the $40 billion of cash on their BS).
What Facebook capital raise? There is none and Mark Zuckerberg has said time and time again that he couldn't give less of a shit about the monetization of Facebook. And sceondly, Facebook is a benficial to GS from a franchise perspective... there is literally zero revenue stream associated with a company which will likely be as flush with cash as an Apple. All they can hope to do is make a 10-20 bucks off the IPO and snag a few M&A fees here and there... trust me no one is losing any sleep at GS (save one or 2 mid-level MDs) because Mark Zuckerberg is less than pleased.
GS has had bad years before... 1993...
Marcus said it all.
@ Antsman - As previously mentioned, this is a telecom deal. More importantly though - by any objective measure, GS is no longer the leader in M&A or tech (especially tech IPOs - that will all change if they get FB though). For WSO purposes, it will always be showered with love (and rightfully so - the TMT group as a whole is remarkable) because it places so well, arguably better than anywhere on the street depending on what you want to do - e.g., places like GS SSG place very wel into distressed debt / hybrid funds.
@ Solidarity - you got this right. JPM got the deal because it has the balance sheet that a GS/MS/Lazard (fill in top boutique of your choice) does not. JPM will actually end up making far and away the most money out of this deal.
@ Marcus - accurate and insightful as always. I know a little about tech banking and these kind of "conflict" scenarios happen all the time.
Will be very interesting to see how long the HSR process drags out here. Seems like T-Mobile's large U.S. presence actually lowers the chance of the deal being completed from an antitrust POV.
Who is the leader in tech now?
Why it's the principal adviser to Deutsche Telekom, of course ;)
THIS IS MADNESS!!!!!!!
Marcus Halberstram, come on you know I'm right.
Bloomberg writes :"The redemption will cut first-quarter earnings per share by $2.84, the bank said in a statement today." Google it if you don't believe me. I also suggest "IFRS for dummies".
I'm sure that the guys at Facebook were happy about American investors being discriminated against when Goldman offered clients a stake in the company. In fact the FT and other newspapers reported about widespread discontent. You can be sure that GS will not handle the IPO.
I did not apply to any group called Goldman Sachs M&A, I just applied to Goldman Sachs IBD. I'm sorry if all you think about is group names. But when I applied I was not familiar with any GS groups, I just wanted to do M&A. So I wrote M&A to show that it's different from the CRM position.
I'm sure that "IFRS for Dummies" will be useful, considering Goldman reports under GAAP.
And considering Goldman and GSAM were part of a financing for Facebook, somehow I doubt Facebook has poor relations with them; you seem to have a very poor understanding of how pre-public financings work. One of the purposes of the investment vehicle, and the reason American investors couldn't buy in to it, was because of SEC limitations on the number of shareholders Facebook can have before they have to start publicly reporting, which they don't plan to do until April 2012.
Marcus already wiped the floor with you. Considering you're looking forward to a career in risk, you should learn when to cut your losses and give up.
What exactly does one quarter's EPS have to do with a firm's overall competitiveness? The move was well received by the market, Goldman's stock was up on the news... analysts were positive as well.
And its the SEC that was "discriminating" against US investors, not Goldman Sachs and not Facebook.
Well, first of all I wanted to show that I was right concerning the P&L impact. Goldman Sachs should have anticipated the SEC's complaint. Also, it does show that you are less competitive when you don't manage to post impressive numbers for a couple of quarters in a row. Third, Goldman Sachs is still a great company. If you manage to get in now, or managed to get in in the past, that still shows you are awesome. But it doesn't mean that the company will stay on top. My point is, Goldman will slip a couple of places in the league tables starting this year, but you guys there still have great exit opps and thus don't have to fear the demise.
Sorry for digressing. Could someone elaborate on the arrangement of the $20bn bridge financing JPM is providing? Which IBD teams would typically be heading this process, i.e. structuring, pricing, underwriting (LevFin and Syndication)? I would be interested in the arranging of the financing of the deal besides the strategic/process/valuation part of M&A. Thanks.
Architecto aut praesentium consequatur amet enim qui voluptatum. Ut officia corrupti at non. Esse debitis consequuntur et. Saepe alias omnis adipisci rerum fugit aspernatur.
Quis est maxime odit ipsa qui. Alias et dolore nihil. Autem sunt dolorem consectetur in. Non ut aut similique architecto perspiciatis veritatis mollitia.
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...
Placeat voluptas quo rerum laboriosam temporibus accusantium iure. Beatae maiores est provident velit. Nihil illo repudiandae beatae voluptate beatae.
Sint ad consequuntur et optio. Corrupti aut qui unde. Omnis est eveniet voluptas atque in maxime.
Libero libero dolore officia ea et aut. Minus omnis cum accusamus sit aut. Et blanditiis nisi ipsa nulla fuga voluptatibus quidem. Omnis nisi ex quod eos.