When Centerbridge Partners, a New York–based private
equity and distressed-debt investor, gained the right this
spring to sponsor the reorganization of bankrupt Extended Stay
Hotels, it was more than just a corporate coup. For
Centerbridge managing directors Vivek Melwani and William Rahm,
it was a personal triumph. For close to two years, Melwani, 38,
at one time a bankruptcy lawyer, and Rahm, 31, formerly a
private equity specialist for Blackstone Group, had been
painstakingly combing through the convoluted debt of the
684-hotel, Spartanburg, South Carolina, chain.
“Extended Stay had a $4.1 billion mortgage that was
securitized and sliced into 18 tranches, along with $3.3
billion of mezzanine debt divided into ten separate
loans,” recalls Rahm with a shudder. Some prospective
investors in the efficiency-hotel company had thrown up their
hands after discovering what a mishmash its finances were
— a situation exacerbated by the fact that this was the
first-ever large-scale corporate bankruptcy involving
commercial-mortgage-backed securities, and therefore posed
extra uncertainty. (The numerous holders of CMBSs are
presumably harder to round up to vote on a rescue plan than a
smattering of banks holding shares of a mortgage.)
Yet Centerbridge saw opportunity buried beneath the
complexity. “Based on our analysis, we recognized that
there was a very good business here struggling under too much
debt in a complicated structure,” says Rahm. Extended Stay
had good management and a low-cost business model that produced
high margins but was saddled with a bubble-era balance sheet,
he explains.
Unfortunately for Centerbridge, other private equity
operators and distressed-debt investors were arriving at the
same conclusion. Thus, when Centerbridge, at Melwani and
Rahm’s recommendation, bought a big chunk of Extended
Stay’s CMBSs at a sizable discount in late 2008, other
investors swooped in too. And when Centerbridge and New York
hedge fund firm Paulson & Co. put up $450 million in
February 2010 in a partial bid intended to give them effective
control over Extended Stay’s reorganization (and which
valued the company at about $3.3 billion), the offer was topped
less than one month later by real estate mogul and
glamour-hotel impresario Barry Sternlicht. His Greenwich,
Connecticut–based Starwood Capital Group paired up with
Fort Worth,Texas–based private equity giant TPG Capital in
March to pony up $905 million in sundry forms (cash, a backstop
rights offering and cash alternatives).
Centerbridge matched Starwood’s offer and sweetened
it by agreeing to forgo the breakup fee and other expenses
that it would ordinarily be entitled to as a stalking-horse
bidder: the one that gets a corporate auction going by
creating a floor price. Moreover, Centerbridge demanded that
an open auction be held before long so that one of the
investor groups could be picked to implement a reorganization
plan to try to salvage the long-suffering Extended Stay.
So after 19 straight hours of bidding and counterbidding,
Centerbridge, Paulson and a third partner, Blackstone,
declared victory in the wee hours of Thursday, May 28. Their
offer of $3.925 billion topped the Starwood group’s bid
by just $40 million. The bidding war pushed up the value of
Extended Stay by roughly $625 million. Thrilled at winning
the auction, Melwani and Rahm assert that Centerbridge got a
great price, especially considering that the firm’s
holdings of cheap Extended Stay CMBSs will be paid back at
100 cents on the dollar.
For distressed-debt investors, the epic contest for
Extended Stay is both good and bad news — a combination
with which they are intimately familiar. On the positive
side, it demonstrates that an industry not long ago written
off as half dead is registering fresh vital signs. On the
negative side, the sheer impenetrability of Extended
Stay’s finances and the fierce bidding for the insolvent
company attest both to the unprecedented complexity of
distressed-debt investing today and the intense competition
for deals.
Distressed-debt investors say that, compared with the
high-yield bond market’s collapse in the early ’90s
or the stock market bubble’s bursting a decade later,
the recent financial crisis is characterized by considerably
more-recondite corporate reorganizations. Creditors of Lehman
Brothers Holdings, for example, are divided into more than
100 classes, each with what seems to be a different repayment
priority. The freewheeling financial creativity of the past
decade has added to the complications of many workouts.
The ferocious rivalry for deals, meanwhile, is in large
part merely a function of overcrowding. In the downturn of
the early 2000s, some $30 billion of capital was committed to
distressed debt, according to Chicago-based data provider
Hedge Fund Research. One expert on the subject, New York
University Leonard N. Stern School of Business professor
Edward Altman, gauges the sum at $300 billion today. The
field is awash in deep-pocketed new entrants, such as
Blackstone, KKR & Co., Paulson and Tudor Investment
Corp.
“There is an awful lot of money chasing too few
opportunities,” contends Jeffry Haber, controller of the
$558 million Commonwealth Fund, a New York–based private
foundation. “People might pitch buying debt at 60 cents
on the dollar. Then you see them buying things at 90
cents.”
Howard Marks, co-founder and chairman of one of the
largest and most venerable distressed-debt firms, $76
billion-in-assets Oaktree Capital Management, sees
interlopers as the big problem. “A lot of money can
swing into distressed debt that is not technically allocated
to it,” he points out. “Warren Buffett can be the
biggest distressed-debt buyer. Hedge funds can swing into
distressed debt. Knowing how much money has been raised by
pure distressed-debt funds is only half of the
picture.”
Excessive demand aside, there’s also a supply-side
issue. Some insist that as the economy recovers, albeit
haltingly, the great bargains tossed up by the worst
financial upheaval since the Great Depression are growing a
little scarce. At the end of 2008, the distressed-debt ratio
— the proportion of junk bonds trading at truly
distressed levels (1,000 basis points or more above
Treasuries) — peaked at 85 percent, according to
Standard & Poor’s. By May the ratio had improved
(or, from a distressed-debt investor’s perspective,
worsened) all the way to 9.4 percent. At the same time, the
high-yield default rate, having peaked at 13.5 percent last
November, had eased to 5.4 percent in July, reports
Moody’s Investors Service.
The upshot, many were contending this spring, is that the
grave dancers’ ball is well and truly over. The 28
percent average return on distressed-debt investing in 2009
(according to HFR) will not be repeated for some time, they
insist.
Yet many distressed-debt investors beg to differ.
Doom-mongerers by nature, they see a world of troubles ahead
— they’re hardly alone — and past surveys have
amply captured this Cassandra streak. According to an annual
poll last January by publisher Debtwire, while one third of
distressed-debt investors believed corporate restructurings
had peaked, two thirds didn’t expect that to happen
until this year, 2011 or even beyond.
“The fact is that over $1 trillion of bank loans and
junk bonds are maturing over the next five years, and given
the number of companies that are leveraged north of 5 times,
the supply of overleveraged credit is as large as it has ever
been,” contends Anthony Ressler, co-founder and senior
partner of Los Angeles–based alternative-investments
outfit Ares Management.
Jonathan Lavine, chief investment officer of Sankaty
Advisors, the credit affiliate of private investment manager
Bain Capital, adds: “We simply need to be patient. Our
analysis on the ‘maturity wall’ suggests that the
opportunity is significant — about 15 to 20 percent of
maturing debt is potentially going to need to be
restructured, which would be three times more than the last
cycle.”
Credit Suisse was estimating in mid-July that about $985
billion of high-yield bonds and leveraged loans will mature
between 2011 and 2014. That’s somewhat less than the
bank’s December 2008 estimate of $1.2 trillion —
reflecting a rush of refinancing — but it’s still a
staggering figure. What’s more, the gloom-sayers
gleefully note, the average annual default rate on U.S.
speculative-grade corporate debt remained below 2 percent
from 2005 through 2007 — a condition unseen in the 30
years before that. Implication: A slew of defaults are ready
to erupt. On top of all that, the past three years witnessed
a record $436 billion in high-yield U.S. bond issues.
“We see the default rate as a W pattern” with
the slanted vertical on the right extending into the future,
says Centerbridge co-founder Jeffrey Aronson. He figures that
many overleveraged buyouts will hit snags and come asunder.
“Amend and extend” deals merely delayed the
underlying companies’ day of reckoning with an
unsustainable debt load, Aronson asserts. He points out too
that some buyouts during the precrash boom years relied on
floating-rate loans and that the companies involved will be
squeezed all the harder when rates eventually rise from their
current record low. But he adds that overall, “it’s
much more situational today in distressed debt — you
have to do the work and focus on special
situations.”
Gloom is apparently everywhere, though, if you look
eagerly enough for it. High-yield bond issuance globally
reached $178.9 billion last year, only 7 percent below
2006’s record volume. And these latest, postcrash bonds
carry tighter covenants, meaning companies won’t find it
so easy to slither through loopholes to avoid formal default.
Jitters about European sovereign debt are a reminder that the
global economy is not out of the Bretton Woods yet. Small
wonder that the more optimistically pessimistic
distressed-debt investors foresee returns this year ranging
from the high teens to 20 percent.
“This is a better time than a year ago for distressed
debt,” declares WL Ross & Co.’s Wilbur Ross
Jr., a doyen of investing in ailing companies and whole
industries. He notes that “we have a pillow somewhere
that says, ‘Don’t buy anything you can buy off a
Bloomberg screen.’” Ross is looking in particular
at financial institutions. “Around 500 banks will fail
before we are out of this mess,” he says.
That kind of encouraging news (depending on one’s
perspective) resonates with Marc Lasry, co-founder and CEO of
New York–based, $18 billion-in-assets Avenue Capital
Group. “I’m more optimistic because there are more
problems out there,” he says. “The economy is not
growing as fast as people had hoped. There’s a
significant amount of debt and less capital available. You
could end up having a lot of restructuring as companies
choose to work with creditors to avoid bankruptcy. This could
be a perfect storm, and that is great for distressed-debt
investors like us.” From its inception in 2007 through
March 31, Avenue’s nearly $17 billion Special Situations
Fund V has run up a net annual internal rate of return of
11.6 percent.
But no matter whether they see Armageddon coming or merely
bad times, or if they differ on which targets will be the
ripest in the approaching disaster, distressed-debt investors
agree on one thing: They are going to have to labor harder
than they did in 2009 to bring home alpha. One area a number
of firms are looking at closely is the sometimes neglected
middle market, usually defined by distressed-debt investors
as companies with ebitda (earnings before interest, taxes,
depreciation and amortization) of anywhere from $10 million
to $100 million. Close to $300 billion of middle-market debt
is due to mature between now and the end of 2014, according
to S&P. Moreover, these credits haven’t recovered in
price to anywhere near the debts of large-capitalization
companies. In July the spread between the loans of
middle-market and large-cap companies was on average 300
basis points, compared with about 80 basis points
historically.
“We expect middle-market companies with enterprise
values ranging from $200 million to $800 million to remain
underserved by middle-market lenders for several years to
come,” says Michael Parks, head of distressed funds at
Los Angeles asset manager Crescent Capital Group. “These
companies tend to be less followed by Wall Street research,
less liquid and undercapitalized.” Parks’s fund
ordinarily invests $20 million to $30 million apiece in
middle-market companies.
In a typical such exercise, Crescent spent more than $30
million between 2003 and 2006 buying up the debt of Brown
Jordan International, a Florida maker of snazzy outdoor
furniture. Plagued by mismanagement and overleveraged, the
company wound up undergoing an out-of-court restructuring in
2007. Having gained 30 percent of the reorganized Brown
Jordan, Crescent led a turnaround that saw ebitda go from $12
million in 2004 to $43 million in 2008.
“Everybody wants to do the big-name bankruptcies
because they are liquid and you can invest a lot of cash, but
there are only a handful of megadeals,” notes another
middle-market enthusiast, Thomas Fuller, senior managing
director of alternative-invesment specialists Angelo, Gordon
& Co. in New York.“So what we are focused on are
companies that have between $500 million and $3 billion of
debt.”
Killings at all target levels are becoming rarer. The
63-year-old Marks, interviewed in his sun-splashed 28th-floor
office at Oaktree’s spalike LA headquarters (marble
floors, California artwork, white roses), is
characteristically guarded about the outlook. “You
can’t find bargains like two years ago,” he
cautions, adding: “That’s okay; we can still make
good investments. We just have to accept lower returns in
order to avoid increased risk.”
And work as hard as ever. “We will continue to try to
find bargains by constantly doing analysis and through close
relations with brokers and debtholders,” vows Marks.
“It’s all execution, just like baseball.”
Oaktree’s conservative investment stance has seen it
through challenging times before. Founded in 1995, the firm
has outlasted such potentially formidable rivals in the
distressed-debt arena as Fidelity Investments; Goldman, Sachs
& Co.; and T. Rowe Price Group. All three launched
serious distressed-debt operations only to abandon them
because of conflicts of interest or other concerns.
Oaktree’s working motto, in Marks’s words, is,
“If we avoid the losers, the winners will take care of
themselves.” He explains that the goal is to “match
market returns in good times and do markedly better in bad
times.”
For that, one needs strict discipline. During the
2004-’06 credit boom, when the default rate stayed below
2 percent, Oaktree did not raise a batch of money, as
tempting as that would have been in a giddy market. Nor did
it deploy all the funds at its disposal. “Oaktree only
invested half of the money we committed,” confides one
institutional investor client. “When the opportunities
are not there, they don’t do deals.”
That defensive approach has resulted in pretty reliable
performance, though Oaktree naturally fares better when
companies do worse and defaults are abundant. The firm’s
OCM Opportunities Fund IVb, whose strategy is to
“influence” distressed debt (that is, it does not
aim to take actual control of companies), was raised in 2002,
when memories of the tech bubble bursting were still fresh,
and through June had a net IRR of 46.5 percent. By contrast,
OCM Opportunities Fund III, raised two years earlier during
happier times, had a more modest IRR of 11.9 percent.
Recent results have been robust. About the time the U.S.
stock market peaked precrash, Oaktree raised its largest-ever
distressed-debt fund — the $10.9 billion OCM
Opportunities Fund VIIb — and the firm invested it
aggressively during volatile 2008 and 2009. From its
inception in 2008 through June 30, the fund had a net IRR of
23.5 percent.
In February, Oaktree finished raising a $3.3 billion fund,
OCM Principal Fund V, that will act as a principal in taking
control of companies and forcibly extricating them from
trouble. Marks says he wants to be prepared for opportunities
in overleveraged buyouts and commercial real estate if the
recovery stalls. However, he also wants to be well positioned
in case the economy gets better on schedule. Over at $12
billion Centerbridge, the 51-year-old Aronson is cheered by
the case for pessimism.
“Last year everyone could buy debt at maybe around 50
cents,” he says. “Today it may trade at 80 cents.
So it must be over, some people think. In our view it is all
about value versus price. The default rate will decline this
year, but as this massive amount of buyout-related debt
matures from 2011 to 2015, some of those companies will be
refinanced; others will have to be restructured.” The
result, he predicts, will be a default rate trending up
smartly in 2011 and 2012. “The macro environment is
quite fragile,” he notes.
That is halfway good news for Centerbridge. The reason is
that this bipolar firm is virtually unique among
distressed-debt shops in also doing substantial private
equity investing as a way to smooth out returns — in
theory, private equity should thrive in good economic cycles
and distressed debt in bad.
“What is attractive about Centerbridge is its
combination of buyout and distressed debt,” contends Jay
Fewel, senior investment officer at Oregon’s Public
Employees Retirement System, which manages $53 billion.
“The firm can take advantage of whatever economic
environment we are in.”
Consider Centerbridge’s hybrid approach to investing
in Dana Holding Corp. When the Maumee, Ohio, auto-parts
manufacturer filed for bankruptcy in 2006, Centerbridge was
able to form an alliance with the United Auto Workers and
United Steelworkers — a process helped, no doubt, by the
firm’s in-house auto expert at the time, Stephen Girsky,
once a special adviser to former GM CEO Rick Wagoner and
since March the automaker’s vice chairman for corporate
strategy and business development. (He was also the
top-ranked automotive and auto-parts analyst in Institutional
Investor’s All-America Research Team while at Morgan
Stanley.) With the unions’ blessing, Centerbridge’s
distressed-debt team negotiated a recapitalization with
Dana’s creditors. The investment firm itself bought $250
million of the company’s convertible preferred shares,
giving it sway in appointing directors; other debtors bought
$500 million of the shares, which paid a 4 percent
dividend.
Once Dana emerged from bankruptcy in February 2008,
Centerbridge’s private equity specialists took over.
Centerbridge co-founder Mark Gallogly and a managing
director, David Trucano, were installed on Dana’s
seven-member board. A Centerbridge turnaround expert, Brandt
McKee, was brought in to cut costs and shore up the
company’s capital structure. Dana’s ebitda profit
margin has increased from 0.3 percent at the end of 2008 to
10 percent in this year’s second quarter. Once highly
leveraged, the company now has $1.06 billion in cash versus
$939 million in debt.
More than two years after Dana exited Chapter 11,
Centerbridge still holds its original complement of
convertible preferreds, which if converted would make it the
company’s largest shareholder. And Dana’s shares
have risen from $0.23 last year to $11 as of mid-August.
Founded in 2006, Centerbridge has prospered from its
baptism by fire in the financial crisis. The firm’s $3.2
billion Capital Partners fund, which invests in both buyouts
and distressed debt, has a net IRR of 21.5 percent from
inception through March 31. And its $6.4 billion Credit
Partners Fund, focusing on just distressed debt, returned
62.5 percent in 2009 after suffering a 23.2 percent loss in
2008. For this year through June, the fund’s IRR was
10.4 percent. Meanwhile, Centerbridge’s $2 billion
Special Credit Partners Fund, which does nothing but buyouts,
had an IRR of 76.5 percent from its inception in June 2009
through March 31. (All these numbers come from an investor in
Centerbridge funds.)
Scanning the horizon for opportunities, Aronson fixes on
commercial real estate. “Today there are hundreds of
billions in commercial real estate debt on banks’ books,
which they’re holding while hoping things will get
better,” he observes. “But as banks heal themselves
and build up equity cushions, eventually they will write down
those loans and sell them” to distressed-debt investors
like Centerbridge.
Distressed-debt investing requires patience even more than
capital. “People come and go,” says Oaktree’s
Marks. “For those people who raised funds in 2007, the
best ones will survive and the worst ones will
disappear.” Much like the companies in which they
invest.