Make it a checkbook....
"Democratic Newark mayor criticizes Obama attack
Mayor Cory A. Booker of Newark, a prominent Democrat enlisted as a
surrogate for President Obama’s campaign, criticized it Sunday for
attacking Mitt Romney’s work at the private equity firm Bain Capital.
Booker, speaking on NBC’s “Meet the Press,’’ made his comments in
response to a television advertisement the president’s campaign unveiled
last week. It portrays Romney, the presumptive Republican presidential
nominee, as someone who eliminated jobs for the sake of profits during
his years running Bain Capital.
“I have to just say, from a very personal level, I’m not about to sit
here and indict private equity,’’ Booker said. “To me, it’s just we’re
getting to a ridiculous point in America, especially that I know I live
in a state where pension funds, unions, and other people are investing
in companies like Bain Capital.
“If you look at the totality of Bain Capital’s record, they’ve done a
lot to support businesses, to grow businesses. And this to me - I’m
very uncomfortable with.’’
Booker said he still supports the reelection of the president.
--more--"
"Obama campaign got donations from Bain employees" by Callum Borchers |
Globe Correspondent, May 23, 2012
President Obama has accepted $92,270 in his last two
campaigns from employees of Bain Capital, the private equity firm
formerly led by Mitt Romney, which he has villainized for profiting on
failed companies that laid off workers.
Tired of the $hit political fooleys.
Related: Banks Bought Off Both Parties
That's why there really is no change down there, and why they haven't even written rules (or delayed them) yet.
Romney has taken $229,650, more than any other politician. But
together, Democratic candidates and committees have received more than
$1.3 million from Bain Capital workers since the 2008 election cycle -
double the amount collected by Republicans.
That's odd. Ed Schultz didn't mention that when he was blasting Booker on the radio the other day.
The willingness of Obama and his party to fund their campaigns with
Bain Capital money threatens to undermine their protests against the
manner in which it was earned....
Yeah, it sure does.
But even as the Obama campaign has attempted to
clarify its message, the issue is not whether Romney is a good guy or a
bad guy, the campaign now says, but whether running Bain Capital
qualifies him to run the country.
I love AmeriKan politics in the 21st-century, don't you?
“We’re not challenging the virtues of the private equity business, or
Romney’s right to run his business as he saw fit, or even his right to
run other businesses into the ground while turning a profit for himself
and his investors,’’ Obama campaign spokesman Michael Czin said.
“Instead, we’re pointing out that Romney economics puts short-term
profit for himself and his investors ahead of long-term growth for the
companies - and their employees.’’
That explains the lack of enthusiasm for your campaign.
--more--"
And what virtues is he talking about?
"Bain often couldn’t lose with buyouts" by Beth Healy | Globe Staff, January 14, 2012
Mitt Romney spent much more of his career in leveraged buyouts than in the investments in start-up companies known as venture capital....
With leveraged buyouts, the investment firm purchases a mature company, partially with its money and with debt it transfers to the company. The new owners then usually streamline the business and seek to resell it.
For example, in the same year that Romney invested in Staples, he led
the firm in its $200 million acquisition of Accuride, a wheel rim maker
that was part of Firestone. Bain put down only $5 million and borrowed the rest, using junk bonds from Drexel Burnham Lambert. Eighteen months later, Bain resold the company and reaped $121 million in its first taste of the big time in the go-go 1980s.
Soon after, Romney steered Bain Capital more toward debt-driven buyouts. There was more money at stake and less risk for Bain than betting on untested technology.
Venture capital is “absolutely more risky’’ than buyouts, said Howard
Anderson, a venture investor and former entrepreneur who teaches at the
Sloan School of Management at the Massachusetts Institute of
Technology.
You know where venture capital comes from?
Related: VenCap Vroom-Vroom
No wonder tuition costs are rising and your pension statements have stagnated, America.
For one, he said, buyouts often involve companies that have been in business for a long time. Second, buyout firms tend to take profits out of deals quickly, even having the target companies take on enormous loans to pay the investors back.
“These guys have figured out a way to make money even if the company loses money,’’ Anderson said. “It’s heads we win, tails we win. Not always - but they can do that.’’
We call it a RIGGED GAME here!
Romney and his former partners at Bain Capital have said they make the
most money by growing companies, not shrinking them. But they often make money no matter what.
Take a giant deal like Domino’s Pizza Inc. Bain led the $1.1 billion
deal in 1998, putting down about $385 million in cash. The rest of the
money was borrowed. Then, as Bain wanted to get its money out over the years, it had Domino’s borrow more to pay it back. Bain reaped a 500 percent return. Domino’s has $1.5 billion in debt on its books.
You know, this does NOT SEEM like a GOOD BUSINESS MODEL to ME!
Romney has been criticized for doing deals at Bain Capital where the firm made money but employees were laid off and the company was left with large debt loads, and sometimes bankruptcy.
And Mitt says that created jobs?
In a 1994 deal to acquire Dade International, an Illinois medical equipment company, Bain invested $27 million and made roughly eight times its money. But it also loaded up the company with $1.6 billion in debt; 1,700 people would lose their jobs, and the company briefly filed for bankruptcy protection in 2002.
Bain counters that Dade emerged from bankruptcy stronger and growing; it was acquired by Siemens for $7 billion in 2007.
Did that REPAIR all the SHATTERED LIVES caused by the deal?
--more--"
Related:
Big Banks Are Booming
With This Ring I Thee Vote
Also see: Health Hypocrite Mitt
Update:
"Regulators cast eye on private equity firms" February 13, 2012|By Peter Lattman
NEW
YORK - In recent years, the private equity industry has escaped much of
the regulatory scrutiny that has been directed toward hedge funds and
Wall Street banks. But that appears to be changing.
The Securities
and Exchange Commission has begun a broad examination of the private
equity industry, seeking information about the business practices of
some of the country’s most powerful financial firms....
Oh, we are all saved, the SEC said it was going to investigate!
One focus of the inquiry is how private equity firms value their
investments and report performance.
You mean they might -- gasp! -- lie?
Unlike the valuing of publicly
traded stocks, valuing private equity investments - largely in private
companies that are not listed on an exchange - can be a thorny and
subjective process.
That means its a self-serving fraud in newspeak, folks.
The SEC’s concern, say people familiar with
the government inquiry, is that some private equity funds might
overstate the value of their portfolios to attract investors for future
funds....
Oh, YOU'RE KIDDING!!?? WHO would want to DO something like THAT?
The private equity industry drew heightened interest during last
decade’s buyout boom. Backed by billions of dollars in loans from flush
banks, the firms acquired major US companies, including radio giant
Clear Channel Communications, hospital chain HCA, and automaker
Chrysler.
Washington began to pay attention. The favorable tax
treatment that private equity executives receive on a large portion of
their compensation came under attack....
Yeah, that's the Bain of Mitt Romney when Americans are only seeing taxes rise on themselves.
Critics
of the industry argue that private equity’s core investment strategy -
borrowing large amounts of debt to buy companies - too often results in
bankruptcies and job losses.
Yeah, WE KNOW!
Private equity officials counter that their acquisitions drive economic growth by making companies more competitive.
After you've slashed jobs, taken a ton of loot out of the thing, and saddled 'em with debt payments -- and then you tell us you turned the company around and created jobs?
The
SEC inquiry appears less focused on questions like private equity’s
effect on jobs or the companies that it buys. Instead, the commission
wants to deepen its understanding of more arcane issues like firms’ fee
structures and how they value investments.
I'm sure it will be a grueling investigation for the PEEs.
Handling the inquiry is
the SEC’s enforcement division, which drew criticism for its
ineffectiveness as a regulator in the period leading up to the financial
crisis. The agency has recently taken a more aggressive public stance,
vowing to root out misconduct on Wall Street....
Yeah, have you bought that hunk of public relations damage control, dear readers?
--more--"
