Risk Arbitrage: Restoration Hardware (RSTO)

Not too sure about this one but I'm wondering whether I should take a risk arbitrage position in Restoration Hardware (RSTO). A management-led private equity buyout is in the works for $6.70 (deal expected to close in March 2008). The company has said it will solicit other offers until December 13th. It looks like Sears Holdings (SHLD), led by value investor Eddie Lampert, is thinking of bidding for the company. Speculation is that RSTO will be a good strategic fit for SHLD so a higher bid may come.

The shares are currently trading around $7, which is about 5% more than the original offer by the private equity group. The problem for anyone taking a position now is that no new offer may come from SHLD. Sears has bought up almost 14% of RSTO's shares so even if they don't offer anything, they will profit from the original bid; whereas if you buy the stock now, you will end up with a 5% loss. The motives of Sears isn't clear. The strategic fit argument would have a lot more merit if (i) Eddie Lampert wasn't a value investor, and (ii) the original offer wasn't such a big premium (the offer was a 100%+ premium). Value investors will forgo opportunities than overpay so I don't know how much Lampert thinks RSTO is worth. For instance, he might have liked it when the stock price was in the $4 to $5 range but I'm not sure how much higher than $7 he will pay.

The one positive going for RSTO risk takers is that strategic buyers will pay more than what private equity can these days.

I'll think about this... most likely I think I'll pass on this...

Comments

  1. AnonymousFebruary 10, 2008 at 3:09 PM

    I stayed away from this one too! Good thinking! I go to www.madmergers.com for my merger data.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular Posts

Thoughts on the stock market - March 2020

Image
Right now, DJIA has a P/E of 16.8 and forwand P/E of 15.1, whereas S&P 500 is at 20.1 with forward P/E of 15.8. Source: WSJ market Data If you ignore interest rates and inflation expectations--both of these influence valuations but depends on your macro call-- the market is not cheap. Long-term P/E is around 15. Trailing P/E is around 20% (Dow) to 40% (S&P500) higher than average. Forward P/E is in line with long term average but that assumes a strong V recovery. Consensus forecast is for profits to drop 1.2% in 2020. In 2008, it dropped 25.4% so current forecast is a very mild recession. Covid-19 coronavirus is not going to last more than a few months but these forecasts are still too rosy in my opinion. So I wouldn't rely on forward P/E. The richly valued (mostly tech or high quality) have not fallen much but the distressed ones have. So if you want to outperform in the long run, I think one’s choice right now is to: • Wait for market to fall another, say
✖ READ MORE >>>

Warren Buffett's Evolution and his Three Investment Styles

Image
A Young Warren Buffett In a comment to one of my posts , Mark Carter, who incidentally appears to have a  good blog worth checking out , asked: "Buffett Prime is 1970's to early 1990's" Could you elaborate? I have vaguely indicated how I view Warren Buffett in the past, but I thought I would detail my view of his investing behaviour. This is more of an opinion piece and many others would disagree with me (if you do, I'm curious to hear your thoughts). I don't follow Warren Buffett as closely as many value investors so I may get some facts wrong. My view is that Warren Buffett went through three different phases, with each consisting of different investment techniques. The overall investment theory remained the same—what people call value investing—but his execution, tactics, and strategy differs across the three phases. Some people may break up his career into additional periods but my feeling is that the three I will describe essentially capt
✖ READ MORE >>>

Hugh Hendry discussion at the Alternative Investment Conference

Thanks to Value Investing World for bringing this Hugh Hendry interview to my attention. I may not agree with all the things—short-term orientation of hedge funds is actually worse IMO; the sharp pencil effect doesn't always work—but Hendry is a true contrarian and worth listening. Like Marc Faber or Jim Rogers, you also can't take everything Hugh Hendry says seriously. I had always felt Hugh Hendry was firmly in the deflation camp but I get the feeling that he is now opening up to high-inflation possibilities. Otherwise, his stance appears to be similar to past opinions.
✖ READ MORE >>>