WSJ : From $2 Billion to Zero: A Private-Equity Fund Goes Bust in the Oil Patch

From $2 Billion to Zero: A Private-Equity Fund Goes Bust in the Oil Patch
The more than $1 billion of debt an EnerVest fund took on during oil’s price surge now threatens its viability

A $2 billion private-equity fund that borrowed heavily to buy oil and gas wells before energy prices plunged is now worth essentially nothing, an unusual debacle that is wiping out investments by major pensions, endowments and charitable foundations.

EnerVest Ltd., a Houston private-equity firm that focuses on energy investments, manages the fund. The firm raised and started investing money in 2013, when oil was trading at more than double the current price of about $45 a barrel. But the fund added $1.3 billion of borrowed money to boost its buying power. That later caused it trouble when oil prices tumbled.

Now the fund’s lenders, led by Wells Fargo WFC -1.10% & Co., are negotiating to take control of the fund’s assets to satisfy its debt, according to people familiar with the matter.

“We are not proud of the result,” John Walker, EnerVest’s co-founder and chief executive, wrote in an email to The Wall Street Journal.

The outcome will leave investors in the 2013 fund with, at most, pennies for every dollar they invested, the people said. At least one investor, the Orange County Employees Retirement System, already has marked its investment down to zero, according to a pension document.

Though private-equity investments regularly flop, industry consultants and fund investors say this situation could mark the first time that a fund larger than $1 billion has lost essentially all of its value.

EnerVest’s collapse shows how debt taken on during the drilling boom continues to haunt energy investors three years after a glut of fuel sent prices spiraling down.

At its onset, the oil bust was expected to cause widespread losses for private-equity investors. While most funds have been able to navigate the downturn and are hanging on for higher prices, there have been pockets of acute pain. EnerVest’s struggles have been among the most severe.

Only seven private-equity funds larger than $1 billion have ever lost money for investors, according to investment firm Cambridge Associates LLC. Among those of any size to end in the red, losses greater than 25% or so are almost unheard of, though there are several energy-focused funds in danger of doing so, according to public pension records.

EnerVest has attempted to restructure the fund, as well as another raised in 2010 that has struggled with losses, to meet repayment demands from lenders who were themselves writing down the value fund of assets used as collateral, according to public pension documents and people familiar with the efforts.

Mr. Walker in an interview last year said he and his partners put $85 million of their own money toward satisfying the banks, but it wasn’t enough.


A number of prominent institutional investors are at risk of having their investments wiped out, including Caisse de dépôt et placement du Québec, Canada’s second-largest pension, which invested more than $100 million. Florida’s largest pension fund manager and the Western Conference of Teamsters Pension Plan, a manager of retirement savings for union members in nearly 30 states, each invested $100 million, according to public records.

The fund was popular among charitable organizations as well. The J. Paul Getty Trust, John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur and Fletcher Jones foundations each invested millions in the fund, according to their tax filings.

Michigan State University and a foundation that supports Arizona State University also have disclosed investments in the fund.

None of these investors commented. It is possible some of them earlier sold their stakes in the fund, paring losses.

In the earlier interview, Mr. Walker said the struggles of EnerVest’s 2013 and 2010 funds had sparked ire among his investors: “We’ve had some chew us out and hang up on us.”

EnerVest was launched in 1992 and says it operates more U.S. oil and gas wells than any other company. It started out investing for GE Capital, General Electric Corp.’s finance arm. Eventually it began pooling other big investors’ cash, which it used to buy producing oil and gas wells. EnerVest hunted for fields already producing oil and gas but neglected by big oil companies. Once EnerVest bought them, it made improvements and drilled more to increase output.

The strategy isn’t as risky as staking wildcatters or borrowing heavily to buy entire oil companies, but profits are usually lower. To juice returns, however, funds managed by EnerVest and rivals that shared the strategy borrowed money as if they themselves were oil companies, encumbering all of the funds’ assets with the same debt.

Doing that eliminates a key protection for private-equity investors, which generally finance each investment independently so that soured deals don’t put good ones at risk. The use of fund-level debt effectively cross-collateralizes assets, meaning that good investments can be pulled down by bad ones.

Institutional investors were drawn to these so-called resource funds because they typically pay out steady streams of cash as soon as they make their first investments, unlike other private-equity investments that can take years to bear fruit, said Christian Busken, who advises endowments and other big energy investors as director of real assets for Fund Evaluation Group LLC.

“It shouldn’t be something where you can be wiped out. But you are exposed to commodity prices,” said Mr. Busken, who hasn’t worked directly with EnerVest.

EnerVest’s funds historically returned more than 30% or so, which enabled it to raise progressively larger pools of cash. In 2010, it raised about $1.5 billion for its 12th fund and added $800 million of debt. Three years later it raised $2 billion for its next and borrowed $1.3 billion. The fund bought wells in the Texas Panhandle, Utah, outside Dallas and elsewhere, according to securities filings from some of the sellers. The purchases were made largely as U.S. oil prices hovered in the $100-a-barrel range and when natural-gas prices were higher.

CNBC : Let the bank merger boom begin

Let the bank merger boom begin

Banks are swimming in so much excess cash that they don't know what to do with it.
The people at the regulatory agencies have changed so that the foxes are running the hen houses.
This will lead to the start of a bank merger boom.
Richard X. Bove

Let the bank merger boom begin
American banks are swimming in excess funds. They do not know what to do with this money so they are giving it away in the form of stock buybacks and dividends. At the same, time the irony is that the banks are just starting to report mediocre to disappointing second quarter earnings. So, on one hand, the resources necessary to support meaningful growth are being given away.
On the other hand, the need to use this money to stimulate growth has never been greater. Initial earnings reports for the second quarter suggest that the banks are not obtaining the hoped for margin increases and it is tougher to locate new loans.
The absurdity of this situation is not going to persist. The door to intra-industry acquisitions may be about to crack open. The first inkling of merger mania was seen recently when JPMorgan Chase was reported to be considering buying a payment systems company Worldpay Group in Great Britain.

Under the old political regime this would have been impossible because of regulations and a strict view of antitrust laws. However, the old regime is gone. Now regulatory agencies are, or are about to be run, by leaders who think like bankers and are therefore more willing to accede to bankers requests.
Since the financial crash in 2009, according to FDIC numbers, banks have had common equity to asset ratios of approximately 11.0 percent to 11.3 percent. The last time this ratio was this high was in 1938. Interestingly, for the last four years all of the common equity in the banking industry was invested in cash – pure cash. This has not happened since 1992, 25 years ago.
The first reason banks have so much money is because they are earning record amounts. This was true in 2013, 2015 and 2016.
The second reason that the banks have so much money is because the government has forced them to build much larger equity bases and invest the money raised into cash and securities, most of which are backed by U.S. government guarantees.
"All that is needed to start the rush is for someone to ring the bell. That someone is likely to be a new bank acquisition by BB&T."
So, they have all the cash they can use and they have met all of the government's requirements for holding cash and capital. So, what do they do with the money? Bank managements do not appear to know so they are giving it away. Banks as large as JPMorgan Chase and Citigroup to smaller entities like Regions Financial and Comerica are expected to payout more than 100 percent of their earnings in dividends and stock buybacks in 2018.
What would they like to do with the money? It would appear that banks like BB&T, Citizens Financial, Fifth Third, KeyCorp, M&T Bank, PNC Financial, SunTrust, and even U.S. Bancorp would prefer to make acquisitions. Expect JPMorgan Chase and Bank of America to harbor similar feelings. Some of these banks have said so publicly.
Changes in the structure of the regulatory agencies might make this dream a reality.
There are two ex-bankers in the Administration:
Steve Mnuchin at Treasury
Gary Cohn in the Economic Council
Joseph Otting, a banker, is to lead the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency
Randal Quarles, an investor in financial institutions at the Carlyle Group, may be the next Fed governor in charge of bank regulation.
Jay Clayton, a lawyer who advised companies as to how to deal with the Securities and Exchange Commission, is now head of that body.
Jeff Sessions is the Attorney General
Jamie Dimon, JPMorgan's CEO, heads the Business Roundtable.
Plus, the need of the United States to grow its banks to facilitate its foreign policy is now an issue. If there are to be non-military sanctions against North Korea, they will start with eliminating that country's access to the global banking system. This requires the U.S. to have big banks; much bigger than they are now.
The need/will among big banks to make acquisitions is there. The money is there. The need for acquisitions to happen on the part of the U.S. government is being changed by international developments. The people at the regulatory agencies have changed so that the foxes are running the hen houses – bankers and their supporters are or will be running the regulatory agencies. All that is needed to start the rush is for someone to ring the bell. That someone is likely to be a new bank acquisition by BB&T. Also consider that JPMorgan Chase may acquire an overseas bank.
The primary targets for acquisitions are mid-sized regional banks with large customer bases and excess deposits. These companies can be absorbed by the bigger banks; their infra-structures eliminated and a wider array of products sold to the customer base. These deals always seem to work well.

>>> US Gapping up

Gapping up
In reaction to strong earnings/guidance
:
  • MDXG +7.9%, PNC +0.5%
Other news:
  • CLIR +37.5% (receives order from supermajor oil company to qualify Duplex technology)
  • CGI +14.9% (appoints Paul Svindland as CEO effective on or about July 24; Michael Miller, current lead independent director, to become Chairman)
  • CTIC +11.2% (announces that European Medicines Agency has validated the Marketing Authorization Application for pacritinib for the treatment of patients with myelofibrosis who have thrombocytopenia)
  • BLFS +10.2% (announces that Kolon Life Science, TissueGene's exclusive licensee for Asia, including Korea, has received marketing approval for Invossa-K Inj for degenerative arthritis from the Korea Ministry of Food and Drug Safety)
  • HPJ +8.7% (enters smart vacuum market with two new partnerships ),
  • GMO +3.7% (FDA has granted Fast Track designation to SB-318 and SB-913, the Co's clinical stage in vivo genome editing product candidates for the treatment of Mucopolysaccharidosis Type I and MPS II)
  • ALDR +2.9% (favorable commentary on Thursday's Mad Money),
  • MYL +1.9% (Oncologic Drugs Advisory Committee votes unanimously to recommend MYL-1401O -- proposed biosimilar to Genentech's RHHBY unit HERCEPTIN)
  • AZN +1.4% (following late sell-off on potential CEO departure announcement)
  • MRSN +1.4% (Pfizer discloses 9.8% passive stake)
  • GNW +1.2% (Genworth Financial and Oceanwide provide CFIUS update; timing of regulatory reviews will likely delay the completion of the transaction to later than the originally targeted time frame )
  • MNK +0.9% (Phase 3 terlipressin trial achieves its enrollment target ahead of schedule - marks halfway point toward interim analysis of trial data), .
Analyst comments:
  • NTNX +9% (added to its Conviction Buy list at Goldman)
  • AFMD +4.2% (initiated with Buy at Suntrust)
  • ULTA +2.3% (upgraded and added to Conviction Buy List at Goldman)
  • EXEL +1.9% (initiated with Buy at Suntrust)
  • WMT +1.6% (upgraded and added to Conviction Buy List at Goldman)
  • ROST +1.1% (upgraded to Outperform at Telsey Advisory Group)
  • BA +0.8% (upgraded to Overweight from Neutral at JP Morgan)

>>> ells Fargo beats by $0.02, reports revs in-line (55.60)

ells Fargo beats by $0.02, reports revs in-line (55.60)
  • Reports Q2 (Jun) earnings of $1.03 per share, excluding non-recurring items, $0.02 better than the Capital IQ Consensus of $1.01; revenues rose 0.2% year/year to $22.2 bln vs the $22.23 bln Capital IQ Consensus.
    • Second quarter 2017 also excluded discrete tax benefits totaling $186 million, or approximately $0.04 per share.
  • Net interest income in second quarter 2017 increased $183 million from first quarter 2017 to $12.5 billion, as the benefit of repricing earning assets in response to higher short-term interest rates exceeded the cost of repricing liabilities, due in part to continued deposit pricing discipline. Second quarter results also benefited from one additional business day. These benefits more than offset the impact of lower average loan and investment securities balances.
  • Net interest margin was 2.90 percent, up 3 basis points from first quarter 2017. The benefit of higher short-term interest rates, disciplined deposit pricing, and a reduction in long-term debt was partially offset by the impacts from lower loan and investment securities balances.
  • Total average loans of $956.9 billion, up $6.1 billion, or 1 percent.
  • Return on assets (ROA) of 1.21 percent and return on equity (ROE) of 11.95 percent.
  • Provision expense of $555 million, down $519 million, or 48 percent, from second quarter 2016; Net charge-offs of $655 million, down $269 million Net charge-offs were 0.27 percent of average loans (annualized), down from 0.39 percent Reserve release of $100 million
  • Auto originations of $4.5 billion in second quarter, down 17 percent from prior quarter and down 45 percent from prior year, as proactive steps to tighten underwriting standards resulted in lower origination volume.
  • Home Lending Originations of $56 billion, up from $44 billion in prior quarter;
    • Applications of $83 billion, up from $59 billion in prior quarter;
    • Application pipeline of $34 billion at quarter end, up from $28 billion at March 31, 2017
  • Expect efficiency initiatives will reduce expenses by $2 billion annually by year-end 2018 and that those savings will support our investment in the business; expect an additional $2 billion in annual expense reductions by the end of 2019; these savings are projected to go to the "bottom line"

>>> US Gapping down

Gapping down
In reaction to disappointing earnings/guidance
:
  • CYBR -19.4%, (lowers Q2 sales, profit guidance primarily because deals in EMEA did not close in time), WPRT -16.5%, ATEN -16.3%, (sees Q2 results below consensus), ACIA -7.6%, JPM -1.2%, WFC -1.1%
Select CYBR peers showing weakness:
  • FEYE -2.9%, PANW -2.1%, FTNT -2%, HACK -1.4%, SYMC -1.2%, IMPV -0.7%, PFPT -0.5%
Other news:
  • CHKE -8.3% (obtains further extension of forbearance through July 28)
  • SHLO -5% (prices 5 mln shares of common stock at $8.25 per share)
  • WY -4.5% (announced effective immediately the ban of all campfires on its lands in Flathead, Lake, Lincoln, Missoula, Sanders and Ravalli counties in Western Montana due to high fire danger)
  • INSY -2.3% (WSJ reporting Anthem has launched civil suit against Insys)
  • ATHN -1.3% (CFO Karl Stubelis to step down; FY17 guidance reaffirmed)
Analyst comments:
  • HIMX -4.9% (downgraded to Underperform at Oppenheimer; tgt $4)
  • FFIV -4% (downgraded to Neutral from Overweight at Piper Jaffray)
  • SNAP -2% (downgraded to Market Perform at Cowen)
  • AVT -1.1% (downgraded to Underperform at BofA/Merrill)

>>> itigroup beats by $0.07, beats on revs --> +0.15% Pre-Mkt

--> C US trading +0.15% 70k shares traded

Citigroup beats by $0.07, beats on revs
  • Reports Q2 (Jun) earnings of $1.28 per share, excluding non-recurring items, $0.07 better than the Capital IQ Consensus of $1.21; revenues rose 2.0% year/year to $17.9 bln vs the $17.38 bln Capital IQ Consensus.
  • Net income of $3.9 billion decreased 3%, as the higher revenues were more than offset by higher cost of credit and operating expenses, as well as a higher effective tax rate
  • Common Equity Tier 1 capital ratio grew to 13.0%, well above the 11.5% we believe we need to prudently operate the firm. Our recently announced 2017 capital plan includes a return of $18.9 billion enabling us to reduce the amount of capital we hold. We are clearly on course to increase both the return on capital and return of capital for our shareholders.
  • Citigroup's operating expenses were up slightly at $10.5 billion in the second quarter 2017.
  • Citigroup's cost of credit in the second quarter 2017 was $1.7 billion, a 22% increase, driven by an increase in net credit losses of $94 million and a net loan loss reserve release of $16 million, compared to a net release of $256 million mostly related to legacy assets in the prior year period.
  • Citigroup's end of period loans were $645 billion as of quarter end, up 2% from the prior year period.
  • Banking revenues of $4.8 billion increased 19% (including gain / (loss) on loan hedges).
    • Investment Banking revenues of $1.5 billion were up 22% versus the prior year period, reflecting strength in equity underwriting and advisory, as well as continued momentum in debt underwriting.
    • Advisory revenues increased 32% to $314 million, equity underwriting revenues increased 70% to $295 million and debt underwriting revenues increased 9% to $877 million.
    • Fixed Income Markets revenues of $3.2 billion in the second quarter 2017 decreased 6% primarily reflecting lower G10 currencies revenue, given low volatility in the current quarter and the comparison to higher Brexit-related activity a year ago.
    • Equity Markets revenues of $691 million decreased 11%, reflecting episodic activity in the prior year period, as well as low volatility in the current quarter. Securities Services revenues of $584 million increased 10% driven by growth in client volumes across the global custody business.
  • Global Consumer Banking
    • North America GCB revenues of $4.9 billion increased 5%, as higher revenues in Citi-branded cards and Citi retail services were partially offset by lower revenues in retail banking, driven by lower mortgage revenues. North America GCB net income was $670 million, down 18%, driven by higher cost of credit and higher operating expenses, partially offset by the higher revenues. North America GCB cost of credit increased 27% to $1.3 billion. The net loan loss reserve build in the second quarter 2017 was $103 million, compared to a build of $56 million in the prior year period, largely supporting volume growth and the impact of changes in collections activity in cards.
    • International GCB revenues increased 4% to $3.1 billion. International GCB net income decreased 3% to $455 million. Operating expenses increased 3% both on a reported and constant dollars basis, versus the prior year period. Credit costs increased 15% on a reported basis and increased 18% in constant dollars.

>>> US Early premarket gappers

Early premarket gappers
Gapping up:
  • CLIR +16.7%, CGI +14.9%, BLFS +10.2%, CTIC +9.4%, NTNX +6.8%,MDXG +5.5%, AFMD +4.2%, SGMO +3.2%, MYL +2.4%, GNW +1.7%, EXEL+1.6%, MRSN +1.5%, MNK +0.9%
Gapping down:
  • CYBR -17.6%, ATEN -17.6%, WPRT -11.9%, ACIA -8.7%, WY -4.5%, SHLO-2.9%, OCLR -2.9%, FTNT -2.7%, FEYE -2.3%, HACK -1.4%, INSY -1.3%,PANW -1.2%, SYMC -1.2%, YNDX -1%, CHKE -0.9%, INFY -0.8%