(BFW) KPN Buybacks Plausible, M&A Potential Supportive: Morgan Stanley


KPN Buybacks Plausible, M&A Potential Supportive: Morgan Stanley
2015-07-03 06:56:12.678 GMT


By Kasper Viita
(Bloomberg) -- KPN’s 2Q results should be supportive of
earnings stabilization with similar trends to 1Q, Morgan Stanley
says in note, keeps overweight.

* Says it’s “plausible” to expect extra returns or buybacks
* Returns would be mid-single-digit accretive for free
cash flow available to shareholders if using proceeds
from Belgian unit Base; double digit from potential
Telefonica Deutschland stake sale
* Says potential for M&A could be supportive for shares,
referring to earlier comments from Altice, Orange
* NOTE: Drahi prepares for bigger M&A deals with new Dutch
entity
* NOTE: KPN was second-best European telco performer in June,
stock trades above 2-year historical valuations, peer group
multiples


For Related News and Information:
First Word scrolling panel: FIRST<GO>
First Word newswire: NH BFW<GO>

To contact the reporter on this story:
Kasper Viita in London at +44-203-525-9219 or
kviita1@bloomberg.net
To contact the editor responsible for this story:
James Ludden at +44-20-3525-2645 or
jludden@bloomberg.net

(Makor) Tech View Euro Stoxx 50 Index (expecting a rejection in price at 3,5

 Euro Stoxx 50 Index

 

·         Very little developments in yesterday's price action as the Index remains capped between support at 3,374-81 (recent cycle low & 200dma) and resistance at 3,544-3,569 (open gap) and then the 55dma and declining channel resistance at 3,588-3,625

·         A break below 3,374-3,381 would target 3,312, 3,189 & possibly 3,036

 

Strategy: Sell 1 unit at 3,560 & 1 more at 3,620, target 3,312 with a stop loss above 3,652

 

 

EUR/USD

 

·         The CCY pair continues its attempt to stabilize above the rising channel support at 1.1065 and above Monday's low of 1.0955 and while above this area I continue to expect a move higher.

·         A daily close back above the 55dma at 1.1142 would be a positive sign and suggest a low is in place.

·         The CCY pair maybe forming a triangle continuation pattern and if this was the case expect to see the CCY start to push higher towards 1.1410 shortly (Maybe after Greek Referendum vote on Monday morning)

 

 

Daily chart

 

 

 

 

>>>> Insight: Floor and Electronic market trading hours for July 3rd holiday Flo

Insight: Floor and Electronic market trading hours for July 3rd holiday 

Floor Trading: 
- CME/CBOT closed for July 4th Independence Day Holiday
- NYSE: Closed for July 4th Independence Day Holiday
- NYMEX Closed for July 4th Independence Day Holiday

Electronic Trading:
CME Globex 
- Equity products halted between 13:00 ET/17:00 GMT Friday July 3rd until Sunday July 5th at 18:00 ET/22:00 GMT 
- Interest Rates halted between 13:00 ET/17:00 GMT Friday July 3rd until Sunday July 5th at 18:00 ET/22:00 GMT 
- FX halted between 13:00 ET/17:00 GMT Friday July 3rd until Sunday July 5th at 18:00 ET/22:00 GMT 

NYMEX and COMEX: halted between 13:15 ET/17:15 GMT Friday July 3rd until Sunday July 5th at 18:00 ET/22:00 GMT

(Barron's) After the Mergers, the Pain of Goodwill

After the Mergers, the Pain of Goodwill

Huge acquisitions by Avago, Facebook, and Microsoft can come back to haunt them with big charges to earnings.

It’s well known by now that the market for technology mergers is running wild with megadeals. A month ago, chip maker Avago Technologies (ticker: AVGO) announced the biggest-ever tech deal, saying it will purchase competitor Broadcom (BRCM) for $37 billion.

Similar eye-popping price tags, and the billions used to finance them, are just part of the story. Even more striking is the phantom value, known as goodwill and intangibles, that is being piled up.

These phantom assets have ballooned to tens of billions for leading companies such as Facebook (FB), Microsoft (MSFT), Cisco Systems (CSCO), and Oracle (ORCL) in recent years, as they have sought to buy assets with seemingly huge potential, but whose actual value at present is far lower than the purchase price.

The upshot is that investors should be particularly cautious about the actual value they see in the companies mentioned, and the price of their shares.

Stocks don’t trade on goodwill and intangibles, but when megadeals go wrong, there’s a direct hit to a company’s earnings and balance sheet, and the intangibles get revalued downward, a lot.

HERE’S HOW IT WORKS: When a company buys another for a price above the current value of the target’s assets, the disparity is recorded on the balance sheet as goodwill and intangibles. Intangibles are amortized over the course of years, as a cost of operations.

Goodwill, which can be something as nebulous as an imagined future revenue stream, is checked each year to see if that imagined potential is still as valuable, or if it has lost value, which, in the latter case, results in a hit to earnings and a reduction of a company’s assets.

We don’t yet know the size of the goodwill pile Avago has gotten itself into, as the deal has yet to close, and the same for other megamergers like Intel (INTC) buying Altera (ALTR), and NXP Semiconductors (NXPI) buying Freescale Semiconductor (FSL).

But Microsoft is a great example of a ticking intangibles time bomb. The company’s goodwill has ballooned to $21.7 billion from $12.4 billion five years ago, the result of the $9.4 billion purchase in 2014 of the phone business of Nokia (NOK). As a result of that deal, almost $10 billion was added to Microsoft’s goodwill and intangibles balance.

Microsoft has taken some heavy charges in the past. In 2012, it found that the 2007 acquisition of advertising network operator aQuantive wasn’t going to pay off as expected. Microsoft took a $6.2 billion charge, a direct reduction to its operating income, to pare the value of the goodwill on the books.

Sometimes, those losses are the canary in the coal mine: Things are seriously going wrong with the business. The massive aQuantive charge, for example, came after the search-advertising and display-ad business failed to live up to expectations that year.

Only now, three years later, is Microsoft admitting what that charge portended. Last week, the company said it would divest its display-ad business to AOL.

The Nokia business may be next. In its most recent quarterly report, the fiscal third quarter ended in March, Microsoft said that the unit didn’t meet its sales goals. Microsoft said it’s beginning its budgeting process for the new fiscal year, and it declared the Nokia assets to be at “an elevated risk of impairment.”

The writing is on the wall: This will be another multibillion charge for Microsoft. Less certain, but a distinct possibility, is that Microsoft may have to reconsider whether it really wants to fight a losing battle in mobile devices against the overwhelming might of Apple (AAPL) and Google (GOOGL).

Maybe that will be seen as a failure for the new era of CEO Satya Nadella, or maybe investors will breathe a sigh of relief. But it certainly won’t be pretty.

ANOTHER GREAT EXAMPLE is Facebook. A year ago, it said it would buy messaging service WhatsApp for $19 billion, a price that made this column wince, given that WhatsApp had almost no revenue. Most of the price, $15 billion, was recorded as goodwill.

No one knows what that goodwill really represents—Facebook has never laid out the exact logic of the purchase, in dollars and cents. Presumably, CEO Mark Zuckerberg and team envision turning the free service into a source of either advertising revenue or services revenue. But Facebook did not respond to our request for an explanation.

Facebook is a good company, and one with a bright future. The mysterious acquisition probably won’t dent that future. But just like Microsoft in 2012—and, probably, again this year—Facebook may make new headlines with a similarly awesome hit to earnings when it finally admits some substantial chunk of the deal was a fantasy.

(BArrons') Utility Stocks Are Undervalued

Utility Stocks Are Undervalued

Utilities have fallen sharply on fears of rising interest rates. But the punishment doesn’t fit the “crime.” Also, a backlash against buybacks.

If the market is judge, jury, and executioner, then utilities have been tried, convicted, and sentenced to perpetual underperformance. It’s time to consider an appeal.

Utilities stocks fell 11% in the first six months of this year, which made them the worst-performing sector in the Standard & Poor’s 500 index by a wide margin. They are lagging behind even beaten-down energy stocks. Their crime: Being sensitive to changes in interest rates, when Treasury yields have risen, and the Federal Reserve has made no secret of its desire to start raising the federal-funds rate later this year.

Higher interest rates typically pose competition for utilities’ dividend yields. Yet, a worst-case scenario looks to be priced into the shares. What’s more, utilities could even benefit from the very scenario investors appear to fear.

David Bianco, a strategist at Deutsche Bank, expects Fed Chair Janet Yellen to start hiking rates in September, and keep lifting them in a measured way through 2016. The Fed controls only short-term rates, however, while utilities typically take their cue from longer-term Treasuries. If 10-year bond yields shoot higher, utilities will suffer steeper losses -- as will other stocks -- he says.

But if the Fed sticks to its stated plan -- Federal Reserve Vice Chairman Stanley Fischer said last week that the central bank would like to raise rates slowly -- the 10-year yield would rise slowly, as well. In that case, utilities might rebound, and outperform the market.

This scenario isn’t unprecedented. Starting in June 2004, the Fed began hiking rates a quarter of a percentage point at every Fed meeting. Instead of tumbling, utilities rallied strongly. The S&P 500 utilities index rose 32% during the first year of rate hikes, while the broader Standard & Poor’s 500 rose just 8.2%. “If you’re bullish on the market, you should be bullish on utilities,” Bianco says.

There is no guarantee the Fed will raise rates this year; based on various measures of the economy’s health, some market watchers expect the central bank to remain on hold. Jobs data in the U.S. disappointed last week, stoking frustration that slow, steady growth hasn’t grown more robust. Developments elsewhere, such as China’s slowing economic growth, could also stay the Fed’s hand.

Problems in Greece, whose future in the euro could be determined by a vote scheduled for Sunday, might prompt the Fed to take a wait-and-see attitude, as well, given the prospect of turmoil in fixed income, emerging markets, and foreign exchange. “Even if the data tell the Fed to raise [rates], the markets are telling them to lay low and stay low,” says Rhino Trading Partners strategist Michael Block.

In that case, the rush for yield, which came to an abrupt end this year, could be revived, giving utilities a boost. The Utilities Select Sector SPDR ETF (ticker: XLU) yields 3.7%, above the 3.6% yield on the iShares U.S. Real Estate ETF (IYR). It is taxed at the lower dividend rate, as opposed to the higher tax on earned income that applies to income from real-estate investment trusts.

Utilities aren’t cheap, even after their dismal showing; the XLU trades for 15.6 times forward earnings, above its five-year median of 15.2 times. But the stocks are far less expensive than the real-estate ETF, which trades at 18.6 times forward earnings, or the S&P 500, which trades at 17.8 times.

The verdict against utilities should be overturned. It’s time to buy.

DURING THIS BULL MARKET, few have loved U.S. stocks as much as U.S. corporations. The corporate buying binge looks set to continue unabated. Companies announced plans in April to buy back $141 billion in shares, according to HSBC research. That’s the biggest commitment ever in a single month. If it keeps up, this could be a record year for share repurchases. But to some observers, the buyback craze looks to be operating on borrowed time.

HSBC’s Anton Tonev notes that heavy corporate share repurchases go back to 1982, when the Securities and Exchange Commission proposed new rules that made it much easier for companies to buy back their own stock. As deregulation continued through the 1980s, the pace of buybacks increased. The number of companies engaging in the practice tripled from 1972 through 2000.

Now Tonev worries that regulations could shift the other way, making it difficult for companies to keep buying back shares. He notes that the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development claimed, in its most recent Business and Financial Outlook, that returning cash to shareholders boosts only short-term gains. The Brookings Institute’s William Lazonick has recommended that the Securities and Exchange Commission ban the practice altogether.

“The U.S. buyback avalanche may be reaching an extreme point,” Tonev says. “This change in dynamics could be a trigger for a more challenging environment for U.S. equities.”

(Barron's) Margin Calls Threaten Shanghai’s Tottering Market

Margin Calls Threaten Shanghai’s Tottering Market

Small investors earlier this year took out record amounts of loans to buy hot stocks. With the market plummeting, they face having the loans pulled.

In the last three weeks, over $2.7 trillion evaporated from mainland China’s two main stock exchanges. The 25% contraction was propelled by nervous margin calls and excessive trading. The chickens have finally come home to roost.

Chinese investors enthusiastically bought stocks on borrowed money this year. The amount of margin loans more than doubled in six months, to more than two trillion yuan ($320 billion). At 8.8% of the local market’s total free float, margin financing in China is equal in size to Indonesia’s entire stock market valuation, and as high a portion as it has been in any market, at anytime, says Goldman Sachs. Unfortunately, less-sophisticated retail investors are by far the biggest borrowers.

Compounding the problem is the lack of flexibility in China’s margin financing. A typical loan is six months in length, and borrowers have to repay their debt in full before opening a new one. The first large wave of loans, to the tune of 200 billion yuan, started to hit their due dates in late June. In only four days, the margin-financing balance shrank by 85 billion yuan, or close to 4% of the total amount outstanding. Last week, China’s securities regulator scrambled to clarify that borrowers could roll over their margin loans.

BEIJING HAS TRIED TO CALM the market by saying there were only a few billion yuan worth of margin calls a day—trivial compared with one trillion yuan average daily trading volume. And on paper, China’s market valuation is around 250% of the margin loan level, which is well above the regulatory threshold of 150%.

But the reality is a lot murkier, because Chinese investors are very active short-term traders. On average, they hold a position for only 15 days. That means many margin positions were probably opened about 15 days ago, the mid-June market high.

In China, a typical investor can borrow $1.25 for every dollar of cash she has, giving her what China calls a “guarantee ratio” of 180%, or $2.25 (cash and stock bought on margin) divided by $1.25 (loan value). But as her stock loses value, the guarantee ratio also falls. At 150%, the broker will start to issue margin calls. When the ratio hits 130%, the brokerage will force the liquidation of the position to meet the loan.

With the Shanghai Composite Index down 25% and Shenzhen’s small-cap ChiNext Index off 30%, many accounts are on the verge of margin calls. Beijing last week told brokerages they don’t have to force liquidation of holdings.

So far, Beijing has used a kitchen-sink strategy to pull China’s stock markets from the brink. The People’s Bank of China cut its benchmark interest rate last weekend; the Ministry of Finance said China’s $500 billion pension fund would start investing in the stock markets; and of course, the securities regulator repeatedly came out—during market hours—to assure us that margin financing was safe. There was also chatter that the Chinese sovereign fund Huijin was buying A-share exchange-traded funds to prop up the market.

Beijing could go further and order the brokers not to issue margin calls. But market confidence seems broken. The markets seem to be testing new technical support levels daily. The Shanghai Index last week dipped below a support level at 4,000–a long way from its June 12 high of 5,166.

(Barron's) Despite Greece, Equities Look Like a Bargain (out today )

Despite Greece, Equities Look Like a Bargain

This time around Europe looks equipped to deal with turmoil, and meanwhile a number of stocks look like bargains.

Greece shouldn’t distract investors from the fact that some European stocks are good value—and they could get even cheaper if the country leaves the euro zone.

After an explosive start to 2015, European stocks have been in retreat for some weeks as Greece’s debt problems boiled over and raised volatility. The Stoxx Europe 600 index is about 7% off the high it reached in April, though it’s still up 13% since Jan. 1.

While Grexit, or Greece’s exit from the common currency, would hurt the euro zone, which made no provisions for members to leave, the implications of a Federal Reserve interest-rate hike or more signs of slowing economic growth in China could be far more worrying. “The Greek crisis isn’t the only reason we’ve had a bumpy ride in the last quarter,” says Alan Mudie, head of investment strategy at Société Générale Private Banking in Geneva.

Grexit could prompt another downward spiral in European equities, but any retreat could be recouped quickly. Europe is better equipped to cope with turmoil than it was four years ago, when Greece first melted down.

What has changed? For starters, the European Central Bank has become a credible lender of last resort. It has erected fire walls to prevent financial brushfires sweeping from country to country. And investors are confident these safety mechanisms will be effective.

For proof, look at Portugal. The yield on 10-year sovereign bonds of Portugal, perceived to be the euro zone’s next-weakest link after Greece, has climbed in recent weeks, but it hasn’t ballooned. On Wednesday, the coupon was 2.94%, little more than 0.5 percentage points above Treasuries.

Under Mario Draghi, the ECB’s stewardship of the euro-zone economy has been sound. Quantitative easing could have come sooner than March, but better late than never.

A weaker euro against the dollar—down more than 8% in 2015—and lower oil prices have helped create conditions for sustainable growth. In Germany, the euro zone’s single-largest economy, full employment and wage inflation are fuelling domestic demand, taking up the slack left by a slowdown in emerging markets. The outlook for corporate earnings is encouraging.

In a time of uncertainty, German stocks can benefit from the country’s perceived destination as a safe harbor. Stocks such as Bayer (ticker: BAYN.Germany), Henkel (HEN3.Germany), and Deutsche Telekom (DTE.Germany) can offer value.

Consumer spending is an attractive theme for investors to play. Shares of auto makers, luxury-goods companies, and hotels and restaurants can outperform. Volkswagen (VOW.Germany) has been mentioned in this column frequently of late, and at less than eight times forecast earnings for 2016, it remains impossible to ignore. Cartier owner Richemont (CFR.Switzerland) is growing strongly and can benefit from increasing wealth and appetite for brands, and hotel operator Accor (AC.France) can profit from solid seasonal demand.

Energy companies could be worth a look, too. Earnings have fallen about 30% year on year since 2014, says Société Générale’s Mudie, but forecasts have stabilized, and analysts have begun upward revisions to 2016 forecasts. At about 12 times projected 2016 earnings, “we think euro-zone energy companies are beginning to look attractive,” he adds.

INVESTORS MAY WANT TO top up with Total (FP.France), which is slashing costs to lower its break-even point. Its shares trade at fewer than 12 times 2016 earnings estimates, and it currently offers a dividend yield around 5%.

The pharmaceutical sector also can help heal some of the pain inflicted by market gyrations. Valuations aren’t cheap, but strong earnings growth through 2017 could be worth the higher price. Roche Holding (ROG.Switzerland) trades at about 17 times 2016 earnings estimates, but it is best in class in biotech, and it’s moving beyond its core area of cancer treatments.

Another potential destination for investors’ cash is Scandinavia. Countries on the edge of the euro zone, such as Sweden and Denmark, have seen their currencies strengthen in response to the ECB’s QE, so they’re being forced to loosen monetary policy aggressively.

Danish stocks are among Europe’s best performers, gaining more than 20% in local currency. Sweden trimmed interest rates further on Thursday. Its shares have gained a much more modest 7%.

Telecom-equipment provider Ericsson (ERIC-B.Sweden) could be an appealing call. Growth looks resilient, and the stock seems inexpensive at about 12 times next year’s earnings. It pays a dividend yield of almost 4%, too.

Of course, if by a miracle Greece manages to cobble together some sort of deal with its creditors, Greek assets would jump sharply. But for most investors, the risks of investing in Greek assets are too high to contemplate.

(Barrons') How Nelson Peltz Gets Results

How Nelson Peltz Gets Results

Nelson Peltz was an activist before the term was popular. Targets like Pentair are bigger, but his aim is the same: Cut costs, boost sales.

You’d think that Nelson Peltz and his fellow operatives at Trian Partners would be down in the dumps after recently losing a hotly contested proxy fight to win seats on the DuPont board. That wasn’t the case when Barron’s met with Peltz and his Trian hedge fund co-founders, son-in-law Edward Garden and longtime business sidekick Peter May. They were upbeat, even defiant in our discussions in their conference room on the top floor of a Park Avenue office building.


Trian Partners’ Peltz: “Years of steady cash flow tend to dull companies’ entrepreneurial fire…” Photo: Rick Wenner for Barron's
They had ample cause to be bitter. Peltz, 73, would be on the DuPont (ticker: DD) board had just one of the big index funds families, Vanguard Group, State Street Global Advisors, or BlackRock, swung to Trian’s side, as most active money managers did. Another 5% of the shares voting Peltz’s way would have carried the day in what many viewed as an important test for activist shareholders.

But the investor and his colleagues obviously were ready to move on. Last week, they revealed a new stake in pump and valve maker Pentair (PNR), and they haven’t forsaken DuPont. “At least we’ve succeeded in educating DuPont’s board and shareholders so they won’t continue to accept mediocre earnings performance by the company. We won’t be the only ones monitoring the company and its management,” says Peltz.

Their $1.5 billion DuPont stake will probably remain, they say. In their estimation, the position is likely to keep the pressure on DuPont Chairman and CEO Ellen Kullman to follow the Trian plan of cost-cutting and business restructuring. Should Kullman fail to perform, there’s always a chance, says one Trian exec, that the firm may mount another proxy fight. Notably, DuPont’s stock fell 7% on the day Trian lost, and it has yet to recover.

Aside from Pentair, the Trian trio indicated they’re taking positions in two other large companies in need of a shake-up, though they won’t say what they are. They have a war chest of over $3 billion in cash to deploy from their $12 billion in assets under management.

PELTZ HAS COME A LONG WAY since the mid-1980s, when he was considered a lesser light in the Drexel Burnham Lambert galaxy of junk-bond-financed raider stars like Carl Icahn, Ronald Perelman, Saul Steinberg, and T. Boone Pickens.

Peltz never quite fit the buccaneer mold of many of Drexel junk-bond chief Mike Milken’s raiders. Peltz didn’t do greenmail deals like the others, buying a position in a target company and then threatening a takeover if it didn’t buy back the shares at higher-than-market price. “We actually wanted to own companies and had confidence that we could operate them, and this made some of the Drexel fold a bit worried,” he recalls.

Decades later, he’s still trying to spruce up companies through judicious cost-cutting and aggressive marketing and capital spending, though given the size of his targets, he has to operate from a minority stock position. While private-equity folks and other leveraged artists take all of the profits in their deals, Peltz, May, and Garden allow fellow shareholders to participate, too.

Since founding the Trian Partners hedge fund family in 2005, Peltz and May, now 72, have wielded a much bigger stick on Wall Street than they did in the 1980s and 1990s. Trian was instrumental, for example, in pushing the food company Kraft in 2012 to split for efficiency’s sake into a domestic unit, Kraft Foods (KRFT), and a faster-growing foreign unit dubbed Mondelez International (MDLZ). Peltz, May, Garden, and others close to Trian have served on the boards of well-known companies like PepsiCo (PEP), Mondelez, Bank of New York Mellon (BK), asset-manager Legg Mason (LM), retailer Family Dollar Stores (FDO), toolmaker Ingersoll-Rand (IR), and Tiffany (TIF) to further Trian’s activist agenda.

Prior to the DuPont dust-up, Trian had faced only one proxy fight to achieve board representation. That was in 2006, when Heinz fought against Trian’s proposed slate of five new directors. Peltz and another slate member won.

Peltz was able to win over Heinz CEO Bill Johnson and the Heinz board with his prescription of cutting extraneous expenses and pushing the savings into more aggressive marketing and plant and product expansion. “Of course, we all had a certain view of Nelson and his supposed raider past, but he turned out to be a wonderful addition to the board,” Tom Usher, former chairman of U.S. Steel and then lead director at Heinz, recalls to Barron’s. “He was always well informed and collaborative and not given to throwing his weight around or grandstanding.”

Echoes Johnson: “I developed the utmost respect for him.” Peltz, in fact stayed on the Heinz board even after Trian exited the bulk of its Heinz position, and he helped the board vet the rich leveraged buyout of the company by the Brazilian private-equity firm 3G and Warren Buffett–led Berkshire Hathaway (BRK.A). Johnson has since become a Trian Advisory Partner (a small group of former CEOs who work with the firm) and was recently added to the PepsiCo board.

What Trian calls its “constructivist activist” approach seems to have served both his hedge fund partners and target companies well. Since its 2005 inception to May 30, 2015, a decade in which indexes topped stockpickers, Trian notched decent annual net returns of 9.7%, compared with an 8.26% return for the Standard & Poor’s 500 and a 4.8% annual return for the HFRI Equity Hedge Fund Index. (Trian was No. 87 this year on Barron’s Penta’s Top 100 Hedge Funds with an annualized three-year compound return of 15.99%.) Trian’s only losing year came during 2009’s vicious market selloff, when it lost 17.21%. The S&P and HFRI returns plummeted 37% and 26.65%, respectively, that year.


After DuPont defeat, Trian founders, from left, Peltz, Edward Garden, and Peter May moved on quickly. Photo: Rick Wenner for Barron's
DECADES BEFORE THEY COULD contemplate targeting DuPont, Peltz and May were running a frozen-food distribution company called Flagstaff. May, a former Peat Marwick accountant, had come on board in 1972 to help take public the Peltz family’s enterprise, which Nelson had been building since the 1960s.

It wasn’t an easy ride. And by the early 1980s, the fledgling Peltz-May empire nearly crashed, after the pair sold Flagstaff to a takeover group that came up short on a promised payment. The business ended up in Chapter 11 in 1981, laid low by soaring interest rates and operating miscues.

A lifeline of a sort came in 1983 when Peltz and May were able to use bank debt granted under onerous terms to buy a controlling interest in a New Jersey wire and cable and vending-machine outfit called Triangle Industries. Triangle was losing money but had a decent balance sheet. “I remember telling my wife that we were putting all our chips on the table in the deal, and if it didn’t work, I could always go back to being a public accountant,” recalls May.

Peltz wasn’t that optimistic. After giving a Manhattan panhandler a buck, he mused to his new wife, fashion model Claudia Heffner, that the vagrant now had a bigger net worth than they did.

They were able to turn Triangle’s operations around in less than a year, says Peltz. Their first coup came in the mid-1980s when Peltz and May linked up with Milken and Drexel to buy National Can Company for $460 million and then, a year later, American Can for $570 million for Triangle. “If the truth be told, our leverage on the National deal was infinite since our equity layer was all borrowed, too,” May remembers with a slight chuckle.

But the packaging companies prospered as a result of cost-cutting combined with an audacious, junk-bond-fueled capital-spending program for new plants. In 1988, the French firm Pechiney bought the American National operation for $3.9 billion, including assumed debt, resulting in a combined personal payday for Peltz and May of about $900 million.

Peltz reminisces on those days: “We weren’t greenmailers like so many of the Drexel corporate raider crowd.” Even so, he adds, “I owe a lot to Mike Milken and have remained close to him and his charitable work and foundation.”

The next big score came in 1997, when an entity that Peltz and May controlled, Triarc, bought Snapple from Quaker Oats for $300 million, $1.4 billion less than Quaker had paid for the company in 1994. In less than three years, by cutting corporate overhead and reviving the edgy Snapple marketing culture, sales volume revived and earnings surged. In 2000, Triarc sold Snapple and a few smaller beverage brands to Cadbury Schweppes for $1.45 billion, netting Peltz and May nearly $450 million.

THE DECISION IN 2005 to become a hedge fund was pushed by Peltz’s son-in-law, Garden, now 54, who had joined Peltz and May two years before. “I had a ‘come to Jesus moment’ that we had to attract outside capital, as private equity and hedge funds were doing, to operate on the scale necessary to invest in more and bigger targets,” says Garden, a former investment banker.

With its $12 billion of mostly institutional money, Trian has become a powerful force in activism’s most potent era. Its clientele include many major pensions, endowments, and even some sovereign wealth funds. Much of the money has lockup provisions of five years or more, giving Trian plenty of time to work its strategies on different companies.

Trian’s activist style is attractive to both investment partners and target companies. Institutions like investing in mostly staid blue-chip companies that come with an informal management-consulting group -- Trian -- trying to squeeze out better results. Trian also provides management with the cover to make bold corporate cuts and other tough decisions.

The firm likes companies that, after decades of success, have begun to rest on their laurels. Peltz elaborates, “Years of steady cash flow tend to dull companies’ entrepreneurial fire and focus on having best-in-class profit margins and revenue growth. Top-heavy corporate structures result, characterized by layer upon layer of bureaucracy anxious to justify their very existence. Accountability erodes as key decisions, such as where to spend research-and-development, capital expansion, marketing, and advertising dollars, devolve more and more from operating units to headquarters. Special constituencies and interest groups develop to subvert any attempt at zero-based, or what we at Trian call white-sheet, budgeting, in which every expense has to be justified as enhancing profitability and growth.”

TRIAN AND OTHER ACTIVISTS have critics. Bill George, a Harvard Business School senior fellow and the former chairman and CEO of medical-device maker Medtronic, claimed in a blog post that DuPont’s proxy victory should embolden other companies to stand up to the bullying tactics of aggressive activists like Trian. DuPont was controversial, in part, because the stock has risen in the past three years. Others, such as fund powerhouse BlackRock’s chief Laurence Fink, claim that too many activists do “smash and grab” attacks on corporate balance sheets, either forcing companies to siphon off excess cash or incur more debt to buy back stock or boost dividends to push the stock price temporarily higher. All of this can adversely affect the long-term competitive future of Corporate America by causing companies to give short shrift to capital spending and R&D, these critics contend.

Trian officials say that much of the cost-cutting they push is designed to be redeployed into growth initiatives like plant expansion and more-aggressive marketing budgets. Likewise, they typically hold stock positions for years, since makeovers of income statements to boost operating margins can’t be achieved quickly.

Enlarge Image

Finally, their stakes in large companies like Pepsi and DuPont -- just 1% and 3%, respectively -- are small relative to their huge valuations. “Even when we serve on boards, we can only win over management and other directors with the power of analysis and argument,” Peltz observes. And, perhaps most interesting, if Trian succeeds in its activist makeovers, fellow public shareholders get to participate in the upside.

Regardless of a losing proxy vote, Trian has influenced all of the companies in which it holds stakes, the biggest of which, ranging from $1.5 billion to $2 billion, are DuPont, PepsiCo, and Mondelez. Trian takes credit for pressuring a reluctant DuPont board and management into a number of shareholder-friendly moves since Trian’s investment was reported in early 2013.

Among other things, DuPont has announced about $1 billion in long-overdue cost cuts, and just last week spun off the Chemours unit that produces products like Teflon. It also upgraded its board of directors to include two respected executives from outside the company, Tyco’s Edward Breen and former LyondellBasell chief James Gallogly, whom Trian has consulted with previously. DuPont has also disclosed plans to return $9 billion in capital to shareholders.

DuPont, of course, doesn’t see Trian’s hand in these decisions. The company says they were part of a restructuring plan that CEO Kullman launched when she was named to the top job in January 2009. Yet, Trian officials insist that much more remains to be done to boost profit margins and revenue growth to peer levels, including making $2 billion to $4 billion in cost cuts and hiving off poorly performing business lines.

PepsiCo has been a tough nut for Trian to crack since the fund first disclosed its stake in early 2013. The Pepsi board and the company’s charismatic Chairman and CEO Indra Nooyi turned down Trian’s suggestion to separate its fast-growing snack-food operation, Frito-Lay, from the beverage business to unlock shareholder value.

But a truce was reached this year when Pepsi agreed to put Trian Advisory Partner Johnson on its board. Trian is also heartened by Pepsi’s moves to return more money to shareholders and begin a five-year, $5 billion productivity-enhancement program. “PepsiCo needs to return to its roots as a company that was lean at the corporate level and gave virtual autonomy to hard-charging, able executives at the beverage, snack food, and, until 1997, fast-food operation [since spun off],” says a Trian exec.

Trian acquired a stake in Mondelez after the global seller of everything from Cadbury candies to Oreos to gum separated from Kraft in 2012. Ever since, Mondelez management has embraced much of the Trian playbook by adopting zero-based budgeting and investing in new high-tech plants to bring down production costs. The moves are starting to improve operating profit margins and earnings on a constant currency basis. Peltz joined the Mondelez board in early 2014.

Expect a similarly friendly approach with Pentair, whose valves and pumps are used on farms, at food and beverage makers, and in wastewater-treatment plants, among other deployments. Trian would like the company to tap $800 million in cash and a tax-advantaged base in the United Kingdom, to make more acquisitions and grow.

THESE DAYS, TRIAN’S OFFICES exude an air of establishment respectability, with lots of sedate wood paneling, muted fabric wallpaper, and architectural renderings of 19th century Beaux Arts buildings culled from May’s private collection. The firm makes a big deal of the rigor of Trian’s research. In all, 14 Trian partners and squads of analysts churn out white papers, examining in minute detail how target companies stack up against rivals, employing dozens of metrics and offering rafts of remedies to improve performance.

That’s not to say that Peltz doesn’t cut a larger-than-life figure. He displays all the trappings of a billionaire. There’s his private jet and the fancy SUV that takes him to New York City daily from his 130-acre estate in Westchester County’s Bedford, N.Y., which features a lake, a waterfall, and a large indoor skating rink he built for his kids. He also owns an opulent French Regency–style home in Palm Beach, Fla., that sits on 15 acres fronting the Atlantic Ocean.

Yet, Peltz is a devoted family man who ferries his children to hockey games and other sporting events. He has 10 children ranging in age from 50 to 12. Eight of them are from his third marriage, to Claudia, to whom he has been wed for over 30 years. “That number is a bit deceptive,” he explains in his gravelly voice. “They include two sets of twins. I’ve always liked leveraging productivity. One delivery room, one doctor, and two kids.”

He’s quick to acknowledge that he was not as good a student as his children were. Peltz was a college dropout (“I was a ski bum at the time”), but a number of his kids made it to the Ivy League, including three graduates of Yale University. His daughter Nicola is a Hollywood actress with a recent starring role in the fourth edition of Michael Bay’s Transformers movie franchise, along with Mark Wahlberg.

Giving up on school, Peltz joined his father’s company and found he had flair for both deal making and operating businesses. His father’s guiding business principle -- which he soon internalized -- was “sales up, expenses down.”

That has remained his mantra, albeit on successively larger stages. He and his hedge fund will keep trying to make it work for its large corporate targets.