Connect with us

Published

on

Bill Ackman has grown Pershing Square Capital Management to more than $16 billion from $54 million since he founded the fund nearly two decades ago. The 57-year-old activist investor speaks with On The Money about his return to office policy, his possible presidential picks and why hes still bullish on New York City.

Lydia: You are among the big names on Wall Street who didn’t move to Florida. Why?

Bill: The short answer is that I love New York City. My desire to be successful is founded on a desire to be independent. It always seemed crazy to me to sacrifice that independence to save money on taxes. If you make $100 million some people in finance make even more than that you can save $25 million of that by living somewhere cheaper.

Some people choose to manage their lives that way. I do think it’s incumbent upon New York City to make this a desirable place to live and we have to make it an attractive place to do business. If one super wealthy person leaves the city thats really bad for the revenue. I dont think it’s smart to push taxes higher I think that would actually generate less revenue.

Lydia: There have been some top players in finance like Ken Griffin who have made a show of moving to Miami and talking about how smart it is for their business. But do you think that trend will be reversed? Will we see a lot of headlines in the next year about people moving back?

Bill: I think it’s a great thing that [Citadel founder] Ken Griffin is building a major campus, if you will, in New York City on Park Avenue. I think thats an amazing thing for NYC whether it’s his primary office or not, and it speaks to the fact that a lot of the youngest, most talented people want to be here. My nephew graduated from Harvard and many of his classmates moved here even before they had a job. The city is still a big draw for young people and if this is where the talented, young people want to be, then the companies will have to have a major presence here.

Lydia: Given the younger generation wants flexibility, is it realistic to expect people to return to the office five days a week? On the flip side, can New York City flourish if you dont have people back in Midtown and back in office buildings?

Bill: Everyone wants more flexible work whether its a school play, a sports game you dont want to miss and we have technology that lets you do that. What weve done at Pershing Square is bring people back five days a week 10 months a year. Of course if theres something you need to do like a doctors appointment or working from home one day, use your best judgment. And then we give people July and August to work from anywhere with the caveat that if there’s something where we need to bring everyone together, you show up. Weve experimented with that for two years and thats worked well, people like the balance, and it works for our business.

Lydia: And you believe New York will still be a place where businesses want to operate? 

Bill: I think if NYC became an unsafe place the images you see of San Francisco where you have open air drug users lying on the street that would be very damaging and could be a tipping point for people leaving the city.

You have to manage the city and its population effectively. In San Francisco you have homeless people acting in a threatening and hostile way thats led to the emptying out and death spiral of San Francisco. Again you want to manage a city so that it is pro-business and pro-resident and you want to show care for people who are less fortunate, but that doesnt mean they can defecate on the street and threaten parents or kids.

Lydia: Is NYC poised to go into that kind of death spiral?

Bill: No, I dont think so. We have a mayor who has for obvious reasons respect for the police force and I think they respect him. I think thats really important. The whole defunding the police movement was not a good one. Bail reform went too far. If you believe the statistic, it’s several hundred people committing the vast majority of street crime and those people should be locked up.

Lydia: The new movie Dumb Money and the meme stock craze clearly a cautionary tale of a short bet gone wrong. What do you make of that film?

Essential weekly read to fuel business lunches.

Please provide a valid email address.

By clicking above you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.

Thanks for signing up!
Never miss a story.

Bill: We are among the most famous short sellers but thats because we shorted two stocks in the last twenty years. One short theres a movie about Herbalife [Betting on Zero] and the other short theres a book about MBIA [Confidence Game]. But we dont short stocks for precisely the reason you say. We gave up that business a long time ago because its too risky. Even when youre right you can lose a lot of money. Of course, short sellers can do amazing research.

Lydia: Youve publicly applauded the work Hindenburg has done on Carl Icahns firm. How are you thinking about Icahn now? Do you think the report captured whats going on at his firm?

Bill: What Hindenburg said has been proven out.

Lydia: Youve expressed support for a lot of different 2024 presidential candidates. Anyone else you plan to support? 

Bill: Id love Jamie Dimon to be president but hes made it clear hes not going to run. Id love for a candidate of his quality to run. I think Biden-Trump part II is not the best option for America. It would be great for us to be brought together by a more centrist candidate that members of both parties can vote for. 

Lydia: What about Vivek or RFK Jr. youve tweeted support for?

Bill: Id like to see multiple alternatives. Ive been supportive of Vivek because I know him and hes super smart and capable. I wish he was a more centrist candidate. Ive not yet met RFK but hopefully will have an opportunity to do so. But I still havent found my ideal candidate. Biden should step aside and that would create a flurry of alternative candidates. People are afraid to run against the president and I think theres some possibility of that happening.

Continue Reading

Sports

Sources: Big Ten closes in on $2 billion capital deal

Published

on

By

Sources: Big Ten closes in on  billion capital deal

The Big Ten is closing in on voting on a capital agreement that will infuse league schools with more than $2 billion, industry sources told ESPN.

There’s been momentum within recent days for the deal to push forward, and the structure of the complicated agreement is coming together. A vote is expected in the near future, per sources.

The framework calls for the formation of a new entity, Big Ten Enterprises, which would hold all leaguewide media rights and sponsorship contracts.

Shares of ownership in Big Ten Enterprises would fall to the league’s 18 schools, the conference office and the capital group — an investment fund that’s tied to the University of California pension system. Yahoo Sports first reported the involvement of the UC investment fund.

The pension fund is not a private equity firm, and the UC fund valuation proved to be higher than other competing bids. This has been attractive to the Big Ten and its schools, according to sources.

A source familiar with the deal said there’s been momentum in recent days, but the league is still working with leadership to make a final decision.

The exact equity amounts per school in Big Ten Enterprises is still being negotiated. There is expected to be a small gap in equity percentage between the biggest brands and others, however it is likely to be less than a percentage point.

ESPN reported last week that a tiered structure is expected in the initial allocation of the $2 billion-plus in capital, with larger brands receiving more money. Each school, however, would receive a payout in at least the nine-figure range, sources said.

The deal would call for an extension of the league’s Grant of Rights through 2046, providing long-term stability and making further expansion and any chance league schools leave for the formation of a so-called “Super League” unlikely.

Traditional conference functions are expected to remain with the conference. Any decision-making within Big Ten Enterprises would be controlled by the conference. The UC pension fund would receive a 10% stake in Big Ten Enterprises and hold typical minority investor rights but no direct control.

The money infusion is acutely needed at a number of Big Ten schools that are struggling with debt service on new construction, rising operational expenses and providing additional scholarships and direct revenue ($20.5 million this year and expected to rise annually) to athletes.

The Big Ten has argued that the deal would alleviate financial strain and help middle- and lower-tier Big Ten schools compete in football against the SEC.

ESPN first reported last week that the league was in detailed conversations about the deal.

Big Ten Enterprises would be tasked with not just handling the league’s valuable media rights (the current seven-year, $7 billion package runs through 2030) but trying to maximize sponsorship and advertising deals leaguewide such as jersey patches or on-field logos.

“Think of it this way — the conference is not selling a piece of the conference,” a league source told ESPN last week. “Traditional conference functions would remain 100 percent with the conference office — scheduling, officiating and championships. The new entity being created would focus on business development, and it would include an outside investor with a small financial stake.”

The deal has not been without detractors, with both Michigan and Ohio State — the league’s two wealthiest athletic programs — expressing skepticism initially, per sources. Each school has been hit with significant lobbying not just from the league office but also other conference members to come to an agreement.

Politicians in a number of states have also voiced opposition, including United States Senator Maria Cantwell (D-WA) who stated Thursday, “You’re going to let someone take and monetize what is really a public resource? …That’s a real problem.”

Cantwell followed up Friday by sending a letter to each Big Ten president warning that any deal involving private equity could invite review, including impacting the schools’ tax-exempt status.

Continue Reading

World

Donald Trump threatens to impose additional 100% tariff on ‘extraordinarily aggressive’ China

Published

on

By

Donald Trump threatens to impose additional 100% tariff on 'extraordinarily aggressive' China

Donald Trump has announced the US will impose an additional 100% tariff on China imports, accusing it of taking an “extraordinarily aggressive position” on trade.

In a post to his Truth Social platform on Friday, the US president said Beijing had sent an “extremely hostile letter to the world” and imposed “large-scale export controls on virtually every product they make”.

Mr Trump, who warned the additional tariffs would start on 1 November, said the US would also impose export controls on all critical software to China.

The president added that he was imposing the tariffs because of export controls placed on rare earths by China.

He wrote: “Based on the fact that China has taken this unprecedented position, and speaking only for the USA, and not other nations who were similarly threatened, starting November 1st, 2025 (or sooner, depending on any further actions or changes taken by China), the United States of America will impose a tariff of 100% on China, over and above any tariff that they are currently paying.

“It is impossible to believe that China would have taken such an action, but they have, and the rest is history. Thank you for your attention to this matter!”

President Trump says he sees no reason to see President Xi as part of a trip to South Korea. Pic: Reuters
Image:
President Trump says he sees no reason to see President Xi as part of a trip to South Korea. Pic: Reuters

Mr Trump said earlier on Friday that there “seems to be no reason” to meet with Chinese leader Xi Jinping in a scheduled meeting as part of an upcoming trip to South Korea at the end of this month.

More on China

He had posted: “I was to meet President Xi in two weeks, at APEC, in South Korea, but now there seems no reason to do so.”

Read more:
China tightens control of global rare earth supply
Three things you may have missed from China this week

The trip was scheduled to include a stop in Malaysia, which is hosting the Association of Southeast Asian Nations summit, a stop in Japan and then the stop to South Korea, where Mr Trump would meet Mr Xi ahead of the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation summit.

Mr Trump added: “There are many other countermeasures that are, likewise, under serious consideration.”

The move signalled the biggest rupture in relations in six months between Beijing and Washington – the world’s biggest
factory and its biggest consumer.

It also threatens to escalate tensions between the two countries, prompting fears over the stability of the global economy.

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

Sky’s Siobhan Robbins explains why Donald Trump didn’t receive the Nobel Peace Prize

Friday was Wall Street’s worst day since April, with the S&P 500 falling 2.7%, owing to fears about US-China relations.

China had restricted the access to rare earths ahead of the meeting between Presidents Trump and Xi.

Under the restrictions, Beijing would require foreign companies to get special approval for shipping the metallic elements abroad.

Continue Reading

US

Donald Trump threatens to impose additional 100% tariff on ‘extraordinarily aggressive’ China

Published

on

By

Donald Trump threatens to impose additional 100% tariff on 'extraordinarily aggressive' China

Donald Trump has announced the US will impose an additional 100% tariff on China imports, accusing it of taking an “extraordinarily aggressive position” on trade.

In a post to his Truth Social platform on Friday, the US president said Beijing had sent an “extremely hostile letter to the world” and imposed “large-scale export controls on virtually every product they make”.

Mr Trump, who warned the additional tariffs would start on 1 November, said the US would also impose export controls on all critical software to China.

The president added that he was imposing the tariffs because of export controls placed on rare earths by China.

He wrote: “Based on the fact that China has taken this unprecedented position, and speaking only for the USA, and not other nations who were similarly threatened, starting November 1st, 2025 (or sooner, depending on any further actions or changes taken by China), the United States of America will impose a tariff of 100% on China, over and above any tariff that they are currently paying.

“It is impossible to believe that China would have taken such an action, but they have, and the rest is history. Thank you for your attention to this matter!”

President Trump says he sees no reason to see President Xi as part of a trip to South Korea. Pic: Reuters
Image:
President Trump says he sees no reason to see President Xi as part of a trip to South Korea. Pic: Reuters

Mr Trump said earlier on Friday that there “seems to be no reason” to meet with Chinese leader Xi Jinping in a scheduled meeting as part of an upcoming trip to South Korea at the end of this month.

More on China

He had posted: “I was to meet President Xi in two weeks, at APEC, in South Korea, but now there seems no reason to do so.”

Read more:
China tightens control of global rare earth supply
Three things you may have missed from China this week

The trip was scheduled to include a stop in Malaysia, which is hosting the Association of Southeast Asian Nations summit, a stop in Japan and then the stop to South Korea, where Mr Trump would meet Mr Xi ahead of the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation summit.

Mr Trump added: “There are many other countermeasures that are, likewise, under serious consideration.”

The move signalled the biggest rupture in relations in six months between Beijing and Washington – the world’s biggest
factory and its biggest consumer.

It also threatens to escalate tensions between the two countries, prompting fears over the stability of the global economy.

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

Sky’s Siobhan Robbins explains why Donald Trump didn’t receive the Nobel Peace Prize

Friday was Wall Street’s worst day since April, with the S&P 500 falling 2.7%, owing to fears about US-China relations.

China had restricted the access to rare earths ahead of the meeting between Presidents Trump and Xi.

Under the restrictions, Beijing would require foreign companies to get special approval for shipping the metallic elements abroad.

Continue Reading

Trending