Samaritan’s purse sale is in full swing and we’re talking about a lot of deals.
Here’s what’s going on.
On Monday, November 17, 2017, the two largest private pension funds in New Zealand announced a deal to sell their shares of the Chala purse to a consortium led by a private equity firm called EIS Capital Partners.
It’s a deal worth about $20 billion and would see the two funds merge their existing shares of Chala and its purse, valued at about $400 million, to form EIS.
This deal would see Samaritas pension fund share price rise from about $100 per share to around $140 per share, while EIS shares would rise from around $40 to $60 per share.
What does this mean?
Well, Samarits pension fund is worth $400 per share but EIS has a market cap of $1.8 billion.
EIS owns a stake in both the Chaldean-majority Iraqi government in Baghdad and the US-owned Bank of America.
The two funds have different ideas about how to divide the proceeds of the sale and how the money should be spent.
Both funds want to keep a chunk of the money they receive, the amount they got for their shares, and they want to distribute the rest equally.
As a result, they’re both working with their own lawyers and lawyers to work out the details of a deal.
One of the main issues is that Samarita’s purse was valued at $100 and EIS’s purse at $40.
That’s where the problem lies.
Samarita has about $60 billion in assets and Eis has about the same amount, but the assets are more like $400 billion than the assets of the two fund.
So how do you divide the money?
It starts with what the funds have in common.
They both operate pension funds and have different philosophies about how best to divide up their respective shares.
For example, EIS wants to split up the funds’ earnings into two separate streams, one that would be paid out by Samariton and another that would go to Samaritans pension fund.
The funds are also working on how to set up their own separate accounts, similar to how companies set up accounts for their employees.
While both fund managers want to share the profits from the sale with their shareholders, Eis’s management wants to keep most of the proceeds.
“This will mean a significant increase in the shares that Samariites share, and we will be able to distribute them equally, ensuring we can meet our commitment to reinvestment,” Samaritias chief executive officer and chief financial officer, Dr Mary Atherton said.
But EIS is more interested in holding on to as much of the profits as it can.
A spokesman for EIS declined to comment.
Now that the purse sale has taken place, both funds have been looking to make the best of the situation.
According to the deal, Samaris pension fund will keep the lion’s share of its earnings and will use the money to invest in its own pension plans.
However, EISA will hold the lion.
Its pension fund, EISS, will continue to receive most of Samaritors share earnings and reinvest the rest of the funds profits.
If you’ve been paying attention, you’ll know that EIS already has a very successful fund.
It’s worth around $300 billion, but it has a much smaller market cap than Samarites.
With the purse sales announced, Eiss’ shares are worth about 10 times more than Samarias, so the two have a vested interest in the deal.
It will be interesting to see how much EISA holds on to, and how much Samaritia shares will be split with.
Meanwhile, Samaria has been working with its own lawyer to negotiate a deal with EIS, and the two parties are close to reaching a deal that would see EIS retain a majority of its own shares in the purse, and EISA keep about 20% of its shares.
If this deal comes through, it will mean that Samaria and EISS will share a combined $300-400 billion of assets.
(source: Newshub) And the deal is getting a lot more complicated.
Earlier this week, Samarus chief executive, Dr Mike Noyes, told Newshubs: “We’re very excited about the prospect of the new deal.
We are pleased to be working with our new partners to build a stronger, more competitive fund for New Zealanders and for investors.
I’m sure the public will be keen to know how much we’ll have to pay, how much will we be allowed to borrow and, importantly, how we’ll be able do it all without