Cool_老虎社区_美港股上老虎

Dommm
2021-08-23

Cool

Bill Ackman Wants to Liquidate His SPAC. Hello, SPARC.<blockquote>比尔·阿克曼想要清算他的特殊目的收购公司。你好，斯帕克。</blockquote>

After a scuttled deal, a shareholder lawsuit, and a steep decline in share price, Bill Ackman wants

Bill Ackman Wants to Liquidate His SPAC. Hello, SPARC.<blockquote>比尔·阿克曼想要清算他的特殊目的收购公司。你好，斯帕克。</blockquote>

免责声明：上述内容仅代表发帖人个人观点，不构成本平台的任何投资建议。

推荐
最新

暂无评论

热议股票

{"i18n":{"language":"zh_CN"},"data":{"magic":2,"id":835088488,"tweetId":"835088488","gmtCreate":1629681063244,"gmtModify":1633683297702,"author":{"id":4088391628153520,"idStr":"4088391628153520","authorId":4088391628153520,"authorIdStr":"4088391628153520","name":"Dommm","avatar":"https://static.laohu8.com/default-avatar.jpg","vip":1,"userType":1,"introduction":"","boolIsFan":false,"boolIsHead":false,"crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"individualDisplayBadges":[],"fanSize":1,"starInvestorFlag":false},"themes":[],"images":[],"coverImages":[],"extraTitle":"","html":"<html><head></head><body>Cool</body></html>","htmlText":"<html><head></head><body>Cool</body></html>","text":"Cool","highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":2,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"favoriteSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/835088488","repostId":1103418295,"repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1103418295","kind":"news","pubTimestamp":1629680642,"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/1103418295?lang=zh_CN&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-08-23 09:04","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Bill Ackman Wants to Liquidate His SPAC. Hello, SPARC.<blockquote>比尔·阿克曼想要清算他的特殊目的收购公司。你好，斯帕克。</blockquote>","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1103418295","media":"Barrons","summary":"After a scuttled deal, a shareholder lawsuit, and a steep decline in share price, Bill Ackman wants ","content":"After a scuttled deal, a shareholder lawsuit, and a steep decline in share price, Bill Ackman wants to get out of the special purpose acquisition company game.<blockquote>在交易失败、股东诉讼和股价大幅下跌之后，比尔·阿克曼希望退出特殊目的收购公司的游戏。</blockquote> Pending regulators’ thumbs-up, the Pershing Square hedge-fund manager is hoping to instead move forward with a different vehicle that will allow him to continue big-game hunting for a company to take public.<blockquote>在等待监管机构的认可之前，这位潘兴广场对冲基金经理希望采用不同的工具，让他能够继续寻找一家上市公司。</blockquote> It’s the latest chapter in a convoluted saga that has already seen Ackman pivot several times. The end goal of merging with a “mature unicorn” remains elusive.<blockquote>这是阿克曼已经多次转向的错综复杂的传奇故事的最新篇章。与“成熟的独角兽”合并的最终目标仍然难以捉摸。</blockquote> Under his latest plans, Ackman’s SPAC, called Pershing Square Tontine Holdings (ticker: PSTH), would liquidate its $4 billion trust to shareholders at $20 a share. They would also receive one warrant tied to a new entity, called Pershing Square SPARC Holdings—short for special purpose acquisition right company, an Ackman-coined term.<blockquote>根据阿克曼的最新计划，阿克曼的SPAC名为Pershing Square Tontine Holdings（股票代码：PSTH），将以每股20美元的价格向股东清算其40亿美元的信托。他们还将获得一份与一个名为Pershing Square SPARC Holdings的新实体相关的认股权证，该实体是阿克曼创造的特殊目的收购权公司的缩写。</blockquote> Pershing Tontine Holdings warrant (PSTH.WT) holders would also get warrants—essentially call options—for the new company’s shares. The SPARC would search for an operating business to merge with and take public in the process, while the SPAC would cease to exist and its “tontine” warrant structure likewise goes away.<blockquote>Pershing Tontine Holdings认股权证（PSTH.WT）持有人还将获得新公司股票的认股权证（本质上是看涨期权期权）。SPARC将寻找一家运营企业合并并在此过程中上市，而SPAC将不复存在，其“tontine”认股权证结构也将消失。</blockquote> That is not much comfort for investors who bought Pershing Square Tontine shares after its initial public offering in July 2020, when the SPAC sold $20 units consisting of a common share and one-ninth of a warrant, exercisable at $23 after the SPAC’s merger. Shares peaked around $33 in February, and had consistently traded in the mid-to-high $20 range until just recently.<blockquote>对于在2020年7月Pershing Square Tontine首次公开募股后购买其股票的投资者来说，这并不是什么安慰，当时SPAC出售了20美元的单位，包括普通股和九分之一的认股权证，在SPAC合并后可以23美元的价格行使。股价在2月份达到33美元左右的峰值，直到最近一直在20美元的中高区间交易。</blockquote> The SPAC’s stock fell below its trust value per share for the first time on Thursday, closing at $19.99. Investors who paid more than $20 a share will be losing out.<blockquote>周四，SPAC的股价首次跌破每股信托价值，收于19.99美元。每股支付超过20美元的投资者将遭受损失。</blockquote> Pershing Square Tontine Holdings stock dropped 0.9% on Friday morning, to $19.80. Pershing Square Tontine warrants tumbled in value, trading down more than 65% in morning trading to around $1.<blockquote>潘兴广场通廷控股公司股价周五上午下跌0.9%，至19.80美元。潘兴广场通天认股权证价值暴跌，早盘交易下跌超过65%，至1美元左右。</blockquote> Ackman’s shift in strategy is in response to a recent lawsuit filed against Pershing Square Tontine, contending that a SPAC is in fact an investment company and should be subject to applicable regulations.<blockquote>阿克曼的战略转变是为了回应最近针对Pershing Square Tontine提起的诉讼，该诉讼认为SPAC实际上是一家投资公司，应遵守适用的法规。</blockquote> “While the lawsuit is brought on behalf of a purported shareholder of PSTH, this individual is simply an unwitting prop to enable the academics, and the plaintiff law firms with whom they have partnered, to bring the lawsuit,” Ackman wrote in a letter to shareholders published late Thursday night. “The two law professors who concocted the legal theory behind the complaint conceded to the press that their motivation in bringing the lawsuit was ‘to reform’ the entire SPAC industry.”<blockquote>阿克曼在致股东的一封信中写道：“虽然这起诉讼是代表PSTH的一名所谓股东提起的，但这个人只是一个不知情的道具，使学术界以及与他们合作的原告律师事务所能够提起诉讼。”周四深夜发表的股东。“炮制诉状背后法律理论的两位法学教授向媒体承认，他们提起诉讼的动机是‘改革’整个SPAC行业。”</blockquote> Ackman wrote that the uncertainty surrounding the lawsuit would scare off potential merger candidates, and that as a result it might not be able to close a deal before its deadline in July 2022. Ackman paraphrased Berkshire Hathaway’s (BRK.A and BRK.B) Warren Buffett in a tweet thread on Thursday night: “If you find yourself in a leaky boat, oftentimes you are better off switching boats than patching leaks to complete the mission.”<blockquote>阿克曼写道，围绕诉讼的不确定性将吓跑潜在的合并候选人，因此可能无法在2022年7月的最后期限之前完成交易。阿克曼在周四晚上的一条推文中转述了伯克希尔哈撒韦公司（BRK.A和BRK.B）沃伦·巴菲特的话：“如果你发现自己在一艘漏水的船上，通常最好换船，而不是修补漏洞来完成任务。”</blockquote> (“Should you find yourself in a chronically leaking boat, energy devoted to changing vessels is likely to be more productive than energy devoted to patching leaks,” Buffett wrote in his 1985 shareholder letter.)<blockquote>（巴菲特在1985年的股东信中写道：“如果你发现自己在一艘长期漏水的船上，花在更换船只上的精力可能比花在修补漏洞上的精力更有成效。”）</blockquote> It’s not the first leak that Pershing Square Tontine has sprung. In June, the largest-ever SPAC by IPO proceeds agreed to a complex deal that would have created three public vehicles, with two hoping for more deals in the future. The SPAC agreed to purchase 10% of the Amsterdam-listed shares of Universal Music Group from the French media conglomerate Vivendi (VIVHY), and distribute them to shareholders along with a SPARC warrant. That wouldn’t have used up all of Pershing Square Tontine’s trust cash, however, and the company would have continued hunting for another deal.<blockquote>这不是潘兴广场通天第一次出现泄漏。今年6月，按IPO收益计算，有史以来最大的SPAC同意了一项复杂的交易，该交易将创建三个公共工具，其中两个希望在未来进行更多交易。SPAC同意从法国媒体集团维旺迪(VIVHY)手中购买环球音乐集团在阿姆斯特丹上市的10%股份，并将其与SPARC认股权证一起分配给股东。然而，这不会用完潘兴广场通廷的所有信托现金，该公司会继续寻找另一笔交易。</blockquote> Regulators didn’t agree with that last part—SPACs tend to do one merger with one company then disappear, not live on to do deal after deal. Ackman called off that proposed transaction in mid-July, and the Pershing Square hedge fund bought the Universal shares instead.<blockquote>监管机构不同意最后一部分——SPAC倾向于与一家公司进行一次合并，然后消失，而不是继续进行一笔又一笔的交易。阿克曼于7月中旬取消了该拟议交易，潘兴广场对冲基金转而购买了环球股票。</blockquote> Now, the SPARC idea from the initial deal is back. Those plans still need to be approved by regulators at the Securities and Exchange Commission and require a rule change at the New York Stock Exchange, a process that could still take months. If approved, the Pershing Square SPARC will have 200 million SPARC warrants—exercisable at $20 at the time of a merger—and 22.22 million additional warrants, exercisable at $23 within five years after the SPARC’s merger. The SPARC’s capital structure will be approximately the same as Pershing Square Tontine’s, just without the cash for a deal already sitting in a trust.<blockquote>现在，最初交易中的SPARC想法又回来了。这些计划仍需获得美国证券交易委员会监管机构的批准，并需要纽约证券交易所修改规则，这一过程可能仍需要数月时间。如果获得批准，潘兴广场SPARC将拥有2亿份SPARC认股权证（合并时可以20美元的价格行使）以及2222万份额外认股权证，可在SPARC合并后五年内以23美元的价格行使。SPARC的资本结构将与Pershing Square Tontine大致相同，只是没有信托中已有的交易现金。</blockquote> A SPARC is more of a blank IOU than a blank check. Each SPARC warrant represents a right to invest $20 in an eventual deal that the hedge-fund manager negotiates, without a deadline. That differs from a SPAC, in which money is raised upfront in an initial public offering, with backers then going out to secure a merger usually within the next two years. SPAC shareholders get to vote on an eventual deal and have a redemption option that they can elect to receive a proportionate share of the SPAC’s trust in cash, rather than participating in its merger.<blockquote>SPARC与其说是空白支票，不如说是空白借据。每份SPARC认股权证代表着在对冲基金经理谈判的最终交易中投资20美元的权利，没有截止日期。这与特殊目的收购公司不同，特殊目的收购公司在首次公开募股中预先筹集资金，然后支持者通常在未来两年内出去确保合并。SPAC股东可以对最终交易进行投票，并拥有赎回选择权，他们可以选择以现金形式获得SPAC信托的一定比例份额，而不是参与其合并。</blockquote> In a SPARC, those two decisions are essentially one and the same. Warrant-holders who support or oppose an eventual deal that Ackman brings to the table will vote with their dollars. And they don’t have to endure the opportunity cost of locking up their $20 per share in a SPAC’s trust for years as Ackman searches for a deal, he argues. The SPARC offers more of an opt-in choice, rather than a SPAC’s opt out.<blockquote>在SPARC中，这两个决定本质上是相同的。支持或反对阿克曼提出的最终协议的认股权证持有人将用他们的美元投票。他认为，在阿克曼寻求交易时，他们不必忍受多年来将每股20美元锁定在SPAC信托中的机会成本。SPARC提供了更多的选择加入选择，而不是SPAC的选择退出。</blockquote> “The principal benefit of SPARC is that it would not hold investors’ money while we are looking for a target…” Ackman wrote. “The SPARC warrants will also remove the two-year ‘shot clock’ for a sponsor to consummate a transaction. This reduces the time pressure faced by the sponsor, which provides an incentive for SPAC sponsors to complete transactions before the clock runs out.”<blockquote>“SPARC的主要好处是，在我们寻找目标时，它不会持有投资者的资金……”阿克曼写道。“SPARC认股权证还将取消保荐人完成交易的两年‘拍摄时钟’。这减少了保荐人面临的时间压力，从而激励SPAC保荐人在时钟用完之前完成交易。”</blockquote> It’s an innovative but untested structure. In the past few months, Ackman has proven to investors that he’s capable of thinking up serious feats of financial engineering—if sometimes too creative for regulators. So far, however, finding a top-tier company to merge with his entities has been more of a challenge. That will be doubly true for his SPARC, which may need another large commitment from Pershing Square funds to ensure there’s enough cash to seal a deal even if SPARC holders don’t participate.<blockquote>这是一个创新但未经测试的结构。在过去的几个月里，阿克曼向投资者证明了他有能力提出严肃的金融工程壮举——尽管有时对监管机构来说太有创意了。然而，到目前为止，寻找一家顶级公司与他的实体合并更具挑战性。对于他的SPARC来说更是如此，它可能需要潘兴广场基金的另一笔巨额承诺，以确保即使SPARC持有人不参与，也有足够的现金来达成交易。</blockquote> “We have got your six,” Ackman signed off his letter to shareholders on Thursday night, military-speak for “We’ve got your back.'” So far, Pershing Square Tontine investors might not feel that way.<blockquote>“我们支持你，”阿克曼在周四晚上致股东的信中签名，用军方的话说，“我们支持你。”到目前为止，潘兴广场通天的投资者可能不会有这种感觉。</blockquote>","source":"lsy1601382232898","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>Bill Ackman Wants to Liquidate His SPAC. Hello, SPARC.<blockquote>比尔·阿克曼想要清算他的特殊目的收购公司。你好，斯帕克。</blockquote></title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 12.5px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nBill Ackman Wants to Liquidate His SPAC. Hello, SPARC.<blockquote>比尔·阿克曼想要清算他的特殊目的收购公司。你好，斯帕克。</blockquote>\n</h2>\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\nBarrons2021-08-23 09:04\n\n</h4>\n</header>\n<article>\nAfter a scuttled deal, a shareholder lawsuit, and a steep decline in share price, Bill Ackman wants to get out of the special purpose acquisition company game.<blockquote>在交易失败、股东诉讼和股价大幅下跌之后，比尔·阿克曼希望退出特殊目的收购公司的游戏。</blockquote> Pending regulators’ thumbs-up, the Pershing Square hedge-fund manager is hoping to instead move forward with a different vehicle that will allow him to continue big-game hunting for a company to take public.<blockquote>在等待监管机构的认可之前，这位潘兴广场对冲基金经理希望采用不同的工具，让他能够继续寻找一家上市公司。</blockquote> It’s the latest chapter in a convoluted saga that has already seen Ackman pivot several times. The end goal of merging with a “mature unicorn” remains elusive.<blockquote>这是阿克曼已经多次转向的错综复杂的传奇故事的最新篇章。与“成熟的独角兽”合并的最终目标仍然难以捉摸。</blockquote> Under his latest plans, Ackman’s SPAC, called Pershing Square Tontine Holdings (ticker: PSTH), would liquidate its $4 billion trust to shareholders at $20 a share. They would also receive one warrant tied to a new entity, called Pershing Square SPARC Holdings—short for special purpose acquisition right company, an Ackman-coined term.<blockquote>根据阿克曼的最新计划，阿克曼的SPAC名为Pershing Square Tontine Holdings（股票代码：PSTH），将以每股20美元的价格向股东清算其40亿美元的信托。他们还将获得一份与一个名为Pershing Square SPARC Holdings的新实体相关的认股权证，该实体是阿克曼创造的特殊目的收购权公司的缩写。</blockquote> Pershing Tontine Holdings warrant (PSTH.WT) holders would also get warrants—essentially call options—for the new company’s shares. The SPARC would search for an operating business to merge with and take public in the process, while the SPAC would cease to exist and its “tontine” warrant structure likewise goes away.<blockquote>Pershing Tontine Holdings认股权证（PSTH.WT）持有人还将获得新公司股票的认股权证（本质上是看涨期权期权）。SPARC将寻找一家运营企业合并并在此过程中上市，而SPAC将不复存在，其“tontine”认股权证结构也将消失。</blockquote> That is not much comfort for investors who bought Pershing Square Tontine shares after its initial public offering in July 2020, when the SPAC sold $20 units consisting of a common share and one-ninth of a warrant, exercisable at $23 after the SPAC’s merger. Shares peaked around $33 in February, and had consistently traded in the mid-to-high $20 range until just recently.<blockquote>对于在2020年7月Pershing Square Tontine首次公开募股后购买其股票的投资者来说，这并不是什么安慰，当时SPAC出售了20美元的单位，包括普通股和九分之一的认股权证，在SPAC合并后可以23美元的价格行使。股价在2月份达到33美元左右的峰值，直到最近一直在20美元的中高区间交易。</blockquote> The SPAC’s stock fell below its trust value per share for the first time on Thursday, closing at $19.99. Investors who paid more than $20 a share will be losing out.<blockquote>周四，SPAC的股价首次跌破每股信托价值，收于19.99美元。每股支付超过20美元的投资者将遭受损失。</blockquote> Pershing Square Tontine Holdings stock dropped 0.9% on Friday morning, to $19.80. Pershing Square Tontine warrants tumbled in value, trading down more than 65% in morning trading to around $1.<blockquote>潘兴广场通廷控股公司股价周五上午下跌0.9%，至19.80美元。潘兴广场通天认股权证价值暴跌，早盘交易下跌超过65%，至1美元左右。</blockquote> Ackman’s shift in strategy is in response to a recent lawsuit filed against Pershing Square Tontine, contending that a SPAC is in fact an investment company and should be subject to applicable regulations.<blockquote>阿克曼的战略转变是为了回应最近针对Pershing Square Tontine提起的诉讼，该诉讼认为SPAC实际上是一家投资公司，应遵守适用的法规。</blockquote> “While the lawsuit is brought on behalf of a purported shareholder of PSTH, this individual is simply an unwitting prop to enable the academics, and the plaintiff law firms with whom they have partnered, to bring the lawsuit,” Ackman wrote in a letter to shareholders published late Thursday night. “The two law professors who concocted the legal theory behind the complaint conceded to the press that their motivation in bringing the lawsuit was ‘to reform’ the entire SPAC industry.”<blockquote>阿克曼在致股东的一封信中写道：“虽然这起诉讼是代表PSTH的一名所谓股东提起的，但这个人只是一个不知情的道具，使学术界以及与他们合作的原告律师事务所能够提起诉讼。”周四深夜发表的股东。“炮制诉状背后法律理论的两位法学教授向媒体承认，他们提起诉讼的动机是‘改革’整个SPAC行业。”</blockquote> Ackman wrote that the uncertainty surrounding the lawsuit would scare off potential merger candidates, and that as a result it might not be able to close a deal before its deadline in July 2022. Ackman paraphrased Berkshire Hathaway’s (BRK.A and BRK.B) Warren Buffett in a tweet thread on Thursday night: “If you find yourself in a leaky boat, oftentimes you are better off switching boats than patching leaks to complete the mission.”<blockquote>阿克曼写道，围绕诉讼的不确定性将吓跑潜在的合并候选人，因此可能无法在2022年7月的最后期限之前完成交易。阿克曼在周四晚上的一条推文中转述了伯克希尔哈撒韦公司（BRK.A和BRK.B）沃伦·巴菲特的话：“如果你发现自己在一艘漏水的船上，通常最好换船，而不是修补漏洞来完成任务。”</blockquote> (“Should you find yourself in a chronically leaking boat, energy devoted to changing vessels is likely to be more productive than energy devoted to patching leaks,” Buffett wrote in his 1985 shareholder letter.)<blockquote>（巴菲特在1985年的股东信中写道：“如果你发现自己在一艘长期漏水的船上，花在更换船只上的精力可能比花在修补漏洞上的精力更有成效。”）</blockquote> It’s not the first leak that Pershing Square Tontine has sprung. In June, the largest-ever SPAC by IPO proceeds agreed to a complex deal that would have created three public vehicles, with two hoping for more deals in the future. The SPAC agreed to purchase 10% of the Amsterdam-listed shares of Universal Music Group from the French media conglomerate Vivendi (VIVHY), and distribute them to shareholders along with a SPARC warrant. That wouldn’t have used up all of Pershing Square Tontine’s trust cash, however, and the company would have continued hunting for another deal.<blockquote>这不是潘兴广场通天第一次出现泄漏。今年6月，按IPO收益计算，有史以来最大的SPAC同意了一项复杂的交易，该交易将创建三个公共工具，其中两个希望在未来进行更多交易。SPAC同意从法国媒体集团维旺迪(VIVHY)手中购买环球音乐集团在阿姆斯特丹上市的10%股份，并将其与SPARC认股权证一起分配给股东。然而，这不会用完潘兴广场通廷的所有信托现金，该公司会继续寻找另一笔交易。</blockquote> Regulators didn’t agree with that last part—SPACs tend to do one merger with one company then disappear, not live on to do deal after deal. Ackman called off that proposed transaction in mid-July, and the Pershing Square hedge fund bought the Universal shares instead.<blockquote>监管机构不同意最后一部分——SPAC倾向于与一家公司进行一次合并，然后消失，而不是继续进行一笔又一笔的交易。阿克曼于7月中旬取消了该拟议交易，潘兴广场对冲基金转而购买了环球股票。</blockquote> Now, the SPARC idea from the initial deal is back. Those plans still need to be approved by regulators at the Securities and Exchange Commission and require a rule change at the New York Stock Exchange, a process that could still take months. If approved, the Pershing Square SPARC will have 200 million SPARC warrants—exercisable at $20 at the time of a merger—and 22.22 million additional warrants, exercisable at $23 within five years after the SPARC’s merger. The SPARC’s capital structure will be approximately the same as Pershing Square Tontine’s, just without the cash for a deal already sitting in a trust.<blockquote>现在，最初交易中的SPARC想法又回来了。这些计划仍需获得美国证券交易委员会监管机构的批准，并需要纽约证券交易所修改规则，这一过程可能仍需要数月时间。如果获得批准，潘兴广场SPARC将拥有2亿份SPARC认股权证（合并时可以20美元的价格行使）以及2222万份额外认股权证，可在SPARC合并后五年内以23美元的价格行使。SPARC的资本结构将与Pershing Square Tontine大致相同，只是没有信托中已有的交易现金。</blockquote> A SPARC is more of a blank IOU than a blank check. Each SPARC warrant represents a right to invest $20 in an eventual deal that the hedge-fund manager negotiates, without a deadline. That differs from a SPAC, in which money is raised upfront in an initial public offering, with backers then going out to secure a merger usually within the next two years. SPAC shareholders get to vote on an eventual deal and have a redemption option that they can elect to receive a proportionate share of the SPAC’s trust in cash, rather than participating in its merger.<blockquote>SPARC与其说是空白支票，不如说是空白借据。每份SPARC认股权证代表着在对冲基金经理谈判的最终交易中投资20美元的权利，没有截止日期。这与特殊目的收购公司不同，特殊目的收购公司在首次公开募股中预先筹集资金，然后支持者通常在未来两年内出去确保合并。SPAC股东可以对最终交易进行投票，并拥有赎回选择权，他们可以选择以现金形式获得SPAC信托的一定比例份额，而不是参与其合并。</blockquote> In a SPARC, those two decisions are essentially one and the same. Warrant-holders who support or oppose an eventual deal that Ackman brings to the table will vote with their dollars. And they don’t have to endure the opportunity cost of locking up their $20 per share in a SPAC’s trust for years as Ackman searches for a deal, he argues. The SPARC offers more of an opt-in choice, rather than a SPAC’s opt out.<blockquote>在SPARC中，这两个决定本质上是相同的。支持或反对阿克曼提出的最终协议的认股权证持有人将用他们的美元投票。他认为，在阿克曼寻求交易时，他们不必忍受多年来将每股20美元锁定在SPAC信托中的机会成本。SPARC提供了更多的选择加入选择，而不是SPAC的选择退出。</blockquote> “The principal benefit of SPARC is that it would not hold investors’ money while we are looking for a target…” Ackman wrote. “The SPARC warrants will also remove the two-year ‘shot clock’ for a sponsor to consummate a transaction. This reduces the time pressure faced by the sponsor, which provides an incentive for SPAC sponsors to complete transactions before the clock runs out.”<blockquote>“SPARC的主要好处是，在我们寻找目标时，它不会持有投资者的资金……”阿克曼写道。“SPARC认股权证还将取消保荐人完成交易的两年‘拍摄时钟’。这减少了保荐人面临的时间压力，从而激励SPAC保荐人在时钟用完之前完成交易。”</blockquote> It’s an innovative but untested structure. In the past few months, Ackman has proven to investors that he’s capable of thinking up serious feats of financial engineering—if sometimes too creative for regulators. So far, however, finding a top-tier company to merge with his entities has been more of a challenge. That will be doubly true for his SPARC, which may need another large commitment from Pershing Square funds to ensure there’s enough cash to seal a deal even if SPARC holders don’t participate.<blockquote>这是一个创新但未经测试的结构。在过去的几个月里，阿克曼向投资者证明了他有能力提出严肃的金融工程壮举——尽管有时对监管机构来说太有创意了。然而，到目前为止，寻找一家顶级公司与他的实体合并更具挑战性。对于他的SPARC来说更是如此，它可能需要潘兴广场基金的另一笔巨额承诺，以确保即使SPARC持有人不参与，也有足够的现金来达成交易。</blockquote> “We have got your six,” Ackman signed off his letter to shareholders on Thursday night, military-speak for “We’ve got your back.'” So far, Pershing Square Tontine investors might not feel that way.<blockquote>“我们支持你，”阿克曼在周四晚上致股东的信中签名，用军方的话说，“我们支持你。”到目前为止，潘兴广场通天的投资者可能不会有这种感觉。</blockquote>\n<div class=\"bt-text\">\n\n\n 来源：<a href=\"https://www.barrons.com/articles/bill-ackman-spac-51629477062?siteid=yhoof2\">Barrons</a>\n为提升您的阅读体验，我们对本页面进行了排版优化\n\n\n</div>\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"PSTH":"Pershing Square Tontine Holdings"},"source_url":"https://www.barrons.com/articles/bill-ackman-spac-51629477062?siteid=yhoof2","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1103418295","content_text":"After a scuttled deal, a shareholder lawsuit, and a steep decline in share price, Bill Ackman wants to get out of the special purpose acquisition company game.\nPending regulators’ thumbs-up, the Pershing Square hedge-fund manager is hoping to instead move forward with a different vehicle that will allow him to continue big-game hunting for a company to take public.\nIt’s the latest chapter in a convoluted saga that has already seen Ackman pivot several times. The end goal of merging with a “mature unicorn” remains elusive.\nUnder his latest plans, Ackman’s SPAC, called Pershing Square Tontine Holdings (ticker: PSTH), would liquidate its $4 billion trust to shareholders at $20 a share. They would also receive one warrant tied to a new entity, called Pershing Square SPARC Holdings—short for special purpose acquisition right company, an Ackman-coined term.\nPershing Tontine Holdings warrant (PSTH.WT) holders would also get warrants—essentially call options—for the new company’s shares. The SPARC would search for an operating business to merge with and take public in the process, while the SPAC would cease to exist and its “tontine” warrant structure likewise goes away.\nThat is not much comfort for investors who bought Pershing Square Tontine shares after its initial public offering in July 2020, when the SPAC sold $20 units consisting of a common share and one-ninth of a warrant, exercisable at $23 after the SPAC’s merger. Shares peaked around $33 in February, and had consistently traded in the mid-to-high $20 range until just recently.\nThe SPAC’s stock fell below its trust value per share for the first time on Thursday, closing at $19.99. Investors who paid more than $20 a share will be losing out.\nPershing Square Tontine Holdings stock dropped 0.9% on Friday morning, to $19.80. Pershing Square Tontine warrants tumbled in value, trading down more than 65% in morning trading to around $1.\nAckman’s shift in strategy is in response to a recent lawsuit filed against Pershing Square Tontine, contending that a SPAC is in fact an investment company and should be subject to applicable regulations.\n“While the lawsuit is brought on behalf of a purported shareholder of PSTH, this individual is simply an unwitting prop to enable the academics, and the plaintiff law firms with whom they have partnered, to bring the lawsuit,” Ackman wrote in a letter to shareholders published late Thursday night. “The two law professors who concocted the legal theory behind the complaint conceded to the press that their motivation in bringing the lawsuit was ‘to reform’ the entire SPAC industry.”\nAckman wrote that the uncertainty surrounding the lawsuit would scare off potential merger candidates, and that as a result it might not be able to close a deal before its deadline in July 2022. Ackman paraphrased Berkshire Hathaway’s (BRK.A and BRK.B) Warren Buffett in a tweet thread on Thursday night: “If you find yourself in a leaky boat, oftentimes you are better off switching boats than patching leaks to complete the mission.”\n(“Should you find yourself in a chronically leaking boat, energy devoted to changing vessels is likely to be more productive than energy devoted to patching leaks,” Buffett wrote in his 1985 shareholder letter.)\nIt’s not the first leak that Pershing Square Tontine has sprung. In June, the largest-ever SPAC by IPO proceeds agreed to a complex deal that would have created three public vehicles, with two hoping for more deals in the future. The SPAC agreed to purchase 10% of the Amsterdam-listed shares of Universal Music Group from the French media conglomerate Vivendi (VIVHY), and distribute them to shareholders along with a SPARC warrant. That wouldn’t have used up all of Pershing Square Tontine’s trust cash, however, and the company would have continued hunting for another deal.\nRegulators didn’t agree with that last part—SPACs tend to do one merger with one company then disappear, not live on to do deal after deal. Ackman called off that proposed transaction in mid-July, and the Pershing Square hedge fund bought the Universal shares instead.\nNow, the SPARC idea from the initial deal is back. Those plans still need to be approved by regulators at the Securities and Exchange Commission and require a rule change at the New York Stock Exchange, a process that could still take months. If approved, the Pershing Square SPARC will have 200 million SPARC warrants—exercisable at $20 at the time of a merger—and 22.22 million additional warrants, exercisable at $23 within five years after the SPARC’s merger. The SPARC’s capital structure will be approximately the same as Pershing Square Tontine’s, just without the cash for a deal already sitting in a trust.\nA SPARC is more of a blank IOU than a blank check. Each SPARC warrant represents a right to invest $20 in an eventual deal that the hedge-fund manager negotiates, without a deadline. That differs from a SPAC, in which money is raised upfront in an initial public offering, with backers then going out to secure a merger usually within the next two years. SPAC shareholders get to vote on an eventual deal and have a redemption option that they can elect to receive a proportionate share of the SPAC’s trust in cash, rather than participating in its merger.\nIn a SPARC, those two decisions are essentially one and the same. Warrant-holders who support or oppose an eventual deal that Ackman brings to the table will vote with their dollars. And they don’t have to endure the opportunity cost of locking up their $20 per share in a SPAC’s trust for years as Ackman searches for a deal, he argues. The SPARC offers more of an opt-in choice, rather than a SPAC’s opt out.\n“The principal benefit of SPARC is that it would not hold investors’ money while we are looking for a target…” Ackman wrote. “The SPARC warrants will also remove the two-year ‘shot clock’ for a sponsor to consummate a transaction. This reduces the time pressure faced by the sponsor, which provides an incentive for SPAC sponsors to complete transactions before the clock runs out.”\nIt’s an innovative but untested structure. In the past few months, Ackman has proven to investors that he’s capable of thinking up serious feats of financial engineering—if sometimes too creative for regulators. So far, however, finding a top-tier company to merge with his entities has been more of a challenge. That will be doubly true for his SPARC, which may need another large commitment from Pershing Square funds to ensure there’s enough cash to seal a deal even if SPARC holders don’t participate.\n“We have got your six,” Ackman signed off his letter to shareholders on Thursday night, military-speak for “We’ve got your back.'” So far, Pershing Square Tontine investors might not feel that way.","news_type":1,"symbols_score_info":{"PSTH":0.9}},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":3393,"commentLimit":10,"likeStatus":false,"favoriteStatus":false,"reportStatus":false,"symbols":[],"verified":2,"subType":0,"readableState":1,"langContent":"EN","currentLanguage":"EN","warmUpFlag":false,"orderFlag":false,"shareable":true,"causeOfNotShareable":"","featuresForAnalytics":[],"commentAndTweetFlag":false,"andRepostAutoSelectedFlag":false,"upFlag":false,"length":4,"xxTargetLangEnum":"ORIG"},"commentList":[],"hasMoreComment":false,"orderType":2}