Denmark's Largest Pension Lays Off Bonds From Indebted EU Nations

ATP's CEO Lars Rohde has said that the fund will avoid government bonds issued by the European Union's most indebted nations, as it considers the risk too great.

(January 6, 2011) — Danish fund ATP has said it will avoid government bonds issued by the European Union’s most indebted nations, according to the CEO of the $73.4 billion Danish pension fund.

“When we invest in government bonds, it’s absolutely critical for us that there can be no doubt that we’ll get our money back,” said Lars Rohde, chief executive officer at ATP, in an e-mailed reply to questions from Bloomberg. He added that consequently, the fund has completely avoided government debt issued by Greece and Ireland, with European government bond holdings only including Danish, German and, to a lesser degree, French bonds.

While Greece received a $146 billion loan from the EU and International Monetary Fund in May and will post a 7.4% budget deficit of gross domestic product, Ireland received an $110.6 billion rescue package and will post the biggest deficit this year in the EU at 10.3% of GDP, Bloomberg reported.

At the end of the third quarter, according to the fund’s quarterly report on October 28, ATP had a total investment portfolio of $70.3 billion and delivered a return on total assets of 5.7% in the first nine months.

Want the latest institutional investment industry
news and insights? Sign up for CIO newsletters.

In related news, two of Denmark’s largest pensions — the €14 billion PensionDanmark and ATP — are considering joint property and infrastructure deals, a decision that comes as schemes finalized a joint purchase of three department store buildings, representing the country’s largest real estate deal in 2010.



To contact the <em>aiCIO</em> editor of this story: Paula Vasan at <a href='mailto:pvasan@assetinternational.com'>pvasan@assetinternational.com</a>; 646-308-2742

With Facebook, Did Pension and Sovereign Funds Miss an Opportunity – or Dodge a Bullet?

A Goldman unit that invests on behalf of asset owners turned down an opportunity to invest capital in social network Facebook, raising questions over whether the bank’s eventual investment is a robust one.

(January 6, 2011) – The New York Times is reporting that a Goldman Sachs group that manages money for pension and sovereign funds turned down an offer to invest in social networking website Facebook before another section of the bank did just that.

 

The $20 billion Goldman Sachs Capital Partners (GSCP), the internal private corporate equity group led by Richard Friedman, reportedly was offered an investment opportunity in Facebook before the bank used its balance sheet to purchase a $450 million stake, and, in turn, sell shares on to wealthy investors.

 

Never miss a story — sign up for CIO newsletters to stay up-to-date on the latest institutional investment industry news.

Whether this is a good or bad event for pension and sovereign wealth fund clients of the bank has yet to be seen. What is clear, however, is that while Goldman is willing to sell shares in the social networking website to some wealthy clients, the same seems not true for GSCP, which is a fiduciary for its pension and sovereign customers. According to the Times, Friedman, “was concerned about Facebook’s $50 billion valuation and the terms of the deal.” Of course, institutional clients can simple circumvent the GSCP group and its decision by buying a stake via other parts of the bank that are currently offering a limited number of shares for sale.

 

Concerns have been raised elsewhere about the valuation of Facebook after the Goldman infusion. Facebook’s 2010 revenues were $2 billion, with $400 million in profit, according to reports – significant growth over past years, but still a stretch for many analysts considering the $50 billion implied valuation.

 

It is well known – and the Times comments on this fact – that the GSCP unit was harmed in the Internet bubble of the late 1990s. According to the Times, a $2.8 billion fund run by the unit invested upward of 70% of its capital in dot-com and technology companies during that time, which harmed its valuation on the other side of  the bubble.



To contact the <em>aiCIO</em> editor of this story: Kristopher McDaniel at <a href='mailto:kmcdaniel@assetinternational.com'>kmcdaniel@assetinternational.com</a>

«