Macquarie model blowtorched
April 4, 2008
Michael West, The Sydney Morning Herald
New York-based corporate governance service RiskMetrics Group has
delivered a stinging rebuke to Australia's infrastructure
sector, and in particular the "Macquarie Model" which has
been mimicked by Babcock & Brown, and has spawned a
generation of toll-roads, airports, telecommunications and
power generation stocks.
In the most detailed independent research of Macquarie Group
and Babcock satellites to be published, Risk Metrics
critiques the financially-engineered infrastructure model
for its high debt levels, high fees, paying distributions
out of capital rather than cashflow, overpaying for assets,
related-party transactions, booking profits from
revaluations, poor disclosure, myriad conflicts of interest,
auditor conflicts and other poor corporate governance.
The RiskMetrics research is likely to send shockwaves
through the sector and give both state and federal
governments cause for concern as governments have mostly
privatised public assets via these structures.
RiskMetrics is a leading adviser to institutional investors
both in Australia and overseas. They have been a critic for
some time of individual transactions, but this is first time
they have strung all the pieces together, and raised doubts
about the model's viability.
An example of RiskMetrics' previous scepticism was its
advice to domestic institutions to vote against the
Macquarie Bank remuneration report last year. The result was
a 20% protest vote against the bank's pay structures.
Anyway, this report is a haymaker.
Although the report has not put a figure on it, fees in the
billions above normal public-private partnership (PPP) rates
of return have gone to the investment banks.
"The infrastructure model raises investment-related concerns
that can be grouped as follows: a series of issues related
to the sustainability of the model; a danger of overpaying
for assets; fee structures that deliver high fees and
provide an incentive to increase a fund's size; and
accounting practices that have the capacity to provide an
overly robust picture of a fund's profitability,'' says the
report.
The model was "pioneered by Australia's Macquarie Group" and
the research covers Macquarie Airports, Macquarie Capital
Alliance Group, Macquarie Communications Infrastructure
Group, Macquarie Media Group and the original and largest
fund:
Macquarie Infrastructure Group and Babcock & Brown spinoffs
Babcock & Brown Infrastructure, Babcock & Brown Capital,
Babcock & Brown Environmental Investments (presently subject
to a takeover offer by Babcock & Brown), Babcock & Brown
Wind Partners and Babcock & Brown Power, as well as
Rivercity Motorway, Duet, Hastings Diversified, Challenger,
ConnectEast SP AusNet and Spark Infrastructure.
The initial success of the model, at least in capital
raising and fee generation terms, has allowed the growth in
infrastructure funds to expand overseas into US and European
markets.
RiskMetrics, meanwhile, had been chipping away earlier at
the more ambitious deals being done by Macquarie-type
acolytes, such as Allco Finance Group.
For example, it recommended strongly against the Allco
proposal to buy Rubicon Asset Management last year, and
institutions came close to voting the deal down.
Allco principal David Coe had led an Allco roadshow to
spruik the merits of the deal and it finally scraped
through.
In retrospect, Allco shareholders should have taken
RiskMetrics' advice. The Rubicon transaction proved
disastrous.
The three Rubicon trusts are now down more than 80% in just
a few months and Allco teeters on the verge of insolvency.
In the case of Allco, the proxy adviser raised doubts about
corporate governance and potential conflicts of interest on
the Rubicon.
It should also be noted that the adviser was a critic of
MFS, Centro and ABC Learning for some of the same reasons it
has criticised Babcock and Macquarie in its latest, most
in-depth, paper.
Those three, like Allco and Rubicon, are close to corporate
extinction.
MFS, Allco and Centro all favoured the externally-managed
model as does the Hedley pubs stable of companies which has
just fallen into trouble. Many real estate trusts or REITs
also have the trust structure.
Their underperformance has been significant since the
downturn in credit markets as the aggressive financing
practices, and booking profits from revaluations, hamper
performance when credit spreads blow out and asset values
come under pressure.
But back to the latest RiskMetrics report. Of prurient
interest is their work on fees.
As an extreme example, it takes Babcock & Brown Wind
Partners which "had operating cash flow of $14.2 million in
the 2006 financial year, but paid distributions totalling
$48 million in relation to that year. The distributions were
equivalent to 54% of the total cash receipts from customers
during the year,'' says the report.
"Even the most mature infrastructure fund of all, Macquarie
Infrastructure Group, is no exception.
It had operating cash flow of $306.9 million in the 2006
financial year, but paid distributions totalling $512.9
million in relation to that year.
Furthermore, the distributions were equivalent to 116% of
the total toll revenue received during the year.''
The ''stapled'' entities of the infrastructure model "have
multiple boards, and are run by an external management
company employed under a management agreement providing for
substantial fees.
Many of the features of these vehicles appear to make it
practically difficult, and possibly expensive, for investors
to replace the external manager if dissatisfied with its
performance.''
In sum, RiskMetrics finds the model probably has more in
common with private equity than with publicly traded
property funds.