It's kind of absurd how closely Carl Icahn's mirrors that of the story of Gordon Gekko in Oliver Stone's movie Wall Street. What Icahn did to TWA is pretty much exactly what Gekko did (or planned to do) to Bluestar Airlines in that film. Longer period of time - but in principle, very similar.
I was just about to post exactly this. Anyone interested in what Wall Street actually does needs to watch this movie.
I have an MBA. I have nothing against making money. But while it's possible to make money by creating something of value, it's unfortunately possible to make even more money while doing the opposite.
Shitpiles like this always have a "business alibi" that they create liquidity, or improve efficiency/productivity, etc. I suppose it's true that the forest needs fires, but we don't have to like them.
From what I've read, Icahn argues that the companieshe's going up against aren't do a good job of running the company. If that's true, Icahn is doing shareholders a service.
Well, let's look at the TWA story related here. Icahn took the company private just three years after buying it, then started relentlessly selling off assets. At the time it went private, he owned 77% of the company's outstanding shares -- so he was far and away the biggest beneficiary of that move, and he effectively cut the remaining 23% of the shareholders out of the profits he made by dismantling the airline over the next few years.
It's possible that TWA couldn't have been turned around and selling it off was really the best return he could get on his investment -- but I think it's at least debatable whether Icahn did anyone else much of a service. The other shareholders got to exit a company they'd lost faith in and hopefully made some money in the process, but that seems to be it as far as silver linings go.
Whenever I hear a story about someone being "underhanded" and "of low character" I always see what the other side of the story is. Usually, the truth isn't so straightforward.
It appears that TWA owed him money so he negotiated the cheap ticket as a form of payment...[1] How convenient that Marc left that out of his blog post...
In the interim, Icahn negotiated for airline vouchers from the company in lieu of the $190 million that TWA owed him. As the deal included the provision that he could not sell these tickets through travel agents, Icahn founded LowestFare.com, where he both sold the tickets and created a revolution in the travel industry.
One of those creditors, to the tune of $190 million, was Icahn. He resigned as chairman in 1993, and by 1995 he was growing impatient to be repaid. TWA executives, desperate to bring the tragic Icahn chapter to a close, gave away the farm, the cows and the farmer’s wife. They came up with a deal called the Karabu ticket agreement, an eight-year arrangement that allowed Icahn to buy any ticket that connected through St. Louis… for 55 cents on the dollar and resell them at a discount.
Then of course, if you believe that the company is undervalued and can grow (and that is why you would buy it, anyway), you wouldn't try to force them to pay your money back, because they could generate a positive return on the money.
I don't know the details, but maybe it kept the company from filling bankruptcy by a few months? They didn't have the cash to pay the loan, so they offered the tickets.
Selling off the most profitable route, tickets, short ordering replacement aircraft - there is not one thing he did that benefited anyone but himself. Nevermind long term company value.
That doesn't make any sense. Icahn is a shareholder himself and he mainly makes his money through share appreciation. If the share price goes up, all shareholders benefit.
I don't know enough about the TWA business dealings, but sometimes a company is more valuable broken up.
Did you read the article you linked to with the stock buy-back, ticket sales, and then tanking it in Chap 11? That didn't benefit the other shareholders.
