Stocks were tumbling last fall as the new school year began, but at Harvard
University, it was as if the boom had never ended.

Workers were digging across the river from Harvard's Cambridge, Mass., home,
the start of a grand expansion that was to eventually almost double the size
of the university. Budgets were plump, and students from middle class
families were getting big tuition breaks under an ambitious new financial
aid program.

The lavish spending was made possible by the earnings from Harvard's $36.9
billion endowment, the world's largest. That pot was supposed to be good for
$1.4 billion in annual earnings.

Behind the scenes, though, a different story was unfolding.

In a glassed-walled conference room overlooking downtown Boston, traders at
Harvard Management Co., the subsidiary that invests the school's money, were
fielding questions from their new boss, Jane Mendillo, about exotic
financial instruments that were suddenly backfiring.

Harvard had derivatives that gave it exposure to $7.2 billion in commodities
and foreign stocks. With prices of both crashing, the university was getting
margin calls--demands from counterparties (among them, JPMorgan Chase and
Goldman Sachs) for more collateral. Another bunch of derivatives burdened
Harvard with a multibillion-dollar bet on interest rates that went against
it.

It would have been nice to have cash on hand to meet margin calls, but
Harvard had next to none. That was because these supremely self-confident
money managers were more than fully invested. As of June 30, they had,
thanks to the fancy derivatives, a 105 per cent long position in risky
assets. The effect is akin to putting every last dollar of your portfolio to
work and then borrowing another 5 per cent to buy more stocks.

Desperate for cash, Harvard Management went to outside money managers
begging for a return of money it had expected to keep parked away for a long
time. It tried to sell off illiquid stakes in private equity partnerships
but couldn't get a decent price. It unloaded two-thirds of a $2.9 billion
stock portfolio into a falling market.

Now, in the last phase of the cash-raising panic, the university is
borrowing money, much like a homeowner who takes out a second mortgage in
order to pay off credit card bills. Since December, Harvard has raised $2.5
billion by selling IOUs in the bond market. Roughly a third of these Harvard
bonds are tax exempt and carry interest rates of 3.2 per cent to 5.8 per
cent. The rest are taxable, with rates of 5 per cent to 6.5 per cent.

It doesn't feel good to be borrowing at 6% while holding assets with
negative returns. Harvard has oversize positions in emerging-market stocks
and private equity partnerships, both disaster areas in the past eight
months.

The one category that has done well since last June is conventional Treasury
bonds, and Harvard appears to have owned little of these. As of its last
public disclosure on this score, it had a modest 16 per cent allocation to
fixed income, consisting of 7 per cent in inflation-indexed bonds, 4 per
cent in corporates and the rest in high-yield and foreign debt.

For a long while, Harvard's daring investment style was the envy of the
endowment world. It made light bets in plain old stocks and bonds and went
hell-for-leather into exotic and illiquid holdings: commodities, timberland,
hedge funds, emerging-market equities and private equity partnerships.

The risky strategy paid off with market-beating results as long as the
market was going up. But risk brings pain in a market crash. Although the
full extent of the damage won't be known until Harvard releases the
endowment numbers for June 30, 2009, the university is already working on
the assumption that the portfolio will be down 30 per cent, or $11 billion.

The strain of market turmoil is visible in staff turnover at the management
company, which axed 25 per cent of its staff recently and is on its fifth
chief in four years. Mendillo, 50, came to Harvard last July after running
Wellesley's small endowment.

She declines to comment. But how much blame she should get is unclear; the
big bets on derivatives and exotic holdings were in place before she got
there. The bad bet on interest rates--a swap in which Harvard was paying a
high fixed-interest rate and collecting a low short-term rate--goes back to
a mandate from former Harvard President Lawrence Summers.

Jack R. Meyer, 64, a revered money manager who headed Harvard's endowment
until 2005, offers a few guarded comments. "The liquidity thing most
concerns me--that should not have happened," he says. Though he wasn't there
at the time, Meyer says Harvard Management bought the commodity and foreign
stock derivatives as a way to get exposure to those asset classes while
freeing up cash to put to work elsewhere. The strategy, he says, "drained
liquidity" from the endowment in recent months. "Many endowments stretched
too far, and I think Harvard did as well," he says.

The endowment will remain stretched. Harvard has been counting on it to fund
more than a third of its $3.5 billion operating budget. Assuming the fiscal
year ends with around a $24 billion endowment value, the university will be
drawing down half again as high a percentage of its assets as it did in
2004, the last time the endowment was around that size.

That can't go on forever. The strain on liquidity will continue, as the
private equity partnerships compel Harvard to meet billions in capital calls
in future years. Why not just unload those partnerships along with the
liabilities that stick to them? Because no one wants to buy them. Private
equity stakes like Harvard's are selling at 40 per cent to 60 per
cent discounts in various markets. "Endowments will be shocked at the
valuations of their (private equity) portfolios," says Stewart Massey, an
endowment consultant at Massey Quick. "It's going to be an absolute
bloodbath."

Harvard's woes are in some ways no different from those at other
universities or in the market generally (the S&P 500 is down 37 per
cent since last July 1). "A loss in these kinds of markets is inevitable,"
says Michael Eisenson, a former HMC staffer who now runs private equity firm
Charlesbank. The average endowment is down 23 per cent in the five months
through November, according to a university trade group.

But Harvard was supposed to be different. In the 15 years through last June,
it returned an annual 15.7 per cent versus 9.2 per cent for the S&P. Meyer
landed at Harvard in 1990 after scoring big investment returns at the
Rockefeller Foundation.

In an unorthodox move for an endowment chief, Meyer built a Wall Street-like
trading operation and managed most of HMC's money in-house. It looked like a
giant hedge fund, and it had paychecks to match. A high-level HMC manager
would make as much as $35 million in good years.

Those sums triggered what became an annual Harvard tradition: first, the
disclosure (compelled by tax laws applying to nonprofits) of the HMC
bonuses, followed by an outcry led by the late William Strauss and a group
of Harvard alumni from his class of 1969.

HMC not only became a place to make big bonuses, it was also where you could
make a name for yourself and become a "crimson puppy," meaning launching
your own private equity firm or hedge fund with Harvard's backing. One of
the puppies, Jeffrey Larson, left in 2004 to start Sowood Capital. That pile
of smart money cratered in 2007, losing $350 million for Harvard.

By September 2005, Meyer himself decided it was time to go. Some people say
it was because of the persistent criticism about bonuses, which were reduced
near the end of his tenure; others say he had run-ins with former US
Treasury Secretaries Lawrence Summers and Robert Rubin, who assumed Harvard
leadership positions at the start of the decade. Meyer denies both reasons
and says 16 years at Harvard was simply enough.

Meyer formed his own hedge fund, Convexity Capital, which seems to have held
up well in the current market. He took with him the Harvard heads of
domestic and international fixed income and both their staffs, as well as
the chief risk officer, chief technology officer and chief operating
officer. The survivors were demoralized. "You walked onto the trading floor,
and it was just 10 per cent full," says someone who was there at the time.
"There was a sense that if you were good, you left."

Five months later, Mohamed El-Erian, now 50, took over. The son of an
Egyptian diplomat, he had risen to deputy director of the International
Monetary Fund before joining giant bond manager Pimco. He seemed perfect for
smoothing relations between HMC and the university. Filling the hole that
Meyer left was another matter.

One solution: Don't even try, just hand over all of the endowment to outside
money managers. But El-Erian insisted on keeping things intact. He talked of
the "structural advantages" of investing a big endowment backed by an
AAA-rated university, such as allowing you to borrow at low rates when
making leveraged bets. The former Pimco emerging-market superstar also
believed that the developing countries offered big profits to smart
investors like HMC because they had become less risky thanks to ample dollar
reserves and a growing middle class.

So El-Erian upped HMC's exposure to emerging-market stocks, which rose from
6 per cent of assets when Meyer left, to 11 per cent two years later. He
also used total return swaps to bet on developed world stocks and
commodities on the cheap, freeing up money for other investments. Tapping
former Stanford endowment staffer Mark Taborsky (an "important hire,"
El-Erian would later write in a book), El-Erian also took money from hedge
funds he didn't like and redirected it to ones he thought were winners,
putting hundreds of millions into funds in Latin America, Asia and the
Middle East.

The moves looked brilliant. For the year ended June 2007, Harvard returned
23 per cent versus 17.7 per cent for 151 other big institutional investors
(and 20.6 per cent for the S&P 500). Fearing all markets could soon fall,
El-Erian injected what he referred to as "Armageddon insurance" into HMC's
portfolio for the first time by buying interest rate floors, or a wager that
rates would fall, and betting, via credit default swaps, that companies
could soon struggle to pay their debts.

For the following year, through June 2008, Harvard gained 8.6 per cent,
versus a 13 per cent fall in the S&P. El-Erian's insurance accounted for
much of HMC's outperformance. Hedge funds, however, were sucking up
cash--HMC had increased investments in those areas to 19 per cent from 12
per cent a year earlier. The returns were flat. It's unclear how much of the
results--good or otherwise--were El-Erian's doing. He left at the end of
2007, six months before the results came in, citing a desire to move back
near his wife's family in California and return to Pimco as heir apparent to
founder Bill Gross.

Since July, emerging-market shares have been a disaster, falling 50 per
cent, as measured by the MSCI Emerging Markets Index, worse than US stocks.
Another problem: El-Erian's insurance has been partly taken off since he
left, leaving HMC vulnerable when markets plunged this fall.

The total return swaps, which easily could have been terminated, were left
alone. The EFG-Hermes Middle East North Africa Opportunities Fund, a hedge
fund launched in September 2007 with some $200 million of HMC cash, was down
35 per cent in 2008. El-Erian's big hire, Taborsky, left HMC in September.
He's since joined El-Erian at Pimco. El-Erian and Taborsky decline to
comment.

By the time Jane Mendillo walked into HMC's offices in July 2008, she
figured some changes needed to be made. A former consultant who worked for
years at HMC under Meyer, Mendillo got the HMC gig partly as a result of
Meyer's recommendation.

She had spent the last six years running the $1.6 billion Wellesley College
endowment, which was completely outsourced to external managers. Her
detractors say that she was ill prepared for Harvard's liquidity crisis and
slow to take cognizance of the swap exposure. But they concede that the
crisis came fast on the heels of her arrival.

Mendillo did move quickly to deal with the private equity portfolio. One of
her first moves at HMC, which she initiated before the markets started to
fall in earnest, was to sell between $1 billion to $1.5 billion of Harvard's
private equity assets in one of the biggest such sales ever attempted.

The high bids on such assets have recently been 60 cents on the dollar, says
Cogent Capital, an investment bank that advised Harvard on the sale. Cogent
says the big discounts are due to "unrealistic pricing levels at which funds
continued to hold their investments" and "fantasy valuations."

Defenders of Harvard's portfolio argue the secondary market is discounting
private equity stakes too much. The market is made up of a dozen secondary
funds with at most $15 billion available, says Bryon Sheets, a partner at
San Francisco secondary firm Paul Capital.

That makes it a buyer's market, given the slew of desperate banks, pension
funds and endowments looking to unload assets to meet obligations. So what
are Harvard's private equity stakes worth? Most private equity investors
like Harvard have been waiting for their money managers to finish marking
down their assets following a brutal 2008. It is a slow process that lags
the public markets by as much as 180 days, says William Frieske, a
performance consultant at Northern Trust, which administers endowment
accounts.

But one clue to what may be coming can be found in Harvard's own portfolio.
It owns units of Conversus Capital, a publicly traded vehicle that holds
slices of 210 private equity funds. Conversus has cut its net asset value by
21 per cent since last summer to make a "best estimate."

Yet stock investors think things are a lot worse. Conversus shares have
fallen 67 per cent since June 30 and are trading at a 62 per cent discount
to the net asset value. The Conversus stock drop translates into a potential
$168 million loss for Harvard, which, as of Jan. 31, was still listed as a
"strategic investor."

Conversus is run by Robert Long, a former Bank of America exec who went to
Boston and got $250 million from El-Erian to help him set up the firm and
buy $1.9 billion of Bank of America's private equity assets. Harvard also
owns a piece of Garnett & Helfrich Capital, a $350 million fund opened in
2004.

Garnett has purchased six companies but, five years later, is yet to realize
any returns. The value of one of those investments, software maker Ingres,
has been reduced by its minority owner to nothing "as a result of reported
losses." Then there is Tallwood Venture II, a $180 million fund raised in
2002 to invest in semiconductors. It has hardly exited any of its portfolio
companies, according to Thomson Reuters and SEC filings.

The fact that a fifth of HMC's portfolio is in private-equity-like
investments makes it vulnerable to the kind of problems HMC faced this fall.
HMC has made $11 billion of capital commitments to investment partnerships
through 2018, says Moody's. HMC used to make good on those commitments with
income generated by the existing private equity portfolio. "Endowments are
afraid capital calls will come quickly and far ahead of any liquidity from
private equity funds," says Colin McGrady, managing director at Cogent
Partners.
Watching all of this, the group of 10 Harvard alumni from the class of 1969
feel vindicated. "The events of the last year show that the whole procedure
of rewarding people so handsomely based on increases on paper value of the
endowment was deeply flawed," says a spokesman for the group, which recently
sent a letter to the Harvard president suggesting HMC staffers return $21
million of their latest bonuses. "Even now, we don't really know how well it
has done in the last 10 years."
http://www.rediff.com/money/2009/feb/24forbes-how-harvards-investing-superstars-crashed.htm

--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
""GLOBAL SPECULATORS"" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
[email protected]
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/globalspeculators?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to