Get Articles Daily from StraightStocks - Enter Email Address


  • National Debt Clock


Vanguard To Buy iShares?

Source: http://www.indexuniverse.com/blog/5928-vanguard-to-buy-ishares.html?Itemid=3&utm_source=straightstocks.com&utm_medium=sidebar&utm_campaign=rss
Posted on Monday, June 1st, 2009 | In Exchange Traded Funds, Market Commentary
Contributed by: Jim Wiandt (http://www.indexuniverse.com/sections/blog.html) -

A deal that’s been kicking around for some time in the rumor
mills just got some press coverage.

ATTENTION: This is NOT an April Fool’s joke. Though at first
blush it may seem more implausible than the April 1 blog I posted about the
“Street Shares and iDRS” (a blog that got me into so much trouble in certain circles),
the word is that the Vanguard bid for iShares and/or BGI is actually for real.

Well, I’ll believe it when I see it. Matt and I have been
kicking this around today, and as Matt says, “You have to assume that iShares is less valuable in Vanguard’s
arms than someone else’s. For starters, coming in, you would expect it to slash
expense ratios. For instance, EEM would have to be folded into VWO, since those
are essentially the same fund. But because VWO’s expense ratio is about
one-third of EEM’s, that means you are taking a fund that made $19 million a
year in revenues and turning it into one earning $7 million a year instead.”

I think that
pretty much sums up Matt’s view that this deal is being cooked up by some
nefarious spinmeister behind the scenes, and is straight out of Fantasia.

Let me give you five
reasons why I don’t agree with Matt (I know any of you who follow these blogs
are shocked that we might disagree
about something).

  1. The
    iShares product lineup would give Vanguard tremendous scale and distribution
    with the “intermediaries” (read: financial advisers) that are presently
    Vanguard’s weak link. With that range of ETFs, Vanguard could immediately
    become a sort of “mega-DFA” for advisers and capture tremendous market share in
    the rapidly growing ETF segment of that market.
  2. From a
    financial perspective, it is absolutely plausible that Vanguard could raise the
    money necessary to complete the deal both through interested investors and by
    leveraging its trillion or so odd dollar asset base. The question is whether
    the additional scale that $300-$350 billion in iShares assets would bring
    Vanguard is worth the $5 billion it’d have to pay for it. In one year, that’s
    167 basis points off those assets, so there’s your hurdle. The question,
    really, is what that scale would do for Vanguard investors, who are effectively
    the shareholders in the company.
  3. The
    Daily Telegraph article that mentions Vanguard indicates an interest in iShares.
    What DOES seem like a good potential fit for Vanguard—which neither Matt nor
    that article mention—is Vanguard buying the entire BGI arm, which would
    include a huge and extremely low-cost institutional business that I think would
    bring significantly more scale to the deal and might be the real appeal of a
    Vanguard buyout.
  4. As
    much as industry insiders say that Vanguard and BGI are bitter rivals and that
    it would be a huge culture clash, I don’t really believe it. Both are full of
    intellectual/academic, geeky types (no offense to any of you reading this) and
    have a bit of an altruistic bent. I don’t think it’s a crazy fit. But the pay scales
    are different (note that the flow of employees leaving one and going to the
    other has mostly gone east to west) and both pricing and management teams would
    be huge issues that would need to be worked through. But there’s a reason those
    people took those jobs—it’s not such
    a wild difference in cultures.
  5. Vanguard
    CIO Gus Sauter has had his eye on iShares CEO Lee Kranefuss’ corner office for
    years now. (OK, that one I AM joking about. )

I still think that
the spin-off scenario is the one that’s most likely to happen. Black Rock,
Vanguard and all the rest in that category seem more messy—but I may well be
wrong. And it is certainly fun for us to speculate a bit.

Regardless, I
think, whether by spin-off or merger, there’s a good chance it will be a net
positive for investors and lead to better products and invigorated competition.

Last 5 posts by Jim Wiandt





About Jim Wiandt (http://www.indexuniverse.com/sections/blog.html)
Jim Wiandt is the editor and publisher of the Journal of Indexes and publisher of IndexUniverse.com and Exchange-Traded Funds Report (ETFR). Wiandt also oversees the Financial Technology and Design Group (FTDG) of Index Publications LLC. Wiandt was formerly publisher of IndexFunds.com, and is the author of Exchange Traded Funds, published by John Wiley & Sons in 2001.

He previously worked as a contract journalist in West Africa, after serving in the Peace Corps in Niger. He graduated from Tufts University in 1991.

Leave a Reply

Name

Email (kept private)

Website









No recommendations, either expressed or implied, are being made to buy, sell, hold or short any of the mentioned stocks. No legal, tax or accounting advice is expressed or implied. Always contact your attorney, CPA, or tax advisor before acting on any legal or tax issues. StraightStocks.com is not responsible for the content, products, or services of any of the advertisers on this site. StraightStocks.com receives compensation from advertisers on this blog. Services and products referred to herein are trademarks, registered trademarks, servicemarks, and/or registered servicemarks of their respective trademark or servicemark owners.