为什么激进投资者更激进了？

    从Icahn Enterprises公司到潘兴广场资本管理公司，再到对冲基金Third Point，维权对冲基金(activist hedge funds)的影响力似乎在不断增强。而且，受到影响的不是那些通过投入较少资源就能大量持股的小公司，而是《财富》（Fortune）500强榜上有名的大企业。

    这股新力量的背后是什么？

    维权派对冲基金最近非常活跃。他们的行为对相关公司的市值产生了重大影响。这些基金接二连三地获胜不是由于某一个因素，而是多重情境下的共同作用使然。首先，一步为赢，步步为赢，信心具有感染力。其次，许多大型公司显然没有做好对付对冲基金的准备。最后，受到对冲基金挑战的董事会和管理层普遍缺乏自信。所有这些使得维权派成为赢家。

    亿万富豪兼激进投资者卡尔•伊坎的Icahn Enterprises公司呼吁购物网站eBay出售支付业务PayPal的行动不仅成功推动eBay股价创下六个月新高，其对eBay董事、著名风险资本投资者马克•安德森缺乏独立性的指责也导致后者辞职。

    丹尼尔•勒布的Third Point对冲基金也在不停挑战苏富比拍卖行（Sotheby’s）。受此影响，苏富比首席执行官比尔•鲁普雷希特宣布辞职，该拍卖行的股价随后急剧上升。另外，勒布为陶氏化学公司（Dow Chemical）安排了四名独立董事，这让人们愈发相信对冲基金对美国公司董事会的影响越来越大。当然，虽然陶氏化学的股价立即上扬，但涨势并不持久。

    潘兴广场也一直忙个不停。该公司创始人比尔•阿克曼对康宝莱公司（Herbalife）发起的挑战（他指责康宝莱从事传销，从而引发政府调查）造成后者的收入增速显著放缓，这在很大程度上是因为康宝莱为了平息传销指责而调整了销售策略。阿克曼还打赢了官司，被获准使用其在肉毒素注射剂保妥适（Botox）生产商艾尔建公司（Allergan）的10%投票权，来支持后者的商业对手Valeant对其进行收购。虽然制定了用于防止恶意收购的“毒丸计划”，但法官仍判阿克曼胜诉。实际上，能让艾尔建摆脱阿克曼控制的唯一途径就是被另一家对手公司阿特维斯（Actavis）吞并。

    对冲基金Starboard Value比潘兴广场更胜一筹。它不仅把达登连锁餐饮公司（Darden Restaurants，拥有Olive Garden等连锁餐馆）的首席执行官赶下了台，还在上个月用自己提名的人选把达登的12名董事换了个遍。

    这开始看起来像是成为了某种趋势。

    普华永道（PwC）最近对公司董事进行的一份调查得出结论称，大公司需要小心维权对冲基金的动向。逾三分之一大公司（收入超过100亿美元）的董事们表示，他们和激进投资者打过交道。而只有少于五分之一的小公司对付过此类对冲基金。

    The influence of activist hedge funds, from Icahn Enterprises to Pershing Square to Third Point, appears to be growing. And not among smaller companies where buying a significant stake means fewer resources are tied up, but among large, Fortune 500 companies.

    What’s behind this new muscle-flexing?

    Activist hedge funds have been very, well… active lately, and their actions have had a major effect on the value of companies. The current run of successes has not been due to any one thing but to a nexus of circumstances and events. First, success breeds success, confidence is infectious. Second, there is the apparent lack of readiness among very large companies to deal with hedge funds. Finally, there is a general lack of confidence among the boards and management teams that hedge funds have challenged. All these are leading to activist triumphs.

    Not only was Icahn Enterprises’ campaign to force eBay to sell PayPal successful, causing the stock price to climb to a six-month high, Icahn’s criticisms of eBay director Marc Andreessen’s lack of independence resulted in him stepping down from the board.

    Daniel Loeb’s Third Point has been running a campaign to shake up auction house Sotheby’s. This led to the announcement of CEO Bill Ruprecht’s resignation and a significant uptick in the company’s stock price. In addition, Loeb has now installed four independent directors on Dow Chemical’s board, cementing the idea that hedge fund influence in U.S. boardrooms is on the rise. To be sure, the immediate increase in Dow’s stock price was short-lived.

    Pershing Square has also been busy. Bill Ackman’schallenges to Herbalife (he accused it of being a pyramid scheme, which led to a government investigation) has led to a significant income slowdown at the company, much of it due to changes the company has made to its sales strategy to mitigate the pyramid-scheme allegations. Ackman also successfully sued to gain permission to vote his 10% stake in Botox-maker Allergan in support of a takeover of the company by rival drug company Valeant. Allergan had a poison pill in place, an instrument designed to prevent hostile takeovers, but the judge still ruled in Ackman’s favor. In fact, the only way Allergan was able to avoid Ackman’s power was by being taken over by yet another rival pharmaceutical firm, Actavis.

    Outdoing Pershing Square, hedge fund Starboard Value not only ousted the CEO of Darden Restaurants (the owner of Olive Garden, among other chains), but, last month it replaced the entire 12-person board with its own nominees.

    This is beginning to look like a trend.

    A recent survey of directors by consultancy PwC concludes that big companies need to watch out because the activists are about. Directors at over a third of these large companies (over $10 billion in revenues) indicated they had had interactions with activists. By contrast, less than a fifth of smaller companies reported dealings with hedge funds.

    Yes, some hedge funds have been instrumental in instituting change at large companies in the past—Relational Investors successfully changed management and compensation policy at both Occidental and Home Depot. However, the increased focus on the biggest companies is atypical and marks a new development. Hedge funds previously focused on smaller companies, where it was easier to acquire a significant stake with enough voting power to make changes. Now, these funds are using their success with small firms, which in many cases resulted in enormous gains, and devoting resources to taking large stakes in big companies.