| Issuer: | Priceline.com Inc.
|
| Issue: | $1 billion senior notes due June 15, 2020 priced to yield 0.35%, up 66%
|
| Bookrunners: | Goldman Sachs & Co.
|
| Pricing date: | May 30, 2013
|
| Recent trading: | N/A
|
| • Norwalk, Conn.-based online travel agency has brand name cache like Tesla Motors, but its $1 billion convertible deal that priced in May seemed like something of a replay of Priceline's $1 billion of notes that priced in March 2012. Both came at a discount to par, but the 2013's deal didn't recover as well as the 2012 deal.
|
| • The newer deal priced at a discount of 98 and sunk to about 96, sources said. The year-earlier deal was reoffered at a discount to par of 99.5 but at least it gained about 2 points on a dollar-neutral, or hedged, basis, on its first-day trading.
|
| • The older deal has a 1% coupon and had a 50% initial conversion premium for six-year notes. The new deal has a 0.35% coupon and had a 66% initial conversion premium for seven-year notes.
|
| • It was less successful as market players eyed valuations that seemed very rich.
|
| • "The Priceline deal came at a discount to par of 98 and traded down from there. The handle of the low prints was thought to be 96. I don't think it was very active," a New York-based sellsider said.
|
| • "People did not like this because it was worth 94," a New York-based sellsider said. He said he used reasonable inputs for a valuation such a 150 basis points credit spread and a 26% vol. and got the paper to value very rich.
|
| • A second sellsider said, "It looks like Priceline tried to take advantage of some good pricing in the market."
|
|
|
| NQ MOBILE INC.
|
| Issuer: | NQ Mobile Inc.
|
| Issue: | $172.5 million senior notes due Oct. 15, 2018 priced to yield 4%, up 30%
|
| Bookrunners: | Morgan Stanley & Co. International plc and Deutsche Bank Securities Inc.
|
| Pricing date: | Oct. 8
|
| Recent trading: | N/A
|
| • The mobile internet services company with dual headquarters in Dallas and Beijing priced convertible bonds two weeks before allegations of fraud surrounding the company surfaced in a research report by Muddy Waters.
|
| • The bonds, which lifted to a little above par on their debut in the secondary market on Oct. 9, were heard at 30 bid after the report later that month.
|
| • The Muddy Waters report alleged at least 72% of NQ's 2012 China security revenue was fictitious. NQ said the accusations were false.
|
|
|
| YAHOO! INC.
|
| Issuer: | Yahoo! Inc.
|
| Issue: | $1.25 billion senior notes due Dec. 1, 2018 priced to yield 0%, up 50%
|
| Bookrunners: | J.P. Morgan Securities LLC, Goldman Sachs & Co., Citigroup Global Markets Inc., BofA Merrill Lynch and Morgan Stanley & Co. LLC
|
| Pricing date: | Nov. 20
|
| Recent trading: | 104.25-104.625 versus share price of $40.85
|
| • Yahoo! convertibles slipped on their debut in the secondary market after the Sunnyvale, Calif.-based internet search, content and communications company priced the paper at the rich end of talked terms.
|
| • Weaker performance of the new Yahoo! deal was in line with a trend at that time of new issues hovering around par or slipping after release for secondary dealings, which is in contrast to 2- to 3-point climbs for many new convertible issues previously.
|
| • "They upsized it and it was already modeling rich, so people were skittish. If this had come at a 1% coupon, up 50%, I think it could have done well, but at 0%, up 50%, I can see why this would happen," a New York-based sellsider said.
|
| •"They overestimated demand," the sellsider said of the investment-grade credit. "There was an expectation that outrights would snap it up."
|
| • The problem, the sellsider surmised, is that "issuers are not leaving too much on the table, so there is not a natural demand to put it in the portfolio, plus it was too big. A deal size of $750 million would have been better."
|
| • Yahoo!'s 0% notes slipped to 99 bid, 99.25 offered versus a share price of $35.62 and also traded above par at 100.375 bid, 100.5, sources said.
|
