Slashdot Mirror
Data Centers Crucial To Lehman Sale
miller60 writes "What assets retain value in the midst of a financial panic? Data centers. When assets of bankrupt Lehman Brothers were sold to Barclays Tuesday for $1.75 billion, Lehman's data centers and headquarters accounted for $1.5 billion of the value in the deal. That echoes the JPMorgan-Bear Stearns fire sale, in which Bear's two data centers and HQ represented much of the sale price. Amidst financial turmoil, Wall Street's high-tech data centers become the crown jewels for buyers of distressed assets."
Hi! I'm a programmer for Lehman brothers and I'm looking for work. I was the designer of Assett Manager 1.0, a powerful tool that allowed our brokers to get values of our contracts....it's not a bad program, but it had a couple of bugs in it that I would like to have fixed.
This is my sig.
No. it's all about avoiding the expense of building one yourself. The actual data in those centers may or may not be worthwhile to the buying organisation, but the floor space and ready-to-roll IT structure most certainly is.
Posted anon since I was involved in one of these things recently.
Is it any surprise that the most valuable assets in a company that is going down the tubes would be its physical assets, real estate, etc? The summary itself says data centers AND HEADQUARTERS. What a shock that "datacenterknowledge.com" is telling us how valuable and important data centers are. I'm almost tempted to say this is spam, but I can't be bothered to go to the website to learn more about it.
Information is timeless and valuable.
I just can't agree with this. When something is timeless that means that it does not age. But information does age. Virtually all information ages; all information relating to human affairs certainly does. The aging of information can be measured not merely in whether it is forgotten, or known, but in how it is considered. Remember: we can still watch the original series of Knight Rider on re-run channels. This does not mean it is 'timeless'. It would be too polite to call it anachronistic.
Even for example the information we have about the collapse of Lehman.
Two weeks ago that information would have been worth billions.
Now it is common knowledge, and the details must be investigated, after the fact.
In twenty years it will be of historical interest, taught in economics classes.
In a thousand years it may have been forgotten.
The very fact that we have already seen different states of this information over two weeks means that it is not timeless.
Also, a difference between 'dumb' and 'uneducated about financial matters.' Is there a class on ARMS in high school people can take? I don't think those are covered in home ec.
People can't be experts on every field. Add to that fact that finances bring up survival fears in most people, and fear shuts down the brain, and you will see that many people may be smart in many areas, but uneducated about finance.
So people have to trust the experts they hire to do right by them. When those experts say, "Hey, you can own a house now and save that money you were putting into rent. Don't read the fine print, it's boring and it doesn't matter," people trust those experts. And they were misled.
Finally, I know you probably agree with me but I have to point it out: dumb people do not DESERVE to be taken advantage of by smart people. Social Darwinism is an inherently fascist, evil, and anti-social philosophy that destroys societies and people's lives. Don't subscribe to it. Society works because of trust, and social Darwinism destroys that trust.
- None can love freedom heartily, but good men; the rest love not freedom, but license. -- John Milton
I have to point it out: dumb people do not DESERVE to be taken advantage of by smart people. Social Darwinism is an inherently fascist, evil, and anti-social philosophy that destroys societies and people's lives. Don't subscribe to it. Society works because of trust, and social Darwinism destroys that trust.
Quoted because it deserved to be posted twice.
No sig for the moment.
No, you're mixing two separate things up. If you don't understand ARMs that doesn't make you dumb. But if you then buy one and you don't understand them, that definitely makes you dumb. What the hell?! A mortgage is a huge commitment. You're going to be paying it back for a long, long time. If somebody commits to a huge thing, turns around and says "Oops! I guess I can't deal with this after all. It was scary and my brain shut down" then I don't see why they are deserving of much sympathy.
No, they were stupid. The risks involved with large debts are enormous. This is way different than being misled by a second hand car salesman and buying a SUV with poor mileage. This is a vast sum of money. If there's one time in your life you read the boring fine print and think about it really hard, it's when taking out a gigantic loan.
Now this I do agree with. However trust can cross a line into blindness. Somebody who does whatever they're told without considering the consequences eventually crosses the line from being a poor innocent misled person into something else - a liability to society.
I somewhat doubt Lehman is making a profit on their data centers, either. What they are doing is liquidating the assets that have value.
As amusing as it is, that's exactly why AIG is in trouble. Each tier saw the risk coming and tried to pass the risk upstream. The problem is that the risk was not isolated. With all these upstream pushes, the risk ended up concentrated in the largest companies in the market. It's no coincidence that AIG is one of the largest insurance underwriters in the world.
Javascript + Nintendo DSi = DSiCade
Indeed. It's one of the few sectors where rapidly rising oil costs and plummeting property values has little effect. As a result, the sector is one of the strongest in the market today. And not just because people must have the latest and greatest software and gadgetry. (Consumers actually have less money for that.) Instead, technology is seen as a possible solution to the problems plaguing other industries.
Real world example: UPS developed software to route their trucks through fewer left turns. This rerouting reduces fuel costs and thus produces tremendous savings for the company.
Javascript + Nintendo DSi = DSiCade
I am an investment banker and can say with confidence that the datacenters were an afterthought in this deal. Important? Certainly. The most important? a joke. Bob Diamond and Barclays have wanted to extend its US investment banking business for several years, and found an opportunity to grab one at a fire sale. But the true value of the deal is enormously larger than listed, as it involves taking on assets estimated (with confidence, I'm sure)at $72 billion and liabilities of $68 billion. I'd recommend reading http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/5c9dcc26-83f1-11dd-bf00-000077b07658.html?nclick_check=1 to inform yourselves about the transaction.
As to the Bear Stearns datacenters comprising the bulk of the value - that is about as wrong as you can get. The breakup fee (the fee paid to JP Morgan if the deal did not go through) was the building. JPM could have walked from the deal and gotten the builing, so to argue that the deal was for the building/datacenter is absurd. Let's not forget that the Federal Reserve alone lent $29 billion for the transaction. Datacenters are valuable, but not worth that amount of money.