Bill Ackman

Uh, and general growth stock, uh, the general growth, the company, the CFO in particular was very aggressive in the way that he borrowed money. And he borrowed money from a kind of wall street, uh, not long-term, uh, mortgages, but generally relatively short-term mortgages. It was pretty aggressive as the value went up, he would borrow more and more against the assets.

And that helped the short-term results of the business. The problem was during the financial crisis, the market for what's called CMBS, commercial mortgage-backed securities, basically shut. And the company, because its debt was relatively short-term, had a lot of big maturities coming up that they had no ability to refinance. And the market said, oh my God,

And that helped the short-term results of the business. The problem was during the financial crisis, the market for what's called CMBS, commercial mortgage-backed securities, basically shut. And the company, because its debt was relatively short-term, had a lot of big maturities coming up that they had no ability to refinance. And the market said, oh my God,

And that helped the short-term results of the business. The problem was during the financial crisis, the market for what's called CMBS, commercial mortgage-backed securities, basically shut. And the company, because its debt was relatively short-term, had a lot of big maturities coming up that they had no ability to refinance. And the market said, oh my God,

The lenders are going to foreclose and the shareholders are going to get wiped. The company's going to go bankrupt. They're going to get wiped out. The stock went from $63 a share to 34 cents. So, and there was a family, the Bucks bound family owned, I think about 25% of the company. And they had a $5 billion, $5 billion of stock that was worth 25 million or something by the time.

The lenders are going to foreclose and the shareholders are going to get wiped. The company's going to go bankrupt. They're going to get wiped out. The stock went from $63 a share to 34 cents. So, and there was a family, the Bucks bound family owned, I think about 25% of the company. And they had a $5 billion, $5 billion of stock that was worth 25 million or something by the time.

The lenders are going to foreclose and the shareholders are going to get wiped. The company's going to go bankrupt. They're going to get wiped out. The stock went from $63 a share to 34 cents. So, and there was a family, the Bucks bound family owned, I think about 25% of the company. And they had a $5 billion, $5 billion of stock that was worth 25 million or something by the time.

we bought a stake in the business. And what interested me was I thought the assets were worth substantially more than the liabilities. The company had 27 billion of debt. and had $100 million value of the equity down from like 20 billion. Okay. And one that, you know, sort of an interesting place to start with a stock down 99%.

we bought a stake in the business. And what interested me was I thought the assets were worth substantially more than the liabilities. The company had 27 billion of debt. and had $100 million value of the equity down from like 20 billion. Okay. And one that, you know, sort of an interesting place to start with a stock down 99%.

we bought a stake in the business. And what interested me was I thought the assets were worth substantially more than the liabilities. The company had 27 billion of debt. and had $100 million value of the equity down from like 20 billion. Okay. And one that, you know, sort of an interesting place to start with a stock down 99%.

But the fundamental drivers, the mall business, our occupancy, how occupied are the malls? Occupancy was up year on year between 07 and 08, interestingly. Net operating income, which is kind of a measure of cashflow from the malls, that was up year on year. So kind of the underlying fundamentals were doing fine.

But the fundamental drivers, the mall business, our occupancy, how occupied are the malls? Occupancy was up year on year between 07 and 08, interestingly. Net operating income, which is kind of a measure of cashflow from the malls, that was up year on year. So kind of the underlying fundamentals were doing fine.

But the fundamental drivers, the mall business, our occupancy, how occupied are the malls? Occupancy was up year on year between 07 and 08, interestingly. Net operating income, which is kind of a measure of cashflow from the malls, that was up year on year. So kind of the underlying fundamentals were doing fine.

The only problem they had is they had billions of dollars of debt that they had to repay. They couldn't repay. And if you kind of examine the bankruptcy code, it's precisely designed for a situation like this, where it's kind of this resting place you can go to kind of restructure your business. Now, the problem was that every other company that had gone bankrupt, the shareholders got wiped out.

The only problem they had is they had billions of dollars of debt that they had to repay. They couldn't repay. And if you kind of examine the bankruptcy code, it's precisely designed for a situation like this, where it's kind of this resting place you can go to kind of restructure your business. Now, the problem was that every other company that had gone bankrupt, the shareholders got wiped out.

The only problem they had is they had billions of dollars of debt that they had to repay. They couldn't repay. And if you kind of examine the bankruptcy code, it's precisely designed for a situation like this, where it's kind of this resting place you can go to kind of restructure your business. Now, the problem was that every other company that had gone bankrupt, the shareholders got wiped out.

And so the market's seeing every previous example, the shareholders get wiped out. The assumption is the stock is going to go to zero. But that's not what the bankruptcy code says. What the bankruptcy code says is that the value gets apportioned based on value.

And so the market's seeing every previous example, the shareholders get wiped out. The assumption is the stock is going to go to zero. But that's not what the bankruptcy code says. What the bankruptcy code says is that the value gets apportioned based on value.

And so the market's seeing every previous example, the shareholders get wiped out. The assumption is the stock is going to go to zero. But that's not what the bankruptcy code says. What the bankruptcy code says is that the value gets apportioned based on value.

And if you could prove to a judge that there was the assets worth more than the liabilities, then the shareholders actually get to keep their investment in the company. And that was the bet we made. And so we stepped into the market and we bought 25% of the company in the open market for, we had to pay up. It started out at 34 cents. I think there were 300 million shares.