Keep Us Strong WikiLeaks logo

Currently released so far... 51122 / 251,287

Articles

Browse latest releases

Browse by creation date

Browse by origin

A B C D F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W Y Z

Browse by tag

A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z

Browse by classification

Community resources

courage is contagious

Viewing cable 08DUSSELDORF34, FOOTNOTE TO AN OLD CONTROVERSY: "LOCUST" BECOMES MODEL

If you are new to these pages, please read an introduction on the structure of a cable as well as how to discuss them with others. See also the FAQs

Understanding cables
Every cable message consists of three parts:
  • The top box shows each cables unique reference number, when and by whom it originally was sent, and what its initial classification was.
  • The middle box contains the header information that is associated with the cable. It includes information about the receiver(s) as well as a general subject.
  • The bottom box presents the body of the cable. The opening can contain a more specific subject, references to other cables (browse by origin to find them) or additional comment. This is followed by the main contents of the cable: a summary, a collection of specific topics and a comment section.
To understand the justification used for the classification of each cable, please use this WikiSource article as reference.

Discussing cables
If you find meaningful or important information in a cable, please link directly to its unique reference number. Linking to a specific paragraph in the body of a cable is also possible by copying the appropriate link (to be found at theparagraph symbol). Please mark messages for social networking services like Twitter with the hash tags #cablegate and a hash containing the reference ID e.g. #08DUSSELDORF34.
Reference ID Created Released Classification Origin
08DUSSELDORF34 2008-07-11 08:09 2011-08-24 01:00 UNCLASSIFIED Consulate Dusseldorf
VZCZCXRO4452
RR RUEHAG RUEHAST RUEHDA RUEHFL RUEHIK RUEHKW RUEHLA RUEHLN RUEHLZ
RUEHPOD RUEHROV RUEHSR RUEHVK RUEHYG
DE RUEHDF #0034 1930809
ZNR UUUUU ZZH
R 110809Z JUL 08
FM AMCONSUL DUSSELDORF
TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC 0160
INFO RUCPDOC/USDOC WASHDC 0006
RUCNFRG/FRG COLLECTIVE
RUEHZL/EUROPEAN POLITICAL COLLECTIVE
RUEHDF/AMCONSUL DUSSELDORF 0176
UNCLAS DUSSELDORF 000034 
 
SIPDIS 
 
E.O. 12958: N/A 
TAGS: EINV ECON ELAB PGOV GM
SUBJECT: FOOTNOTE TO AN OLD CONTROVERSY: "LOCUST" BECOMES MODEL 
INVESTOR 
 
1.  (SBU) Summary: Germany watchers will recall the 
politicization surrounding the takeover in 2004/2005 of the well 
known North Rhine Westphalia-based company Grohe by the 
U.S.-based Texas Pacific Group (TPG), which prompted former SPD 
party chair Franz Muentefering to coin the term "locusts" 
(Heuschrecken) to describe equity capital firms and hedge funds. 
 This perjorative term has entered the German political lexicon 
and surfaces from time to time in connection with the 
acquisition of German assets by foreign investors.  This 
controversy may be ancient history, but Grohe Managing Director 
told CG recently that the reality has been much more positive 
than critics predicted, as the "locust" is now widely seen as a 
model investor.  All may be well that ends well, but this is a 
case that needn't have happened.  End Summary. 
 
2.  (U) In 2004, the proposed takeover by a consortium of 
foreign investors led by the Texas Pacific Group of the firm 
Grohe, a well known, family owned producer of high quality 
bathroom fixtures, unleashed a major controversy in Germany over 
the role foreign investors should be allowed to play in the 
national economy.  Led by former SPD Chair Franz Muentefering, 
opposition to the sale reached a crescendo in Spring 2005, just 
prior to Bundestag elections in which former Chancellor Gerhard 
Schroeder sought reelection.  Rhetoric became heated and nasty, 
with charges primarily by SPD and DGB trade union leaders that 
foreign equity capital firms and hedge funds should not be 
allowed to purchase German assets, on the grounds that they 
would allegedly swoop down, strip them of value, fire employees, 
and move on to their next prey.  Amcham and USG officials spent 
considerable time and energy combating this vivid metaphor (and 
still do so), using public diplomacy and other means to 
demonstrate the many ways U.S. investors contribute to the 
German economy and society. 
 
3.  (U) It is against this background that we were pleased to 
learn recently that Grohe has not only emerged stronger than 
ever after the takeover, but that the firm would have gone 
bankrupt had an investor not stepped in at that time.  Managing 
Director David Haines told us that the large firm, located in 
Hemer, a rural town in the Sauerland region of North Rhine 
Westphalia with relatively few employers nearby, had been poorly 
managed and had been operating under threat of bankruptcy for 
years.  The family had withdrawn a large amount of the firm's 
capital, neglected to modernize its products and production 
processees, taken on massive debt, and then sold it to UK-based 
BC Partners in 1999, which in an attempt to return to 
profitability shed hundreds of workers and fed anxieties about 
the role foreign capital plays in the German economy.  When the 
turnaround still was not successful, the UK firm proposed to 
sell its share to the consortium, led by TPG, which set off the 
controversy. 
 
4.  (U) The sale went through, despite major political 
opposition and negative coverage in several major national media 
outlets, and Grohe employees and regional politicians prepared 
for the worst -- which did not happen.  Gaines described the 
great lengths through which he went with labor, management and 
NRW-based power brokers to make the turnaround a success, but 
that difficult decisions had to be made regarding products and 
production processees.  Rather than shedding 3000 jobs, as 
McKinsey had proposed, the new owners backed a restructuring 
plan that have restored the firm's position a leading 
international producer of premium sanitary fittings, with 
employees, revenues, profits and market share at historic 
levels.  Not only did the negative scenario not materialize, but 
an independent study by White & Case, the Technical University 
of Munich, and the European Busines School commissioned by the 
Federal Finance Ministry called the takeover "an example for a 
successful restructuring of a German Mittelstand (SME) company." 
 The media have also begun to write positively about this case. 
 
 
Comment 
------- 
 
5.  (SBU) The Grohe case is now ancient history, but the 
perjorative "locust" metaphor continues to surface from time to 
time in Germany, despite the fact that even former opponents now 
consider TPG a model investor, and American investors in general 
(including equity capital or hedge funds) positive for the 
national economy.  "Anglo-Saxon" investors, a term that usually 
refers to U.S.-based but also to British firms, continue to have 
a lingering but undeserved reputation in parts of the populace 
as allegedly less concerned with social issues than German 
employers.  All may be well that ends well, but this was a 
controversy that needn't have happened.  According to the firm, 
the only former player in the deal who does not acknowledge the 
success is Muentefering, who declines to meet with Grohe 
managers, despite the fact that they are major employers in his 
region. 
 
BOYSE