花旗稀释与机构投资者
机构投资者对花旗银行兴趣缺乏，是因为害怕政府接管。
对于花旗这样的大的金融公司，一般而言，机构投资者的持股要占到70%的比例。现在的花旗股东中，机构投资者的持股比例为26.65%，远低于对富国银行的74%的比例。对摩根大通和高盛的比例则分别为74%和75%左右。
除了一般的机构投资者拥有的26.65%的股份之外，就是政府这个特殊的机构“投资者”拥有的34%的股份了。政府还借给了花旗200亿美元，占到花旗880亿美元市值（股价$3.8时）的接近四分之一。如果政府再将这部分转化为普通股，政府就是占股超过一半的大大股东了。
花旗宁愿将股票卖给一般投资者，在获得现金之后还清所借的政府贷款，并且在可能的情况下从政府手里买回那些股份。
看来，对于花旗而言，还是普通投资者比较好欺负。
从道理上来讲，任何人持股都是一样的。而且，有政府这么个硬腰板，似乎也不是一件坏事。问题是，美国政府“太认真”，太在乎自己金钱的收益，这才是麻烦所在。如果政府只是出钱不管事多好，可是，这在美国又不行，因为纳税人不干，而这些纳税人还有办法折腾政府。
卖新股就意味着稀释，对现有股东不利。不卖新股，又得继续支付大量的股息给美国政府（20亿美元一年），而且，机构投资者还会因为担心花旗被国有化而不愿意投资，真的是难办。
在美国做企业也有难处，特别是在你搞出麻烦来的时候。
明知今日，何必当初。
如果花旗通过发售新股还清政府的贷款，机构投资者会再次产生兴趣，将持股增加到70%吗？如果能够，那么，是不是就意味着花旗的股价将会上升呢？如果继续丢弃，那么，花旗就会出更大的麻烦了。
花旗到底值几个铜板？
【附录】Citi's TARP Payback Could Cheer Fearful Institutions
12/10/09，By Matthias Rieker
NEW YORK (Dow Jones)--The government's expected exit from Citigroup Inc. (C) could trigger the re-entry of institutional investors like mutual and pension funds.
Institutional ownership in Citi is roughly 20%, the bank calculates. That makes Citigroup "one of the least owned banks" by institutional investors such as mutual funds and pension funds, J.P. Morgan Chase & Co. analyst Vivek Juneja wrote in a research report. Normally, institutions hold 70% or more of large companies' shares.
David Trone, an analyst with Macquarie Capital, whose firm's customers are institutional investors, says, "A lot of clients I talk to are afraid" of the government ownership.
Should those investors lose their fear--and should index funds, for technical reasons, start buying more Citigroup stock--the shares could rise, offsetting downward pressure of the dilution expected when Citigroup issues some large amount of stock as part of its exit from the government's Troubled Asset Relief Plan investment. Indeed, some hedge funds appear to have positioned themselves long in Citigroup's common stock to benefit.
The U.S. government continues to own $20 billion in Citi trust preferred securities, which the company wants to buy back. The government converted other preferred stock into a 34% stake in Citigroup common stock, which the government is expected to sell to investors.
Citi's stock price has been on a slow descent since it last exceeded $5 in October; it fell below $4 Tuesday. In Thursday trading, the stock was up a penny at $3.87.
As of Sept. 30, big institutional investor Fidelity Management & Research controlled 5.1% of Wells Fargo & Co. (WFC) and 2.9% of Bank of America Corp (BAC), but only 0.2% of Citi, a stock that used to be a staple of mutual funds. Wellington Management was the seventh largest holder of Wells Fargo & Co., controlling 1.1% of the San Francisco bank's stock, and 1% of Bank of America; it is not among the top 20 investors of Citi, according to FactSet.
Also on Sept. 30, several well-known hedge fund managers owned large chunks of Citigroup stock. John Paulson's Paulson & Co. bought 300 million Citi shares during the third quarter, while David Tepper's Appaloosa Management bought 79.7 million and Lee Ainslie's Maverick Capital bought 42.4 million. Both purchases were new positions, according to the filings.
Weighing against these hopes is the likelihood of dilution.
Earlier this year, the Federal Reserve said any bank that seeks to repay TARP would have to demonstrate that it can raise equity, and non-government guaranteed debt. Investors expect Citi to be required to raise some capital, and at least some in the form of equity. The bank is negotiating with the government and its regulators to determine the amount of capital it needs to raise.
J.P. Morgan's Juneja wrote in his note that a $10 billion common stock raise would be 6% dilutive to current owners, and combined with a sale of a part of the government's stake, "could pressure the stock price initially."
Citi's current stock price reflects some expectations of dilution, but, Trone said, "the market is not discounting a full $20 billion" issue of equity capital.
The positive impact on Citi's stock of a government exit would be even more substantial if the Treasury Department sold its common shares. That's because those shares are not counted as part of the bank's capitalization by indexes such as the Standard & Poor's 500, Trone said. As those shares go from government to private hands, lead index funds would automatically increase their holdings.
