Brand Manager Battles
The half-year reporting season has begun in earnest this week with a slight trickle of financials coming through.
Of little interest to us so far are the reports from a number of listed investment companies (LIC’s) and also Agenix Limited (ASX: AGX), an unprofitable early-stage medical device company. These reports and many others like them are quickly pushed to one side to ensure we focus our time, energy and effort on more productive outcomes. Conversely, we have read GUD Holdings half year with interest.
GUD’s core business is the management and distribution of a suite of ‘brands’. One of those brands in their consumer division is Sunbeam, a range of small kitchen appliances which heavily competes with Breville Group (ASX: BRG) for market share. We have had a financial interest in Breville for some time, and it is a business that you may well know by now as well.
Putting aside the fact that GUD divested their 19.3% stake in BRG in early 2012 for $3.35 a share (currently $6.40), it was notable in management’s commentary (given Oates saw only small reductions) that a decline in Sunbeam sales was responsible for the lion’s share of a 15% decline and a 38% fall in EBIT, the worst performing division for the group by a wide margin.
Understandably, and in an attempt to arrest the fall, management has flagged a need to align the cost base with the competitive landscape they are facing, pursue offshore alliances to build scale and revitilise their product development program to boost returns. Does this new strategic direction sound all too familiar?
Post the exit from its Homeware’s division, Breville was free to focus on its core electrical products with a number of goals:
• Operational efficiency and excellence,
• Restructure the cost base to be more competitive and improve margins,
• Maintain investment and focus on product innovation and development,
• align the company with its product with a name change to Breville Group Limited and
• Leverage the brand and product innovation with a reset cost base into international markets.
Because the results of the above strategy have been nothing short of stunning, understandably one has ask why GUD took so long to follow in the same footsteps? The next logical question is can they succeed?
Perhaps, but our investment stays with Breville for the time being.
It is clear that Breville has brand leadership. It is considered one of the best products in the business and as such, has been taking market share from its competitors. If you are on the losing side in this environment, a reactive, delayed, follow-the-leader approach to restructuring your business does not inspire the greatest level of confidence as a potential investor (particularly when this restructure must occur for what was GUD’s largest division).
With a $17m decline in sales in the consumer division announced in the first half, there is a possibility that BRG was on the other side. Even if the spoils are never shared equally, the Breville half year report is eagerly awaited by our investment team for an update.
This post was contributed by a representative of Montgomery Investment Management Pty Limited (AFSL No. 354564). The principal purpose of this post is to provide factual information and not provide financial product advice. Additionally, the information provided is not intended to provide any recommendation or opinion about any financial product. Any commentary and statements of opinion however may contain general advice only that is prepared without taking into account your personal objectives, financial circumstances or needs. Because of this, before acting on any of the information provided, you should always consider its appropriateness in light of your personal objectives, financial circumstances and needs and should consider seeking independent advice from a financial advisor if necessary before making any decisions. This post specifically excludes personal advice.
INVEST WITH MONTGOMERY
paul.williamson.12764
:
Any comments regarding yesterdays results?
Joost Daalder
:
I am concerned to see the huge slide in the share price for SIV (Silver Chef), a company which you and I inherently like, though with awareness of its debt. What do you think is behind the selling off that is occurring? Is it just profit taking that we are seeing, or something more serious? I am sure I am not the only person to be interested in knowing (if possible) …
zoran arnautovic
:
SIV
For 5 years prior to thisone SIV always traded below IV. D/E is big concern and
profits are taken as it has run ahead of IV. It will take couple of years for value
to rise to $5.00
This is not another MCE,just price run too high.
Cheers
Chris Embery
:
Sorry Roger, I had to cringe when I read the following – “flagged a need to align the cost base with the competitive landscape they are facing, pursue offshore alliances to build scale and revitilise their product development program to boost returns”
Too many “corporate weasel words”, and being a Toastmaster, I always wince in agony when I read such statements in ANY corporate communication.
Why can we/they not just say “rethink the price it costs to make this stuff because the AUD$ is too high and so are labour costs, take a look at opening a factory in China / Vietnam so that we can make greater volumes and invest more in R+D to stay ahead of product obsolescence”
(or is that too simplistic ?!)
Roger Montgomery
:
You’re spot on Chris.