Companies
-
Do Asciano’s wins justify an optimistic price?
Roger Montgomery
February 4, 2010
Asciano is a company I covered in detail this week in Alan Kohler’s Eureka Report. Its popped up because it seems to be winning rail haulage market share from Queensland Rail. One analyst sent me a research note today saying; “Asciano’s on a roll” Tee, hee, hee indeed.
AIO announced a coal haulage deal today with Macarthur Coal (MCC ) in Queensland for ~7mt starting in November. The company now has 100% (10.7 mt) of Macarthur Coal, a 14.0mt contract with Rio/Xstrata, 5.8mt with Anglo and 1.1mt with Isaac Plains. There are more contracts up for grabs as the coal business in Queensland continues to expand. Analysts assuming Asciano wins a decent percentage of these, are upgrading their earnings estimates for Asciano.
The company, however, offers several hurdles for the value investor. The first is the balance sheet, the second is the uncertain competitive landscape and the third the valuation.
Recently Asciano announced it has no debt due for two-and-a-years. But this will fly as any parent of young children knows, and then the debt WILL be due.
Reports of the company’s debt-free status are incorrect. A capital raising and debt refinancing has still left the company with loans of $2.9 billion and $300 million in cash. That’s like you taking out a $2.9 million mortgage to buy a $3.2 million house. Total forecast liabilities of $3.9 billion should be compared to equity of $4.2 billion, which in turn includes intangibles/goodwill of $3.9 billion.
While NPAT is expected to grow from the $71.8 million reported in 2009 to $205 million in 2010, $263 million in 2011 and $320–400 million in 2012 (subject to upgrades following today’s announcement).
The second hurdle I referred to above is the competitive landscape.
The Port of Melbourne Corporation would like a third operator to join Asciano and DP World’s P&O (also considering listing of its own later this year) on Melbourne’s wharves. In Queensland there are the proposed changes to the ownership of Queensland Rail (QR). Under new, non-government ownership QR will have the incentive to “do a Telstra” on its competitors, especially Asciano, by charging more for the use of its network so it can offer lower prices to its own rail freight customers.
Happily for those hoping for a better Asciano share price, the coal industry, with about $40 billion revenue last year and strong growth projected, has some clout and big coal companies will not be happy if their deliveries are affected in any way.
Instability around Asciano’s competitive landscape means it is imprudent to be optimistic when valuing the company. And thats the third hurdle.
Asciano will report its half-year results on February 24; most analysts, including me, expect it will show the company’s first ever December-half profit. But returns for the next three years will still average only about 7% for the next three years.
Adopting an after tax 9% discount rate – the lowest I have ever given for any company – I get a valuation of 73¢. The valuation rises for the next few years but goes nowhere the current price of $1.70 or broker target prices of about $2.
Posted by Roger Montgomery
February 4, 2010
by Roger Montgomery Posted in Companies.
- save this article
- POSTED IN Companies
-
How often do I revalue businesses?
rogermontgomeryinsights
February 1, 2010
Paul wrote to me in December, asking for my valuation of Patties Foods.
“I have finally had a look at PFL. Its value is about 80 cents and while it is expected to rise over the next three years, it still won’t get to the current price. The company is thus overpriced. PFL also raised a lot of money in 2007, evidently to pay down some debt, but today the debt is right back up there again. Not a first class business I am afraid either. Of course none of this is a prediction of the share price, which could halve or double. Valuing a company is not the same as predicting the price”.
He subsequently wrote back with the following question… Roger, can I ask how often do you value companies? Following is my reply.
In general terms, I revalue companies constantly. When a company provides an update to its guidance, when interest rates change, when a company makes an acquisition, raises capital or buys back shares, all these things may affect the value. The intrinsic value for whole the company may change or just on a per share basis. And because I am tracking so many companies, there are valuation changes occurring daily. continue…
by rogermontgomeryinsights Posted in Companies, Insightful Insights.
- save this article
- POSTED IN Companies, Insightful Insights
-
The Lowe’s are the best in the business, but would I buy Westfield?
Roger Montgomery
January 30, 2010
Since early December Paul, Squigly, Steven and Darren have requested I value Westfield. WDC is also a popular stock with viewers of Nina May’s Your Money Your Call on the Sky Business Channel (you can watch highlights at my YouTube channel, just type ‘Westfield’ into the search feature), and rightly so. It’s a company run by three of the most capable men in the world and one whose shares I have owned in the past.
Today its price, according to a number of analysts and strategists, does not appear to have responded to expectations for an improvement in economic conditions in the US. The biggest gap between inventories and orders since the mid 70’s, the decline in housing inventory, the strong turnaround in cyclical indicators and the steep yield curve all suggest an acceleration in US economic growth – by the way if this doesn’t sound like me, you are right. I am just repeating what I have been reading.
I don’t subscribe to the view that it’s the job of the investor to allow macro economic forecasts to influence micro-based investment decisions.
If however the economists are right, and the US economic recovery does gain traction, then all that remains is a recovery in consumer confidence to see Westfield benefit. Of course if the US economic strength is sustained, then one suspects the US dollar will also recover, making Westfield’s profits more valuable in Australian dollar terms.
Those things aside, lets have a quick look at the valuation and take a dispassionate view about the price irrespective of whether others believe the price has or hasn’t responded to US growth expectations. continue…
by Roger Montgomery Posted in Companies, Consumer discretionary, Property.
-
Will 2010 be the year of inflation, interest rates, commodities and Oil Search?
rogermontgomeryinsights
January 30, 2010
Welcome back. On Christmas Eve, just before I left for my annual family holiday, I said that this year would be fascinating in terms of inflation, interest rates and commodities prices. Interest rates can be ticked off – the topic has already been front page news and I expect the subject to hot up even more over the coming year.
Inflation and commodities however are arguably even more interesting. When money velocity picks up in the US – that is, the speed with which money changes hands – inflation could be a problem. I don’t know whether that will be this year or not, but I do know that at some point the benign inflation and extraordinarily low interest rates will be nothing but a fond memory.
One of the places inflation presents is in commodity prices, and there is no shortage of very smart, successful and wealthy people – Jim Rogers is one – who believe the bull market in commodities is far from over. continue…
by rogermontgomeryinsights Posted in Companies, Energy / Resources, Insightful Insights.
-
Wishing you a safe and happy Christmas
rogermontgomeryinsights
December 24, 2009
I am away for Christmas and January and will only be publishing thoughts to the blog on a spasmodic basis.
If you go to my website, www.rogermontgomery.com, and register for my book or send a message to me, I will let you know via email when I am back on deck.
I expect 2010 will be a very interesting year on the inflation, interest rate and commodity fronts so stay tuned and focus on understanding what is driving a company’s return on equity and how to arrive at its value.
Before doing anything seek always professional advice, but zip up your wallet if you hear the words “only trade with what you can lose”. I don’t like losing money at any time and neither should you.
Posted by Roger Montgomery, 23 December 2009
by rogermontgomeryinsights Posted in Companies, Energy / Resources, Insightful Insights, Market Valuation.
-
Which Bank do you own?
rogermontgomeryinsights
December 24, 2009
Half of all shareholders in Australia own at least one major bank in their share portfolios. The economics for banks in the last two years have changed dramatically and on several fronts.
First, they are believed to have largely dodged the impact of the GFC. This was predictable, as was the second change – the substantial gain in market share the banks enjoyed as their mortgage origination peers fell like dominoes relying, as they were, on short term wholesale funding and with no deposit base.
For both reasons I mentioned at the end of 2008 and the beginning of 2009 on CNBC that bank prices represented a rare opportunity to own the best businesses you can on an island – a legislated oligopoly that charges people to get their own money in and out. You can see the video from December 16 here.
There was also another major change that kept analysts on our toes. Dilutionary capital raisings wreaked havoc on the returns on equity and the equity per share for all four majors. Then Westpac, previously the bank with the best business performance, bought St George, and CBA bought ING. NAB has since bid for Axa (at arguably a price that is double the intrinsic value of the Axa) and ANZ…well who knows (read more here)
The effect of all this activity has not changed the fundamental attraction of owning a big four bank on an island of 22 million people who don’t care what you charge them because they cannot be bothered moving to another bank; “they’re all the same”. What has changed however is the future returns on equity for each of the banks and therefore, their intrinsic values.
Here’s my take on each banks’ forecast return on equity range for the next few years and valuation. I have ordered them by profitability in ascending order (ROE range, Intrinsic value):
NAB (11%-15%, $22.08)
ANZ (12.6%-16%, $18.10)
WBC (14.5%-18%, $19.19)
CBA (17.5% – 20.7%, $53.53)
In every case, current prices are well ahead of the current valuation however, I should add that the valuations are based on 2010 estimates and for all four banks, the valuations rise significantly in future years as ROE heads towards the top of each of the ranges given. Given the time frames that I can see, you will be waiting for values to catch up to current prices. NAB and ANZ are the cheapest, but you are buying the new 2nd tier banks. WBC is a better performing bank than ANZ and NAB but its price reflects it and you will be waiting twice as long as the others to catch up.
Many of you have told me you want to keep this blog a little bit of a secret, but let me tell you we will all benefit if we receive contributions and insights from those closer to the coal face of various industries. So let me encourage you to post your own thoughts and insights and invite anyone else you know (that owns bank shares for example or works in a company that is a competitor to any of those I mention) to do likewise. Do you think you know anyone that owns bank shares and would benefit from this insight? Spread the link.
http://rogermontgomeryinsights.wordpress.com/
Posted by Roger Montgomery, 23 December 2009
by rogermontgomeryinsights Posted in Companies, Financial Services, Insightful Insights.
-
Can you value commodity type companies?
rogermontgomeryinsights
December 24, 2009
Commodity prices… can anyone predict their movements? Driven by supply and demand, and exaggerated by speculation, predicting the price of oil, iron ore, coal, diamonds and titanium is an almost impossible task. \It is however a task that is required if you are planning to buy shares in a mining company. Ruling out mining exploration companies that make no profit, and whose race to a valuation of zero is only retarded by the amount of cash remaining in the bank and measured by a ratio called the cash ‘burn’ rate, we are left with the producers.
For reasons mentioned above, no mining company is easy to value, however some lend themselves to valuations better than others. The best are those that are large, broadly diversified and relatively stable. BHP immediately comes to mind. Born as a silver and lead mine in Broken Hill in 1885, BHP, following the 2001 merger between it and Billiton, is now the world’s largest mining company with operations from Algeria to Tobago and everywhere in between.
But even BHP cannot escape the commodity cycle and this can be seen in the swings in its valuations in the past. BHP’s valuation can be $48 in one year (2008) and $13 the next (2009). This “valuation volatility” is vastly different to JB Hi-Fi, for example, whose value has risen from less than a dollar in 2003 to $20 to $24 today and in a steady ‘staircase’ fashion.
Many of you have asked me for a valuation for BHP. Using the earnings estimates of the rated analysts on the company, there is clearly some optimism about BHP’s prospects. Returns on equity are expected to rise from 17.5% this year to 24% next year, and circa 28% in 2011 and 2012. These numbers however are still lower than the rates of return the company generated between 2005 and 2007. The estimate I come up with for BHP using the actual estimates of the rated analysts is a value of A$36.56, and if the analysts are right, the value rises dramatically in future years.
Warren Buffett doesn’t like businesses that are price takers – commodity type businesses. The reason is that it is impossible to forecast future rates of return on equity with any confidence. BHP reflects this historically. BHP is big enough now that in some cases it is calling the (price) shots, but don’t forget we are talking about capital-intensive businesses.
Posted by Roger Montgomery, 23 December 2009
by rogermontgomeryinsights Posted in Companies, Energy / Resources.
- save this article
- POSTED IN Companies, Energy / Resources
-
What is MacMahon worth?
rogermontgomeryinsights
December 24, 2009
On the Sky Business Channel with Nina May recently, a caller rang in and asked for my valuation of MacMahon Holdings Limited (ASX Code: MAH).
I ran the numbers and received mixed signals. The return on equity of the company has only exceeded 21% in one year – 2008. In 2006 returns on equity were less than 1% and since 2002 ROE with these two years removed, has averaged just under 14%. This is not a return on equity to get excited about. Disappointingly, the company has also raised $216 million from shareholders, and diluted them by increasing the shares on issue by more than 300% since 2000.
The decline in borrowings between 2007 and today from $169 million to $111 is initially encouraging, as is the reduction of retained losses by $86 million since 2002, but since 2007 the company has raised $78 million through equity raisings. Arguably it is not the performance of the business that is reducing the debt burden and the retained losses simultaneously, but the performance of the company’s PR team. Finally, at a price of 59 cents, all the value investing margin of safety is gone. Indeed the price today is about my value for this company two years out. I cannot predict what the share price will do – it may double from here, but on present performance expectations, such a move would not be justified.
Posted Roger Montgomery, 23 December 2009
by rogermontgomeryinsights Posted in Companies.
- save this article
- POSTED IN Companies
-
MMS – is it still a good company?
rogermontgomeryinsights
December 11, 2009
On Wednesday this week I wrote in Alan’s Eureka Report:
“Postscript: I note that McMillan Shakespeare, a salary packaging specialist many readers know I have followed for some time, saw its founder sell a significant number of shares. You should know that it is not the quantum of the sale that should pique your curiosity or set off alarm bells, but the timing, coming as it does ahead of the findings of Dr Ken Henrys first major overhaul of Australias tax system in 50 years, which could include potentially adverse changes to fringe benefits tax and thus salary packaging demand.”
“My experience as a fund manager is that when major owners or founders are selling it has sometimes been the start of a negative period for the company and its shares (CCP). At other times, founders and major stakeholders have sold and the shares have gone on to do great things (TRS). In this case I have been leaning to the cautious side – as it seems Anthony Podesta, MMS’ founder has.”
Addendum 16 Dec. 2009: The facts remain that MMS is a wonderful company with huge cash generation, high rates of return on equity and net fixed assets and a company that up until recently was trading well below its intrinsic value. That intrinsic value value has also been rising significantly in recent years but some caution is warranted ahead of the release of Ken Henry’s tax review and the government’s determination about what recommendations it will adopt.
By Roger Montgomery, 11 December 2009
First published 9 December 2009, www.EurekaReport.com.au
by rogermontgomeryinsights Posted in Companies.
- 35 Comments
- save this article
- POSTED IN Companies
-
Relative P/E's: Nonsense squared?
rogermontgomeryinsights
December 10, 2009
I had a call yesterday from one of my brokers (who also happens to have become a friend). He informed me that the restrictions have come off all the broker’s so that they are now able to write research about Myer. As you would expect so soon after its widely supported float (A float that lost money for the thousands of investors who sold out in the first weeks), the research has been predictably bullish. It is not however the views of the analysts that is interesting. What is interesting is the reference in several of the reports to a relative P/E. The argument goes that because Harvey Norman and David Jones have a higher P/E than Myer, that the gap should narrow and Myer’s P/E should rise, pulling the price up with it. See any weaknesses in the logic?
Its like saying that there’s a Ferrari and there’s a VW Combi and the VW combi will get faster because the Ferrari is too fast compared to it. Clearly such conclusions are flawed.
The performance of management, the economics of businesses and their prospects all affect their values and the sentiment towards them, which in turn, affects prices in the short term.
Buffett has frequently said that academics where correct in observing the market was frequently efficient. In other words, a lot of the time, the price is right and perhaps in the case of Myer it should be on a lower P/E than David Jones. This post should be read in conjunction with my previous posts on Myer that discuss its intrinsic value.
Roger Montgomery, 10 December 2009.
by rogermontgomeryinsights Posted in Companies, Consumer discretionary, Insightful Insights.