Showing posts with label Research in Motion. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Research in Motion. Show all posts

Sunday, December 16, 2012

2102 revisited: stock commentaries


We reviewed a few stocks this year.  So far, our take has been mostly right.  Our current scorecard is provided at the top of each section.

YPF (+33%) and Telecom Argentina (+16%)
Last April we noted that the nationalization of YPF and the expropriation of its then controlling shareholder, the Spanish multinational Repsol, was part of a long standing pattern of misbehaving by the Kirchner governments. 

Last month, with surprise developments affecting its unrestructured sovereign debt (impounding of the frigate Libertad in Ghana, adverse New York court judgment), with massive street demonstrations against the Kirchner government and the evident difficulties that YPF had in closing joint-venture deals with the likes of Chevron and others, we surmised that change may soon become inevitable and we started to invest in Argentina, just a little.  We thought that YPF would be a good start, with Telecom Argentina as a less speculative second choice.  At the time, their ADR prices were $10.46 and $9.82 respectively.

Today, they are $13.90 and $11.41.  While Repsol’s legal pressure is continuing, the Spanish government has made it known that it was in regular contact with its Argentine homologue and that a resolution of the dispute was likely.  After initial difficulties, YPF was able to raise substantial sums by issuing bonds on the local market; ironically, the repressive financial controls made YPF bonds the best deal in town.  It also helped that the government could force its Social Security system to buy half of the company’s debt offerings.

Negotiations seem to be continuing with Chevron and now Bridas, and they are very difficult: how could it be otherwise given the Repsol expropriation precedent and the unrealistic energy pricing system?  In the end, I think that Argentina has no choice but to pay Repsol for its stake in YPF and to adopt economically sensible oil and gas prices.  After all, its shale deposits are among the richest in the world, it will control and benefit their exploitation and it doesn’t want to be too dependent on Bolivia and Brazil for its energy needs.

Even though it gears to become the energy national champion (by taking control of Metrogas and with its expected bid for Petrobras Argentina),YPF continues to be priced for disaster (see peer comparisons in our September post). I do believe that the current strategy consisting in copying the Brazilian energy model is wrong and terribly costly; but even then, if the Repsol dispute is settled, as I expect it will, the YPF stock should rise very appreciably.

Telecom Argentina is well managed, profitable and carries a large net cash position.  Price controls and high inflation have squeezed its profit margin, but it too is priced for disaster.  Its stock may not pop up as much as YPF’s, but it is offers lower risks.

The other big risk factor for US investors is the continued listing of these companies’ ADRs in New York, as this provides liquidity and attractive economics given the overvaluation of the Argentine peso.  One would think that, unable to tap international bond markets, Argentina would be anxious to maintain access to international equity markets. 

JP Morgan Chase (+19%)
In May, I commented on the London Whale travails of JP Morgan which had pushed its stock price down to $36.96 on the day of my post.  I advised prudence, cautioned that the loss on its derivatives could well exceed the initial estimate of $2 billion (it did) but took the view that buying below $36 would result in a profitable trade.  The stock price spent two months below that level, bottoming at $30.70.  Today it is $42.81.

The bank management was extensively reshuffled.  Yet markets have responded without enthusiasm.  Although the stock price should appreciate further next year, my view of the company has evolved.  I have come to the conclusion, partly through personal experience and partly through industry review, that the bank has grown too big and diversified to provide superior customer products and services and to be effectively controlled. 

Warren Buffett once said that he wanted to invest in businesses that even fools couldn’t sink, because sooner or later fools would be in charge.  JP Morgan’s top management is very smart, even if it may suffer from some hubris; but I wouldn’t want to own the stock if fools were at the helm.  Admittedly, this is a remote possibility in the case of JPM.

Standard Chartered plc (-6%)
Last August, I wrote about Standard Chartered plc.  I expressed disbelief with their decision to continue doing business with Iran through their US facilities despite clear prohibition imposed by their host country.  I questioned the bank’s decision-making and the oversight exercised by its Board of Directors.  I also felt that its market value failed to reflect the inherent risks of its business model.  I elected to pass and wait for another day to invest.  The stock price then was 1,418.5p; today it is 1,497p.

Since then, little has changed. Of its twenty-one Directors, only two new have joined the Board following disclosure of the Iran saga.  No top or senior manager has paid the price for this fiasco.  The bank settled the outstanding charges with the US federal authorities for $327 million.   However, its latest quarterly results were satisfactory and, had I bought the stock back then, I would have made a 6% gain to-date.  I remain a skeptic but I admit that I may have been wrong.
 
Apple (+26%) and Research in Motion (+87%)
Last September, I argued that Apple was not a cheap stock despite its modest p/e multiple, the reason being that such multiple resulted from a very high gross margin.  I noted that reverting to 2006 gross margin levels would push the p/e above 23, even after deducting Apple’s large cash balances from its market value.  I also expressed some doubt that Apple could maintain its growth rate and gross margins by targeting emerging markets such as China.  Interestingly, Apple’s latest quarterly results showed a small drop in margins which the company put on the concurrent launches of new products.  The stock price, which was $691 on the day of our initial writing, has now fallen to $510. 

Irrespective of its fundamentals, Apple, once buoyed by client adoration and investor exuberance, seems to have lost some of its magic:  Steve Jobs passed away; it stumbled with its handling of Google Maps and Youtube; it continues to rankle with its refusal to support Adobe Flash; Apple TV remains an undefined possibility.  That said, relative to its peers, it remains a unique company; it is just very difficult to keep beating extraordinary expectations and to have to add $50 to $70 billion a year to justify current market valuation.   

On September 28th, I argued that Research in Motion, the maker of the Blackberry, was a buy as it was priced for extinction, which didn’t seem likely. Today, a consensus has emerged that its new Blackberry 10 will come to market early next year.  Carriers and large corporate clients are testing it.  Besides its reported merits, the BB10I is benefitting from telephone carriers wanting to break the Apple/Android duopoly.  On the other hand, RIMM is faced with patent litigation from Nokia and has a very steep hill to climb in Europe and North America to regain market share. 

How will RIMM look like in two years, will it have succeeded in regaining critical mass, I don’t know.  But it has a sporting chance thanks to a meaningful client base (80 million), strong technology and good finances.  Back on 9/28/12 the stock price was $7.50.  Today, even at $14.05, its stock price continues to discount a somber future.

We should remind ourselves that extrapolating in a straight line is always dangerous; that was true when I wrote about these stocks back then and that is true now.  Market valuations are right most of the time, but when consensus reaches 90% or more, it is usually worth our while to investigate.

 

Friday, September 28, 2012

Apple (and RIM) stock revisited, part 2


In an earlier post, I made the argument that Apple was not necessarily undervalued.  Since market valuation is by nature a relative concept, I would also like to make the argument that Research in Motion (RIMM) is most likely undervalued.

Since I wrote my first post on Apple, a few things happened.  One of them was that a power surge caused by a particularly strong storm destroyed my 2006 iMac.  Why was my computer plugged into the wall socket rather than into my surge protected outlet?… So I bought a new iMac, and it really is a thing of beauty, it works great and it couldn’t be easier to set up, for the most part.
 
As I wanted to retrieve some of the data from my original iMac and had bungled my first attempt, I called Apple’s hot line; their specialist couldn’t have been more helpful.  I also wanted to synchronize my iPod, and there, things got messier.  One staff at the Apple store told me that I could do that.  But when I called Apple’s hot line again, the new specialist declined to help, suggesting that I bring my new iMac, the hard disk drive of my old iMac and my iPod, all thirty pounds of them, to an Apple store for further assistance.  I was not happy.

The change of computer also necessitated the transfer of some Adobe programs which required the de-authorization of my previous iMac.  The Adobe customer support person was efficient and told me that I would receive by email a link to rate his service.  I did, but I was very surprised to see that the questionnaire also asked about my satisfaction with similar support service from Apple.  Clearly, the questionnaire was not tailor-made for me, but it made me wonder: besides its ongoing Flash Player saga, did Adobe know something I didn’t about Apple customer service?

The second thing that happened was when my wife suggested that I upgrade my iPad to IOS6 as she had just done.  Aware of the Apple switch to proprietary map software, I asked her if she still had Google Maps, which she confirmed.  Yet much to my annoyance, when I rebooted my iPad, both Google Maps and Youtube aps were gone!  At no point in the upgrading process had I been forewarned that I would lose these two aps, and the new mapping ap, too cleverly in my opinion, had a similar icon to that of Google, except that, underneath, it said “Maps” rather than “Google Maps”.  My wife had been fooled and so, I suspect, many other users.  The iPad allows you to “restore” an earlier version of its software, except that restoring will not get rid of IOS6 and therefore will not get your Google Maps and Youtube back.

Today, much was made of the Apple CEO’s apology for installing a poorly performing mapping application.  In my view, he should have apologized for not giving his customers an informed choice of upgrading or not.  In this instance, a company that prided itself on being customer focused, sacrificed its customers to its ongoing battle with Google.  Which brings the question, aesthetics apart, if Apple justifies its premium pricing on providing a premium experience, what happens when this experience (technical assistance or software upgrade) starts to falter?

The final thing was the release of the latest RIMM quarterly results.  Much has been commented already.  Suffice to say that the loss (ex-goodwill impairment) was lower than expected, cash holdings were slightly increased despite selling devices at a loss (thanks to cost cutting and a reduction in working capital due to business shrinking), sales fell sharply from a year ago but the subscriber base increased at an annualized rate of 10% quarter-over-quarter.

Earlier this week, RIMM’s management disclosed some of the features of its upcoming Blackberry 10.  Even to a non-geek like me, the upcoming RIMM smart phone looked sleek and well thought out.  Will it have many meaningful applications?  Will it have something comparable to Skype or Apple’s Facetime?  I don’t know.  A keyboard and a touch screen versions are set for release during the first quarter of next year.

At the time of this writing, RIMM has no debt and a market value of US$3.9 billion.  Net of cash, its enterprise (or business) value is US$1.6 billion.  This works out to US$20.4 per customer.  In other words, the company is priced as if it were going bankrupt.

Yet, it looks like the company has the financial resources to produce the BB10.  It also looks like it will have the resources to market it, as it will receive financial support from carriers that are anxious to reduce Apple’s negotiating leverage and interested in having a wider smart phone offering.  It is true that RIMM runs far behind Apple and Android-powered phones and that it is unlikely to catch them any time soon, if ever.  But it does have strengths, apart from his new technology: a secure network, a hardcore customer base, and excellence in text messaging.

We already have a “going out of business” value estimate for RIMM: US$1.6 billion.

What if it makes it?  That is very difficult to estimate, in part because RIMM has already announced that it will strike alliances and licensing agreements with third parties which will share the downside as well as the upside of the BB10 and beyond.

If we look at Apple, we can make some very rough estimates: its revenue per iPhone is about US$660, its gross margin US$ 430 and its net profit after-tax US$270.  Using a p/e multiple of 13, each one million iPhone sold would have a market value of US$3.5 billion.  Analysts expect that it will sell over 160 million units in 2013.

RIMM is not the market leader that Apple is, its new BB10 may be priced lower than the iPhone 5, its leverage with sub-contractors is much weaker, and as we already pointed out, it has decided to share some of its upside.  So for argument’s sake we will assume that its normalized net profit/BB10 unit will be US$150; using an arbitrary p/e multiple of 11 and assuming that RIMM sells 10 million new phones a year, its market value would then be US$16.5 billion (I assume that all excess cash balances will have been consumed to ramp up the business).
 
Which will it be?  Probably neither of the above, but somewhere in between.  The key decision though is whether RIMM will make it or whether it will bomb. 

I think that it will make it.  I also fear that Apple may be starting to suffer from the kind of hubris which stellar performers almost inevitably fall into, sooner or later.  Putting it all together, I see more upside with RIMM than with Apple, even considering the very steep challenges that the former is facing.

I am long RIMM and have no position in Apple.