Friday, October 31, 2008

Contrarians hate it when the market moves up!


...particularly when there isn't a valid reason for it to do so!!! Efficient market, my #@$@.

I realize that Wall and Bay Street try to be forward looking but this is nuts. All the fears that precipitated the panicked selling have not gone away. They were overblown to an extent but they are still there. Every level headed person realizes that the "great de-leveraging" still has to play out for some time longer-- probably until mid-2009 at the very least.

In the mean time, I'm accumulating as much cash on the sideline as I can for entry into up to 4 new position and adding to some old ones:

New ones:

LUK: mentioned in the previous post, LUK came within a few dollars of my bid of $19/share and then leaped up to $27. Very frustrating. There is a cult-like following of this holding company so a lot of regular people (and gurus like Bruce Berkowitz) understand the quality of its management and the balance sheet despite the detractor: short term uncertainty of the highly assets Leucadia is so adept at acquiring (i.e. 70% of the portfolio is in JEF, a boutique investment bank!). I'm hoping that these people will go away soon and there will be some sort of macro-economic scare to knock them out of the stock so I can buy it real cheap. I'd hold this 3-10 years+.

HHULF.PK: Hamburger Hafen und Logistik reviewed several times. Knocked down to the low 20's euros. Short term outlook for this high margin, highly profitable company isn't good but long term is excellent. I think that it is very well managed. I'd buy in the high teens-- only because Europe is so out of fashion right now (like PHG) and I think I can get that price. I think the FMV of HHLA should be 50-60 Euros/share based on comparable ports EV/EBIDTA valuations. Being traded OTC makes this a thinly traded stock-- another reason it shouldn't be traded but bought for the 5 year+ horizon.

Old ones:

PHG-- because of the dividend, great balance sheet and the "green" play with the LED lighting market share. It's also very, very cheap, even after the rally. I don't think it's a GREAT company like LUK or has potential to be great like Hamburger. I think it's dirt cheap for a profitable company with 3 B of cash in the bank, trading at 0.7 book value, P/E of 5, P/S 0.5 and 15% ROE. Hard to resist at < $16/share

BBSI-- one of my favourite small caps. In a deeply cyclical business and still making money. Has no debt, high insider ownership and very strong management. The CEO has been sick lately and required some sort of major surgery-- this has me mildly concerned. The company ran well and maintained their + cash flows despite a terrible environment for staffing/PEO services with him being absent so that's reassuring. Dividend is being maintained and the share buyback proceeding as planned. They still have 50 M in the bank for acquisition etc. I'd buy at $9 or less without hesitating.


Others:

SEB

AXP

HOG

SNY

NVS

Tuesday, October 28, 2008

Invest in the Investors: LUK Leucadia National Corporation


I'm attracted to holding companies that are:

  1. trading below book value
  2. have management with "skin in the game" (significant insider ownership) and a long term track record
  3. little or manageable debt

I've admired Leucadia for a long time but much like BAM, held off actually owning shares because of inflated valuations. This clearly is no longer the case.



Run by gifted mavericks Ian Cumming and Joseph Steinberg, Leucadia National corp is an eclectic, diversifed holding company that was founded over 150 years ago. Its investment portfolio is quite focused and includes small cap biotechs, wineries, copper mines and boutique investment banks. They are deep value investors with a penchant for the "cigar butt" approach. To quote the duo in a shareholder's letter:

“We tend to be buyers of assets and companies that are troubled or out of favor and as a result are selling substantially below the values which we believe are there. From time to time, we sell parts of these operations when prices available in the market reach what we believe to be advantageous levels.”



Bull Case for LUK

  • masterful capital allocation has produced a 21.4% CAGR increase in book value/share since 1979!
  • average ROE is 21% over 29 years
  • being mid cap (5 B) has allowed it to outperform Berkshire Hathaway's stock over the last 20 yrs
  • high insider ownership. Steinberg and Cumming each own 13% of the outstanding shares.
  • high degree of guru ownership, with many recently increasing their stakes including Bruce Berkowitz, Tom Gayner and David Winters.
  • Mr. Steinberg and Mr. Cumming have signed a 10 year contract to stay with the company and in the last AGM they said they would work there as long as they physically could. Apparently they are both in excellent health.
  • historically trades at 2 x book value, currently trading at 0.7
  • plenty of liquidity current ratio> 3
  • mostly long term debt with a low D:E ratio v.s. peers of 0.29 and leverage ratio of 1.38.
  • currently P/E ratio 10 x P/B 0.7 = 7 (far below Ben Graham's 22 criteria)
  • using an aggregate sum-of-the-parts, P/B value analysis and DCF analysis, they came up with a FMV of about $40/share roughly double what the shares are currently trading at.

Bear Case for LUK

  • shareholders need to rely on the expertise of only 2 aging individuals as the company is a specialist in picking unprofitable and troubled investments and fixing them up as opposed to Buffett's strategy of picking wonderful businesses that essentially run themselves, with or without him
  • heavy exposure to commodities and overseas ones to boot. These will suffer in the global slowdown and may well not survive
  • a concentrated portfolio magnifies bad investment decisions as well as good ones
  • recent heavy investment in JEF, a small investment bank they bailed out of trouble. It may have a rough run before the credit squeeze runs its course.
  • LUK's assets under management has shrunk by almost half (9 B-->5.3B) since Jan 2008 due to dwindling valuations
  • as the company grows, it will likely grow more slowly due to more competition for distressed potential investments and the law of large numbers
  • dividend yield is very modest at 1%; however, the managers are considering increasing this

IMHO, this is an excellent long term opportunity to own a company with a superb track record at an affordable price. It would be appropriate for a 3+ year time horizon in an RRSP.

I've put in a low ball bid at $19/share and hope it gets filled on a really nasty day in the stockmarket!

when a dollar goes for $0.60

Stocks trading for less than the company's cash in the bank

Friday, October 24, 2008

More comments and stocks ideas to exploit the panicked selling

Unwinding hedge funds, mutual funds and some silly retail investors with margin accounts have been forced to sell their favourite holdings of late. Those of us who have some cash on the sidelines may well have the opportunity of a lifetime.

Read First Eagle's view on this matter.

I've been concentrating on accumulating shares in companies with an established history of creating shareholder value (i.e. ROE >20% over 5 years), strong balance sheets, dividend yield over 2.5% and compelling valuations. The Grahamian simple valuation measure of focusing on companies that have a price-to-book ratio multiplied by the price-to-earnings ratio of less than or equal to 22 is helpful. I also prefer companies that have hard assets so I can focus on tangible book value that exclude such nebulous items as goodwill.

If you can ignore the macro-economic view for a moment (and I agree that it is hard to), you can choose wide economic moat companies with household names trading at amazing discounts to FMV. Most of them are in the DOW: AXP, MMM, GE, JNJ just to mention a few. DIA (the DOW Diamond ETF) is yielding about 3% now which isn't too shabby.

Sunday, October 19, 2008

If you haven't read it already

Warren Buffett's New York Times Opinion Piece

Grumpy old man = brilliant investor

Marty Whitman's Value Picks


I'm intrigued by the ADR Henderson Land Development. It has extensive commercial and residential properties in HK and mainland China. It is trading at a deep discount to NAV (as Whitman suggests....> 50% discount on shares as they currently trade) and only has a D:E ratio of 0.15. Read the latest annual report presentation here.

I need to delve into this company's financial reports much more extensively before taking the plunge; however, if the LONG term growth story for China is intact and one believes in investing in hard assets then buying a company like this at bargain basement prices is compelling.

Note dividend yield is 2.7%. IMHO this would be a very long term investment >3 years +. Real estate is illiquid and one needs to be patient to allow the market to recognize hidden value.

Also: you may be confused by the currency denominations. 1 US dollar = about 8 HK dollars (7.7 today)

Thursday, October 16, 2008

The greatest challenge now: Allocation of Capital

The short and intermediate term outlook for both the domestic and global economy has probably never been more uncertain in my lifetime.

Companies with superb track records, strong management, excellent liquidity and minimal debt are available at valuation ratios not seen for many years. Benjamin Graham criteria for stock selection is so rigorous that most years since I started investing either no stocks in North America qualified or only a couple. Today there are 270 stocks that meet his criteria on the US exchanges alone! Interesting times, eh? BTW, to review those criteria:


Benjamin Graham's Criteria for the Defensive Investor
  1. P/E Ratio less than 15
  2. P/Book Ratio less than 1.5
  3. Book Value over 0
  4. Current Ratio over 2
  5. Earnings growth of 33% over 10 years
  6. Uninterrupted dividends over 20 years
  7. Some earnings in each of the past 10 years
  8. Annual revenue of more than $100 Million (1950).
    Source: The Intelligent Investor, 4th Revised Edition (pages 184-185).

I belong the school of thought that the macro economic picture is inherently unpredictable. Those few who successfully perceive the future are really only guessing and statistically some of them are going to be right, sometimes even several times in a row. It's similar to slot machines. The danger is that after going on a statistically inevitable winning streak you start to believe that you have a special skill or insight that others do not. Of course, you don't and the casino walks away with all your winnings (eventually) and more. The stock market is really no different.

The vast majority of successful investors with a long term track record of profitable investment decisions (i.e. Buffett, Klarman, Berkowitz, Schwartz) take only a faint and detached interest in the macro economic picture and/or what the stock market is "doing". He/she is doing that for one reason only-- to find high quality companies on sale for pennies on the dollar.

I've been spending a lot of time reading through SEC filings and conference call transcripts, trying to find companies that have at least a narrow moat and the financial health to survive a downturn in the global economy, even a protracted one. I have quite a few prospects, many of which I already own and have analyzed on this blog and intend to buy more of. A few new ones I'm intently interested in and will review when I have time:

ISCA
FSTR
NTRI
POW.to


Vitaliy Katnelson is an offkey but insightful value analyst/money manager. He comments on his favourite stocks here.

l

Friday, October 10, 2008

Time to buy the survivors

I'm buying businesses today with the following "safe and cheap" characteristics:

  • ample liquidity
  • wide moat
  • manageable or no debt
  • trading at or less than tangible book value P/E <8
  • high insider ownership (15% or higher)

Wow-- never in my life has there been so many opportunities. Rather than reel with the sheer number of them I've chosen to concentrate on a few:

BAM-- on sale like it never has been. I don't use conventional metrics to value this company.
SEB-- same
MKL
BBSI
PHG

I'm spending hours pouring over financial reports so I can decide the best way to allocate my limited capital. I may sell BPOP as its share price has been propped up by an improbable upgrade. I would love to own more CX, LYG, AXP and CKI.TO; however, these companies are being conspicuously quiet (well, other than Cemex) and there is a palpable opacity to their current liquidity situation that makes me nervous. All four have potential to be great investments and I'm monitoring them closely.



I'm putting in bids for some or all of them today and adding slowly over the next year to my stake in DIA, the diamonds of the DOW. I think the DOW has potential to drop into the 7000's and that would be great.

l

Thursday, October 9, 2008

Seth Klarman's comments about today's opportunities and risks

Posted by: sabonis (IP Logged)
Date: October 9, 2008 01:52PM

I called my boy Seth at Baupost and he gave me some details of what he talked about:

Seth Klarman at CIMA Conference 10/2/08


1. Biggest fear was buying too soon and on way down, from up in over-valued levels. Knew market collapse was possible and sometimes imagined I was back in 1930. Surely there were tempting bargains and just as surely would have been crushed after decline of next 3 years. A fall from 70 to 20 and fall from 100 to 20, would feel almost exactly the same. At some point being too early becomes indistinguishable from being wrong.

2. Getting in too soon brings risk to all investors. After a stock market has dropped 20% – 30% there is no way to tell when the tides will change. It would be silly to expect that every bear market will turn into a great depression. Yet fair value from under-valued can’t be predicted, and would be equally wrong.

3. As market descends you are tempted with purchasing companies. You will be bombarded with tempting opportunities. You never know how low things will go. When credit contracts and tide goes out on liquidity. At these times recall the wisdom of Graham and Dodd. At this time, you should not market time, but stick to your value convictions. You will see tempting bargains and value imposters. Ignore macro and look to buy cheap.

4. In a market like we have been experiencing. Most investors lose their rudders. They become unwilling to part with cash. They start working on macro economic level. Investors look to pull out of market and wait for a clear signal of change. Value investors should be able to keep their focus and remember Graham and Dodd of 1934.

5. If you can maintain your focus, resist business pressures and have a multifaceted tool kit, you can expect to prosper, even in difficult times.

A. Always recall road map of Graham and Dodd. Revisit this road map when times get difficult. Maintain discipline and value with a margin of safety. This doesn’t mean you won’t lose money. It means if there are drops in price, you have even more of a bargain.

B. Avoid highly leveraged stocks, junk bonds and shaky financials.

C. Look for bargains in various industries and nations.

D. Look at value, not great companies and great management.

E. Listen to Warren Buffett when he states you should buy a stock as if the market would close for a long period of time after you bought the stock.

6. Remain focused on the long run. Graham and Dodd motivate our diligence. They are like silent sentinels. Navigate the best you can and Graham and Dodd are the North Star for value investors.

7. Stand against the prevailing winds, selectively and resolutely. Yet for a while a value investor will under-perform. Interim price declines allow you to average down. Do not suffer the interim losses, relish and appreciate them.

8. Value investing at its core is the marriage between a contrarian streak and a calculator. Buying what is in favor is ensuring long-term under-performance.

9. It is critical to remind your clients, investment team and as often as necessary yourself, that you can only control your process and approach. Understand that you cannot control or forecast the vagaries of the market. Then you should invest in what you believe and what your research dictates. Be indifferent if you lose your short-term oriented clients, remembering that they are their own worst enemies.

10. Controlling your process is essential.

A. Be focused on process, not outcome.

B. Do not judge a decision based on its outcome.

C. During periods of under-performance it is easy to change your process.

D. When a firm is worried about tempers, second-guessing and fear, the process will fail. Look for long-term results; anything else will corrupt the process.

11. Value investing is an art and not a precise science. It is dealing with the fact that we do not work with perfect information.

12. Mechanical rules are dangerous. Graham and Dodd principles should serve as a screen.


Q&A


1. How do you see current investment climate?

A. James Grant - Look at some MBS and beaten down bonds. Some are priced to yield teens. They are priced for a further 25% decline. Also unsecured debentures of nations top retailers. These are priced at 5% to 7%. Hence, short the retailers at 6% and go long the beaten down mortgages.

B. Seth Klarman - Unusual amount of forced sellers, via margin calls. This could breed opportunity. Sees a lot of money managers staying on the sideline. He finds this as an opportunity to buy. Buy when others react to news or false news. His experience is when people give away stocks out of need, due to fear or margin calls, that sounds like a great buying opportunity. In this environment you are playing against very smart people.

C. Bruce Greenwald - Take a deep breath. All the doomsday talking is not being reflected in stock prices. Stocks are basically down 25%, but unemployment is not great like early 1940’s. You need to put this into perspective like 1991 or 1982.

2. Klarman discussed buying one security at a time. Not everything is a bargain out there. Be selective. Many of us have seen opportunities now, and history says to buy them. We bought knowing that banks are going to fail, that real estate would drop, but that certain mortgage backed securities were under-valued. Never leverage, where you can have an opportunity to buy and not be able to take advantage of it because of leverage.

3. James Grant - Treasuries are yielding less than expected future CPI. Treasuries are now being priced as a macro-economic play. Treasuries are not intrinsically safe. They are not safe based on valuation.

4. What factors do you look at in sizing a position?

Seth Klarman - He thinks this has been missed over the last 15 years. Most of the diversified risk is done via 20 to 25th position. We have had a 10% or so concentrated position about a dozen times over the last 20 years. Most of the time we have 3,5 and 6% position. We will take it higher if we see a catalyst for increased value. We would not own 10% position in a common stock, only because it seemed under-valued. We would have a greater than 10% position if there was a margin of safety. I see managers make mistakes with concentrated positions in similar industries. Small positions of say 1% are nonsensical. We do not use macro views, yet when we hedge, we will use a macro view. We think inflation could become out of control in 3 to 5 years. Yet, we might not wait for that position. Hence, perhaps early, we have a large inflation hedge. We don't own gold as a commodity. We won't disclose our inflation hedge, yet with enough work, you can find true inflation hedges.

insane P/E ratios from Bespoke





The average 2009 estimated P/E ratio for stocks in the S&P 500 is 11.9. Currently, 48% of stocks in the index have an estimated P/E of less than ten. Below we highlight stocks with the lowest estimated P/E ratios in the S&P 500. Either earnings estimates are still way too high, or many of these stocks are trading at values of a lifetime. Just looking at the top three stocks on the list (GNW,X, CF), even if their '09 earnings come in at half of current estimates, at current prices their P/Es would still be less than five.

Wednesday, October 8, 2008

Tips for bargain hunting from Morningstar

Value in Healthcare as well as safety

read the brief review here.

My favourites: NVS, SNY, WLP and UNH for reasons detailed in previous posts.

UNH and WLP are cheaper (per PEG ratio) than the others because of real or perceived political risk they face from the incoming US administration's promised reforms. These reforms may well not be in the HMOs best interest.

If you believe that the more things change the more they stay the same, either company is a pretty good bet. Healthcare is on the back burner in the US as it is eclipsed by the economy, Iraq and Afghanistan.

l

Tuesday, October 7, 2008

Ponzio's view of today's situation

Now What? The Great Market Meltdown.
October-7-2008

The US Government passes a $700 billion bailout (or rescue) package, and the markets continue their spiral down. Financial advisors across the country are shouting, "Stay the course!" (Usually from under their desks.)

This crisis is unlike anything we've seen in recent history (and perhaps not-so-recent history); so, what should we do now?

First, Stocks Stink. Consider Buying Bonds.

One year ago (actually, on October 11, 2007) the S&P 500 topped out at 1,576.09. Today, it hit 1,007.97 — a 36% loss. From top to bottom, the Dow lost 32% over the past year. While the news is reporting that we closed at 2004 levels, I think a much more sobering reality needs to be addressed: Over the past ten years — from October 8, 1998 through today's close —[b] the Dow has grown just 2.6% on average for ten straight years.[/b]

Add in dividends, take out some management fees and commissions, and you're lucky to have a 4% or so return for a decade.

(And I won't say anything about how irresponsible, foolish, or downright fraudulent some of Wall Street's finest were over those ten years. Remember Lucent? WorldCom? Enron? Merrill Lynch? Bear Stears? Really — I don't want to beat a dead horse.)

(Morons.)

What can Joe and Jane American learn from all this volatility? First off, remember that stocks stink! A portfolio of solid bonds would have crushed the stock markets over the past ten years; and, while I don't necessarily advocate 100% bonds for everyone, I do think that most people should own them.

Wall Street doesn't talk about bonds except to the extent that they try to get you to buy bonds funds. Individual bonds are not very profitable to Wall Street; bond funds will pay your broker the quarterly kickbacks and allow you to be put on the back burner. (What adviser wants to track all those individual maturities or have to actually do some research?)

That leads me to my first point: Beware of bond funds.


The Danger of Bond Funds


Simply put, when you invest in a bond fund, you give the manager $x to purchase bonds. The manager then takes your cash, pools it with cash from other investors, and buys bonds of varying maturities.

Sounds pretty harmless.

The problem with bond funds is not in the buying, but in the selling. When investors sell their bond funds, the manager must generally sell bonds to pay the investors. The problem is that bond prices change; so, the manager might have to sell some bonds that you personally would have held to maturity.

How does this affect you? Consider this: You want to hold bonds for income and stability; but, in bond funds, your income and stability is directly affected by the actions of other investors. If a ton of people are buying into your bond fund today, your manager will be forced to buy bonds for you in a low interest environment. Then, when those same investors want to get out of that bond fund in five years — and if interest rates are higher — your manager might have to sell those low interest, now low priced bonds at a loss.

At the end of the day, you got a raw deal.

Instead, focus on buying individual bonds with the goal of holding them until maturity. If you buy a high quality bond offering a 5.5% yield until June of 2009, you know exactly what to expect — a 5.5% return for two years, and a definite dollar amount upon maturity, regardless of how happy or scared other investors are.

In short, don't let the panic and fear of other investors determine your return if your goal is stability, income, and a defined return.

Second, Realize That Volatility Is Here To Stay.

I'll admit — 6% or 8% daily swings in the markets are out of line. Still, volatility is here to stay. If you recall from this earlier post, the average number of daily transactions in the markets have grown 562% over the past ten years. Every day, 4.4 billion transactions occur, each moving a stock price in a certain direction.

Over the past two weeks, this number has grown to more than 8 billion transactions. If you are waiting for things to calm down, you'll be waiting a long time. There is simply too much excited money floating around to ever return us to consistently small and "comfortable" movements.

If 36% losses make you sick to your stomach, it's time for a reality check and a new strategy. Diversification (ie. holding a bunch of investments) is not the key — asset allocation is what will help you sleep at night.

When you are putting money to work in stocks, you must have a completely iron constitution. If watching your portfolio drop 50% will make you nervous, you shouldn't be 100% invested in stocks. Nobody likes 50% drops and we'd love to avoid them whenever possible; but, if you're 100% invested and prices drop quickly with no fundamental change in your businesses, you'll suffer some big temporary losses in your portfolio.

Combating Volatility the Intelligent Way

Many advisors will tell you that "diversification" will help mitigate losses and maximize returns. Then, they sell you a mutual fund that holds hundreds or thousands of stocks.

It doesn't make sense.

If the key to growing and preserving wealth (as Buffett has said) is putting your money into great investments and great prices, how can it make sense to buy a basket of great, mediocre, and bad companies at great, mediocre, and bad prices?

[i]As of June 30, AllianceBernstein Holding LP; ClearBridge Advisors, a subsidiary of Legg Mason Inc.; Fidelity Management & Research LLC; Barclays PLC unit Barclays Global Investors NA; Wellington Management Co.; and State Street Global Advisors were the mutual-fund managers with the largest stakes in Lehman's stock, according to FactSet.[/i]

So said the Wall Street Journal on September 16, 2008. While most of the funds did not comment, Vanguard's Rebecca Cohen had this to say:

[i]If you look at the absolute number of shares, we end up as one of the larger holders of Lehman...but on a relative basis, it's a relatively small portion of our funds.[/i]

Oops. We lost hundreds of millions of dollars of your money; but hey, you were diversified. You only lost a little (even though you shouldn't have lost anything in Lehman).

The intelligent way to combat volatility is to realize how much volatility you can handle, and then invest the rest in bonds. If you take a step back and realize that 50% losses are possible, then you have a base for building your portfolio.

Comfortable with a 10% drop, but not a 15% drop? Invest 20% in stocks and 80% in bonds and cash. Okay with a 25% drop but not a 30% drop? Put half of your money in stocks and half in bonds.

Focus on intelligently allocating your portfolio, not on broadly diversifying into more and more mediocre and bad investments. After all, [b]those broadly diversified, armchair investor stock and index funds are down just as much — if not more — than the markets right now.[/b]

Don't Change a Darn Thing in Your Approach

It is times like these that many investors panic and change their investment strategy in stocks. The fact that the markets are down does not change the fact that:

1. stocks are pieces of businesses with intrinsic values;
2. the value is the amount of cash that can be taken out of the business during its remaining life; and,
3. price follows value, even if it takes a few years for that to occur.

Stock market volatility

When we bought Johnson & Johnson last year, we looked sheepish, as though JNJ was a boring buy at $62 or so. A few months later, we looked really smart as JNJ topped $72 a share. Today, it was down as much as 14% from its near-$73 high, and many people are kicking themselves thinking, "Boy, I wish I took my profits $10 ago."

Why did we buy Johnson & Johnson at $62? Because we saw more than $62 — and more than $72 — of value. As the company's value continues to grow, we have to sit back patiently until Mr. Market is ready to realize it.

It may take a few months; it may be years.

Finally, Realize That It Will Be Better In a Few Years

I wish the internet was around in the 1970s. From its peak on January 11, 1973, the Dow began a two year, 47% slide from 1,067 to its December 9, 1974 low of 570. With no internet or stock market channel, most people continued on saving and investing, cognizant of the losses but not completely panicked or terrified.

Today, the doomsday crowd is calling for the end of the world and a total and final financial collapse. If we were to drop 47% from our high, the Dow would be 2,300 points lower at 7,568. Possible? Absolutely. Anything is possible.

But, like we did after the Great Depression and the 47% drop in 1973 and 1974, and like after so many other times throughout history, we will get through this, great businesses will be more valuable five- and ten-years from now, and price will eventually follow value.

Believe me — there are some very attractive bargains developing in this market, and you should look for them the same way you looked for them when the Dow was at 14,000.

International Blue Chips on sale

Monday, October 6, 2008

Wow

the streets (Bay and Wall) are running with blood.

I put in a bid for more BAM.A shares at $20 after a prior bid was filled at $25.

I'm trying to shore up some capital to buy initial stakes in PKX and DEO, both excellent wide moat long term plays that will survive a severe and protracted global slowdown IMHO.

Saturday, October 4, 2008

PHG: Phillips is too cheap to ignore


As I mentioned in my summary last month, I'm not a big fan of huge conglomerates. Too complicated, too hard to understand and assign value to the business.

Royal Phillips Electronics NV (ADR) ticker PHG is such a beast but it attracted me for a number of reasons:

  • it was simplifying and focusing its portfolio
  • it was becoming a major player in the "green energy" high margin LED lighting consumer sphere and medical imaging sector (see the cardiac CT above-- cool, eh?)
  • it had an excellent balance sheet D:E 0.16 Current ratio > 1.5 interest coverage > 17x and they have $8/share of cash in the bank
  • a decent dividend of 3.3% yield and only 8% payout ratio (divi is sustainable & lots of room for increasing it)
  • a global footprint

Since then earnings have been a bit sluggish; however, it is respectably profitable with a ROE of 15% and decent cash flows of 1.7 B dollars/annum. Double digit net margins to date and management expects these to improve as the product mix changes over to the higher margin stuff they sell in their medical device and lighting portfolios.

Since I started buying it at $40 and $35 dollars/share the share price has slowly sunk down to $26/share.

Look at these eye popping valuations:

  • P/E ratio of 3 (!)
  • P/B of 0.8
  • P/Cash Flow of 4.8
  • PEG <1
It's being priced as if it were an investment bank sinking in massive debt and begging for a bail out! That's craziness. After it's acquisition of Genlyte, it has the vast majority of the market share for lighting in North America. With a great balance sheet, it deserves better and it will be revalued closer to $40/share down the line IMHO.

PHG is not a great company. It's management's execution is mediocre to above average at this point. It's just massively undervalued right now considering it has the resources to withstand a prolonged recession and perhaps even a depression if that's in the offing for us.

I'd buy at <$30 (it's $26 today!) and hold for up to 3 years. Unless I'm impressed that PHG becomes a great company, I intend to sell at $55 or greater and not hold for the very long term.

l

Friday, October 3, 2008

A notorious bear who has done very well recently


Prem Watsa's FP interview. He is very bright and always has had extreme and mostly negative views on the global economy and stock markets i.e. he predicted 10 out of the last 3 bear markets.

"The Bear argument always sounds more intelligent." Charlie Munger

Read it but don't be too scared by it or make any hasty investment decisions. Nobody knows what is going to happen from here. Cheap and safe investments historically have paid off hugely when bought while there is blood running on Wall St.--- clearly the case right now. The toughest part right now is determining what is safe in such extreme conditions.

Prem Watsa's interview.

note: Mr. Watsa is a contemporary of Francis Chou, my favourite mutual fund manager. I don't believe Mr. Chou is completely in agreement with the apocalyptic viewpoint of Mr. Watsa; however, he is a perpetual pessimist and has invested in many of the same equities Mr. Watsa has in the past i.e. Torstar. Chou filed with the Ontario SEC to be allowed to purchase CDS but a bureaucratic delay prevented him from executing the trade (that made FFX several billion in one fell swoop!). Fairfax is also the largest holder of Chou Associates, Chou's main balanced fund. I suspect that they must have a collegial relationship and it shows in their investment decisions.

Disclaimer: my wife and I both own Chou's funds and they make up a large proportion of our portfolio. Chou performs best in bear markets and I intend to hold these for the very long term.

Bogle wisdom

Thursday, October 2, 2008

Ponzio's notes on Monish Pabrai's presentation

Notes from the Pabrai Funds 2008 Annual Meeting

by Joe Ponzio

Mohnish Pabrai - Notes From The Pabrai Funds 2008 Annual Meeting

On September 13th, I attended the 2008 Pabrai Funds annual meeting held here in Chicago. I met a few F Wall Street visitors and, unfortunately, missed meeting up with a few others. I must say that I am amazed at how many "Early Buffett" partnerships are out there.

For the explosive growth of these types of partnerships, I give 100% of the credit to Mohnish Pabrai for structuring his partnerships like the early Buffett ones and bringing them to the public eye. (If that's Greek to you, or if you're Greek and that's Chinese, stay tuned because I'll explain "Early Buffett Partnerships" in a subsequent post.) Before Pabrai, few people knew what an "Early Buffett" partnership was.

But I digress (and I'll get back to these partnerships later). For now, let's look at the Pabrai Funds 2008 annual meeting.

A Look at Performance

Pabrai's funds are all about long-term performance; so, looking at his one-year or year-to-date performance is downright silly. Sure, he'd love to show positive gains every year; still, even Charlie Munger himself couldn't pull off that feat, and Munger's not too shabby of an investor!

You didn't know? Like Buffett, Munger ran a partnership in the 1960s and 1970s. And like Buffett, he killed the Dow — except in 1973 and 1974, when Munger's partners lost about 53% over those two years. By comparison, Pabrai is doing quite well.

(How did Uncle Charlie's story end? In 1975, Munger's partnership earned a 73% return. When Munger liquidated the partnership, he had compounded money at just over 24% for fourteen years, even through the 53% two year decline.)

Pabrai's Presentation

Mohnish Pabrai talked for about 30 minutes or so (could have been longer...I wasn't watching the clock) and then opened the floor up for questions. (He won't discuss current or prospective holdings; so, I couldn't ask some of your questions.)

Pinnacle Airlines. Mohnish admitted that he would have been better off spending $20 on a book than $20 million (or whatever the real loss was) on Pinnacle. Airlines are tough, and Pabrai admitted that he should have learned from Buffett's lesson (or "beating") on US Air.

The takeaway lesson on Pinnacle. Airlines are typically bad businesses to invest in. Like auto makers, airlines have thin profit margins, suffer from high capital expenditures, and have to compete on price. Most investors should stay away from airlines entirely.

Investing in China. I'll give you the "short short version" of Pabrai on investing in China:

It is said that they maintain three books: one for running the business, one for the government...and one for the owner's wife.

Pabrai does not plan on making any investments in Chinese companies (though I don't think he'd rule the right opportunity out just because it's in China). Instead, he continues to believe that there are plenty of opportunities in the US.

Delta Financial (and other financials). Pabrai said that the big mistake he made on this one was not figuring out the "lifeline" for Delta. That is, he didn't properly assess the outs for the company and his investment. He then had this to say about Delta and the financial crisis (as well as all debt):

If you depend on borrowed money, you have to worry about what world thinks of you everyday.

(This was actually a quote ripped from Buffett at the Berkshire annual meeting on May 3, 2008. I give an example of this "borrowed money" danger in this post.)

Think about it personally — until your house is paid off, you have to worry about what the banks think of you. If you carry credit card debt, you have to worry that your interest rate will shoot up because the credit card company's opinion of you and your "creditworthiness" has changed.

Back to Delta: Mohnish said very simply that he did not consider the fact that the credit/securitization markets would completely freeze up. In short, he was "unprepared for a 1 in 50 year event."

Berkshire Hathaway. Over the years, Pabrai has been using Berkshire as a "placeholder" of sorts for up to 10% of his portfolio's cash. He'll hold it for a few days to a few months, and figures that he's averaged about 12% a year on it. (Beats the heck out of cash!)

He also talked about Buffett and Munger's amazing ability to compound money, "adding a zero every ten years." That is to say, every ten years or so, they added another zero to Berkshire's price ($40 to $400 to $4,000 to $40,000).

A Change in Strategy

Pabrai did talk about making a change in his strategy over the past year or so. He is now focusing more on the jockey (management) than the horse (cold financials). I took it this way: Up until a year ago, Pabrai was more than happy to "cigar butt" invest — find underpriced assets regardless of their quality.

Today, he is shifting to a more 1980s Buffett-style approach — find strong businesses run by highly talented, shareholder-focused managers.

Pabrai's Current Portfolio

Looking at his portfolio, Pabrai sees the widest discount to intrinsic value today than at any other point in the history of his partnerships. Some positions are trading at just 25% of his estimation of intrinsic value.

What will cause convergence of price and value? Pabrai talked about two types of assets in the portfolio:

  • hard assets and book value;
  • future earnings streams and cash flows.


Hard Assets — the Frontline Example

When Pabrai purchased frontline, the market value was less than one half of the liquidation value — a situation that cannot persist forever. Eventually, that price must correct because:

  • Wall Street will recognize its mistake in improperly pricing the business; or,
  • Someone will also recognize that value and begin buying, pushing the price upwards.


If the business is generated positive cash flow every month, that gap between price and intrinsic value widens every month. The widening of that gap puts tremendous pressure for the price to move up.

As Mohnish put it, "It's Ben Graham 101." Eventually market value (price) and intrinsic value will converge.

Future Earnings Stream as a Value Driver

In this case, Mohnish used IPSCO as an example. He bought the company at less than three times free cash flow. Thus, if the price did not change in three years, the market cap would be less than the cash on the books of the business.

What does that mean?

Plants, Inventory, Future Earnings Streams, Growth, Management, Permits, Licenses, Talented Employees — all free!

That "obvious" value caused tremendous pressure for upward movement in price. Pabrai bought for $45 and sold for over $155.

(As an aside, Pabrai said many of his holdings are trading at low single-digit multiples of free cash flow.)

The Pabrai Meeting Summary

All in all, it was a wonderful meeting and evening. You might think that Pabrai would be sheepish or cautious considering his recent performance; but, seeing the man in person, you can easily see that he believes his recent performance is not a problem in strategy (a strategy with a long, successful history with many mangers throughout history) but a problem with market prices and action.

Regrettably, I missed the Warren roundtable. At the end of the evening, Mohnish sat at a table with ten or twelve other attendees (whoever wanted to) and discussed his experiences at lunch with Buffett. But, I'll end with some points Mohnish had thrown out about Buffett earlier in the evening:

1. Buffett is a very reasonable person — full of energy and passion. As Mohnish put it, he's the type of person that comes along once in a century, like Einstein or Ben Franklin.
2. Warren Buffett posited: In investing, you have to make tough choices. As a non-investment example...would you want to be the best lover in the world, but have the world think you're the worst? Or, would you rather be the worst lover in the world, but have the world think you're the best?
3. Finally, do what you love.

And I'll add some wisdom to that last one — wisdom that Buffett surely implied and that my father always told me:

To be the best at what you do, you have to do what you love. And if you're the best, the money will follow. And that's true whether you're saving lives or digging ditches.

Buffett's comments about the bailout and more

read the transcript here.

Buffett pulls the trigger again.

one may view it as material proof of his belief that the global economy will improve. It looks like the bail package will be finally voted in on Friday (with a little pork being passed around as usual). Doomsday may be averted, this time. lol.

IMHO, there are a few opportunities developing that "bear" close observation if you have capital on the sideline:

  1. American Express-- heading to the low 30's. a guru favourite with a great business plan that will almost certainly survive to fight another day.
  2. Brookfield Asset Management BAM-- a personal favourite. Still hasn't hit my target entry price of $25 CDN or lower (for the BAM.A.TO equity traded on the TSX, anyway). I have a standing bid at this level and am waiting patiently.
  3. Diageo DEO-- has hit my target entry of $69 or below, but my capital evaporated in that account (tax bill). I think this is a very safe long term investment with an excellent upside. I agree with Morningstar that it is trading at a 30-40% discount to FMV.
  4. Conocophillips COP-- I'm not as bullish on oil as many others but the fundamentals, management, Buffett stake and exposure to nat gas makes this company compelling. It is approaching my original entry price over 2 years ago!
  5. Seaboard Corp SEA-- if it were to drop below $1200, it would be irresistible.
  6. Hamburger Hafen HHULF.PK-- still hanging in there about 40 euros/$57 USD. I'm holding out for an entry stake at $55.
  7. Lloyds TSB Bank LYG-- the very large acquisition of HBOS and apparently opaque back room deals with the UK gov't is making the risk assessment of this investment a bit tough. I'm holding tight on my stake and considering add a bit when and if I get enough information about the bank's financial situation/liquidity status.