Friday, October 22, 2010

Stock of the Day: Xero Ltd



A significant move made today by Peter Thiel, the San Francisco based investor and Silicon Valley authority by investing $ NZ 4 million into Xero Ltd [XRO.NZX] has propelled Xero stock up by 20c or just over 13% today on higher than average volume of shares traded on a daily basis.

Peter Thiel is the founder of Paypal and one of the first investors in Facebook, so his investment in Xero and placement on the company's US Advisory Board is a positive impact for the company on the market and his involvement seems to be in terms of the expertise he can bring to growing the business in North America where it is currently relatively unknown.

The stock reached an all-time high today of $1.75 and is currently trading at $1.69. It has spent the last 2 years trading between $1.40 - $1.60, so it has bounced out of that range thanks to this latest positive news.

Investors might like to wait for tangible results from Peter Thiel's involvement before plunking down the hard earned but it looks to the outsider that this company might be starting to make a real impact within the business that it operates.

From CEO of Xero Rod Drury to me just a few minutes ago:

"With the platform investment coming together, as the market starts to build the next challenge is building US grade marketing skills. These guys will help."

Just remember investors, the market always overreacts to positive news, so if you are interested in buying you might want to leave it until the heat of this news wears off.

Of course this news is possibly materially positive for the company - someone with global influence and a penchant for picking tech winners to invest in - so it could just be the right time to take the plunge as Xero insiders have been telling me for a couple of years.

Happy investing.


Xero @ Share Investor

Rod Drury ready for the long-haul with Xero
Share Investor Interview: Xero's Rod Drury
Xero Ltd: Download full Company Analysis
Rod Drury on Xero and Growing Business
Xero set for surprise to the Market?
Love Xero?
Share Investor's 2010 Stock Picks
Stock of the Week: Xero Ltd

Discuss Xero @ Share Investor Forum
Download Xero Company Reports


Recommended Fishpond Reading

Crisis: One Central Bank Governor and the Global Financial Collapse

Buy The Intelligent Investor & more @ Fishpond.co.nz

Fishpond


c Share Investor 2010

Allan Hubbard Saga: Evidence of Fraud now Clear

The latest revelation made yesterday by South Canterbury Finance's receiver McGrathNicol included evidence of money provided to Allan Hubbard to invest in specific investments agreed to with the investors but then used for other more risky investing is clearly the most damning evidence yet that old Mr Hubbard was playing his shell games with others money in a very deliberate manner, rather than him being a victim of current financial circumstance, as his supporters still contend.

Even they have softened their support for him, perhaps now seeing the writing on the wall. In a statement desperately leaked to the mainstream media this Tuesday their supporters previous stance that Hubbard had done nothing wrong to now (he)"never intended to defraud anyone" and "or that he was completely responsible for the outcome"(s)

They are now saying in their statement that he might indeed have defrauded his customers and that he maybe partially responsible. That is a far cry from the complete innocence that they attributed to their pinup boy.

Of course, the revelation made public yesterday by SCF receivers clearly shows Hubbard intentionally pursued a fraudulent line when it came to investing SCF investors money.

McGrathNicol's evidence will be able to be used so that the SFO,the Securities Commission and the new Financial Markets Authority recently set up can prosecute in their specific roles as market regulators.

I am absolutely gobsmacked at the boldness and openness in which Mr Hubbard carried this out - it is clearly reminiscent of the Mark Hotchins , Bryers and Watsons of this world and they way they hoodwinked their clients.

I was skeptical about Hubbard being charged and found guilty of fraud a few weeks ago but this evidence clearly places the man in a position that will impossible for him to squirm out of.

They got him.


Related Share Investor Reading


Full SFO Statement on SCF Fraud Investigation
Download Grant Thornton Report 1
Download Grant Thornton Report 2
Download Grant Thornton Report 3


Allan Hubbard Saga: NBR VS the SFO
Allan Hubbard Saga: South Canterbury Finance to be investigated by the SFO
Allan Hubbard Saga: Third Grant Thornton Report
Allan Hubbard Saga: Will He Walk?
Allan Hubbard Saga: No Longer Bothered by Botherway
Allan Hubbard Saga: 60 Minutes Interview, Sept 23 2010
Allan Hubbard Saga: Supporters head to the exit door
Allan Hubbard Saga: Threats & the Mysterious PWC Report
Allan Hubbard Supporters: Conflict of Interest
VW Veneer reveals BMW heart
VIDEO: Jenni McManus Explains Allan Hubbard Collapse
Allan Hubbard Statement on SCF Receivership
VIDEO: Sandy Maier - full news conference on SCF Receivership
Market Alert: South Canterbury Finance to be placed in Receivership
Allan Hubbard: Ignorant Supporters Blissfully Unaware
Thornton Report 2: Allan Hubbard Guilty as Charged
Allan Hubbard: Full TV3 Interview - July 16 2010
Thornton Report: Allan Hubbard's Aorangi Securities
Bothered by Simon Botherway





c Share Investor 2010




Thursday, October 21, 2010

Guest Post: Bruce Sheppard - Picking a Share

It seems that me old mate Bruce Sheppard is heading off into the sunset and his burying his blog, Stirring the Pot.

I frequently read what he has to say on a number of topics and he is always entertaining in the extreme.

He is at his most entertaining and informative to me though when he is writing about investing and specifically writing about shares.and the stockmarket.

With this in mind you must read what he wrote back in August of this year about Picking a Share.

It is an excellent place to start before putting your hard earned moola at risk and will put beginners in the right place when in comes to investing in the stockmarket.

Please pay particular attention to the long term nature of his investment style.

Read on:

Picking a Share

Any investment is worth to you what it will return to you over its expected life. As you outlay cash to purchase such an investment, "return" to you means cash returns.

As most investments can expect to keep returning cash to you until they fail, and good ones don't fail, the income from such investments can eventually be regarded as an annuity.

Humans on the other hand expire, and thus every investment has a time horizon on it, not dictated by the investment, but dictated by the investor's own circumstances.

Thus every assessment of an investment's future cash back to you should include a notional sale at a point in the future that is tailored to your own investment horizon. For most this should not be less than five years or more than 10. This does not necessarily mean you sell the investment at any time during that period.

So in order to value an investment and determine if it is cheap, you have to assess the likely future cash flows of the business. So how do you do this?

Brokers and forecasts

If you are penny wise and using an online broker, consider changing to a full service broker. If you are a full service broker's client, you should receive the bi-annual research data that they produce which will include one, three and five year comprehensive forecasts for cash earnings and dividends for most of the large companies and some of the small ones too. In addition, if you are thinking of buying a share, if they have any research on it they will send it to you.

Now while the cash flows they produce are interesting, and I have had these for over 20 years now, beyond one year they are totally conjecture. There is no statistically significant correlation between forecasts of earnings and actual outcomes beyond at most two years. So the most you should look at is the one year forecast.

This forecast is generally prepared by the broker following a detailed review of the financials, and a discussion with management, and the board. The forecasts are thus in essence the management and board's forecasts, and the most you can expect from continuous disclosure is a poor shadow of this data.

Historical Data

Well at least this is fact rather than conjecture, or is it?

Profit or EPS is simply an opinion. Earnings are now so spun with Financial Reporting standards that it is difficult to rely on Earnings or Earnings per share either. This said the past is a better source of data than the conjecture about the future.

Even the cash flow statement can be gamed, interest received from borrowers for example, was it really received by the lending finance companies.

What you can believe however is two things only. The price you have to pay for the share - as that is the money you outlay, and the cash that has been paid back to shareholders as dividends over time. Dividends are real cash. Or are they? Sure some companies hoodwinked shareholders with dividends that they pay with borrowings, in which case such dividends are not sustainable into the future, but testing the sustainability of past returns is phase two after you have completed the first shift of opportunities to reduce the list.

The first pre-screen

With listed equities (private company investing requires a different approach) to determine what I want to look at in more detail, I have a simple ratio called the PEGY ratio. This is an extension of the James Slater PEG ratio which I found in his book the Zulu Principle.

The plus of this ratio is that it does not require you to do much work or for that matter to make any assumptions. It is simply a hard number assessment of the value of a particular share.

The ratio, and even me a mathophobe can do it:

PE/( G+Y).

PE = the published price earnings ratio.

G = Normalised EPS growth over 5 years turned into a percentage multiplied by 100.

Y = the current pre tax dividend per share divided by the current price multiplied by 100.

PE and Y you can get from your morning paper, G, requires you to do a bit of work, ie you have to go back over five years of financial statements and pick out five years of Normalised EPS and calculate the growth over five years and turn that into an effective compounding growth rate from year one to year five. So I only tend to do this for companies that actually do have a dividend yield, as the lower the dividend yield the higher the growth has to be to justify the investment and with NZ equities growth is hard to find.

The lower the result of this formula on the face of it the cheaper the investment is, and thus on the face of it, it might be a buying opportunity; the higher the ratio is, the less attractive an investment is.


For example - you can buy a company on a PE of 20 with a Yield of 5 percent and a growth rate of 5 percent, this has a score of two. Or you can buy a company on a PE of 12 with a yield of 10 percent and a growth rate of 5 percent, this is a score of .8. Which company would you prefer to buy?

Cautionary note

Now before you get carried away, the PE ratio and the Yield quoted in the paper is not always right. Sometimes you will see really low PE ratios and this is sometimes because they have used the reported profits, and not the normalised profits. So check it. Likewise sometimes they get confused about Imputation credits as well, and these are valuable.

Any score more than 1 is unlikely to be cheap and anything less than .5 may be a bargain.

This first skim is about the return side that you can expect from an investment, now the harder work begins, understand the risk.

In no particular order:

  • The risk of total failure.

  • The risk of adverse surprises to earnings or dividends.

  • The sustainability of dividends going forward.

  • The risk of fraud idleness or stupidity, i.e. the people.


So now to the second skim:

The first thing to look for is debt. In big companies debt is not like it is for us mortals, ie about security, it is about cash flow. So the key ratios for you to check around this are as follows:

  • Net interest bearing debt ( net of cash holdings)/ Earnings before interest tax and depreciation. ( EBITDA)


It will be a rare company that can sustain a score above 5 and a ratio of around 2.5 is, depending on income volatility likely to be safe enough. As soon as it goes over 3 you are taking a risk of total default at worst and income or return default at best.

  • Earnings before interest and tax/ Interest paid. ( interest cover)


$4 should be the minimum you would consider safe.

  • Debt/total tangible assets.


This is sometimes important, but if any of the other ratios look too risky is a good one to do as well. If the lending is less than 50 percent of tangible assets even if the income is currently crappy or if the margin is a bit thin to cope with an adverse event the tangible asset backing might hold off a total default.

The list should be smaller now.

The third skim is around the risk of dividend default.

Three key things.

  • The first is the dividend cover ratio which is the net profit after tax/ dividend ( net of ICA or other tax credits , but excluding Resident withholding tax).


A ratio of 2:1 is normally pretty safe, a ratio of $1.20 to $1 will normally indicate a high risk of dividend volatility especially if debt is also high.

  • The next is earnings volatility. This is the maximum adverse movement EPS in the last five years.


It is earnings that fund dividends, high volatility of earnings and low dividend cover would indicate that there is a high risk that dividends will be volatile and might drop before they revert to trend.

  • And the final one which should always be checked is the operating cash flow to dividend cover ratio. This is operating cash flow / Dividends net of ICA taxes etc.


It is cash that pays dividends , and if it looks a bit tight but everything else looks ok, you should be alright for at least one year.

Now in terms of your filtering you need to set your own filters, but mine go like this:

  • A PEGY ratio of more than .9 strike it off the list.

  • Debt, more than three times EBITDA, or exceeding 80 percent of NTA cross it out.

  • Earnings per share volatility greater than 30 percent, this is the biggest one year adverse fall in earnings in the last five years strike it off the list.

  • The sum of five years' operating cash flows should be greater than 70 percent of reported profits, and should be at least $1.50 for each dollar of dividends paid over the last five years, if not strike it off the list.

With these filters the list will be a short list, and now the real work begins.

Assuming you have nothing on your list and you are still keen to invest move the parameters by 10 percent. If more than one on your list, then rank them from the lowest PEGY ratio, as that is the most cheap stock relative to risk levels you are prepared to bear.

Now you are going to do some work on the company.

What do they do, how do they do it, why would a customer buy their product or service, how do they sell it what is the selling process, how do they reward the team to make money, who are the leading managers , who are the directors who are the major shareholders what are their track records?

To start with get the last three years annual reports, start with the oldest, read the Chairman's and CEO's reports. Write down the key predictions and outlooks, map it to outcomes. Check what they have said they will be doing , strategically, see if they did it. You are looking for people who take risks, who have at least some reliability of forecasting and say what they will do and do what they say. The most recent report has to have some element of optimism about it, and there should be no adverse continuous disclosure announcements.

Now before you buy you need to assess the likely return you will make on this investment, ignoring gearing. The factors are these dividend, earnings and growth of each over a timeline.

How much is enough of a return to justify the risks you have accepted is mute point and one that investors in finance junk ignored.

My base line is 8 percent for any equity, being double the tax paid risk free rate of return from cash, very roughly. I then increase this by the amount of volatility, so 25 percent volatility increases the hurdle rate to 10 percent. I then increase it if debt is high, again I calculate a base line figure. Let's assume the target has debt 15 percent higher than base case, or earnings are not correlated with cash, again if out of line, by how much as a percentage, or if the cash or profit cover of dividends is skinny again by how much. Then I add these percentages together, say the sum of these is 80 percent, then increase the base line yield by 80 percent. The required yield on this investment is 18 percent. If on a far wind the prospective yield is more than this, then the share is worth buying, if with the rubbish factor taken in for the first year, it is still above the base line equity yield it is still worth buying. Other wise pass for the moment and set yourself a target price. If you have to wait six months, learn patience, but before you put in the buy order make sure nothing has changed.

In the words of Buffett, the market rewards the patient at the expense of the impatient.

Related Share Investor Reading

Stockmarket Education: How do you buy shares?
Stockmarket Education: What is a Share?


Stockmarket Education

Stockmarket Dictionary
Stockbrokers: What you should know before choosing one
10 Basic questions to ask before investing
How the Stockmarket works
Understanding Risk
Watch Your Risk Tolerance
Stockmarket Education: What is a Share?
What Moves the Stockmarket?
7 Signs of Shareholder Friendly Management
Financial Media For Investors
Dividends in detail

Related Links

NZX - How to Invest


New From Fishpond

A Perfect Gentleman: The Sir Wilson Whineray Story

A Perfect Gentleman: The Sir Wilson Whineray Story


Fishpond


c Share Investor 2010

Actors Union actions a blast from the past

Well, sniveling actor union members like Jennifer Ward-Lealand, Bruce Hopkins, and Robyn Malcolm have managed to bully, manipulate and organise the movement of the Hobbit sequel out of New Zealand to somewhere in Eastern Europe.

They wanted to make a point and it looks like they have. The New Zealand film industry now appears to be on the edge of the abyss thanks to the grandstanding, sniveling wet left bullying of Peter Jackson.

The actors union wanted collective bargaining on future film contracts when this couldn't happen as it was an illegal practice due to New Zealand employment laws.

Their move has now cost the country the thick end of $500 million for the Hobbit movie and billions more for future movies that will no doubt end up being made in Europe.

As happened to this country from the 1950s to the 1980s and a pathetic resurgence by bully boy teachers unions today, the only outcome for the respective industries bullied by those unions are always negative for everyone concerned.

In the 1950s the Watersiders union brought the country to its knees, while every union had a go in the 1970s and 80s and had similar deleterious effects on the country and its economy.

The teachers union has brought the education system to its knees and The NZ actors union has now single handedly ruined the film industry here in a few short weeks of stupidity.

The very people unions profess to "look after", the workers, are the very ones who end up with the short end of the stick and the only winners seem to be the union heads who manage to get attention and make a name for themselves.

It seems the actors union are out of touch with the realities of the economy today and are stuck in a 1950s time warp that has no relevance today. We are suffering through the worst economic conditions in more than 70 years. They should feel extremely lucky to work at all.

Their selfishness has cost thousands of actors and technicians jobs now and into the future.

Pathetic, left wing bullshit.



Bookmark and Share