Event-Driven

In this briefing:

1. Scout24 Tender Offer Launched: Price Still Not Quite Full
2. Denso Continues to Strengthen Its Investment CASE with Acquisitions
3. Xenith Is Running Out Of Excuses
4. Nissan Governance Structure Report Out: Fog Dissipating Slowly. Sunny in Summer. Storms Next Winter?
5. DHICO Rights Offer: Arb Yields for Early Arb Traders & Trade Approach for Late Arb Traders

1. Scout24 Tender Offer Launched: Price Still Not Quite Full

In December (13 Dec after trading hours), the FT had an article noting that Germany’s leading property classifieds firm Scout24 AG (G24 GR) (also known for auto classifieds across Europe) was possibly looking to sell itself and that PE firms were lining up to bid. Silver Lake, which had bought British player ZPG (which operates property portals Zoopla and PrimeLocation) for $2.8bn in July 2018, was mentioned as a bidder. Once owned by Deutsche Telekom, control of Scout24 was sold to Blackstone and Hellman & Friedman LLC in 2013-14 (H&F spent €1.5 billion to take a 70% stake in 2013, and Blackstone bought a stake of undisclosed size in 2014), and they listed the company in 2015 with an initial market cap of €3.2 billion. The IPO was €1.16 billion and both sold down, with H&F fully exiting in a placement in 2016.

The share price had been doing well until Q3 last year when German lawmakers, anxious with skyrocketing property prices, started looking at revamping the structure of real estate transaction costs so that they were borne by sellers rather than loaded onto buyers. The shares fell.

A combination of Blackstone and Hellman & Friedman LLC launched an non-LBO LBO for Scout24 AG (G24 GR) in mid-January at €43.50/share (€4.7 billion) which was about an 8% premium to the then-current market price, which had already been juiced because of speculation starting after the FT article in late December. The company rejected the Offer saying it was too low. 

The two buyers came back in mid-February with a Takeover Offer priced at €46.00/share, 5.7% higher than January’s foray and 27% higher than the level pre-FT article; that was about 25x earnings and 28x 2019e cashflow, which is a bit lower than Silver Lake’s ZPG buy multiple. Both Scout24’s Management Board and Supervisory Board agreed to support the offer and said they believed that the transaction is in the best interest of the Company, and an Investment Agreement was signed between the three companies.

The unusual thing about this deal is that the two PE firms are looking to buy a minimum of 50% plus one share, and leave the company listed. The shares jumped to €46 and have been trading at just below to slightly through, leaving many to think that this was a setup for a strategic buyer or possibly Silver Lake to come in over the top. 

The New News

Yesterday, the BidCo officially launched its Tender Offer at €46, due to run through 9th May.

More discussion below.

2. Denso Continues to Strengthen Its Investment CASE with Acquisitions

Denso Corp (6902 JP) announced this month that it has invested in the Seattle-based connected vehicle services pioneer- Airbiquity Inc. Airbiquity is one of the leading companies in the connected vehicle services sector and has been one of the companies that has continuously developed automotive telematics technology. This investment made by Denso follows its investment made in Quadric.io this year ( Stake in Quadric.io Following Renesas; Denso Attempts to Keep Chip Makers Close to Achieve AD Aims). As we previously mentioned, Denso is in full swing in its development in the autonomous driving field and next-generation technologies development. Thus, it wouldn’t be a surprise to see Denso emerge as the first mover in next-generation technologies such as AD and connectivity solutions. According to Denso, its investment worth $5m in Airbiquity is expected to accelerate the development of over-the-air (OTA) systems for wirelessly updating automotive software from a remote location. OTA systems are methods of distributing new software, configuration settings, and providing updates to the electronic device in use, for instance, a car navigation system in a vehicle. These OTA systems which have been increasingly used to update the software of such multimedia products in a vehicle are now gaining more prominence given the emergence of next-generation technologies such as electrification, EV and connectivity. We also believe that Denso’s Stake in Airbiquity is likely to accelerate Denso’s transition in its business model to be a leading software solution provider. Thus, its series of investments such as in Tohoku Pioneer EG, JOLED, ThinCI, Quadric, and now Airbiquity are indicative of the decisiveness of its change in business model and moves towards achieving next-generation technology leadership.

3. Xenith Is Running Out Of Excuses

When IPH Ltd (IPH AU) gate-crashed Xenith Ip (XIP AU)/Qantm Intellectual Property (QIP AU)‘s marriage of equals, submitting a scheme proposal comprising cash (A$1.28) and IPH shares (0.1056 IPH shares) or A$1.97/share, versus QANTM’s all-cash offer (1.22 QANTM), the key risk to IPH’s Offer was ACCC opposing its Offer. As announced today, ACCC will not oppose.

This decision was largely expected and previously discussed here. Although IPH, QANTM, and Xenith are the only three ASX-listed intellectual property companies, privately owned companies collectively hold a larger market share – and growing – compared to the three listcos. The ACCC agrees and signed off on an IPH/XIP tie-up as it did on the 21 March, by not opposing the merger of XIP and QANTM.

XIP acknowledged the ACCC decision resolves a major uncertainty, but stops short of supporting IPH’s offer as there still exists a number of concerns as detailed in its 19 March announcement. IPH responded to those concerns on the 20 March. These include:

1. Shareholders of Xenith will hold an immaterial % of the merged IPH entity compared to QANTM.
   • IPH’s scrip portion accounted for (then) 35% of its Offer (now ~37%), shares which have superior liquidity versus QANTM given IPH’s position in the ASX200. 
   • The cash portion also provides added certainty on value into the Offer compared to QANTM’s all scrip offer.
2. The control premium as at 11 March is insufficient.
   • Probably the most contentious concern. QANTM’s all-scrip offer on the 27 November backed out an indicative offer price of $1.598/share or a 28.4% premium to last close.
   • IPH’s $1.97/share indicative offer (a 60% premium to XIP’s undisturbed price, and a 31% premium to the independent expert’s mid-point fair value (page 55)) compared to QANTM’s indicative offer of $2.03 immediately before IPH’s announcement.
   • Circumstances have changed materially since, with IPH’s cash/scrip offer now worth $2.02 as I type, versus $1.67 for QANTM.
     

     

     Source: CapIQ
3. The increased execution risk concerning ACCC. Now a non-issue.
4. It is questionable whether employees, controlling 40% of Xenith, would support the offer.
   • Employees are free to decide on what they consider to be the most compelling Offer. IPH has offered to hold discussions with XIP employees. 
5. CGT rollover will likely be lower via the large cash element under IPH’s offer vs. QANTM’s all scrip offer.
   • Maybe. Possibly. An all-scrip offer typically affords greater rollover relief. Nevertheless, Xenith is trading below its 2015 IPO price of $2.72/share.

With IPH’s 19.9% blocking stake, the QANTM/Xenith scheme is a non-starter. Xenith still should engage with IPH. The scheme meeting to decide on the QANTM Offer is scheduled for the 3 April.

4. Nissan Governance Structure Report Out: Fog Dissipating Slowly. Sunny in Summer. Storms Next Winter?

Six weeks ago I wrote that Nissan’s governance outlook was “Foggy Now, Sunny Later.” I said “Governance changes are afoot, with a steady flow of developments likely coming in March, April, May, and June.”

The last couple of months have seen numerous media articles about the process of Nissan Motor (7201 JP) and Renault SA (RNO FP) rebuilding their relationship. There have been visits to Tokyo by Renault’s new chairman of the board of directors Jean-Dominique Senard, and visits to Paris and Amsterdam by the CEOs of Nissan and Mitsubishi Motors (7211 JP). 

There have been many suggestions in French and European newspapers in the interim that Jean-Dominique Senard would be the obvious choice as a representative director of Nissan. There have been other articles out there in the Japanese press suggesting what conclusions the committee might come to as to what outcomes should result. The difference is notable. The French side still wants control. The Japanese/Nissan/committee side sees the need to fix governance.

Today there was a report in the FT suggesting that Renault “wants” to restart merger talks with Nissan and “aims to restart merger talks with Nissan within 12 months.” It should be noted that these two sentences are not exactly the same. It may still be that France wants Renault to do so, and therefore Renault aims to do so. The same article revealed past talks on Renault merging with FCA but France putting a stop to it and a current desire to acquire another automaker – perhaps FCA – after dealing with Nissan. 

Also today, the long-awaited Nissan Special Committee for Improving Governance (SCIG) report was released. It outlines some of the issues of governance which existed under Ghosn- both the ones which got him the boot, and the structural governance issues which were “discovered” after he got the boot. 

There are clear patches in the fog. Two things shine through immediately. 

1. Governance weaknesses under Ghosn were inexcusably bad. Worse than previously reported.
2. The recommendations to the board now are, on the whole, pretty decent. Some are sine qua non changes – formation of nomination and compensation committees, whistleblower reporting to the audit committee and not the CEO, and greater checks and balances. Some are stronger in terms of the independence of Nissan from Renault: the committee recommends a majority of independent board members, an independent chairman, and no representative directors from Renault, Mitsubishi, or principal shareholders.

There are, however, other issues which were not addressed, which for Nissan’s sake probably should be addressed. Yesterday was a first step on what will be a 3-month procession of news about the way Nissan will address the SCIG report’s recommendations, the process by which it will choose new directors when it does not have an official nomination committee, and the AGM in June to propose and confirm new directors. Then they will start their jobs in July. 

The fog looks to lift slowly. And one may anticipate some better weather beyond. But business concerns remain a threat, and while relations appear to be getting better after the departure of Carlos Ghosn and the arrival of Jean-Dominique Senard, it is not clear that a Franco-Japanese storm is not brewing in the distance.

More below.

5. DHICO Rights Offer: Arb Yields for Early Arb Traders & Trade Approach for Late Arb Traders

• As well expected, DHICO was heavily shorted yesterday, ex-rights day. We had a heavy buying movement by short-term arb traders at both local and foreign on DHICO right before ex-rights. As shown in the second table, yesterday’s shorting was mostly done by short-term traders again both local and foreign alike.
• These early arb traders had presumably bought DHICO shares at ₩8,076 on Mar 25~26. They then disposed shares at ₩6,974 yesterday. They then shorted the same amount of shares additionally at ₩6,983. As a result, at ceiling price ₩5,550 their yield is virtually fixed at 4.10%. If the offering price goes down to the bottom of ₩5,000 which is a very high possibility at this point, their yield will go up as high as 10.91%.
• For those who haven’t made early moves, there are now two options to play this event. You can either trade now and hope that subscription right price won’t hit breaking price level or wait until Apr 19~25 subscription rights period for a perfectly risk-free entry point. At the current price ₩6,800, breaking price for subscription rights is still at a comfortable level. That is, I’d make trades right now by shorting DHICO shares.

→ DHICO price just got down nearly 3%. At this reduced price, below are updated numbers for late arb traders’ arb yield. To me, it still seems we won’t be in a losing position if we make trades now. But we’d better hurry up.

In this briefing:

1. Hanergy’s Hobson’s Choice
2. Hyundai Motor Share Class: Time to Short Common & Long Pref

1. Hanergy’s Hobson’s Choice

On the 23 October last year, the Board of Hanergy Mobile Energy Holdings Group Limited (HMEH), Hanergy Thin Film Power (566 HK)‘s majority shareholder, announced an intention to privatise the company at “no less than HK$5/share” via cash or scrip. Over a full week later, Hanergy acknowledged the proposal.

Following this privatisation, Hanergy would be listed on China’s A-share market. The indicative offer valued Hanergy at ~US$27bn.  Hanergy has been suspended since 20 May 2015 and last traded at $3.91/share.

Hanergy has now announced the intention of HMEH to privatise the company by way of a Scheme. The ultimate intention of HMEH still remains the listing of Hanergy’s business in China.

The rub is that the consideration under the Scheme will be in the form of one special purpose vehicle share (SPV) per Hanergy share.  To this: 

it is not certain whether the A-Share Listing can be achieved. If the A-Share Listing cannot be completed, the Independent Shareholders will be holding onto unlisted SPV Shares for which there is no exchange platform for transfers. Even if the A-Share Listing is completed, there is no certainty as to
(a) when and how the SPV will be able to dispose of the A-Share Listco Shares;
(b) at what price the A-Share Listco Shares can be sold; and
(c) when the cash exit can be available to the Independent Shareholders, via the proposed A-Share Listing.

Upon consultation with the Executive and given the above uncertainties, the Offeror is required not to attribute any monetary value to
(i) the Proposal and
(ii) any potential cash exit for the Independent Shareholders.

The announcement does not stipulate the jurisdiction of the SPV, only that it may be established in a jurisdiction apart from Hong Kong. That itself is a risk.

Long-suffering shareholders, who comprise 32.49% of shares out, have the dubious honour of holding SPV  shares which may remain in A-share pre-listing purgatory; or should the Scheme fail/lapse, hold unlisted shares if Hanergy fails to resume trading by end-July 2019, as per recently introduced HKEx guidelines. Such an outcome affords HMEH the flexibility to squeeze out minorities at a bargain price.

(A Hobson’s choice is a free choice in which only one thing is offered. In this instance, each outcome is undesirable.)

2. Hyundai Motor Share Class: Time to Short Common & Long Pref

• Common is widening pref discount today as it is generating the highest gain mainly on the Elliott pushing. As of now (1PM in Korea time), Common and 1P/2PB gain difference is nearly 1.5%p. This is putting price ratio at nearly 120D high. On a 20D MA, both Common/1P and Common/2PB are above 200% of σ. We see this level for the first time since mid Dec last year.
• It is unlikely that Elliott’s ₩4.5tril dividend demand will get shareholder approval in the upcoming Mar 22 AGM. But it is enough to create a market mood that Hyundai Motor will hand out more generous shareholder friendly measures. Generally, common gets favored market sentiment as we move into AGM cycle. This time should be different. Each time Elliott factor came in, HM Pref tended to outperform Common.
• This should be time again for HM Pref to shine more. Both 1P and 2PB are sufficiently undervalued relative to Common. Div yield difference to Common is also at the highest for both pref types. I’d go short Common and long 1P or 2PB now. 1P seems a little more safe bet. But 2PB is more liquid. Either way wouldn’t go terribly wrong.

In this briefing:

1. Hyundai Motor Share Class: Time to Short Common & Long Pref

1. Hyundai Motor Share Class: Time to Short Common & Long Pref

• Common is widening pref discount today as it is generating the highest gain mainly on the Elliott pushing. As of now (1PM in Korea time), Common and 1P/2PB gain difference is nearly 1.5%p. This is putting price ratio at nearly 120D high. On a 20D MA, both Common/1P and Common/2PB are above 200% of σ. We see this level for the first time since mid Dec last year.
• It is unlikely that Elliott’s ₩4.5tril dividend demand will get shareholder approval in the upcoming Mar 22 AGM. But it is enough to create a market mood that Hyundai Motor will hand out more generous shareholder friendly measures. Generally, common gets favored market sentiment as we move into AGM cycle. This time should be different. Each time Elliott factor came in, HM Pref tended to outperform Common.
• This should be time again for HM Pref to shine more. Both 1P and 2PB are sufficiently undervalued relative to Common. Div yield difference to Common is also at the highest for both pref types. I’d go short Common and long 1P or 2PB now. 1P seems a little more safe bet. But 2PB is more liquid. Either way wouldn’t go terribly wrong.

In this briefing:

1. Hyundai Motor Share Class: Time to Short Common & Long Pref
2. Yungtay Noises Haven’t Produced a Result Yet

1. Hyundai Motor Share Class: Time to Short Common & Long Pref

• Common is widening pref discount today as it is generating the highest gain mainly on the Elliott pushing. As of now (1PM in Korea time), Common and 1P/2PB gain difference is nearly 1.5%p. This is putting price ratio at nearly 120D high. On a 20D MA, both Common/1P and Common/2PB are above 200% of σ. We see this level for the first time since mid Dec last year.
• It is unlikely that Elliott’s ₩4.5tril dividend demand will get shareholder approval in the upcoming Mar 22 AGM. But it is enough to create a market mood that Hyundai Motor will hand out more generous shareholder friendly measures. Generally, common gets favored market sentiment as we move into AGM cycle. This time should be different. Each time Elliott factor came in, HM Pref tended to outperform Common.
• This should be time again for HM Pref to shine more. Both 1P and 2PB are sufficiently undervalued relative to Common. Div yield difference to Common is also at the highest for both pref types. I’d go short Common and long 1P or 2PB now. 1P seems a little more safe bet. But 2PB is more liquid. Either way wouldn’t go terribly wrong.

2. Yungtay Noises Haven’t Produced a Result Yet

After almost three months of preparation after the initial news came out in October, Hitachi Ltd (6501 JP) launched its Tender Offer for Yungtay Engineering (1507 TT) in mid-January 2019. 

The background of the two companies’ relationship, the board kerfuffle last year, and some detail on the financials and the growth of the Chinese mainland elevator market was discussed extensively in Going Up! Hitachi Tender for Yungtay Engineering (1507 TT)at the end of October. When the Tender Offer was confirmed as launched, additional details were provided in Hitachi Tender for Yungtay Engineering Launches.

Since then, there has been a litany of small “nuisance” events which so far have not resulted in any changes to the terms of the Tender Offer, but keeping a watchful eye is recommended.

In this briefing:

1. Hyundai Motor Share Class: Time to Short Common & Long Pref
2. Yungtay Noises Haven’t Produced a Result Yet
3. Kosaido (7868 JP) TOB Extended

1. Hyundai Motor Share Class: Time to Short Common & Long Pref

• Common is widening pref discount today as it is generating the highest gain mainly on the Elliott pushing. As of now (1PM in Korea time), Common and 1P/2PB gain difference is nearly 1.5%p. This is putting price ratio at nearly 120D high. On a 20D MA, both Common/1P and Common/2PB are above 200% of σ. We see this level for the first time since mid Dec last year.
• It is unlikely that Elliott’s ₩4.5tril dividend demand will get shareholder approval in the upcoming Mar 22 AGM. But it is enough to create a market mood that Hyundai Motor will hand out more generous shareholder friendly measures. Generally, common gets favored market sentiment as we move into AGM cycle. This time should be different. Each time Elliott factor came in, HM Pref tended to outperform Common.
• This should be time again for HM Pref to shine more. Both 1P and 2PB are sufficiently undervalued relative to Common. Div yield difference to Common is also at the highest for both pref types. I’d go short Common and long 1P or 2PB now. 1P seems a little more safe bet. But 2PB is more liquid. Either way wouldn’t go terribly wrong.

2. Yungtay Noises Haven’t Produced a Result Yet

After almost three months of preparation after the initial news came out in October, Hitachi Ltd (6501 JP) launched its Tender Offer for Yungtay Engineering (1507 TT) in mid-January 2019. 

The background of the two companies’ relationship, the board kerfuffle last year, and some detail on the financials and the growth of the Chinese mainland elevator market was discussed extensively in Going Up! Hitachi Tender for Yungtay Engineering (1507 TT)at the end of October. When the Tender Offer was confirmed as launched, additional details were provided in Hitachi Tender for Yungtay Engineering Launches.

Since then, there has been a litany of small “nuisance” events which so far have not resulted in any changes to the terms of the Tender Offer, but keeping a watchful eye is recommended.

3. Kosaido (7868 JP) TOB Extended

As discussed in previous insights, Kosaido Co Ltd (7868 JP) is currently the subject of a TOB (Takeover Bid) by an SPV established by Bain to acquire all the shares outstanding. This has been discussed in three different insights so far.
  ❖ Smallcap Kosaido (7868 JP) Tender Offer: Wrong Price But Whaddya Gonna Do?
  ❖ Kosaido: Activism Drives Price 30+% Through Terms
  ❖ Kosaido TOB: Situation Gets Weird – Activists+Independent Opposition to MBO 

The TOB started as a lowball price TOB with the explanation that the MBO was needed to rehabilitate the printing/information business which makes up three-quarters of consolidated revenue of the company and is the basis upon which the company was founded decades ago.

A read between the lines showed quite quickly that the more ostensible reason for taking the company private was to be able to own 61% of the company which provided the other 25% of consolidated revenue and made up materially all of the operating profit of Kosaido over the past few years. And that business was being bought at just over half of book while the rest of the business was being bought for effectively zero.

My first insight questioned that despite “independent directors” not doing so, and an activist in the form of Yoshiaki Murakami’s firm Reno KK did something about it, quickly buying just under 10% of the company in the two weeks after announcement. On that news, the stock shot up to 30-40% through terms, and fell back, but since it started rising above terms and peaking, it has not fallen below about 15% through terms.

The New News

YESTERDAY, the directors of Kosaido released an amendment to their Statement of Support of the Tender Offer adding a phrase to the effect that “subsequent to the initial meeting where all the statutory auditors had expressed support, at the Board Meeting on the 25th of February, Independent Statutory Auditor Nakatsuji-[san] expressed his opposition to the Tender Offer.” This follows his notice of opposition on the 19th.

TODAY, the Offeror announced an Amendment to the Tender Offer and was extending its Tender Offer by 7 business days – from 30 business days to 37 business days – which has the effect of changing the Closing Date from March 1 to March 12.

With the shares 20% through terms (¥738/share as I write) despite what appears to be no increase by the main activist in the last two weeks, the likelihood retail will tender at ¥610/share this looks like a situation where the deal may fail unless there is a bump.

But it would still be up for grabs. 

In this briefing:

1. Hyundai Motor Share Class: Time to Short Common & Long Pref
2. Yungtay Noises Haven’t Produced a Result Yet
3. Kosaido (7868 JP) TOB Extended
4. StubWorld: PCCW Is “Cheap” but Stub Ops Are Deteriorating

1. Hyundai Motor Share Class: Time to Short Common & Long Pref

• Common is widening pref discount today as it is generating the highest gain mainly on the Elliott pushing. As of now (1PM in Korea time), Common and 1P/2PB gain difference is nearly 1.5%p. This is putting price ratio at nearly 120D high. On a 20D MA, both Common/1P and Common/2PB are above 200% of σ. We see this level for the first time since mid Dec last year.
• It is unlikely that Elliott’s ₩4.5tril dividend demand will get shareholder approval in the upcoming Mar 22 AGM. But it is enough to create a market mood that Hyundai Motor will hand out more generous shareholder friendly measures. Generally, common gets favored market sentiment as we move into AGM cycle. This time should be different. Each time Elliott factor came in, HM Pref tended to outperform Common.
• This should be time again for HM Pref to shine more. Both 1P and 2PB are sufficiently undervalued relative to Common. Div yield difference to Common is also at the highest for both pref types. I’d go short Common and long 1P or 2PB now. 1P seems a little more safe bet. But 2PB is more liquid. Either way wouldn’t go terribly wrong.

2. Yungtay Noises Haven’t Produced a Result Yet

After almost three months of preparation after the initial news came out in October, Hitachi Ltd (6501 JP) launched its Tender Offer for Yungtay Engineering (1507 TT) in mid-January 2019. 

The background of the two companies’ relationship, the board kerfuffle last year, and some detail on the financials and the growth of the Chinese mainland elevator market was discussed extensively in Going Up! Hitachi Tender for Yungtay Engineering (1507 TT)at the end of October. When the Tender Offer was confirmed as launched, additional details were provided in Hitachi Tender for Yungtay Engineering Launches.

Since then, there has been a litany of small “nuisance” events which so far have not resulted in any changes to the terms of the Tender Offer, but keeping a watchful eye is recommended.

3. Kosaido (7868 JP) TOB Extended

As discussed in previous insights, Kosaido Co Ltd (7868 JP) is currently the subject of a TOB (Takeover Bid) by an SPV established by Bain to acquire all the shares outstanding. This has been discussed in three different insights so far.
  ❖ Smallcap Kosaido (7868 JP) Tender Offer: Wrong Price But Whaddya Gonna Do?
  ❖ Kosaido: Activism Drives Price 30+% Through Terms
  ❖ Kosaido TOB: Situation Gets Weird – Activists+Independent Opposition to MBO 

The TOB started as a lowball price TOB with the explanation that the MBO was needed to rehabilitate the printing/information business which makes up three-quarters of consolidated revenue of the company and is the basis upon which the company was founded decades ago.

A read between the lines showed quite quickly that the more ostensible reason for taking the company private was to be able to own 61% of the company which provided the other 25% of consolidated revenue and made up materially all of the operating profit of Kosaido over the past few years. And that business was being bought at just over half of book while the rest of the business was being bought for effectively zero.

My first insight questioned that despite “independent directors” not doing so, and an activist in the form of Yoshiaki Murakami’s firm Reno KK did something about it, quickly buying just under 10% of the company in the two weeks after announcement. On that news, the stock shot up to 30-40% through terms, and fell back, but since it started rising above terms and peaking, it has not fallen below about 15% through terms.

The New News

YESTERDAY, the directors of Kosaido released an amendment to their Statement of Support of the Tender Offer adding a phrase to the effect that “subsequent to the initial meeting where all the statutory auditors had expressed support, at the Board Meeting on the 25th of February, Independent Statutory Auditor Nakatsuji-[san] expressed his opposition to the Tender Offer.” This follows his notice of opposition on the 19th.

TODAY, the Offeror announced an Amendment to the Tender Offer and was extending its Tender Offer by 7 business days – from 30 business days to 37 business days – which has the effect of changing the Closing Date from March 1 to March 12.

With the shares 20% through terms (¥738/share as I write) despite what appears to be no increase by the main activist in the last two weeks, the likelihood retail will tender at ¥610/share this looks like a situation where the deal may fail unless there is a bump.

But it would still be up for grabs. 

4. StubWorld: PCCW Is “Cheap” but Stub Ops Are Deteriorating

This week in StubWorld …

• Select media ops (Free TV and OTT), together with substantial losses booked to other businesses and eliminations, continue to weigh heavily on PCCW Ltd (8 HK)‘s stub ops.

Preceding my comments on PCCW and other stubs are the weekly setup/unwind tables for Asia-Pacific Holdcos.

These relationships trade with a minimum liquidity threshold of US$1mn on a 90-day moving average, and a % market capitalisation threshold – the $ value of the holding/opco held, over the parent’s market capitalisation, expressed in percent – of at least 20%.

In this briefing:

1. Denso Continues to Strengthen Its Investment CASE with Acquisitions
2. Xenith Is Running Out Of Excuses
3. Nissan Governance Structure Report Out: Fog Dissipating Slowly. Sunny in Summer. Storms Next Winter?
4. DHICO Rights Offer: Arb Yields for Early Arb Traders & Trade Approach for Late Arb Traders
5. Nissan: Atrocious Governance Should Be Rectified Before Even Thinking of a Merger

1. Denso Continues to Strengthen Its Investment CASE with Acquisitions

Denso Corp (6902 JP) announced this month that it has invested in the Seattle-based connected vehicle services pioneer- Airbiquity Inc. Airbiquity is one of the leading companies in the connected vehicle services sector and has been one of the companies that has continuously developed automotive telematics technology. This investment made by Denso follows its investment made in Quadric.io this year ( Stake in Quadric.io Following Renesas; Denso Attempts to Keep Chip Makers Close to Achieve AD Aims). As we previously mentioned, Denso is in full swing in its development in the autonomous driving field and next-generation technologies development. Thus, it wouldn’t be a surprise to see Denso emerge as the first mover in next-generation technologies such as AD and connectivity solutions. According to Denso, its investment worth $5m in Airbiquity is expected to accelerate the development of over-the-air (OTA) systems for wirelessly updating automotive software from a remote location. OTA systems are methods of distributing new software, configuration settings, and providing updates to the electronic device in use, for instance, a car navigation system in a vehicle. These OTA systems which have been increasingly used to update the software of such multimedia products in a vehicle are now gaining more prominence given the emergence of next-generation technologies such as electrification, EV and connectivity. We also believe that Denso’s Stake in Airbiquity is likely to accelerate Denso’s transition in its business model to be a leading software solution provider. Thus, its series of investments such as in Tohoku Pioneer EG, JOLED, ThinCI, Quadric, and now Airbiquity are indicative of the decisiveness of its change in business model and moves towards achieving next-generation technology leadership.

2. Xenith Is Running Out Of Excuses

When IPH Ltd (IPH AU) gate-crashed Xenith Ip (XIP AU)/Qantm Intellectual Property (QIP AU)‘s marriage of equals, submitting a scheme proposal comprising cash (A$1.28) and IPH shares (0.1056 IPH shares) or A$1.97/share, versus QANTM’s all-cash offer (1.22 QANTM), the key risk to IPH’s Offer was ACCC opposing its Offer. As announced today, ACCC will not oppose.

This decision was largely expected and previously discussed here. Although IPH, QANTM, and Xenith are the only three ASX-listed intellectual property companies, privately owned companies collectively hold a larger market share – and growing – compared to the three listcos. The ACCC agrees and signed off on an IPH/XIP tie-up as it did on the 21 March, by not opposing the merger of XIP and QANTM.

XIP acknowledged the ACCC decision resolves a major uncertainty, but stops short of supporting IPH’s offer as there still exists a number of concerns as detailed in its 19 March announcement. IPH responded to those concerns on the 20 March. These include:

1. Shareholders of Xenith will hold an immaterial % of the merged IPH entity compared to QANTM.
   • IPH’s scrip portion accounted for (then) 35% of its Offer (now ~37%), shares which have superior liquidity versus QANTM given IPH’s position in the ASX200. 
   • The cash portion also provides added certainty on value into the Offer compared to QANTM’s all scrip offer.
2. The control premium as at 11 March is insufficient.
   • Probably the most contentious concern. QANTM’s all-scrip offer on the 27 November backed out an indicative offer price of $1.598/share or a 28.4% premium to last close.
   • IPH’s $1.97/share indicative offer (a 60% premium to XIP’s undisturbed price, and a 31% premium to the independent expert’s mid-point fair value (page 55)) compared to QANTM’s indicative offer of $2.03 immediately before IPH’s announcement.
   • Circumstances have changed materially since, with IPH’s cash/scrip offer now worth $2.02 as I type, versus $1.67 for QANTM.
     

     

     Source: CapIQ
3. The increased execution risk concerning ACCC. Now a non-issue.
4. It is questionable whether employees, controlling 40% of Xenith, would support the offer.
   • Employees are free to decide on what they consider to be the most compelling Offer. IPH has offered to hold discussions with XIP employees. 
5. CGT rollover will likely be lower via the large cash element under IPH’s offer vs. QANTM’s all scrip offer.
   • Maybe. Possibly. An all-scrip offer typically affords greater rollover relief. Nevertheless, Xenith is trading below its 2015 IPO price of $2.72/share.

With IPH’s 19.9% blocking stake, the QANTM/Xenith scheme is a non-starter. Xenith still should engage with IPH. The scheme meeting to decide on the QANTM Offer is scheduled for the 3 April.

3. Nissan Governance Structure Report Out: Fog Dissipating Slowly. Sunny in Summer. Storms Next Winter?

Six weeks ago I wrote that Nissan’s governance outlook was “Foggy Now, Sunny Later.” I said “Governance changes are afoot, with a steady flow of developments likely coming in March, April, May, and June.”

The last couple of months have seen numerous media articles about the process of Nissan Motor (7201 JP) and Renault SA (RNO FP) rebuilding their relationship. There have been visits to Tokyo by Renault’s new chairman of the board of directors Jean-Dominique Senard, and visits to Paris and Amsterdam by the CEOs of Nissan and Mitsubishi Motors (7211 JP). 

There have been many suggestions in French and European newspapers in the interim that Jean-Dominique Senard would be the obvious choice as a representative director of Nissan. There have been other articles out there in the Japanese press suggesting what conclusions the committee might come to as to what outcomes should result. The difference is notable. The French side still wants control. The Japanese/Nissan/committee side sees the need to fix governance.

Today there was a report in the FT suggesting that Renault “wants” to restart merger talks with Nissan and “aims to restart merger talks with Nissan within 12 months.” It should be noted that these two sentences are not exactly the same. It may still be that France wants Renault to do so, and therefore Renault aims to do so. The same article revealed past talks on Renault merging with FCA but France putting a stop to it and a current desire to acquire another automaker – perhaps FCA – after dealing with Nissan. 

Also today, the long-awaited Nissan Special Committee for Improving Governance (SCIG) report was released. It outlines some of the issues of governance which existed under Ghosn- both the ones which got him the boot, and the structural governance issues which were “discovered” after he got the boot. 

There are clear patches in the fog. Two things shine through immediately. 

1. Governance weaknesses under Ghosn were inexcusably bad. Worse than previously reported.
2. The recommendations to the board now are, on the whole, pretty decent. Some are sine qua non changes – formation of nomination and compensation committees, whistleblower reporting to the audit committee and not the CEO, and greater checks and balances. Some are stronger in terms of the independence of Nissan from Renault: the committee recommends a majority of independent board members, an independent chairman, and no representative directors from Renault, Mitsubishi, or principal shareholders.

There are, however, other issues which were not addressed, which for Nissan’s sake probably should be addressed. Yesterday was a first step on what will be a 3-month procession of news about the way Nissan will address the SCIG report’s recommendations, the process by which it will choose new directors when it does not have an official nomination committee, and the AGM in June to propose and confirm new directors. Then they will start their jobs in July. 

The fog looks to lift slowly. And one may anticipate some better weather beyond. But business concerns remain a threat, and while relations appear to be getting better after the departure of Carlos Ghosn and the arrival of Jean-Dominique Senard, it is not clear that a Franco-Japanese storm is not brewing in the distance.

More below.

4. DHICO Rights Offer: Arb Yields for Early Arb Traders & Trade Approach for Late Arb Traders

• As well expected, DHICO was heavily shorted yesterday, ex-rights day. We had a heavy buying movement by short-term arb traders at both local and foreign on DHICO right before ex-rights. As shown in the second table, yesterday’s shorting was mostly done by short-term traders again both local and foreign alike.
• These early arb traders had presumably bought DHICO shares at ₩8,076 on Mar 25~26. They then disposed shares at ₩6,974 yesterday. They then shorted the same amount of shares additionally at ₩6,983. As a result, at ceiling price ₩5,550 their yield is virtually fixed at 4.10%. If the offering price goes down to the bottom of ₩5,000 which is a very high possibility at this point, their yield will go up as high as 10.91%.
• For those who haven’t made early moves, there are now two options to play this event. You can either trade now and hope that subscription right price won’t hit breaking price level or wait until Apr 19~25 subscription rights period for a perfectly risk-free entry point. At the current price ₩6,800, breaking price for subscription rights is still at a comfortable level. That is, I’d make trades right now by shorting DHICO shares.

→ DHICO price just got down nearly 3%. At this reduced price, below are updated numbers for late arb traders’ arb yield. To me, it still seems we won’t be in a losing position if we make trades now. But we’d better hurry up.

5. Nissan: Atrocious Governance Should Be Rectified Before Even Thinking of a Merger

Today Nissan Motor (7201 JP) released its report from the Special Committee for Improving Governance. The FT also reported that Renault SA (RNO FP) (i.e. the French government) was keen to restart merger talks within twelve months with an eye towards then acquiring Fiat Chrysler Automobiles Nv (FCAU US).

The details of the former are unsurprising but disappointing, while Renault’s M&A ambitions just seem delusional at this point.

In this briefing:

1. Xenith Is Running Out Of Excuses
2. Nissan Governance Structure Report Out: Fog Dissipating Slowly. Sunny in Summer. Storms Next Winter?
3. DHICO Rights Offer: Arb Yields for Early Arb Traders & Trade Approach for Late Arb Traders
4. Nissan: Atrocious Governance Should Be Rectified Before Even Thinking of a Merger
5. Versum Materials – Merck KGaA Dials Up the Pressure and Launches Unsolicited Tender Offer (Part III)

1. Xenith Is Running Out Of Excuses

When IPH Ltd (IPH AU) gate-crashed Xenith Ip (XIP AU)/Qantm Intellectual Property (QIP AU)‘s marriage of equals, submitting a scheme proposal comprising cash (A$1.28) and IPH shares (0.1056 IPH shares) or A$1.97/share, versus QANTM’s all-cash offer (1.22 QANTM), the key risk to IPH’s Offer was ACCC opposing its Offer. As announced today, ACCC will not oppose.

This decision was largely expected and previously discussed here. Although IPH, QANTM, and Xenith are the only three ASX-listed intellectual property companies, privately owned companies collectively hold a larger market share – and growing – compared to the three listcos. The ACCC agrees and signed off on an IPH/XIP tie-up as it did on the 21 March, by not opposing the merger of XIP and QANTM.

XIP acknowledged the ACCC decision resolves a major uncertainty, but stops short of supporting IPH’s offer as there still exists a number of concerns as detailed in its 19 March announcement. IPH responded to those concerns on the 20 March. These include:

1. Shareholders of Xenith will hold an immaterial % of the merged IPH entity compared to QANTM.
   • IPH’s scrip portion accounted for (then) 35% of its Offer (now ~37%), shares which have superior liquidity versus QANTM given IPH’s position in the ASX200. 
   • The cash portion also provides added certainty on value into the Offer compared to QANTM’s all scrip offer.
2. The control premium as at 11 March is insufficient.
   • Probably the most contentious concern. QANTM’s all-scrip offer on the 27 November backed out an indicative offer price of $1.598/share or a 28.4% premium to last close.
   • IPH’s $1.97/share indicative offer (a 60% premium to XIP’s undisturbed price, and a 31% premium to the independent expert’s mid-point fair value (page 55)) compared to QANTM’s indicative offer of $2.03 immediately before IPH’s announcement.
   • Circumstances have changed materially since, with IPH’s cash/scrip offer now worth $2.02 as I type, versus $1.67 for QANTM.
     

     

     Source: CapIQ
3. The increased execution risk concerning ACCC. Now a non-issue.
4. It is questionable whether employees, controlling 40% of Xenith, would support the offer.
   • Employees are free to decide on what they consider to be the most compelling Offer. IPH has offered to hold discussions with XIP employees. 
5. CGT rollover will likely be lower via the large cash element under IPH’s offer vs. QANTM’s all scrip offer.
   • Maybe. Possibly. An all-scrip offer typically affords greater rollover relief. Nevertheless, Xenith is trading below its 2015 IPO price of $2.72/share.

With IPH’s 19.9% blocking stake, the QANTM/Xenith scheme is a non-starter. Xenith still should engage with IPH. The scheme meeting to decide on the QANTM Offer is scheduled for the 3 April.

2. Nissan Governance Structure Report Out: Fog Dissipating Slowly. Sunny in Summer. Storms Next Winter?

Six weeks ago I wrote that Nissan’s governance outlook was “Foggy Now, Sunny Later.” I said “Governance changes are afoot, with a steady flow of developments likely coming in March, April, May, and June.”

The last couple of months have seen numerous media articles about the process of Nissan Motor (7201 JP) and Renault SA (RNO FP) rebuilding their relationship. There have been visits to Tokyo by Renault’s new chairman of the board of directors Jean-Dominique Senard, and visits to Paris and Amsterdam by the CEOs of Nissan and Mitsubishi Motors (7211 JP). 

There have been many suggestions in French and European newspapers in the interim that Jean-Dominique Senard would be the obvious choice as a representative director of Nissan. There have been other articles out there in the Japanese press suggesting what conclusions the committee might come to as to what outcomes should result. The difference is notable. The French side still wants control. The Japanese/Nissan/committee side sees the need to fix governance.

Today there was a report in the FT suggesting that Renault “wants” to restart merger talks with Nissan and “aims to restart merger talks with Nissan within 12 months.” It should be noted that these two sentences are not exactly the same. It may still be that France wants Renault to do so, and therefore Renault aims to do so. The same article revealed past talks on Renault merging with FCA but France putting a stop to it and a current desire to acquire another automaker – perhaps FCA – after dealing with Nissan. 

Also today, the long-awaited Nissan Special Committee for Improving Governance (SCIG) report was released. It outlines some of the issues of governance which existed under Ghosn- both the ones which got him the boot, and the structural governance issues which were “discovered” after he got the boot. 

There are clear patches in the fog. Two things shine through immediately. 

1. Governance weaknesses under Ghosn were inexcusably bad. Worse than previously reported.
2. The recommendations to the board now are, on the whole, pretty decent. Some are sine qua non changes – formation of nomination and compensation committees, whistleblower reporting to the audit committee and not the CEO, and greater checks and balances. Some are stronger in terms of the independence of Nissan from Renault: the committee recommends a majority of independent board members, an independent chairman, and no representative directors from Renault, Mitsubishi, or principal shareholders.

There are, however, other issues which were not addressed, which for Nissan’s sake probably should be addressed. Yesterday was a first step on what will be a 3-month procession of news about the way Nissan will address the SCIG report’s recommendations, the process by which it will choose new directors when it does not have an official nomination committee, and the AGM in June to propose and confirm new directors. Then they will start their jobs in July. 

The fog looks to lift slowly. And one may anticipate some better weather beyond. But business concerns remain a threat, and while relations appear to be getting better after the departure of Carlos Ghosn and the arrival of Jean-Dominique Senard, it is not clear that a Franco-Japanese storm is not brewing in the distance.

More below.

3. DHICO Rights Offer: Arb Yields for Early Arb Traders & Trade Approach for Late Arb Traders

• As well expected, DHICO was heavily shorted yesterday, ex-rights day. We had a heavy buying movement by short-term arb traders at both local and foreign on DHICO right before ex-rights. As shown in the second table, yesterday’s shorting was mostly done by short-term traders again both local and foreign alike.
• These early arb traders had presumably bought DHICO shares at ₩8,076 on Mar 25~26. They then disposed shares at ₩6,974 yesterday. They then shorted the same amount of shares additionally at ₩6,983. As a result, at ceiling price ₩5,550 their yield is virtually fixed at 4.10%. If the offering price goes down to the bottom of ₩5,000 which is a very high possibility at this point, their yield will go up as high as 10.91%.
• For those who haven’t made early moves, there are now two options to play this event. You can either trade now and hope that subscription right price won’t hit breaking price level or wait until Apr 19~25 subscription rights period for a perfectly risk-free entry point. At the current price ₩6,800, breaking price for subscription rights is still at a comfortable level. That is, I’d make trades right now by shorting DHICO shares.

→ DHICO price just got down nearly 3%. At this reduced price, below are updated numbers for late arb traders’ arb yield. To me, it still seems we won’t be in a losing position if we make trades now. But we’d better hurry up.

4. Nissan: Atrocious Governance Should Be Rectified Before Even Thinking of a Merger

Today Nissan Motor (7201 JP) released its report from the Special Committee for Improving Governance. The FT also reported that Renault SA (RNO FP) (i.e. the French government) was keen to restart merger talks within twelve months with an eye towards then acquiring Fiat Chrysler Automobiles Nv (FCAU US).

The details of the former are unsurprising but disappointing, while Renault’s M&A ambitions just seem delusional at this point.

5. Versum Materials – Merck KGaA Dials Up the Pressure and Launches Unsolicited Tender Offer (Part III)

Merck KGaA (MRK GR) took off the gloves yesterday in its pursuit of Versum Materials (VSM US) , announcing and launching an unsolicited, fully financed $48 per share cash tender offer for all outstanding shares of VSM. Merck also announced the filing of its definitive proxy materials with the SEC for solicitation of proxies of VSM shareholder against the VSM/Entegris Inc (ENTG US) merger, which is scheduled to be voted on at a special shareholder meeting on April 26^th, 2019.

Along with its press release announcing the offer yesterday, Merck also published its second open letter to Versum shareholders underscoring its commitment to complete the acquisition of the Company. This follows Merck’s presentation to VSM shareholders published on March 14, 2019.

The tender offer is scheduled to expire on 5pm, New York City time on June 7, 2019.

We explore the terms of the tender offer and Merck’s proxy materials below. Readers are reminded to review my earlier research pieces, Versum Materials – Entegris Beaten to the Punch by Merck KGaA and Versum Materials – Merck KGaA Not Going Away (Part II) to get the full background on this situation.

In this briefing:

1. Kosaido (7868 JP) TOB Extended
2. StubWorld: PCCW Is “Cheap” but Stub Ops Are Deteriorating
3. Panalpina To Have EGM to Approve One Share One Vote
4. Golden Land: Less An Offer, More A Consolidation Of Interests

1. Kosaido (7868 JP) TOB Extended

As discussed in previous insights, Kosaido Co Ltd (7868 JP) is currently the subject of a TOB (Takeover Bid) by an SPV established by Bain to acquire all the shares outstanding. This has been discussed in three different insights so far.
  ❖ Smallcap Kosaido (7868 JP) Tender Offer: Wrong Price But Whaddya Gonna Do?
  ❖ Kosaido: Activism Drives Price 30+% Through Terms
  ❖ Kosaido TOB: Situation Gets Weird – Activists+Independent Opposition to MBO 

The TOB started as a lowball price TOB with the explanation that the MBO was needed to rehabilitate the printing/information business which makes up three-quarters of consolidated revenue of the company and is the basis upon which the company was founded decades ago.

A read between the lines showed quite quickly that the more ostensible reason for taking the company private was to be able to own 61% of the company which provided the other 25% of consolidated revenue and made up materially all of the operating profit of Kosaido over the past few years. And that business was being bought at just over half of book while the rest of the business was being bought for effectively zero.

My first insight questioned that despite “independent directors” not doing so, and an activist in the form of Yoshiaki Murakami’s firm Reno KK did something about it, quickly buying just under 10% of the company in the two weeks after announcement. On that news, the stock shot up to 30-40% through terms, and fell back, but since it started rising above terms and peaking, it has not fallen below about 15% through terms.

The New News

YESTERDAY, the directors of Kosaido released an amendment to their Statement of Support of the Tender Offer adding a phrase to the effect that “subsequent to the initial meeting where all the statutory auditors had expressed support, at the Board Meeting on the 25th of February, Independent Statutory Auditor Nakatsuji-[san] expressed his opposition to the Tender Offer.” This follows his notice of opposition on the 19th.

TODAY, the Offeror announced an Amendment to the Tender Offer and was extending its Tender Offer by 7 business days – from 30 business days to 37 business days – which has the effect of changing the Closing Date from March 1 to March 12.

With the shares 20% through terms (¥738/share as I write) despite what appears to be no increase by the main activist in the last two weeks, the likelihood retail will tender at ¥610/share this looks like a situation where the deal may fail unless there is a bump.

But it would still be up for grabs. 

2. StubWorld: PCCW Is “Cheap” but Stub Ops Are Deteriorating

This week in StubWorld …

• Select media ops (Free TV and OTT), together with substantial losses booked to other businesses and eliminations, continue to weigh heavily on PCCW Ltd (8 HK)‘s stub ops.

Preceding my comments on PCCW and other stubs are the weekly setup/unwind tables for Asia-Pacific Holdcos.

These relationships trade with a minimum liquidity threshold of US$1mn on a 90-day moving average, and a % market capitalisation threshold – the $ value of the holding/opco held, over the parent’s market capitalisation, expressed in percent – of at least 20%.

3. Panalpina To Have EGM to Approve One Share One Vote

Yesterday, Panalpina Welttransport Holding (PWTN SW)‘s largest shareholder with 45.9% of shares out, the Ernst Göhner Foundation, made a formal request to the directors of Panalpina to hold an Extraordinary General Meeting to be held prior to the Annual General Meeting scheduled for early May 2019 so that the Articles of Association be changed – specifically Article 5 – such that the limit on transfer rights and voting rights enshrined in Article 5 be abolished and a “One Share One Vote” structure be adopted.

The directors complied with this request.

The limit to now has been that Shareholders have their votes capped at 5% of shares outstanding EXCEPT FOR the votes of the Ernst Göhner Foundation which were deemed “grandfathered” prior to the change. The directors have the right to grant exceptions to this 5% rule, as discussed in The Panalpina Conundrum a bit over a week ago, but have not, leaving the combined 24+% total held by Cevian and Artisan Partners with only ~11.6% of the vote.

This move by the EGF is both “sneaky” AND interesting (and bullish) news. Given the current shareholder vote structure, it wouldn’t be impossible for the EGF to vote it down in the EGM, but I think EGF very specifically do not want to vote it down because the alternative is worse. But getting this passed would suddenly change the outlook for a Panalpina/Agility deal or any deal which required significant issuance.

4. Golden Land: Less An Offer, More A Consolidation Of Interests

Frasers Property (Thailand) Pcl (FPT TB) has announced a conditional voluntary tender offer for Golden Land Prop Dvlp (GOLD TB) at Bt8.50/share, ~2.4% premium to last close.

Frasers Property Ltd (FPL SP) owns 40.95% in FPT and also 39.92% in GOLD. FPT’s director Panote Sirivadhanabhakdi (the son of Charoen Sirivadhanabhakdi), via his majority-controlled vehicle Univentures Public (UV TB), holds 39.28% in GOLD. Panote is also the vice-chairman of GOLD.

Presumably, both FPL and Univentures will tender into the Offer giving FPT a minimum holding of 80.2%. There were no specific minimum acceptance conditions attached to the tender offer mentioned in the announcement.

Should FPP secure 90% of GOLD in the tender offer, it may proceed with its delisting. A voluntary delisting is still achievable with ~80% in the bag, but that is conditional on <10% of shareholders not voting against.

Preconditions to the commencement of the tender offer include the approval from disinterested shareholders in FPP, approval from “relevant contractual parties of GOLD and GOLD’s subsidiaries” and the approval from the Office of Trade Competition Commission.

The fact the Sirivadhanabhakdi family already holds, directly/indirectly ~80% in GOLD, such regulatory approvals should be forthcoming.

This appears a done deal. The only apparent risk is the expected shareholder vote of Univentures wherein Panote will likely need to abstain.

Currently trading at a gross/annualized spread of 1.8%/4.3% assuming early August payment. Very tight, suggesting investors are more likely angling for the back-end.

In this briefing:

1. Nissan Governance Structure Report Out: Fog Dissipating Slowly. Sunny in Summer. Storms Next Winter?
2. DHICO Rights Offer: Arb Yields for Early Arb Traders & Trade Approach for Late Arb Traders
3. Nissan: Atrocious Governance Should Be Rectified Before Even Thinking of a Merger
4. Versum Materials – Merck KGaA Dials Up the Pressure and Launches Unsolicited Tender Offer (Part III)
5. TRADE IDEA – PCCW (8 HK) Stub: The Li Legacy Lives On

1. Nissan Governance Structure Report Out: Fog Dissipating Slowly. Sunny in Summer. Storms Next Winter?

Six weeks ago I wrote that Nissan’s governance outlook was “Foggy Now, Sunny Later.” I said “Governance changes are afoot, with a steady flow of developments likely coming in March, April, May, and June.”

The last couple of months have seen numerous media articles about the process of Nissan Motor (7201 JP) and Renault SA (RNO FP) rebuilding their relationship. There have been visits to Tokyo by Renault’s new chairman of the board of directors Jean-Dominique Senard, and visits to Paris and Amsterdam by the CEOs of Nissan and Mitsubishi Motors (7211 JP). 

There have been many suggestions in French and European newspapers in the interim that Jean-Dominique Senard would be the obvious choice as a representative director of Nissan. There have been other articles out there in the Japanese press suggesting what conclusions the committee might come to as to what outcomes should result. The difference is notable. The French side still wants control. The Japanese/Nissan/committee side sees the need to fix governance.

Today there was a report in the FT suggesting that Renault “wants” to restart merger talks with Nissan and “aims to restart merger talks with Nissan within 12 months.” It should be noted that these two sentences are not exactly the same. It may still be that France wants Renault to do so, and therefore Renault aims to do so. The same article revealed past talks on Renault merging with FCA but France putting a stop to it and a current desire to acquire another automaker – perhaps FCA – after dealing with Nissan. 

Also today, the long-awaited Nissan Special Committee for Improving Governance (SCIG) report was released. It outlines some of the issues of governance which existed under Ghosn- both the ones which got him the boot, and the structural governance issues which were “discovered” after he got the boot. 

There are clear patches in the fog. Two things shine through immediately. 

1. Governance weaknesses under Ghosn were inexcusably bad. Worse than previously reported.
2. The recommendations to the board now are, on the whole, pretty decent. Some are sine qua non changes – formation of nomination and compensation committees, whistleblower reporting to the audit committee and not the CEO, and greater checks and balances. Some are stronger in terms of the independence of Nissan from Renault: the committee recommends a majority of independent board members, an independent chairman, and no representative directors from Renault, Mitsubishi, or principal shareholders.

There are, however, other issues which were not addressed, which for Nissan’s sake probably should be addressed. Yesterday was a first step on what will be a 3-month procession of news about the way Nissan will address the SCIG report’s recommendations, the process by which it will choose new directors when it does not have an official nomination committee, and the AGM in June to propose and confirm new directors. Then they will start their jobs in July. 

The fog looks to lift slowly. And one may anticipate some better weather beyond. But business concerns remain a threat, and while relations appear to be getting better after the departure of Carlos Ghosn and the arrival of Jean-Dominique Senard, it is not clear that a Franco-Japanese storm is not brewing in the distance.

More below.

2. DHICO Rights Offer: Arb Yields for Early Arb Traders & Trade Approach for Late Arb Traders

• As well expected, DHICO was heavily shorted yesterday, ex-rights day. We had a heavy buying movement by short-term arb traders at both local and foreign on DHICO right before ex-rights. As shown in the second table, yesterday’s shorting was mostly done by short-term traders again both local and foreign alike.
• These early arb traders had presumably bought DHICO shares at ₩8,076 on Mar 25~26. They then disposed shares at ₩6,974 yesterday. They then shorted the same amount of shares additionally at ₩6,983. As a result, at ceiling price ₩5,550 their yield is virtually fixed at 4.10%. If the offering price goes down to the bottom of ₩5,000 which is a very high possibility at this point, their yield will go up as high as 10.91%.
• For those who haven’t made early moves, there are now two options to play this event. You can either trade now and hope that subscription right price won’t hit breaking price level or wait until Apr 19~25 subscription rights period for a perfectly risk-free entry point. At the current price ₩6,800, breaking price for subscription rights is still at a comfortable level. That is, I’d make trades right now by shorting DHICO shares.

→ DHICO price just got down nearly 3%. At this reduced price, below are updated numbers for late arb traders’ arb yield. To me, it still seems we won’t be in a losing position if we make trades now. But we’d better hurry up.

3. Nissan: Atrocious Governance Should Be Rectified Before Even Thinking of a Merger

Today Nissan Motor (7201 JP) released its report from the Special Committee for Improving Governance. The FT also reported that Renault SA (RNO FP) (i.e. the French government) was keen to restart merger talks within twelve months with an eye towards then acquiring Fiat Chrysler Automobiles Nv (FCAU US).

The details of the former are unsurprising but disappointing, while Renault’s M&A ambitions just seem delusional at this point.

4. Versum Materials – Merck KGaA Dials Up the Pressure and Launches Unsolicited Tender Offer (Part III)

Merck KGaA (MRK GR) took off the gloves yesterday in its pursuit of Versum Materials (VSM US) , announcing and launching an unsolicited, fully financed $48 per share cash tender offer for all outstanding shares of VSM. Merck also announced the filing of its definitive proxy materials with the SEC for solicitation of proxies of VSM shareholder against the VSM/Entegris Inc (ENTG US) merger, which is scheduled to be voted on at a special shareholder meeting on April 26^th, 2019.

Along with its press release announcing the offer yesterday, Merck also published its second open letter to Versum shareholders underscoring its commitment to complete the acquisition of the Company. This follows Merck’s presentation to VSM shareholders published on March 14, 2019.

The tender offer is scheduled to expire on 5pm, New York City time on June 7, 2019.

We explore the terms of the tender offer and Merck’s proxy materials below. Readers are reminded to review my earlier research pieces, Versum Materials – Entegris Beaten to the Punch by Merck KGaA and Versum Materials – Merck KGaA Not Going Away (Part II) to get the full background on this situation.

5. TRADE IDEA – PCCW (8 HK) Stub: The Li Legacy Lives On

Have you ever wondered how a company secures the Chinese lucky number “8” as their ticker in Hong Kong? I’ll explain later on, but let’s just say that being the son of Li Ka Shing helps. 

Li Ka Shing is a name that hardly needs introduction in Hong Kong and Richard Li, Li Ka Shing’s youngest son and Chairman of PCCW Ltd (8 HK), follows suit. After being born into Hong Kong’s richest family, Richard Li was educated in the US where he worked various odd jobs at McDonald’s and as a caddy at a local golf course before enrolling at Menlo College and eventually withdrawing without a degree. As fate would have it, Mr. Li went on to set up STAR TV, Asia’s satellite-delivered cable TV service, at the tender age of 24. Three years after starting STAR TV, Richard Li sold the venture, which had amassed a viewer base of 45 million people, to Rupert Murdoch’s News Corp (NWS AU) for USD 1 billion in 1993. During the same year, Mr. Li founded the Pacific Century Group and began a streak of noteworthy acquisitions. 

You may be starting to wonder what all of this has to do with a trade on PCCW Ltd (8 HK) and I don’t blame you. In the rest of this insight I will:

• finish the historical overview of the Li family and PCCW
• present my trade idea and rationale
• give a detailed overview of the business units of PCCW and the associated performance of each
• recap ALL of my stub trades on Smartkarma and the performance of each