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.
DSME has this ₩2.3tril worth of CBs that carry a 30 year maturity. Korea Eximbank is the holder. HHI wants no change. Eximbank wants out as soon as possible. Current price of ₩32,600 is nearly a 20% discount to the conversion price of ₩40,350. It’d be still better for Eximbank to do conversion/sale even at this price. This is 27.54%. It will create huge overhang.
HHI should be given much higher priority than DSME even when they are under the same roof. DSME acquisition is supposed to help HHI first, not the other way around. HHI shouldn’t be much incentivized to help turn around DSME in the short-term. Not only that, pressing down DSME price would probably be the only way for HHI to prevent Eximbank’s stake dumping.
In a longer time horizon, things would depend on the outlook of the entire shipbuilding sector. To minimize risks, I’d go for long/short with HHI. What should be at least clear at this point is that HHI should be outperforming DSME in whatever fundamentals situations we are dealing with.
Another week of US-China negotiations and another big boost to market sentiment. Stock markets as well as crude rallied last week on the back of news from Washington that the US and China were preparing to sign a framework deal in the form of several MoUs covering trade and structural issues.
But there are other economic concerns around the globe, and a preliminary deal between the US and China is not going to curb all the headwinds. Further upside to crude may also be limited because much of the anticipated rapprochement between the two countries has already been factored in. WTI prices stabilising well above the $50/barrel threshold are also likely to support strong growth in US production, which hit the 12 million b/d mark last week.
Nonetheless, there are factors on the supply front that could trigger a spike beyond $70/barrel for Brent, especially if combined with a turnaround in economic and oil demand growth expectations.
If that happens, we believe the Saudis will ease up on over-compliance with their own production cuts, either voluntarily or under renewed pressure from US President Donald Trump.
Get Straight to the Source on Smartkarma
Smartkarma supports the world’s leading investors with high-quality, timely, and actionable Insights. Subscribe now for unlimited access, or request a demo below.
It was announced on March 26th after market close that the Korea National Pension Service (NPS) will vote against the re-election of the Cho Yang-Ho as a Director of Korean Air Lines (003490 KS). The final results will become available today when the AGM of Korean Air is completed (AGM starts at 9AM). This has been one of the most anticipated AGMs in Korea, since there is a good chance that Chairman Cho will not be re-elected. Chairman Cho needs at least 2/3 of the participating shareholders’ approval in order to be re-elected.
Foreigners currently own a 24.77% stake in Korean Air, up significantly from 20.61% as of end of 2018. This increase of 4.1% stake represents $128 million. The increase in ownership by the foreigners is a good sign since it suggests that many hedge funds and long-only institutional investors think that finally the tides have turned and Chairman Cho may need to step down from his position in the BOD.
In our view, if Chairman Cho is finally defeated in this AGM, this should have a definite positive impact on Korean Air’s share price. In the near term, we think Korean Air Lines (003490 KS)‘s share price could shoot up by nearly 20% and retest the previous resistance level at around 39,000 won.
Keyence Corp (6861 JP) has long been a standout within the Japanese machinery sector for its exceptional margins, with only Fanuc Corp (6954 JP) and perhaps Smc Corp (6273 JP) really operating in the same the stratosphere. But while Fanuc has faded, with its OPM now struggling to stay over 30% and SMC has only recently peaked its head over the 30% level, Keyence has been powering ahead and is on the cusp of recording five straight years over 50% OPM.
With relatively limited disclosures to go along with such stellar performance it is understandable then that some investors are concerned that the story is too good to be true, and even the FT has written a series of articles with a slightly critical bent: 1234
Having recently visited the company, we analyse below, the nature of its competitive advantages by comparing it with its most similar peer Cognex Corp (CGNX US).
Our proprietary corporate governance scoring system now covers over 1,800 stocks including 70 Electricity, Alternative Energy, Distribution, Water and Utilities companies in Emerging Markets.
This report includes the Energy and Utilities names currently under coverage. The lowest score in this group is Korea Gas (44/100).
We have found that scores below 50/100 indicate poor corporate governance and higher risk of fraud.
Korean companies often have lower scores as a result of a lack of board independence and convoluted corporate structure.
Of the groupings presented here Alternative Energy has the highest average score at 64/100. We welcome requests from clients of names they want to see added to the universe.
Wesfarmers Ltd (WES AU) launched a conditional, non-binding indicative proposal for Lynas Corp Ltd (LYC AU), one of the world’s only rare earths suppliers based outside China. Wesfarmers’ proposal of A$2.25 cash per share values Lynas at A$1.5 billion. Lynas’ share price jumped 35% to A$2.10 before going into a trading halt.
The bid comes at a turbulent time for Lynas, which is caught in a regulatory dispute with authorities in Malaysia. While Wesfarmers proposal could be viewed as a lifeline for Lynas, we believe that Wesfarmers’s proposal is opportunistic and unattractive.
The shares are cheap. The company is cash rich and owns 10% in treasury stock; it owned more last year but has cancelled 4%. It has some Y6bn in long term investment. EV in our view is Y57bn vs the current market cap of Y110bn. With ebitda next year coming in at Y15bn, EV/ebitda is under 4x. The shares yield 3.4% and trade at book. They have slightly underperformed the market over the last 12 months. For now, we view this as a defensive buy. There remain many issues longer term as to its place in the global elevator world. A potential positive, however, is that in May the company will announce a new mid-term plan and in it, they will outline their view as regards to shareholder returns for the next three years. They are aware that they are very over capitalised, so greater returns are a real possibility.
Get Straight to the Source on Smartkarma
Smartkarma supports the world’s leading investors with high-quality, timely, and actionable Insights. Subscribe now for unlimited access, or request a demo below.
Keyence Corp (6861 JP) has long been a standout within the Japanese machinery sector for its exceptional margins, with only Fanuc Corp (6954 JP) and perhaps Smc Corp (6273 JP) really operating in the same the stratosphere. But while Fanuc has faded, with its OPM now struggling to stay over 30% and SMC has only recently peaked its head over the 30% level, Keyence has been powering ahead and is on the cusp of recording five straight years over 50% OPM.
With relatively limited disclosures to go along with such stellar performance it is understandable then that some investors are concerned that the story is too good to be true, and even the FT has written a series of articles with a slightly critical bent: 1234
Having recently visited the company, we analyse below, the nature of its competitive advantages by comparing it with its most similar peer Cognex Corp (CGNX US).
Our proprietary corporate governance scoring system now covers over 1,800 stocks including 70 Electricity, Alternative Energy, Distribution, Water and Utilities companies in Emerging Markets.
This report includes the Energy and Utilities names currently under coverage. The lowest score in this group is Korea Gas (44/100).
We have found that scores below 50/100 indicate poor corporate governance and higher risk of fraud.
Korean companies often have lower scores as a result of a lack of board independence and convoluted corporate structure.
Of the groupings presented here Alternative Energy has the highest average score at 64/100. We welcome requests from clients of names they want to see added to the universe.
Wesfarmers Ltd (WES AU) launched a conditional, non-binding indicative proposal for Lynas Corp Ltd (LYC AU), one of the world’s only rare earths suppliers based outside China. Wesfarmers’ proposal of A$2.25 cash per share values Lynas at A$1.5 billion. Lynas’ share price jumped 35% to A$2.10 before going into a trading halt.
The bid comes at a turbulent time for Lynas, which is caught in a regulatory dispute with authorities in Malaysia. While Wesfarmers proposal could be viewed as a lifeline for Lynas, we believe that Wesfarmers’s proposal is opportunistic and unattractive.
The shares are cheap. The company is cash rich and owns 10% in treasury stock; it owned more last year but has cancelled 4%. It has some Y6bn in long term investment. EV in our view is Y57bn vs the current market cap of Y110bn. With ebitda next year coming in at Y15bn, EV/ebitda is under 4x. The shares yield 3.4% and trade at book. They have slightly underperformed the market over the last 12 months. For now, we view this as a defensive buy. There remain many issues longer term as to its place in the global elevator world. A potential positive, however, is that in May the company will announce a new mid-term plan and in it, they will outline their view as regards to shareholder returns for the next three years. They are aware that they are very over capitalised, so greater returns are a real possibility.
DHICO rights offer 1st round pricing was fixed at ₩5,550. This ₩5,550 will serve as the ceiling. It is nearly guaranteed that the final offer price will be fixed somewhere between ₩5,000 and ₩5,550. It can not go lower than the face value ₩5,000.
Today (Mar 26) is the last day to get subscription rights. Subscription rights will be then tradable on Apr 19~25. The 4 bookrunners will buy all forfeited shares at a 15% discount to final offering price. There is no cancellation risk.
Local arb traders made their move yesterday. Foreign arb traders entered as well. Past tendency shows buying earlier would pay off more handsomely than waiting longer. DHICO’s fundamentals isn’t showing any positive sign yet. Deal structure isn’t helping improve street sentiments either. This event needs a lot of arb traders to hit the target. This is another relief point for those making early trades.
Get Straight to the Source on Smartkarma
Smartkarma supports the world’s leading investors with high-quality, timely, and actionable Insights. Subscribe now for unlimited access, or request a demo below.
The Scheme Document for the privatisation of Hopewell Holdings (54 HK) has been dispatched. The court meeting will be held on the 21 March. The consideration will be paid (on or before) the 14 May. The IFA (China Tonghai Capital) considers the $38.80/share Offer to be fair & reasonable. The Scheme is conditional on ≥75% for, ≤10% against from disinterested shareholders. As Hopewell is HK-incorporated, there is no “head count ” test. The full timetable is as follows:
Date
Data in the Date
6-Dec-18
Announcement
24-Feb-19
Scheme document
13-Mar-19
Last time for lodging shares to qualify to vote
15-Mar-19
Meeting record date
19-Mar-19
Court/EGM meeting
2-May-19
Effective date
14-May-19
Cheques dispatched
Source: Hopewell
Substantial Shareholders
Mn
%
The Wu family & concert parties
320.7
36.93
Non-consortium Offeror concert parties
31.7
3.65
Total
352.5
40.48
Disinterested Shareholders
516.1
59.42
After hearing conflicting opinions on what constitutes a blocking stake, a chat with the banker confirmed the blocking stake, as per the Companies Ordinance, is tied to 63.07% of shares out (i.e. Scheme shareholders – see page 95); whereas the Takeovers Code is tied to 59.42% of shares out. Effectively there are two assessments on the blocking stake and the more stringent (the 59.42% out in this case) prevails.
With the Offer Price representing a 43% discount to NAV, wider than the largest discount precedent in past nine years (the Glorious Property (845 HK) offer, which incidentally was voted down), the IFA creatively argues that extenuating factors such as the premium to historical price needs to also be taken into account. Hardly original, but that is where investors must decide whether this is as good as it’s going to get – given the Wu family’s control, there will not be a competing offer – or to hold out for a superior price longer term. This is a final offer and it will not be increased.
What the IFA fails to discuss is that the widest successful discount to NAV privatisation was 29.4% for New World China Land (917 HK)in 2016. And all precedent transactions (successful or otherwise) are PRC (mainly) property development related; except for Wheelock which operated property in Hong Kong (like Hopewell) and in Singapore, which was privatised at a 12.1% discount to NAV.
Therein lies the dilemma – what is a fair and reasonable discount to NAV for a Hong Kong investment property play? With limited precedents, it is challenging to categorically reach an opinion. And that is the disingenuous conclusion from the IFA that the premium to last close and with reference to historical pricing, is in effect the overriding reason to conclude the Offer is reasonable. I would argue the Wu family has made a low-ball offer for what is essentially an investment property play with quantifiable asset value.
A blocking sake is 5.9% or 51.6mn shares. First Eagle, which recently voted down the Guoco Group Ltd (53 HK)privatisation that was pitched at a ~25% discount to NAV, holds 2.7% (according to CapIQ).
Trading at a wide gross/annualised return of 7%/37.5%, reflecting the risk to completion, and the significant downside should the scheme be voted down. Tough one – the premium to last close and with reference to the 10-year price performance, should be sufficient to get it over the line, and the basis for this “bullish” insight. But only for the brave.
Get Straight to the Source on Smartkarma
Smartkarma supports the world’s leading investors with high-quality, timely, and actionable Insights. Subscribe now for unlimited access, or request a demo below.
This was the basis of the trade. Hitachi Ltd (6501 JP) has been susceptible to pressure for a bump since even before the Tender Offer was announced because of the proxy fight at last year’s board meeting for management rights. Hitachi supported the incumbent who consequently retired as chairman, but kept the continuity. The board was split 6:3.
Since late January or early February when it became clear that board support for the deal was still split 6:3 and one of the points in a couple of the independent directors’ comments as reasons why the deal was not supported was that Hitachi’s bid at NT$60/share did not match an informal offer from Otis at $63/share, it has been clear that one way to extinguish that criticism was to bid NT$63 or higher.
And now Hitachi has. After the close on Friday, a release from Yungtay Engineering (1507 TT) hit the mops system saying that Hitachi had amended the Public Purchase statement by raising the Purchase Price to NT$65/share. This is closer to the high end of the original valuations provided by the law firm and public accountancy firms of NT$40.27-68.31 and NT$55.15-67.83. Taiwan Hitachi Elevator released a press release carried by the ChinaTimes here.
After 6 months of haggling and due diligence, debt negotiation, and structuring, global education company Navitas has now signed a Scheme Implementation Deed with a consortium led by Australian Private Equity firm BGH Capital consortium, which includes Navitas Founder Rod Jones (also the largest holder at 13%) and AustralianSuper. The Scheme Price of A$5.825 is a 6% uplift from the original A$5.50 offered in the preliminary, indicative, non-binding offer announced on 10 October 2018 and a 34% premium to the undisturbed price of 9 October 2018 of A$4.35/share.
At an equity valuation of A$2.1bn, this is being done at a TTM EV/EBITDA of ~15.5x (and probably around 0.8 turns less for FY19 forecast, which is healthy, but the company spins off prodigious cashflow, which makes it doable for private equity with leverage.
Given the lack of any real news or rumour of competing offer in the last five months, or in the period since the lockup, Travis Lundy doesn’t think it likely we will see one. Because he thinks this deal has very few hurdles, expect it to trade tight.
Harbin Electric’s (“HE”) composite doc for its merger by absorption has been dispatched. HE’s major shareholder Harbin Electric Corporation, an SOE, is seeking to delist the company by way of a merger by absorption at HK$4.56/share, an 82.4% premium to last close. The offer has been declared final and the IFA considers the offer fair & reasonable. The significant offer premium to last close, the material drop in FY18 profit, and the lack of possibility of a competitive bidder emerging suggests this Offer falls over the line.
Seeing it blocked at the H-share meeting is a risk, although no single shareholder has the requisite stake to block the deal. The tendering acceptance condition in this two-step hybrid Offer of 90% of H shares out, has been seen in prior PRC-incorporated takeovers.
However, I still consider a “fair” price to be something like the distribution of net cash (~$3.48/share by my calcs) to zero then taking over the company on a PER with respect to peers. Dissension rights are available, although I am not aware of any precedents from discussions with both the PRC and HK tribunals, nor the calculation methodology of a “fair price” under such a dissension, nor the timing of payment.
Trading at a wide gross/annualised spread of 8.3%/54.5%, implying a >80% chance of completion. The current downside should this break is 45%. Not an attractive risk/reward.
On March 6th, a day before Hitachi Ltd (6501 JP)‘s Tender Offer for a minimum of just over a third of Yungtay was expected to close, the closing date was extended to 22 April, as Taiwan regulators (MEIC and FTC) had not signed off. The proposed purchase price was unchanged at NT$60.
An EGM called by independent director Chen – who has been against the deal – was expected to take place on the 18 April. It was not clear the underlying purpose of the EGM other than to change the directors in place and gain management rights for the Baojia Group and Hsu Tso-Ming. Perhaps IF the board were to be renewed with less support for Hitachi, then the board could change its support/opinion and that might affect retail investor support for the deal. Retail tends to vote with management. In any event Hitachi filed an injunction to stop the EGM.
IF Hitachi is unlikely to get the required number of shares, then it could easily be the case that they lose board and management control. If they do get the support, they will effectively control the board and management for the foreseeable future.
Travis’ expectation was that this deal was still “Safe” and would get done, most likely at NT$60 but with the option of a “kiss” to NT$63 or so in the case of more public awareness and castigation of Hitachi and the board for ignoring competing indications at higher prices.
Helpfully, after the close on Friday, Hitachi gave it a kiss, raising the Tender Offer price to NT$65/share.
Travis has opinions on what to do here. Read the insights.
On the 8th of March, Bain Capital raised the Tender Offer Price by 14.8% to ¥700/share and extended the Tender Offer by almost two weeks to the 25th of March. It also lowered the amount which needs to be bought to 50.1% from 66.67%. So, on the 21 March, Murakami-san launched a Tender Offer of his own.
Murakami-affiliated entities Minami Aoyama Fudosan KK and Reno KK’s Tender Offer at ¥750/share is to buy a minimum of 9,100,900 shares and a maximum of all remaining shares. The entities currently own 3,355,900 shares (13.47%). That minimum should be easier than buying a minimum of 12,456,800 shares at ¥700/share under Bain Capital’s offer.
There is a theoretical possibility that Japanese retail investors decide to tender their shares into Bain’s bid because it is supported by management rather than sell to a higher bid which is not. Travis doubted it will go this way but stranger things have happened. Bain should be willing to walk.
After Travis wrote the first two insights listed below with the content above, the stock soared 16.5% on Friday and ended at a 14.5% premium to the Murakami tender of ¥750/share (i.e. closed at ¥859/share). The company maintained its support for the Bain Capital bid at ¥700/share, but withdrew its recommendation that investors tender into it. The company did not yet offer a real opinion on Murakami-san’s offer. That must come in the next 9 business days.
Travis has opinions on what to do here. Read the insights below.
Australian property developer, Villa World Ltd (VLW AU)announced that it had received an unsolicited proposal, by way of a scheme, from AVID Property Group Australia at an offer price A$2.23, or a 12% premium to last close. AVID’s indicative offer translates to an LTM PER and P/B of 6.4x and 0.9x, with the P/B metric roughly in line peers.
During 2018, VLW’s share price declined by 36% to A$1.76 from A$2.77, with a large chunk of that downward move occurring in December after VLW withdrew its FY19E earnings guidance. That forecast withdrawal was exacerbated by the fact VLW had maintained the 2019 forward guidance at its mid-November AGM.
Ho Bee Land Ltd (HOBEE SP), VLW’s largest shareholder and JV partner, responded to AVID’s proposal by buying 2.2mn shares (~1.8% of shares out) at an average of A$1.95/share – and a high of A$2.18/share – lifting its stake to 9.41%. VLW has also recently bought back and cancelled 1.76mn shares or ~1.4% of shares out. The highest price paid was $2.09.
AVID’s offer looks opportunistic and it’s doubtful VLW will want to engage. VLW is trading below its book, paying out one of the highest yields among its peers, and with ~21% of the share register potentially defending their position- the largest shareholder actively buying – there’s likely upside from here. Shares closed Friday at $2.24.
Aveo announced in early February a number of indicative non-binding bids were received for a “whole of company transaction” with the AFR reporting (paywalled) that Lone Star had joined the bidding. Other interested parties are believed to include Blackstone and Cerberus Capital. Aveo’s share price is up ~11% since announcing the receipt of the indicative bids – and closing at $1.97 on Friday – having drifted down from a (recent) closing peak of $2.14 earlier this month.
Aveo is currently trading at an attractive 0.52x P/B vs. 1.8x for its peer group, with the next closest peer valuation at 0.7x P/B. An offer of >0.7x, a level last traded as recently as June 2018, appears reasonable with ~92% of assets in investment property.
The partial offer has successfully closed, with no major surprise in the expected pro-ration and the back end traded higher than one’s purchase price – not down. Some of this may be due to lack of stock borrow, and conversely, some of the strength may be due to those who had shorted their borrow buying back their short.
That left us with a question – do we want to own a residual here? Or instantiate a new position? The current post-tender price was 35.7% higher than the undisturbed price.
Travis could not recommend an outright buy on fundamental reasons. He thinks the Itochu story is reasonably compelling, or will be, but the lack of near-term observable fundamental turnaround may disappoint some. There may not be a lot of IR or analyst coverage of the situation either. For that, if you have a residual trade, he would sell it here.
This is not a short recommendation. This is a “It was a good arb trade and now the arb trade is over so don’t become a long-term investor just because it is doing better than you thought.”
CATL which grabbed Panasonic Corp (6752 JP)’s leading position in the battery supplier industry last year now seems to be grabbing the latter’s key customer as well. The news circulating states that CATL could power Tesla Motors (TSLA US)’s Model 3 cars which Tesla is planning to start assembling at Tesla’s new factory near Shanghai.
However, the news lacks credibility as neither company has commented on the matter, while Tesla has already agreed with Tianjin Lishen to supply batteries for its Chinese Plant.
But if true, Tesla would be the key one to benefit, while CATL could be taking up a considerable share of risk in terms of stable future orders.
The boards of Medco Energi Internasional T (MEDC IJ) and Ophir have agreed to increase the Offer price to £0.575 from £0.55, representing a 73.2% premium to the undisturbed price. All other details of the scheme remain unchanged. The court meeting is to take place on the 25 March, while the long stop is the 20 June – unless both companies agree to an extension.
Subsequent to the bump, Coro Energy PLC (CORO LN), which had previously submitted a non-binding cash/scrip reverse takeover offer, declared it has no intention to bid. Sand Grove has also announced it has given an irrevocable undertaking to vote its 18.73% in favour of the scheme. Coro held discussions with Sand Grove before abandoning its bid.
Petrus, which previously estimated a £0.64 – £1.42/share range – just for Ophir’s SEA investments, has yet to respond to the Offer increase; but it’s wholly doubtful their position has altered. Shortly before the bump, it said it would vote its 3.95% stake against the scheme.
While I consider the offer for Ophir sub-optimal – and shares have closed above terms on 30% of the trading days since Medco’s initial offer – Petrus alone cannot disrupt the vote. Medco’s Offer is conditional on 75%+ approval from Ophir’s shareholders, which appears less tenuous following the 4.5% bump and Sand Grove’s irrevocable undertaking. Shares closed at £0.569 on Friday.
CMA CGM SA (144898Z FP)has 89.47% of CEVA and will now move to squeeze out and delist. The additional tender period will run from 20 March to 2 April. CEVA’s board of directors have reversed their earlier opinion and recommend shareholders to tender.
If delisting occurs, it is expected concurrently occur with a squeeze-out, which would be expected to take place in the third quarter of 2019 once all stock exchange and other legal conditions are fulfilled.
Depending on the final tendered %, the squeeze-out will occur via the simpler market squeeze-out process if CMA gets 98%+; or the more complex off-market merger/squeeze out route if the % tendered is between 90%-98%.
Ecopro BM is up 48% since its IPO on March 5th. Ecopro, which holds 56% in Ecopro BN is up just 1%. That stake is now worth 115% of its market cap.
The stub assets primarily comprise a 100% stake in Ecopro Innovation, which is involved in the processing of lithium for lithium ion batteries. Innovation’s net profit increased to ₩26.3bn in the 1Q-3Q18 from ₩10.4bn in 2017. Innovation’s book value also increased to ₩35.3bn at the end of 3Q18 from ₩7.4bn at end of 2017.
Douglas Kim recommended going long Ecopro Co and shorting Ecopro BM. Plugging in his numbers, I back out a discount to NAV of 55%. Both legs are pretty liquid.
Curtis Lehnert closes this set-up trade as levels have reverted to the average. Both companies recently reported so-so results, suggesting the core business continues to face declining revenue from “roadshop” brands aimed at the lower-end of the market.
More surprising was the stock buyback announced at both companies 20 days after the earnings announcement, which spurred a 15% rally in the Group’s share price while Corp rallied nearly 11%. The buyback announcement seems to have caught the market by surprise and also caused the stub to revert to its 6-month average level of ~16% discount to NAV.
Douglas recommended closing the Hyosung unwind trade, which has returned ~8.2% before comms and borrowing cos.
The reason for Hyosung TNC’s recent move upwards? Right place, right time it would seem, as its trading value substantially increased, touching ₩8.9bn on the 19 March, the highest level this year, and the highest level since August 22nd, 2018.
On November 13th last year, Linkbal announced it was looking to move from MOTHERS to the TSE First Section. The stock rallied. Then it fell a lot. On March 5th, the company announced a forthcoming tachiaigai bunbai offering designed to increase the float. This would get it most of the way towards meeting the requirements, but likely not all the way.
An inclusion is still months off. And there would likely be another sale to increase shareholder count by 800-1000 before then, whether in the form of a Public Offering/Uridashi or in the form of another tachiaigai bunbai.
The company’s market cap is not large enough to warrant analyst coverage, and float will remain relatively small. I expect the stock to get re-evaluated by small-cap managers. There are some. There probably should be more.
Travis recommended investors buy the stock – which traded over 2% of shares outstanding at -2% in the first five minutes, and 3% of outstanding in the first 20 minutes, before rising to close +13.6% on Wednesday. The stock fell 6% on Friday.
Hopewell Holdings (54 HK)‘s “Egregiously Bad” scheme has passed with 96.27% of disinterested shareholders approving the resolution. Shares will now be suspended at the close of trading on the 17 April. Cheques are expected to be dispatched on the 14 April. Seems like I’m not the only one as David Webb was also unimpressed with the Offer.
After Eclipx (ECX AU) announced a 42.4% decline in NPATA in the first five months vs. FY18, and other significant issues in the Right2Drive and Grays divisions, Mcmillan Shakespeare (MMS AU)said it did “not believe it will be possible to complete the proposed scheme“. Eclipx closed down 60% on the week.
Brookfield has received FIRB approval in its tilt for Healthscope Ltd (HSO AU). The AFR is reporting (paywalled) that BGH is now out of the running for Healthscope. Which leaves Brookfield’s twin bids ($2.50 via a scheme or $2.40 via an off-market takeover) as the expected winner. Norges Bank announced it now holds 5.08%.
My ongoing series flags large moves (~10%) in CCASS holdings over the past week or so, moves which are often outside normal market transactions. These may be indicative of share pledges. Or potential takeovers. Or simply help understand volume swings.
Often these moves can easily be explained – the placement of new shares, rights issue, movements subsequent to a takeover, amongst others. For those mentioned below, I could not find an obvious reason for the CCASS move.
Lasertec hit a new high in the semiconductor stock rally that followed Micron Technology’s March 20 earnings call. On Friday, March 22 (March 21 was a holiday in Japan), Lasertec was up 8.4% to ¥4,900. At this price, the shares are selling at 42x our EPS estimate for FY Jun-19, 36x our estimate for FY Jun-20 and 31x our estimate for FY Jun-21. On a 5-year view, earnings growth could bring the projected P/E multiple down to 21x, in our estimation.
Following strong 1H results, management left FY Jun-19 sales and profit guidance unchanged, but raised semiconductor-related orders guidance by 13% while cutting orders guidance for FPD-related and other products by nearly 40%. Total new orders guidance was raised from ¥37 billion to ¥39 billion, compared with sales guidance of ¥28 billion, implying an increase in the order backlog from ¥39.9 billion to ¥50.9 billion.
With this in mind, we have raised our sales and profit estimates for FY Jun-20 and added new, higher estimates for FY Jun-21 and beyond. Rising demand for EUV mask blank and mask defect inspection equipment should drive an increase in total sales from ¥29 billion this fiscal year to ¥38 billion in FY Jun-21, and approximately ¥50 billion in FY Jun-23. Over the same period, operating profit should rise from ¥7.0 billion to ¥9.5 billion, and then to approximately ¥14 billion.
Risks for investors include the potential delay or reduction of orders and shipments (as just happened with FPD inspection equipment), high volatility in quarterly orders, sales and profits, and extended valuations.
These are the five developments/news flows/trends and their potential impact on Thai equities you should be aware of in recent weeks:
Reversing Brexit. A special report highlighting the possible reversal of Brexit should have limited impact on Thai equities, though a few names like SSI, Thai Union, and Minor do float up on the screen.
TMB announces a 5 for 1 rights issue at Bt2.07/sh, which could raise US$570m of new capital for their acquisition of Thanchart and imply a 65-35 split of ownership between the two banks.
Politically motivated wage hike. Some of the political campaigns by smaller parties are even more populist than the major parties, implying wage increases between 10-30% from current levels. This could really destabilize Thailand’s long-term prospects as an investment base.
Italian-Thai Chairman thrown into prison. Premchai Karnasutra, who killed one of Thailand’s last 9 black leopards, is sentenced to 16 months in jail. Share prices actually rose!
Bangkok’s third airport! The Navy is putting up the UTaPao airport construction up for bid. Front runners include the CP-led consortium, which includes ITD, but contenders include the BTS-STEC consortium and another smaller one.
In this report, we provide an analysis of our pair trade idea between Ecopro Co Ltd (086520 KS) and Ecopro BM Co Ltd (247540 KS). Our strategy will be to go long Ecopro Co and to go short on Ecopro BM. Our base case strategy is to achieve gains of 7-9% on this pair trade.
Our SoTP valuation suggests a value per share of 52,004 won for Ecopro Co Ltd (086520 KS), representing 65% higher than current share price. Ecopro Co. currently has a market cap of 691 billion won. Ecopro Co’s 56% stake in Ecopro BM is worth 819 billion won, representing 119% of its market cap. Ecopro BM’s share price has jumped nearly 50% since its IPO on March 5th. We believe Ecopro Co has a much higher upside right now versus Ecopro BM over the next one to six months.
Established in 1998, Ecopro Co started its business focusing on air pollution control related products. It also has major investments in companies such as Ecopro BM Co Ltd (247540 KS) and Ecopro Innovation (unlisted). Ecopro Co’s major customers include Samsung Electronics, SK Hynix, and Hyundai Heavy Industries.
Get Straight to the Source on Smartkarma
Smartkarma supports the world’s leading investors with high-quality, timely, and actionable Insights. Subscribe now for unlimited access, or request a demo below.
Wesfarmers Ltd (WES AU) launched a conditional, non-binding indicative proposal for Lynas Corp Ltd (LYC AU), one of the world’s only rare earths suppliers based outside China. Wesfarmers’ proposal of A$2.25 cash per share values Lynas at A$1.5 billion. Lynas’ share price jumped 35% to A$2.10 before going into a trading halt.
The bid comes at a turbulent time for Lynas, which is caught in a regulatory dispute with authorities in Malaysia. While Wesfarmers proposal could be viewed as a lifeline for Lynas, we believe that Wesfarmers’s proposal is opportunistic and unattractive.
The shares are cheap. The company is cash rich and owns 10% in treasury stock; it owned more last year but has cancelled 4%. It has some Y6bn in long term investment. EV in our view is Y57bn vs the current market cap of Y110bn. With ebitda next year coming in at Y15bn, EV/ebitda is under 4x. The shares yield 3.4% and trade at book. They have slightly underperformed the market over the last 12 months. For now, we view this as a defensive buy. There remain many issues longer term as to its place in the global elevator world. A potential positive, however, is that in May the company will announce a new mid-term plan and in it, they will outline their view as regards to shareholder returns for the next three years. They are aware that they are very over capitalised, so greater returns are a real possibility.
DHICO rights offer 1st round pricing was fixed at ₩5,550. This ₩5,550 will serve as the ceiling. It is nearly guaranteed that the final offer price will be fixed somewhere between ₩5,000 and ₩5,550. It can not go lower than the face value ₩5,000.
Today (Mar 26) is the last day to get subscription rights. Subscription rights will be then tradable on Apr 19~25. The 4 bookrunners will buy all forfeited shares at a 15% discount to final offering price. There is no cancellation risk.
Local arb traders made their move yesterday. Foreign arb traders entered as well. Past tendency shows buying earlier would pay off more handsomely than waiting longer. DHICO’s fundamentals isn’t showing any positive sign yet. Deal structure isn’t helping improve street sentiments either. This event needs a lot of arb traders to hit the target. This is another relief point for those making early trades.
In our Discover HK Connect series, we aim to help our investors understand the flow of southbound trades via the Hong Kong Connect, as analyzed by our proprietary data engine. We will discuss the stocks that experienced the most inflow and outflow by mainland investors in the past seven days.
We split the stocks eligible for the Hong Kong Connect trade into three groups: component stocks in the HSCEI index, stocks with a market capitalization between USD 1 billion and USD 5 billion, and stocks with a market capitalization between USD 500 million and USD 1 billion.
In this insight, we highlight the WH Group, which led the inflows last week.
On Monday the 18th of March, Yoshiaki Murakami-associated companies announced they had raised their stake in Kosaido Co Ltd (7868 JP) above 10%. That stake raise happened at a price ABOVE where Bain Capital Japan’s bidding entity had set its “final” Tender Offer Price of ¥700/share beforehand, indicating there was no way Murakami-associated companies would accept Bain’s price.
On the 20th, Minami Aoyama Fudosan – another Murakami-associated company heretofore uninvolved – announced a Tender Offer for a minimum of 50.00% of Kosaido (and up to 100% of the shares out) at ¥750/share (and announced they had bought more bringing their stake to 13.47% in total).
The shares reacted strongly Friday the 22nd after a market holiday Thursday, rising 16.6% to close 14.5% through the Murakami-fund terms.
After the close on Friday, the Murakami-affiliated company Reno KK which has been the lead entity to date in the effort – announced a larger position (as I noted on the 19th was likely). Also after the close, Kosaido itself made three public releases.
It is worth reading them, and it is worth thinking about what the company’s options are.
For Recent Insights on the Kosaido Situation Published on Smartkarma…
Smartkarma supports the world’s leading investors with high-quality, timely, and actionable Insights. Subscribe now for unlimited access, or request a demo below.
The shares are cheap. The company is cash rich and owns 10% in treasury stock; it owned more last year but has cancelled 4%. It has some Y6bn in long term investment. EV in our view is Y57bn vs the current market cap of Y110bn. With ebitda next year coming in at Y15bn, EV/ebitda is under 4x. The shares yield 3.4% and trade at book. They have slightly underperformed the market over the last 12 months. For now, we view this as a defensive buy. There remain many issues longer term as to its place in the global elevator world. A potential positive, however, is that in May the company will announce a new mid-term plan and in it, they will outline their view as regards to shareholder returns for the next three years. They are aware that they are very over capitalised, so greater returns are a real possibility.
DHICO rights offer 1st round pricing was fixed at ₩5,550. This ₩5,550 will serve as the ceiling. It is nearly guaranteed that the final offer price will be fixed somewhere between ₩5,000 and ₩5,550. It can not go lower than the face value ₩5,000.
Today (Mar 26) is the last day to get subscription rights. Subscription rights will be then tradable on Apr 19~25. The 4 bookrunners will buy all forfeited shares at a 15% discount to final offering price. There is no cancellation risk.
Local arb traders made their move yesterday. Foreign arb traders entered as well. Past tendency shows buying earlier would pay off more handsomely than waiting longer. DHICO’s fundamentals isn’t showing any positive sign yet. Deal structure isn’t helping improve street sentiments either. This event needs a lot of arb traders to hit the target. This is another relief point for those making early trades.
In our Discover HK Connect series, we aim to help our investors understand the flow of southbound trades via the Hong Kong Connect, as analyzed by our proprietary data engine. We will discuss the stocks that experienced the most inflow and outflow by mainland investors in the past seven days.
We split the stocks eligible for the Hong Kong Connect trade into three groups: component stocks in the HSCEI index, stocks with a market capitalization between USD 1 billion and USD 5 billion, and stocks with a market capitalization between USD 500 million and USD 1 billion.
In this insight, we highlight the WH Group, which led the inflows last week.
On Monday the 18th of March, Yoshiaki Murakami-associated companies announced they had raised their stake in Kosaido Co Ltd (7868 JP) above 10%. That stake raise happened at a price ABOVE where Bain Capital Japan’s bidding entity had set its “final” Tender Offer Price of ¥700/share beforehand, indicating there was no way Murakami-associated companies would accept Bain’s price.
On the 20th, Minami Aoyama Fudosan – another Murakami-associated company heretofore uninvolved – announced a Tender Offer for a minimum of 50.00% of Kosaido (and up to 100% of the shares out) at ¥750/share (and announced they had bought more bringing their stake to 13.47% in total).
The shares reacted strongly Friday the 22nd after a market holiday Thursday, rising 16.6% to close 14.5% through the Murakami-fund terms.
After the close on Friday, the Murakami-affiliated company Reno KK which has been the lead entity to date in the effort – announced a larger position (as I noted on the 19th was likely). Also after the close, Kosaido itself made three public releases.
It is worth reading them, and it is worth thinking about what the company’s options are.
For Recent Insights on the Kosaido Situation Published on Smartkarma…
This was the basis of the trade. Hitachi Ltd (6501 JP) has been susceptible to pressure for a bump since even before the Tender Offer was announced because of the proxy fight at last year’s board meeting for management rights. Hitachi supported the incumbent who consequently retired as chairman, but kept the continuity. The board was split 6:3.
Since late January or early February when it became clear that board support for the deal was still split 6:3 and one of the points in a couple of the independent directors’ comments as reasons why the deal was not supported was that Hitachi’s bid at NT$60/share did not match an informal offer from Otis at $63/share, it has been clear that one way to extinguish that criticism was to bid NT$63 or higher.
And now Hitachi has. After the close on Friday, a release from Yungtay Engineering (1507 TT) hit the mops system saying that Hitachi had amended the Public Purchase statement by raising the Purchase Price to NT$65/share. This is closer to the high end of the original valuations provided by the law firm and public accountancy firms of NT$40.27-68.31 and NT$55.15-67.83. Taiwan Hitachi Elevator released a press release carried by the ChinaTimes here.
Smartkarma supports the world’s leading investors with high-quality, timely, and actionable Insights. Subscribe now for unlimited access, or request a demo below.
DHICO rights offer 1st round pricing was fixed at ₩5,550. This ₩5,550 will serve as the ceiling. It is nearly guaranteed that the final offer price will be fixed somewhere between ₩5,000 and ₩5,550. It can not go lower than the face value ₩5,000.
Today (Mar 26) is the last day to get subscription rights. Subscription rights will be then tradable on Apr 19~25. The 4 bookrunners will buy all forfeited shares at a 15% discount to final offering price. There is no cancellation risk.
Local arb traders made their move yesterday. Foreign arb traders entered as well. Past tendency shows buying earlier would pay off more handsomely than waiting longer. DHICO’s fundamentals isn’t showing any positive sign yet. Deal structure isn’t helping improve street sentiments either. This event needs a lot of arb traders to hit the target. This is another relief point for those making early trades.
In our Discover HK Connect series, we aim to help our investors understand the flow of southbound trades via the Hong Kong Connect, as analyzed by our proprietary data engine. We will discuss the stocks that experienced the most inflow and outflow by mainland investors in the past seven days.
We split the stocks eligible for the Hong Kong Connect trade into three groups: component stocks in the HSCEI index, stocks with a market capitalization between USD 1 billion and USD 5 billion, and stocks with a market capitalization between USD 500 million and USD 1 billion.
In this insight, we highlight the WH Group, which led the inflows last week.
On Monday the 18th of March, Yoshiaki Murakami-associated companies announced they had raised their stake in Kosaido Co Ltd (7868 JP) above 10%. That stake raise happened at a price ABOVE where Bain Capital Japan’s bidding entity had set its “final” Tender Offer Price of ¥700/share beforehand, indicating there was no way Murakami-associated companies would accept Bain’s price.
On the 20th, Minami Aoyama Fudosan – another Murakami-associated company heretofore uninvolved – announced a Tender Offer for a minimum of 50.00% of Kosaido (and up to 100% of the shares out) at ¥750/share (and announced they had bought more bringing their stake to 13.47% in total).
The shares reacted strongly Friday the 22nd after a market holiday Thursday, rising 16.6% to close 14.5% through the Murakami-fund terms.
After the close on Friday, the Murakami-affiliated company Reno KK which has been the lead entity to date in the effort – announced a larger position (as I noted on the 19th was likely). Also after the close, Kosaido itself made three public releases.
It is worth reading them, and it is worth thinking about what the company’s options are.
For Recent Insights on the Kosaido Situation Published on Smartkarma…
This was the basis of the trade. Hitachi Ltd (6501 JP) has been susceptible to pressure for a bump since even before the Tender Offer was announced because of the proxy fight at last year’s board meeting for management rights. Hitachi supported the incumbent who consequently retired as chairman, but kept the continuity. The board was split 6:3.
Since late January or early February when it became clear that board support for the deal was still split 6:3 and one of the points in a couple of the independent directors’ comments as reasons why the deal was not supported was that Hitachi’s bid at NT$60/share did not match an informal offer from Otis at $63/share, it has been clear that one way to extinguish that criticism was to bid NT$63 or higher.
And now Hitachi has. After the close on Friday, a release from Yungtay Engineering (1507 TT) hit the mops system saying that Hitachi had amended the Public Purchase statement by raising the Purchase Price to NT$65/share. This is closer to the high end of the original valuations provided by the law firm and public accountancy firms of NT$40.27-68.31 and NT$55.15-67.83. Taiwan Hitachi Elevator released a press release carried by the ChinaTimes here.
After 6 months of haggling and due diligence, debt negotiation, and structuring, global education company Navitas has now signed a Scheme Implementation Deed with a consortium led by Australian Private Equity firm BGH Capital consortium, which includes Navitas Founder Rod Jones (also the largest holder at 13%) and AustralianSuper. The Scheme Price of A$5.825 is a 6% uplift from the original A$5.50 offered in the preliminary, indicative, non-binding offer announced on 10 October 2018 and a 34% premium to the undisturbed price of 9 October 2018 of A$4.35/share.
At an equity valuation of A$2.1bn, this is being done at a TTM EV/EBITDA of ~15.5x (and probably around 0.8 turns less for FY19 forecast, which is healthy, but the company spins off prodigious cashflow, which makes it doable for private equity with leverage.
Given the lack of any real news or rumour of competing offer in the last five months, or in the period since the lockup, Travis Lundy doesn’t think it likely we will see one. Because he thinks this deal has very few hurdles, expect it to trade tight.
Harbin Electric’s (“HE”) composite doc for its merger by absorption has been dispatched. HE’s major shareholder Harbin Electric Corporation, an SOE, is seeking to delist the company by way of a merger by absorption at HK$4.56/share, an 82.4% premium to last close. The offer has been declared final and the IFA considers the offer fair & reasonable. The significant offer premium to last close, the material drop in FY18 profit, and the lack of possibility of a competitive bidder emerging suggests this Offer falls over the line.
Seeing it blocked at the H-share meeting is a risk, although no single shareholder has the requisite stake to block the deal. The tendering acceptance condition in this two-step hybrid Offer of 90% of H shares out, has been seen in prior PRC-incorporated takeovers.
However, I still consider a “fair” price to be something like the distribution of net cash (~$3.48/share by my calcs) to zero then taking over the company on a PER with respect to peers. Dissension rights are available, although I am not aware of any precedents from discussions with both the PRC and HK tribunals, nor the calculation methodology of a “fair price” under such a dissension, nor the timing of payment.
Trading at a wide gross/annualised spread of 8.3%/54.5%, implying a >80% chance of completion. The current downside should this break is 45%. Not an attractive risk/reward.
On March 6th, a day before Hitachi Ltd (6501 JP)‘s Tender Offer for a minimum of just over a third of Yungtay was expected to close, the closing date was extended to 22 April, as Taiwan regulators (MEIC and FTC) had not signed off. The proposed purchase price was unchanged at NT$60.
An EGM called by independent director Chen – who has been against the deal – was expected to take place on the 18 April. It was not clear the underlying purpose of the EGM other than to change the directors in place and gain management rights for the Baojia Group and Hsu Tso-Ming. Perhaps IF the board were to be renewed with less support for Hitachi, then the board could change its support/opinion and that might affect retail investor support for the deal. Retail tends to vote with management. In any event Hitachi filed an injunction to stop the EGM.
IF Hitachi is unlikely to get the required number of shares, then it could easily be the case that they lose board and management control. If they do get the support, they will effectively control the board and management for the foreseeable future.
Travis’ expectation was that this deal was still “Safe” and would get done, most likely at NT$60 but with the option of a “kiss” to NT$63 or so in the case of more public awareness and castigation of Hitachi and the board for ignoring competing indications at higher prices.
Helpfully, after the close on Friday, Hitachi gave it a kiss, raising the Tender Offer price to NT$65/share.
Travis has opinions on what to do here. Read the insights.
On the 8th of March, Bain Capital raised the Tender Offer Price by 14.8% to ¥700/share and extended the Tender Offer by almost two weeks to the 25th of March. It also lowered the amount which needs to be bought to 50.1% from 66.67%. So, on the 21 March, Murakami-san launched a Tender Offer of his own.
Murakami-affiliated entities Minami Aoyama Fudosan KK and Reno KK’s Tender Offer at ¥750/share is to buy a minimum of 9,100,900 shares and a maximum of all remaining shares. The entities currently own 3,355,900 shares (13.47%). That minimum should be easier than buying a minimum of 12,456,800 shares at ¥700/share under Bain Capital’s offer.
There is a theoretical possibility that Japanese retail investors decide to tender their shares into Bain’s bid because it is supported by management rather than sell to a higher bid which is not. Travis doubted it will go this way but stranger things have happened. Bain should be willing to walk.
After Travis wrote the first two insights listed below with the content above, the stock soared 16.5% on Friday and ended at a 14.5% premium to the Murakami tender of ¥750/share (i.e. closed at ¥859/share). The company maintained its support for the Bain Capital bid at ¥700/share, but withdrew its recommendation that investors tender into it. The company did not yet offer a real opinion on Murakami-san’s offer. That must come in the next 9 business days.
Travis has opinions on what to do here. Read the insights below.
Australian property developer, Villa World Ltd (VLW AU)announced that it had received an unsolicited proposal, by way of a scheme, from AVID Property Group Australia at an offer price A$2.23, or a 12% premium to last close. AVID’s indicative offer translates to an LTM PER and P/B of 6.4x and 0.9x, with the P/B metric roughly in line peers.
During 2018, VLW’s share price declined by 36% to A$1.76 from A$2.77, with a large chunk of that downward move occurring in December after VLW withdrew its FY19E earnings guidance. That forecast withdrawal was exacerbated by the fact VLW had maintained the 2019 forward guidance at its mid-November AGM.
Ho Bee Land Ltd (HOBEE SP), VLW’s largest shareholder and JV partner, responded to AVID’s proposal by buying 2.2mn shares (~1.8% of shares out) at an average of A$1.95/share – and a high of A$2.18/share – lifting its stake to 9.41%. VLW has also recently bought back and cancelled 1.76mn shares or ~1.4% of shares out. The highest price paid was $2.09.
AVID’s offer looks opportunistic and it’s doubtful VLW will want to engage. VLW is trading below its book, paying out one of the highest yields among its peers, and with ~21% of the share register potentially defending their position- the largest shareholder actively buying – there’s likely upside from here. Shares closed Friday at $2.24.
Aveo announced in early February a number of indicative non-binding bids were received for a “whole of company transaction” with the AFR reporting (paywalled) that Lone Star had joined the bidding. Other interested parties are believed to include Blackstone and Cerberus Capital. Aveo’s share price is up ~11% since announcing the receipt of the indicative bids – and closing at $1.97 on Friday – having drifted down from a (recent) closing peak of $2.14 earlier this month.
Aveo is currently trading at an attractive 0.52x P/B vs. 1.8x for its peer group, with the next closest peer valuation at 0.7x P/B. An offer of >0.7x, a level last traded as recently as June 2018, appears reasonable with ~92% of assets in investment property.
The partial offer has successfully closed, with no major surprise in the expected pro-ration and the back end traded higher than one’s purchase price – not down. Some of this may be due to lack of stock borrow, and conversely, some of the strength may be due to those who had shorted their borrow buying back their short.
That left us with a question – do we want to own a residual here? Or instantiate a new position? The current post-tender price was 35.7% higher than the undisturbed price.
Travis could not recommend an outright buy on fundamental reasons. He thinks the Itochu story is reasonably compelling, or will be, but the lack of near-term observable fundamental turnaround may disappoint some. There may not be a lot of IR or analyst coverage of the situation either. For that, if you have a residual trade, he would sell it here.
This is not a short recommendation. This is a “It was a good arb trade and now the arb trade is over so don’t become a long-term investor just because it is doing better than you thought.”
CATL which grabbed Panasonic Corp (6752 JP)’s leading position in the battery supplier industry last year now seems to be grabbing the latter’s key customer as well. The news circulating states that CATL could power Tesla Motors (TSLA US)’s Model 3 cars which Tesla is planning to start assembling at Tesla’s new factory near Shanghai.
However, the news lacks credibility as neither company has commented on the matter, while Tesla has already agreed with Tianjin Lishen to supply batteries for its Chinese Plant.
But if true, Tesla would be the key one to benefit, while CATL could be taking up a considerable share of risk in terms of stable future orders.
The boards of Medco Energi Internasional T (MEDC IJ) and Ophir have agreed to increase the Offer price to £0.575 from £0.55, representing a 73.2% premium to the undisturbed price. All other details of the scheme remain unchanged. The court meeting is to take place on the 25 March, while the long stop is the 20 June – unless both companies agree to an extension.
Subsequent to the bump, Coro Energy PLC (CORO LN), which had previously submitted a non-binding cash/scrip reverse takeover offer, declared it has no intention to bid. Sand Grove has also announced it has given an irrevocable undertaking to vote its 18.73% in favour of the scheme. Coro held discussions with Sand Grove before abandoning its bid.
Petrus, which previously estimated a £0.64 – £1.42/share range – just for Ophir’s SEA investments, has yet to respond to the Offer increase; but it’s wholly doubtful their position has altered. Shortly before the bump, it said it would vote its 3.95% stake against the scheme.
While I consider the offer for Ophir sub-optimal – and shares have closed above terms on 30% of the trading days since Medco’s initial offer – Petrus alone cannot disrupt the vote. Medco’s Offer is conditional on 75%+ approval from Ophir’s shareholders, which appears less tenuous following the 4.5% bump and Sand Grove’s irrevocable undertaking. Shares closed at £0.569 on Friday.
CMA CGM SA (144898Z FP)has 89.47% of CEVA and will now move to squeeze out and delist. The additional tender period will run from 20 March to 2 April. CEVA’s board of directors have reversed their earlier opinion and recommend shareholders to tender.
If delisting occurs, it is expected concurrently occur with a squeeze-out, which would be expected to take place in the third quarter of 2019 once all stock exchange and other legal conditions are fulfilled.
Depending on the final tendered %, the squeeze-out will occur via the simpler market squeeze-out process if CMA gets 98%+; or the more complex off-market merger/squeeze out route if the % tendered is between 90%-98%.
Ecopro BM is up 48% since its IPO on March 5th. Ecopro, which holds 56% in Ecopro BN is up just 1%. That stake is now worth 115% of its market cap.
The stub assets primarily comprise a 100% stake in Ecopro Innovation, which is involved in the processing of lithium for lithium ion batteries. Innovation’s net profit increased to ₩26.3bn in the 1Q-3Q18 from ₩10.4bn in 2017. Innovation’s book value also increased to ₩35.3bn at the end of 3Q18 from ₩7.4bn at end of 2017.
Douglas Kim recommended going long Ecopro Co and shorting Ecopro BM. Plugging in his numbers, I back out a discount to NAV of 55%. Both legs are pretty liquid.
Curtis Lehnert closes this set-up trade as levels have reverted to the average. Both companies recently reported so-so results, suggesting the core business continues to face declining revenue from “roadshop” brands aimed at the lower-end of the market.
More surprising was the stock buyback announced at both companies 20 days after the earnings announcement, which spurred a 15% rally in the Group’s share price while Corp rallied nearly 11%. The buyback announcement seems to have caught the market by surprise and also caused the stub to revert to its 6-month average level of ~16% discount to NAV.
Douglas recommended closing the Hyosung unwind trade, which has returned ~8.2% before comms and borrowing cos.
The reason for Hyosung TNC’s recent move upwards? Right place, right time it would seem, as its trading value substantially increased, touching ₩8.9bn on the 19 March, the highest level this year, and the highest level since August 22nd, 2018.
On November 13th last year, Linkbal announced it was looking to move from MOTHERS to the TSE First Section. The stock rallied. Then it fell a lot. On March 5th, the company announced a forthcoming tachiaigai bunbai offering designed to increase the float. This would get it most of the way towards meeting the requirements, but likely not all the way.
An inclusion is still months off. And there would likely be another sale to increase shareholder count by 800-1000 before then, whether in the form of a Public Offering/Uridashi or in the form of another tachiaigai bunbai.
The company’s market cap is not large enough to warrant analyst coverage, and float will remain relatively small. I expect the stock to get re-evaluated by small-cap managers. There are some. There probably should be more.
Travis recommended investors buy the stock – which traded over 2% of shares outstanding at -2% in the first five minutes, and 3% of outstanding in the first 20 minutes, before rising to close +13.6% on Wednesday. The stock fell 6% on Friday.
Hopewell Holdings (54 HK)‘s “Egregiously Bad” scheme has passed with 96.27% of disinterested shareholders approving the resolution. Shares will now be suspended at the close of trading on the 17 April. Cheques are expected to be dispatched on the 14 April. Seems like I’m not the only one as David Webb was also unimpressed with the Offer.
After Eclipx (ECX AU) announced a 42.4% decline in NPATA in the first five months vs. FY18, and other significant issues in the Right2Drive and Grays divisions, Mcmillan Shakespeare (MMS AU)said it did “not believe it will be possible to complete the proposed scheme“. Eclipx closed down 60% on the week.
Brookfield has received FIRB approval in its tilt for Healthscope Ltd (HSO AU). The AFR is reporting (paywalled) that BGH is now out of the running for Healthscope. Which leaves Brookfield’s twin bids ($2.50 via a scheme or $2.40 via an off-market takeover) as the expected winner. Norges Bank announced it now holds 5.08%.
My ongoing series flags large moves (~10%) in CCASS holdings over the past week or so, moves which are often outside normal market transactions. These may be indicative of share pledges. Or potential takeovers. Or simply help understand volume swings.
Often these moves can easily be explained – the placement of new shares, rights issue, movements subsequent to a takeover, amongst others. For those mentioned below, I could not find an obvious reason for the CCASS move.
Source: Company announcements. E = my estimates; C =confirmed
Get Straight to the Source on Smartkarma
Smartkarma supports the world’s leading investors with high-quality, timely, and actionable Insights. Subscribe now for unlimited access, or request a demo below.
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.
DSME has this ₩2.3tril worth of CBs that carry a 30 year maturity. Korea Eximbank is the holder. HHI wants no change. Eximbank wants out as soon as possible. Current price of ₩32,600 is nearly a 20% discount to the conversion price of ₩40,350. It’d be still better for Eximbank to do conversion/sale even at this price. This is 27.54%. It will create huge overhang.
HHI should be given much higher priority than DSME even when they are under the same roof. DSME acquisition is supposed to help HHI first, not the other way around. HHI shouldn’t be much incentivized to help turn around DSME in the short-term. Not only that, pressing down DSME price would probably be the only way for HHI to prevent Eximbank’s stake dumping.
In a longer time horizon, things would depend on the outlook of the entire shipbuilding sector. To minimize risks, I’d go for long/short with HHI. What should be at least clear at this point is that HHI should be outperforming DSME in whatever fundamentals situations we are dealing with.
Another week of US-China negotiations and another big boost to market sentiment. Stock markets as well as crude rallied last week on the back of news from Washington that the US and China were preparing to sign a framework deal in the form of several MoUs covering trade and structural issues.
But there are other economic concerns around the globe, and a preliminary deal between the US and China is not going to curb all the headwinds. Further upside to crude may also be limited because much of the anticipated rapprochement between the two countries has already been factored in. WTI prices stabilising well above the $50/barrel threshold are also likely to support strong growth in US production, which hit the 12 million b/d mark last week.
Nonetheless, there are factors on the supply front that could trigger a spike beyond $70/barrel for Brent, especially if combined with a turnaround in economic and oil demand growth expectations.
If that happens, we believe the Saudis will ease up on over-compliance with their own production cuts, either voluntarily or under renewed pressure from US President Donald Trump.
The Scheme Document for the privatisation of Hopewell Holdings (54 HK) has been dispatched. The court meeting will be held on the 21 March. The consideration will be paid (on or before) the 14 May. The IFA (China Tonghai Capital) considers the $38.80/share Offer to be fair & reasonable. The Scheme is conditional on ≥75% for, ≤10% against from disinterested shareholders. As Hopewell is HK-incorporated, there is no “head count ” test. The full timetable is as follows:
Date
Data in the Date
6-Dec-18
Announcement
24-Feb-19
Scheme document
13-Mar-19
Last time for lodging shares to qualify to vote
15-Mar-19
Meeting record date
19-Mar-19
Court/EGM meeting
2-May-19
Effective date
14-May-19
Cheques dispatched
Source: Hopewell
Substantial Shareholders
Mn
%
The Wu family & concert parties
320.7
36.93
Non-consortium Offeror concert parties
31.7
3.65
Total
352.5
40.48
Disinterested Shareholders
516.1
59.42
After hearing conflicting opinions on what constitutes a blocking stake, a chat with the banker confirmed the blocking stake, as per the Companies Ordinance, is tied to 63.07% of shares out (i.e. Scheme shareholders – see page 95); whereas the Takeovers Code is tied to 59.42% of shares out. Effectively there are two assessments on the blocking stake and the more stringent (the 59.42% out in this case) prevails.
With the Offer Price representing a 43% discount to NAV, wider than the largest discount precedent in past nine years (the Glorious Property (845 HK) offer, which incidentally was voted down), the IFA creatively argues that extenuating factors such as the premium to historical price needs to also be taken into account. Hardly original, but that is where investors must decide whether this is as good as it’s going to get – given the Wu family’s control, there will not be a competing offer – or to hold out for a superior price longer term. This is a final offer and it will not be increased.
What the IFA fails to discuss is that the widest successful discount to NAV privatisation was 29.4% for New World China Land (917 HK)in 2016. And all precedent transactions (successful or otherwise) are PRC (mainly) property development related; except for Wheelock which operated property in Hong Kong (like Hopewell) and in Singapore, which was privatised at a 12.1% discount to NAV.
Therein lies the dilemma – what is a fair and reasonable discount to NAV for a Hong Kong investment property play? With limited precedents, it is challenging to categorically reach an opinion. And that is the disingenuous conclusion from the IFA that the premium to last close and with reference to historical pricing, is in effect the overriding reason to conclude the Offer is reasonable. I would argue the Wu family has made a low-ball offer for what is essentially an investment property play with quantifiable asset value.
A blocking sake is 5.9% or 51.6mn shares. First Eagle, which recently voted down the Guoco Group Ltd (53 HK)privatisation that was pitched at a ~25% discount to NAV, holds 2.7% (according to CapIQ).
Trading at a wide gross/annualised return of 7%/37.5%, reflecting the risk to completion, and the significant downside should the scheme be voted down. Tough one – the premium to last close and with reference to the 10-year price performance, should be sufficient to get it over the line, and the basis for this “bullish” insight. But only for the brave.
Get Straight to the Source on Smartkarma
Smartkarma supports the world’s leading investors with high-quality, timely, and actionable Insights. Subscribe now for unlimited access, or request a demo below.
DSME has this ₩2.3tril worth of CBs that carry a 30 year maturity. Korea Eximbank is the holder. HHI wants no change. Eximbank wants out as soon as possible. Current price of ₩32,600 is nearly a 20% discount to the conversion price of ₩40,350. It’d be still better for Eximbank to do conversion/sale even at this price. This is 27.54%. It will create huge overhang.
HHI should be given much higher priority than DSME even when they are under the same roof. DSME acquisition is supposed to help HHI first, not the other way around. HHI shouldn’t be much incentivized to help turn around DSME in the short-term. Not only that, pressing down DSME price would probably be the only way for HHI to prevent Eximbank’s stake dumping.
In a longer time horizon, things would depend on the outlook of the entire shipbuilding sector. To minimize risks, I’d go for long/short with HHI. What should be at least clear at this point is that HHI should be outperforming DSME in whatever fundamentals situations we are dealing with.
Another week of US-China negotiations and another big boost to market sentiment. Stock markets as well as crude rallied last week on the back of news from Washington that the US and China were preparing to sign a framework deal in the form of several MoUs covering trade and structural issues.
But there are other economic concerns around the globe, and a preliminary deal between the US and China is not going to curb all the headwinds. Further upside to crude may also be limited because much of the anticipated rapprochement between the two countries has already been factored in. WTI prices stabilising well above the $50/barrel threshold are also likely to support strong growth in US production, which hit the 12 million b/d mark last week.
Nonetheless, there are factors on the supply front that could trigger a spike beyond $70/barrel for Brent, especially if combined with a turnaround in economic and oil demand growth expectations.
If that happens, we believe the Saudis will ease up on over-compliance with their own production cuts, either voluntarily or under renewed pressure from US President Donald Trump.
The Scheme Document for the privatisation of Hopewell Holdings (54 HK) has been dispatched. The court meeting will be held on the 21 March. The consideration will be paid (on or before) the 14 May. The IFA (China Tonghai Capital) considers the $38.80/share Offer to be fair & reasonable. The Scheme is conditional on ≥75% for, ≤10% against from disinterested shareholders. As Hopewell is HK-incorporated, there is no “head count ” test. The full timetable is as follows:
Date
Data in the Date
6-Dec-18
Announcement
24-Feb-19
Scheme document
13-Mar-19
Last time for lodging shares to qualify to vote
15-Mar-19
Meeting record date
19-Mar-19
Court/EGM meeting
2-May-19
Effective date
14-May-19
Cheques dispatched
Source: Hopewell
Substantial Shareholders
Mn
%
The Wu family & concert parties
320.7
36.93
Non-consortium Offeror concert parties
31.7
3.65
Total
352.5
40.48
Disinterested Shareholders
516.1
59.42
After hearing conflicting opinions on what constitutes a blocking stake, a chat with the banker confirmed the blocking stake, as per the Companies Ordinance, is tied to 63.07% of shares out (i.e. Scheme shareholders – see page 95); whereas the Takeovers Code is tied to 59.42% of shares out. Effectively there are two assessments on the blocking stake and the more stringent (the 59.42% out in this case) prevails.
With the Offer Price representing a 43% discount to NAV, wider than the largest discount precedent in past nine years (the Glorious Property (845 HK) offer, which incidentally was voted down), the IFA creatively argues that extenuating factors such as the premium to historical price needs to also be taken into account. Hardly original, but that is where investors must decide whether this is as good as it’s going to get – given the Wu family’s control, there will not be a competing offer – or to hold out for a superior price longer term. This is a final offer and it will not be increased.
What the IFA fails to discuss is that the widest successful discount to NAV privatisation was 29.4% for New World China Land (917 HK)in 2016. And all precedent transactions (successful or otherwise) are PRC (mainly) property development related; except for Wheelock which operated property in Hong Kong (like Hopewell) and in Singapore, which was privatised at a 12.1% discount to NAV.
Therein lies the dilemma – what is a fair and reasonable discount to NAV for a Hong Kong investment property play? With limited precedents, it is challenging to categorically reach an opinion. And that is the disingenuous conclusion from the IFA that the premium to last close and with reference to historical pricing, is in effect the overriding reason to conclude the Offer is reasonable. I would argue the Wu family has made a low-ball offer for what is essentially an investment property play with quantifiable asset value.
A blocking sake is 5.9% or 51.6mn shares. First Eagle, which recently voted down the Guoco Group Ltd (53 HK)privatisation that was pitched at a ~25% discount to NAV, holds 2.7% (according to CapIQ).
Trading at a wide gross/annualised return of 7%/37.5%, reflecting the risk to completion, and the significant downside should the scheme be voted down. Tough one – the premium to last close and with reference to the 10-year price performance, should be sufficient to get it over the line, and the basis for this “bullish” insight. But only for the brave.
Get Straight to the Source on Smartkarma
Smartkarma supports the world’s leading investors with high-quality, timely, and actionable Insights. Subscribe now for unlimited access, or request a demo below.
