We published a series of Insights explaining our positive outlook for the industrial segment of the global Real Estate sector.
Currently, companies in this segment are capitalizing on strong fundamentals to raise new equity capital. They are using the proceeds from these deals to fund property acquisitions and developments, and to deleverage their balance sheets, thereby setting the stage for continuing growth.
This trend is especially notable because it is taking place in a range of geographic locations, around the world.
Asian currencies are, in general, well supported by economic fundamentals in the form of external surpluses and interest rate differentials. Indeed, most Asian currencies display an appreciating bias, contrary to perceptions in 2018 when all of them lost ground to the US dollar. Over the last year the underlying external strength has been reflected in Asian currency appreciation against the US dollar.
According to SEMI, North American (NA) WFE sales for January 2019 fell to $1.9 billion, down ~10% sequentially and ~20% YoY. This was an abrupt reversal of the recovery trend implied by the December 2018 sales of $2.1 billion and is the biggest monthly sales YoY decline since June 2013.
Just as declining monthly WFE sales preceded the current semiconductor downturn by some six months, the continuation of December’s MoM WFE decline reversal trend was a prerequisite for a second half recovery in the broader semiconductor sector. With that trend well and truly broken, we now anticipate a more delayed, gradual and prolonged recovery, one which is now unlikely to materialise until late third, early fourth quarter 2019.
KOSPI is up 9.4% and Nikkei is up 7.8% YTD. It has been an active first two months of 2019. Many stocks have retraced to the previous resistance levels in November/December 2018. In the past week, the following reports that are relevant for Japan and Korea have received a lot of interest among Smartkarma readers:
US private LNG company Venture Global is starting construction on its 10 million ton per annum (mtpa) US LNG export facility in Louisiana after gaining approval from the US Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC). This is positive for the LNG contractor market and we discuss the companies involved in the project.
Smartkarma supports the world’s leading investors with high-quality, timely, and actionable Insights. Subscribe now for unlimited access, or request a demo below.
Asian currencies are, in general, well supported by economic fundamentals in the form of external surpluses and interest rate differentials. Indeed, most Asian currencies display an appreciating bias, contrary to perceptions in 2018 when all of them lost ground to the US dollar. Over the last year the underlying external strength has been reflected in Asian currency appreciation against the US dollar.
According to SEMI, North American (NA) WFE sales for January 2019 fell to $1.9 billion, down ~10% sequentially and ~20% YoY. This was an abrupt reversal of the recovery trend implied by the December 2018 sales of $2.1 billion and is the biggest monthly sales YoY decline since June 2013.
Just as declining monthly WFE sales preceded the current semiconductor downturn by some six months, the continuation of December’s MoM WFE decline reversal trend was a prerequisite for a second half recovery in the broader semiconductor sector. With that trend well and truly broken, we now anticipate a more delayed, gradual and prolonged recovery, one which is now unlikely to materialise until late third, early fourth quarter 2019.
KOSPI is up 9.4% and Nikkei is up 7.8% YTD. It has been an active first two months of 2019. Many stocks have retraced to the previous resistance levels in November/December 2018. In the past week, the following reports that are relevant for Japan and Korea have received a lot of interest among Smartkarma readers:
US private LNG company Venture Global is starting construction on its 10 million ton per annum (mtpa) US LNG export facility in Louisiana after gaining approval from the US Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC). This is positive for the LNG contractor market and we discuss the companies involved in the project.
On Friday 22 February after the close, Nintendo Co Ltd (7974 JP) announced a buyback (E, J), a share cancellation (E, J), and a public equity offering of secondary shares (J-only). This kind of event is not abnormal in a year when profits are weaker and share prices are down. Cross-holders often sell shares into the end of the year in order to realise profits and let unrealised gains from the balance sheet filter into the income statement.
This time it is five sellers from four banks which all hail from the area: Bank Of Kyoto (8369 JP), Nomura Trust (which holds shares in a trust account for the MUFJ Bank pension fund as a beneficiary), Mitsubishi Ufj Financial (8306 JP)‘s MUFJ Bank, Resona Holdings (8308 JP), and Shiga Bank (8366 JP). The MUFJ Bank holdings likely originate from Sanwa Bank which was Osaka-based before merging with BOT-Mitsubishi almost 15 years ago, and Resona is also from Osaka – next door to Kyoto where Nintendo was founded – and Shiga Bank is the prefecture next door.
This would look like a normal sell-down… except for one thing.
There was a note in the announcement to the effect that “in the context of how companies deal with their policy cross-holdings becoming the subject of greater focus, we confirmed that several shareholders desired to sell shares, and as a company subject to such cross-holdings, we are conducting the above-mentioned Offering.”
In the TSE crossholding of SGX situation, the sale was not the most important part. The explanation of how the Board came to its decision and what they decided to do about it was important.
On the other hand, Japan’s Corporate Governance Code (the Code), which was introduced in 2015, requires listed companies to examine and explain the economic rationale and future outlook of holding shares of other listed companies for reasons other than pure investment purposes. Following a review of the requirements under the Code, JPX reached the conclusion that the existing cooperative relationship with SGX would continue even without holding the shares of SGX. [my bold]
The Japan Exchange Group had now provided the example for why even companies with cooperative business relationships should not own cross-holdings. And it is, if active stewards of capital choose to make it so, more subtle. Shareholders have even an even better pressure point. IF a company’s cooperative relationship with another company would not survive the unwinding of cross-holdings to improve capital efficiency for both sides, is that company truly independent? Is that company beholden to the company whose shares it holds? Is the cross-holding board doing its job?
And the Japan Exchange Group had said it would unwind its holdings of SGX over three years, so as not to overly impact the market for SGX shares. This provided an example of HOW to unwind, in addition to the WHY to unwind announced above.
The BIG QUESTION (And Nothing Else Matters)
The big question here is whether the reasoning for selling is really because of the new focus on policy cross-holdings, or it is just Bank of Kyoto and other banks trying to top up profit before the end of the fiscal year, using heretofore unrealised gains.
An analysis of the Bank of Kyoto-specific situation is discussed below.
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.
According to SEMI, North American (NA) WFE sales for January 2019 fell to $1.9 billion, down ~10% sequentially and ~20% YoY. This was an abrupt reversal of the recovery trend implied by the December 2018 sales of $2.1 billion and is the biggest monthly sales YoY decline since June 2013.
Just as declining monthly WFE sales preceded the current semiconductor downturn by some six months, the continuation of December’s MoM WFE decline reversal trend was a prerequisite for a second half recovery in the broader semiconductor sector. With that trend well and truly broken, we now anticipate a more delayed, gradual and prolonged recovery, one which is now unlikely to materialise until late third, early fourth quarter 2019.
KOSPI is up 9.4% and Nikkei is up 7.8% YTD. It has been an active first two months of 2019. Many stocks have retraced to the previous resistance levels in November/December 2018. In the past week, the following reports that are relevant for Japan and Korea have received a lot of interest among Smartkarma readers:
US private LNG company Venture Global is starting construction on its 10 million ton per annum (mtpa) US LNG export facility in Louisiana after gaining approval from the US Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC). This is positive for the LNG contractor market and we discuss the companies involved in the project.
On Friday 22 February after the close, Nintendo Co Ltd (7974 JP) announced a buyback (E, J), a share cancellation (E, J), and a public equity offering of secondary shares (J-only). This kind of event is not abnormal in a year when profits are weaker and share prices are down. Cross-holders often sell shares into the end of the year in order to realise profits and let unrealised gains from the balance sheet filter into the income statement.
This time it is five sellers from four banks which all hail from the area: Bank Of Kyoto (8369 JP), Nomura Trust (which holds shares in a trust account for the MUFJ Bank pension fund as a beneficiary), Mitsubishi Ufj Financial (8306 JP)‘s MUFJ Bank, Resona Holdings (8308 JP), and Shiga Bank (8366 JP). The MUFJ Bank holdings likely originate from Sanwa Bank which was Osaka-based before merging with BOT-Mitsubishi almost 15 years ago, and Resona is also from Osaka – next door to Kyoto where Nintendo was founded – and Shiga Bank is the prefecture next door.
This would look like a normal sell-down… except for one thing.
There was a note in the announcement to the effect that “in the context of how companies deal with their policy cross-holdings becoming the subject of greater focus, we confirmed that several shareholders desired to sell shares, and as a company subject to such cross-holdings, we are conducting the above-mentioned Offering.”
In the TSE crossholding of SGX situation, the sale was not the most important part. The explanation of how the Board came to its decision and what they decided to do about it was important.
On the other hand, Japan’s Corporate Governance Code (the Code), which was introduced in 2015, requires listed companies to examine and explain the economic rationale and future outlook of holding shares of other listed companies for reasons other than pure investment purposes. Following a review of the requirements under the Code, JPX reached the conclusion that the existing cooperative relationship with SGX would continue even without holding the shares of SGX. [my bold]
The Japan Exchange Group had now provided the example for why even companies with cooperative business relationships should not own cross-holdings. And it is, if active stewards of capital choose to make it so, more subtle. Shareholders have even an even better pressure point. IF a company’s cooperative relationship with another company would not survive the unwinding of cross-holdings to improve capital efficiency for both sides, is that company truly independent? Is that company beholden to the company whose shares it holds? Is the cross-holding board doing its job?
And the Japan Exchange Group had said it would unwind its holdings of SGX over three years, so as not to overly impact the market for SGX shares. This provided an example of HOW to unwind, in addition to the WHY to unwind announced above.
The BIG QUESTION (And Nothing Else Matters)
The big question here is whether the reasoning for selling is really because of the new focus on policy cross-holdings, or it is just Bank of Kyoto and other banks trying to top up profit before the end of the fiscal year, using heretofore unrealised gains.
ALMOST THREE-MONTH HIGH RECOVERY – The bear market rally is now in its second stage, and the market composite is now 14% above the Christmas Day low. The ‘market value’-based percentage above moving averages almost reached a new three-month on Thursday; the stock count version is lagging as usual.
Source: Japan Analytics
STILL SOME UPSIDE – Using the three-month rate of change in this indicator, we are a few weeks away from generating a short-term sell signal, the last such trigger having occurred on 25th October.
– SECTORS –
LEGEND: The ‘sparklines’ show the three-year trend in the weighted percentage above moving average relative to the Market Composite and the ‘STDev’ column is a measure of the variability of that relative measure. The table also provides averages for the breaks above and breaks below and the positive and negative crossovers.
SECTOR BREAKDOWN – The top six sectors remain domestic and defensive. REITs, Information Technology, Transporation and Utilities continue from our previous review with Restaurants and Healthcare replacing Media and Telecommunications. Equally predictable is the bottom half-dozen – Banks, Non-Bank Finance, Autos, and Metals remain from two weeks ago, with Construction and Retail replacing Chemicals and Other Materials.
– COMPANIES –
COMPANY MOVING AVERAGE OUTLIERS – As with the Market Composite and Sectors, the Moving Average Outlier indicator uses a weighted sum of each company’s share price relative to its 5-day, 20-day, 60-day, 120-day and 240-day moving averages. ‘Extreme’ values are weighted sums greater than 100% and less than -100%. We would caution that this indicator is best used for timing shorter-term reversals and, in many cases, higher highs and lower lows will be seen.
In the DETAIL section below, we highlight the current top and bottom twenty-five large capitalisation outliers, as well as those companies that have seen the most significant positive and negative changes in their outlier percentage in the last two weeks and provide short comments on companies of particular note.
PKSHA Technology (3993 JP) is currently the most extreme large capitalisation positive outlier and an excellent example of a -100 to 100 ’roundtrip’ in under two months. SanBio (4592 JP) is, again, the most extreme negative outlier, having topped the 13th January positive outlier list and is another ’round-tripper’. We also add the chart for ‘cockroach’ stock Leopalace21 (8848 JP) which no longer qualifies for inclusion in our tables, having lost 60% of its value in the last two weeks and 79% in less than a year.
Source: Japan Analytics
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.
KOSPI is up 9.4% and Nikkei is up 7.8% YTD. It has been an active first two months of 2019. Many stocks have retraced to the previous resistance levels in November/December 2018. In the past week, the following reports that are relevant for Japan and Korea have received a lot of interest among Smartkarma readers:
US private LNG company Venture Global is starting construction on its 10 million ton per annum (mtpa) US LNG export facility in Louisiana after gaining approval from the US Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC). This is positive for the LNG contractor market and we discuss the companies involved in the project.
On Friday 22 February after the close, Nintendo Co Ltd (7974 JP) announced a buyback (E, J), a share cancellation (E, J), and a public equity offering of secondary shares (J-only). This kind of event is not abnormal in a year when profits are weaker and share prices are down. Cross-holders often sell shares into the end of the year in order to realise profits and let unrealised gains from the balance sheet filter into the income statement.
This time it is five sellers from four banks which all hail from the area: Bank Of Kyoto (8369 JP), Nomura Trust (which holds shares in a trust account for the MUFJ Bank pension fund as a beneficiary), Mitsubishi Ufj Financial (8306 JP)‘s MUFJ Bank, Resona Holdings (8308 JP), and Shiga Bank (8366 JP). The MUFJ Bank holdings likely originate from Sanwa Bank which was Osaka-based before merging with BOT-Mitsubishi almost 15 years ago, and Resona is also from Osaka – next door to Kyoto where Nintendo was founded – and Shiga Bank is the prefecture next door.
This would look like a normal sell-down… except for one thing.
There was a note in the announcement to the effect that “in the context of how companies deal with their policy cross-holdings becoming the subject of greater focus, we confirmed that several shareholders desired to sell shares, and as a company subject to such cross-holdings, we are conducting the above-mentioned Offering.”
In the TSE crossholding of SGX situation, the sale was not the most important part. The explanation of how the Board came to its decision and what they decided to do about it was important.
On the other hand, Japan’s Corporate Governance Code (the Code), which was introduced in 2015, requires listed companies to examine and explain the economic rationale and future outlook of holding shares of other listed companies for reasons other than pure investment purposes. Following a review of the requirements under the Code, JPX reached the conclusion that the existing cooperative relationship with SGX would continue even without holding the shares of SGX. [my bold]
The Japan Exchange Group had now provided the example for why even companies with cooperative business relationships should not own cross-holdings. And it is, if active stewards of capital choose to make it so, more subtle. Shareholders have even an even better pressure point. IF a company’s cooperative relationship with another company would not survive the unwinding of cross-holdings to improve capital efficiency for both sides, is that company truly independent? Is that company beholden to the company whose shares it holds? Is the cross-holding board doing its job?
And the Japan Exchange Group had said it would unwind its holdings of SGX over three years, so as not to overly impact the market for SGX shares. This provided an example of HOW to unwind, in addition to the WHY to unwind announced above.
The BIG QUESTION (And Nothing Else Matters)
The big question here is whether the reasoning for selling is really because of the new focus on policy cross-holdings, or it is just Bank of Kyoto and other banks trying to top up profit before the end of the fiscal year, using heretofore unrealised gains.
ALMOST THREE-MONTH HIGH RECOVERY – The bear market rally is now in its second stage, and the market composite is now 14% above the Christmas Day low. The ‘market value’-based percentage above moving averages almost reached a new three-month on Thursday; the stock count version is lagging as usual.
Source: Japan Analytics
STILL SOME UPSIDE – Using the three-month rate of change in this indicator, we are a few weeks away from generating a short-term sell signal, the last such trigger having occurred on 25th October.
– SECTORS –
LEGEND: The ‘sparklines’ show the three-year trend in the weighted percentage above moving average relative to the Market Composite and the ‘STDev’ column is a measure of the variability of that relative measure. The table also provides averages for the breaks above and breaks below and the positive and negative crossovers.
SECTOR BREAKDOWN – The top six sectors remain domestic and defensive. REITs, Information Technology, Transporation and Utilities continue from our previous review with Restaurants and Healthcare replacing Media and Telecommunications. Equally predictable is the bottom half-dozen – Banks, Non-Bank Finance, Autos, and Metals remain from two weeks ago, with Construction and Retail replacing Chemicals and Other Materials.
– COMPANIES –
COMPANY MOVING AVERAGE OUTLIERS – As with the Market Composite and Sectors, the Moving Average Outlier indicator uses a weighted sum of each company’s share price relative to its 5-day, 20-day, 60-day, 120-day and 240-day moving averages. ‘Extreme’ values are weighted sums greater than 100% and less than -100%. We would caution that this indicator is best used for timing shorter-term reversals and, in many cases, higher highs and lower lows will be seen.
In the DETAIL section below, we highlight the current top and bottom twenty-five large capitalisation outliers, as well as those companies that have seen the most significant positive and negative changes in their outlier percentage in the last two weeks and provide short comments on companies of particular note.
PKSHA Technology (3993 JP) is currently the most extreme large capitalisation positive outlier and an excellent example of a -100 to 100 ’roundtrip’ in under two months. SanBio (4592 JP) is, again, the most extreme negative outlier, having topped the 13th January positive outlier list and is another ’round-tripper’. We also add the chart for ‘cockroach’ stock Leopalace21 (8848 JP) which no longer qualifies for inclusion in our tables, having lost 60% of its value in the last two weeks and 79% in less than a year.
On Friday 22 February 2019 after the close, Nintendo Co Ltd (7974 JP)announced (J) a Secondary Shares Uridashi Offering of 2,428,700 shares by five shareholder banks, with an overallotment of 364,300 shares. This will be a little bit over 2% of shares outstanding.
Applying a hypothetical 4% discount to the last traded price of ¥30,030/share, this is an ¥80bn Offering including greenshoe.
On the same day, Nintendo announced (E) a share buyback program to buy up to 1 million shares or up to ¥33 billion worth (whichever is reached first) to last from the business day immediately following the delivery date of the Offering shares (practically speaking, a day on or between 13 March and 18 March 2019) to 12 April 2019. Based on an average daily volume traded of 2.2mm shares, 10% participation would mean the buyback would take 5 days to complete. 5% would take 9 days. The company also announced (E) it would cancel 10 million shares on 29 March 2019. That may only be 45% of the post-buyback treasury share position, but it leads to another event investors should watch.
This is the first buyback Nintendo has announced in five years. The Nikkei article discussing the situation suggests that the possibility of supply/demand being weak is the reason for the buyback. The stated reason for the Offering as proposed by Nintendo in its Offering announcement, suggested a goal of increasing and diversifying the shareholder base.
The fact that JPX was selling the shares was not important. The reasoning was. And JPX provided an example of how it should be done (as explained in the insight).
My words then still stand.
And JPX provided an example of how it should be done (as explained in the insight). The ramifications are significant.
The ramifications of this Offering are significant too. This is a lot more than just an offering by entities looking to take profits.
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.
US private LNG company Venture Global is starting construction on its 10 million ton per annum (mtpa) US LNG export facility in Louisiana after gaining approval from the US Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC). This is positive for the LNG contractor market and we discuss the companies involved in the project.
On Friday 22 February after the close, Nintendo Co Ltd (7974 JP) announced a buyback (E, J), a share cancellation (E, J), and a public equity offering of secondary shares (J-only). This kind of event is not abnormal in a year when profits are weaker and share prices are down. Cross-holders often sell shares into the end of the year in order to realise profits and let unrealised gains from the balance sheet filter into the income statement.
This time it is five sellers from four banks which all hail from the area: Bank Of Kyoto (8369 JP), Nomura Trust (which holds shares in a trust account for the MUFJ Bank pension fund as a beneficiary), Mitsubishi Ufj Financial (8306 JP)‘s MUFJ Bank, Resona Holdings (8308 JP), and Shiga Bank (8366 JP). The MUFJ Bank holdings likely originate from Sanwa Bank which was Osaka-based before merging with BOT-Mitsubishi almost 15 years ago, and Resona is also from Osaka – next door to Kyoto where Nintendo was founded – and Shiga Bank is the prefecture next door.
This would look like a normal sell-down… except for one thing.
There was a note in the announcement to the effect that “in the context of how companies deal with their policy cross-holdings becoming the subject of greater focus, we confirmed that several shareholders desired to sell shares, and as a company subject to such cross-holdings, we are conducting the above-mentioned Offering.”
In the TSE crossholding of SGX situation, the sale was not the most important part. The explanation of how the Board came to its decision and what they decided to do about it was important.
On the other hand, Japan’s Corporate Governance Code (the Code), which was introduced in 2015, requires listed companies to examine and explain the economic rationale and future outlook of holding shares of other listed companies for reasons other than pure investment purposes. Following a review of the requirements under the Code, JPX reached the conclusion that the existing cooperative relationship with SGX would continue even without holding the shares of SGX. [my bold]
The Japan Exchange Group had now provided the example for why even companies with cooperative business relationships should not own cross-holdings. And it is, if active stewards of capital choose to make it so, more subtle. Shareholders have even an even better pressure point. IF a company’s cooperative relationship with another company would not survive the unwinding of cross-holdings to improve capital efficiency for both sides, is that company truly independent? Is that company beholden to the company whose shares it holds? Is the cross-holding board doing its job?
And the Japan Exchange Group had said it would unwind its holdings of SGX over three years, so as not to overly impact the market for SGX shares. This provided an example of HOW to unwind, in addition to the WHY to unwind announced above.
The BIG QUESTION (And Nothing Else Matters)
The big question here is whether the reasoning for selling is really because of the new focus on policy cross-holdings, or it is just Bank of Kyoto and other banks trying to top up profit before the end of the fiscal year, using heretofore unrealised gains.
ALMOST THREE-MONTH HIGH RECOVERY – The bear market rally is now in its second stage, and the market composite is now 14% above the Christmas Day low. The ‘market value’-based percentage above moving averages almost reached a new three-month on Thursday; the stock count version is lagging as usual.
Source: Japan Analytics
STILL SOME UPSIDE – Using the three-month rate of change in this indicator, we are a few weeks away from generating a short-term sell signal, the last such trigger having occurred on 25th October.
– SECTORS –
LEGEND: The ‘sparklines’ show the three-year trend in the weighted percentage above moving average relative to the Market Composite and the ‘STDev’ column is a measure of the variability of that relative measure. The table also provides averages for the breaks above and breaks below and the positive and negative crossovers.
SECTOR BREAKDOWN – The top six sectors remain domestic and defensive. REITs, Information Technology, Transporation and Utilities continue from our previous review with Restaurants and Healthcare replacing Media and Telecommunications. Equally predictable is the bottom half-dozen – Banks, Non-Bank Finance, Autos, and Metals remain from two weeks ago, with Construction and Retail replacing Chemicals and Other Materials.
– COMPANIES –
COMPANY MOVING AVERAGE OUTLIERS – As with the Market Composite and Sectors, the Moving Average Outlier indicator uses a weighted sum of each company’s share price relative to its 5-day, 20-day, 60-day, 120-day and 240-day moving averages. ‘Extreme’ values are weighted sums greater than 100% and less than -100%. We would caution that this indicator is best used for timing shorter-term reversals and, in many cases, higher highs and lower lows will be seen.
In the DETAIL section below, we highlight the current top and bottom twenty-five large capitalisation outliers, as well as those companies that have seen the most significant positive and negative changes in their outlier percentage in the last two weeks and provide short comments on companies of particular note.
PKSHA Technology (3993 JP) is currently the most extreme large capitalisation positive outlier and an excellent example of a -100 to 100 ’roundtrip’ in under two months. SanBio (4592 JP) is, again, the most extreme negative outlier, having topped the 13th January positive outlier list and is another ’round-tripper’. We also add the chart for ‘cockroach’ stock Leopalace21 (8848 JP) which no longer qualifies for inclusion in our tables, having lost 60% of its value in the last two weeks and 79% in less than a year.
On Friday 22 February 2019 after the close, Nintendo Co Ltd (7974 JP)announced (J) a Secondary Shares Uridashi Offering of 2,428,700 shares by five shareholder banks, with an overallotment of 364,300 shares. This will be a little bit over 2% of shares outstanding.
Applying a hypothetical 4% discount to the last traded price of ¥30,030/share, this is an ¥80bn Offering including greenshoe.
On the same day, Nintendo announced (E) a share buyback program to buy up to 1 million shares or up to ¥33 billion worth (whichever is reached first) to last from the business day immediately following the delivery date of the Offering shares (practically speaking, a day on or between 13 March and 18 March 2019) to 12 April 2019. Based on an average daily volume traded of 2.2mm shares, 10% participation would mean the buyback would take 5 days to complete. 5% would take 9 days. The company also announced (E) it would cancel 10 million shares on 29 March 2019. That may only be 45% of the post-buyback treasury share position, but it leads to another event investors should watch.
This is the first buyback Nintendo has announced in five years. The Nikkei article discussing the situation suggests that the possibility of supply/demand being weak is the reason for the buyback. The stated reason for the Offering as proposed by Nintendo in its Offering announcement, suggested a goal of increasing and diversifying the shareholder base.
The fact that JPX was selling the shares was not important. The reasoning was. And JPX provided an example of how it should be done (as explained in the insight).
My words then still stand.
And JPX provided an example of how it should be done (as explained in the insight). The ramifications are significant.
The ramifications of this Offering are significant too. This is a lot more than just an offering by entities looking to take profits.
On Friday 22 February after the close, NTT Docomo Inc (9437 JP)announced (E) that it would cancel 447,067,906 shares (11.82% of issued shares before the cancellation) of Treasury shares on the 28th of February.
The buyback has already occurred. This is largely technical. But it has an interesting side effect.
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.
On Friday 22 February after the close, Nintendo Co Ltd (7974 JP) announced a buyback (E, J), a share cancellation (E, J), and a public equity offering of secondary shares (J-only). This kind of event is not abnormal in a year when profits are weaker and share prices are down. Cross-holders often sell shares into the end of the year in order to realise profits and let unrealised gains from the balance sheet filter into the income statement.
This time it is five sellers from four banks which all hail from the area: Bank Of Kyoto (8369 JP), Nomura Trust (which holds shares in a trust account for the MUFJ Bank pension fund as a beneficiary), Mitsubishi Ufj Financial (8306 JP)‘s MUFJ Bank, Resona Holdings (8308 JP), and Shiga Bank (8366 JP). The MUFJ Bank holdings likely originate from Sanwa Bank which was Osaka-based before merging with BOT-Mitsubishi almost 15 years ago, and Resona is also from Osaka – next door to Kyoto where Nintendo was founded – and Shiga Bank is the prefecture next door.
This would look like a normal sell-down… except for one thing.
There was a note in the announcement to the effect that “in the context of how companies deal with their policy cross-holdings becoming the subject of greater focus, we confirmed that several shareholders desired to sell shares, and as a company subject to such cross-holdings, we are conducting the above-mentioned Offering.”
In the TSE crossholding of SGX situation, the sale was not the most important part. The explanation of how the Board came to its decision and what they decided to do about it was important.
On the other hand, Japan’s Corporate Governance Code (the Code), which was introduced in 2015, requires listed companies to examine and explain the economic rationale and future outlook of holding shares of other listed companies for reasons other than pure investment purposes. Following a review of the requirements under the Code, JPX reached the conclusion that the existing cooperative relationship with SGX would continue even without holding the shares of SGX. [my bold]
The Japan Exchange Group had now provided the example for why even companies with cooperative business relationships should not own cross-holdings. And it is, if active stewards of capital choose to make it so, more subtle. Shareholders have even an even better pressure point. IF a company’s cooperative relationship with another company would not survive the unwinding of cross-holdings to improve capital efficiency for both sides, is that company truly independent? Is that company beholden to the company whose shares it holds? Is the cross-holding board doing its job?
And the Japan Exchange Group had said it would unwind its holdings of SGX over three years, so as not to overly impact the market for SGX shares. This provided an example of HOW to unwind, in addition to the WHY to unwind announced above.
The BIG QUESTION (And Nothing Else Matters)
The big question here is whether the reasoning for selling is really because of the new focus on policy cross-holdings, or it is just Bank of Kyoto and other banks trying to top up profit before the end of the fiscal year, using heretofore unrealised gains.
ALMOST THREE-MONTH HIGH RECOVERY – The bear market rally is now in its second stage, and the market composite is now 14% above the Christmas Day low. The ‘market value’-based percentage above moving averages almost reached a new three-month on Thursday; the stock count version is lagging as usual.
Source: Japan Analytics
STILL SOME UPSIDE – Using the three-month rate of change in this indicator, we are a few weeks away from generating a short-term sell signal, the last such trigger having occurred on 25th October.
– SECTORS –
LEGEND: The ‘sparklines’ show the three-year trend in the weighted percentage above moving average relative to the Market Composite and the ‘STDev’ column is a measure of the variability of that relative measure. The table also provides averages for the breaks above and breaks below and the positive and negative crossovers.
SECTOR BREAKDOWN – The top six sectors remain domestic and defensive. REITs, Information Technology, Transporation and Utilities continue from our previous review with Restaurants and Healthcare replacing Media and Telecommunications. Equally predictable is the bottom half-dozen – Banks, Non-Bank Finance, Autos, and Metals remain from two weeks ago, with Construction and Retail replacing Chemicals and Other Materials.
– COMPANIES –
COMPANY MOVING AVERAGE OUTLIERS – As with the Market Composite and Sectors, the Moving Average Outlier indicator uses a weighted sum of each company’s share price relative to its 5-day, 20-day, 60-day, 120-day and 240-day moving averages. ‘Extreme’ values are weighted sums greater than 100% and less than -100%. We would caution that this indicator is best used for timing shorter-term reversals and, in many cases, higher highs and lower lows will be seen.
In the DETAIL section below, we highlight the current top and bottom twenty-five large capitalisation outliers, as well as those companies that have seen the most significant positive and negative changes in their outlier percentage in the last two weeks and provide short comments on companies of particular note.
PKSHA Technology (3993 JP) is currently the most extreme large capitalisation positive outlier and an excellent example of a -100 to 100 ’roundtrip’ in under two months. SanBio (4592 JP) is, again, the most extreme negative outlier, having topped the 13th January positive outlier list and is another ’round-tripper’. We also add the chart for ‘cockroach’ stock Leopalace21 (8848 JP) which no longer qualifies for inclusion in our tables, having lost 60% of its value in the last two weeks and 79% in less than a year.
On Friday 22 February 2019 after the close, Nintendo Co Ltd (7974 JP)announced (J) a Secondary Shares Uridashi Offering of 2,428,700 shares by five shareholder banks, with an overallotment of 364,300 shares. This will be a little bit over 2% of shares outstanding.
Applying a hypothetical 4% discount to the last traded price of ¥30,030/share, this is an ¥80bn Offering including greenshoe.
On the same day, Nintendo announced (E) a share buyback program to buy up to 1 million shares or up to ¥33 billion worth (whichever is reached first) to last from the business day immediately following the delivery date of the Offering shares (practically speaking, a day on or between 13 March and 18 March 2019) to 12 April 2019. Based on an average daily volume traded of 2.2mm shares, 10% participation would mean the buyback would take 5 days to complete. 5% would take 9 days. The company also announced (E) it would cancel 10 million shares on 29 March 2019. That may only be 45% of the post-buyback treasury share position, but it leads to another event investors should watch.
This is the first buyback Nintendo has announced in five years. The Nikkei article discussing the situation suggests that the possibility of supply/demand being weak is the reason for the buyback. The stated reason for the Offering as proposed by Nintendo in its Offering announcement, suggested a goal of increasing and diversifying the shareholder base.
The fact that JPX was selling the shares was not important. The reasoning was. And JPX provided an example of how it should be done (as explained in the insight).
My words then still stand.
And JPX provided an example of how it should be done (as explained in the insight). The ramifications are significant.
The ramifications of this Offering are significant too. This is a lot more than just an offering by entities looking to take profits.
On Friday 22 February after the close, NTT Docomo Inc (9437 JP)announced (E) that it would cancel 447,067,906 shares (11.82% of issued shares before the cancellation) of Treasury shares on the 28th of February.
The buyback has already occurred. This is largely technical. But it has an interesting side effect.
An activist has come forward, and the external statutory auditor and lead shareholder (wife of founder) are against the offer, but Kosaido Co Ltd (7868 JP) situation still fits pretty cleanly in the “Too Hard” bucket for now.
Since announcing its foray into the deeper waters of being the fourth Type I Mobile Network Operator in Japan, Rakuten’s shares have taken a mighty hit. But the focus in this insight is on ride-sharing company Lyft. In March 2015, Rakuten CEO Hiroshi Mikitani announced that Rakuten had invested US$300mn in Lyft, giving it a 11.9% stake after Series E round in May 2015. Recent articles suggest that Rakuten remains the top investor.
As best as Travis Lundy can tell, from sources who track this, Rakuten is the single largest shareholder in Lyft, with a holding in the 10.4-12.0% range. That would suggest a position value of US$900mn-$1.2bn based on the last funding round in June 2018. At a $25bn pre-money IPO valuation, that would be worth US$1.5-2.0bn for a likely pre-tax IPO uplift of US$590-800mn.
A report late Thursday Asia time suggested the Lyft roadshow would start the week of March 18th, which would mean the S-1 will be available two weeks before that. Investors will know more about Rakuten’s ownership of Lyft by the end of next week or very early the following week. Travis would want to be long for now.
DHICO announced a larger-than-expected ₩608.4bn rights offer. ₩543bn is expected to be raised through common shares at a preliminary price of ₩6,390; and ₩65bn via RCPS at a preliminary price of ₩6,970. This is a combined 72.56% capital increase a 42.05% share dilution. Concurrently, Doosan E&C announced a ₩420bn rights offer at a preliminary price of ₩1,255, a 15% discount to last close.
For DHICO, Mar 27 is the ex-rights day for both Common and RCPS. Subscription rights (for the Common) will be listed and trade on Apr 19~25. May 2 is final pricing. May 8 is subscription and May 16 is payment. New Common shares will be listed on May 29.
For E&C, the final price will be fixed on Apr 30. Whichever is higher – ₩1,255 or Apr 26~30 VWAP at a 40% discount – will be the final offering price. Mar 27 will be the ex-rights day. Subscription rights will be listed and traded on Apr 18~24. New shares will be listed on May 24.
₩1,255 is a lot more aggressive than generally viewed. DHICO owns nearly two thirds of E&C. With a 20% oversubscription, nearly ₩300bn will likely come from DHICO, essentially buttressing E&C at an even heftier price. Which is probably why the market is being less harsh on E&C relative to DHICO.
The 247-4 Form is out with a tender offer period between 26 Feb-1 April, and payment on the 4th April. The frustrating part is how Delta’s FY18 dividend of Bt2.30 is treated. On one hand, it says the Bt71 Offer price is final unless there is a MAC. Further into the Offer doc, it mentions the Offeror “reserves the right” to reduce the offer price if a dividend is paid. DELTA’s IR believes the dividend will be added, but it is not crystal clear.
Furthermore, there is no minimum acceptance condition, as potentially flagged earlier, which means there is no possibility of fast-tracking payment. Some precedent voluntary offers included a minimum acceptance, which provides an expedited payment should investors who tender shares AND revoke their right to withdraw – provided that minimum is fulfilled.
Shares traded up after the document came out, shrugging off the ambiguity in the document. Currently trading at a gross/annualised return of 1.1%/11%. The dividend is subject to a 10% tax for non-residents.
The previous Friday, the Offerors for M1 announced that their Offer had been declared Unconditional In All Respects as the tendered amount was 57.04% and the total held by concert parties was 76.35%. Axiata Group (AXIATA MK)made an announcement to the Bursa Malaysia that it had accepted the Offer as required because it was a significant asset disposal. Going unconditional has triggered an extension of the Closing Date to 4 March 2019.
If you want to fight this with an appraisal, you can. Travis doesn’t see the point. If you want to hold on to the stock in order to block full squeezeout and play chicken with the big boys, you can, but it requires a relatively big ticket (roughly 6.73% of the shares out).
So Travis recommends taking the money. It was better to take the money in early January and re-deploy, rather than wait for the close of the offer. He would accept now and sees no upside from waiting.
When the Tender Offer / MBO for Kosaido was announced last month, Travis’ first reaction was that this was wrong, concluding this was a virtual asset strip in progress, and suggested that the only way this was likely to not get done is if some brave activist came forward.
Shortly afterwards, an activist did come forward. Yoshiaki Murakami’s bought 5% through his entity Reno KK, and later lifted his stake (combined with affiliates) to 9.55%. Travis thought the stock had run too far at that point (¥775/share). While still cheap, he did not expect Bain to lift its price by 30+%, nor a white knight to arrive quickly enough.
This week a media article suggested longstanding external statutory auditor Mr. Nakatsuji and lead shareholder Sakurai Mie were against the takeover.
The possibility this deal fails because the “put protection” of the deal price at ¥610 is no longer solid has gone up. Conversely, the probability that Bain and the MBO have to come in with a price adjustment higher has gone up. Travis is inclined to remain bearish in the medium-term as there is a significant likelihood there is no alternative solution during the Tender Offer period itself.
After announcing earlier this month a number of indicative non-binding bids were received for a “whole of company transaction”, the AFR is now reporting (paywalled) that Lone Star has also joined the battle for Aveo Group (AOG AU). (A Case for Privatising Aveo)
Saputo Inc (SAP CN) and Dairy Crest announced an all-cash deal where Saputo will buy Dairy Crest for 620p/share, to be implemented through a Scheme of Arrangement with an expected close in Q2 2019. This appears to tick all the necessary boxes. Friendly, horizontal integration, and limited job losses. Shares are trading through terms early (he published at 628.5p), perhaps on expectations the wide open register means shareholders can try to hold out for a higher price.
At almost 14x EV/EBITDA on a TTM basis and a bit lower on a March 2019 FY-end basis, it is a high enough multiple to not be insulting for a dairy company, and may keep other suitors away.
Dairy Crest’s directors have given irrevocable notice to accept, and the directors’ advisors (Greenhill & Co) have deemed the Offer “fair and reasonable.”
One extra turn of EV/EBITDA would lift the takeover price just under 10%. That would clear out most of the naysayers who bought in the frothier “we’re going to be an asset-light branded goods company” days of 2015-2017. Doable, but as it is an agreed deal, Travis doesn’t see the need to push it.
In its prior letter to Ophir on the 14 January, Petrus recommended selling the South-East Asian (SEA) assets to Medco, with a low-end fair value, before synergies, of £0.64/share, through to £1.42/share on a blue sky basis. It also argued that Ophir should negotiate with the Equatorial Guinea ministry (the regulator that terminated the Fortuna license, resulting in write-offs of US$610mn) to be compensated for its $700mn investment and the unfair seizure of the license, otherwise it would set a precedent for other international operators doing business in EG.
Petrus has now rounded on Schrader over perceived mismanagement of the EG licence, and a lack of professionalism in not soliciting and considering offers for Ophir from other buyers. Petrus’ beef is not an outlier – alternative hedge fund Sand Grove has increased its exposure, via cash-settled derivatives, to 17.28% (as at 13 February); while Ian Hannam, who advised Ophir’s board on its 2013 right issue, is understood to have also written to Ophir’s interim CEO Alan Booth and the board saying Medco’s offer is too low.
Overall, Petrus’ assertions that Ophir is being sold at “sub optimal terms” appear valid, most notably on the EG compensation and the illogical operations update earlier this month. The alternative push to sell the SEA assets separately, as that has been Medco’s core focus, not international operations, also makes sense.
Last month, DSV A/S (DSV DC) made a public proposal of a takeover for cash and scrip valued at CHF 170/share, which came at a 24% premium to last and +31% vs 1-month VWAP. The #2, #3, and long-time #4 shareholders are firmly and publicly in the camp of trying to get something done. 45.9%-shareholder Ernst Göhner Foundation is sending mixed signals – do they want a higher price? Or do they want to wait and let Panalpina grow by its own consolidator strategy?
Panalpina has now confirmed that it in preliminary talks with Kuwait-listed logistics company Agility Public Warehouse. A Bloomberg report suggested a deal could be reached as early as this past week for Agility’s logistics business. The same article suggested the Göhner Foundation is supportive of the new talks. Agility’s press release was much more non-committal.
DSV has also announced a new all cash CHF 180/share offer for Panalpina; although the original cash and scrip offer was then worth CHF 184.5/share, which is an even better premium to pre-offer terms. One wonders whether cash-only would suit the Foundation; the DSV press release seemed to respond to that.
It is not clear what would drive the Foundation to give up its control. And Panalpina’s measly share price reaction to the all-cash offer suggest there is considerable skepticism out there. But at some price, Panalpina’s board looks pretty stupid to not accept the cash.
If you do not think a deal with DSV has any chance of getting up, Panalpina shares are a sell here. If they overpay for Agility and cannot improve their own margins well past historical highs in a market trending weaker, then the shares could drop.
Using Curtis’ figures, the implied stub is at its lowest level since a brief downward spike in February 2015, and you would have to go back to April 2014 to find a lower level.
The push back on this setup is that the auto operations have recorded marginally, yet sequential profit declines in FY16 and FY17; while recording three sequential quarterly declines up to December 2018. The big question is whether Mahindra can regain market share as it kick-starts a new model cycle.
In contrast, Sanghyun believes the Holdco is still undervalued relative to the Sub by about 10%. Plugging in Sanghyun’s numbers, I back out a discount to NAV of 45% against a one-year average of 30%, with a 12-month range of -51.5% to 15.5% (premium).
Back on the 13 December 2018, Can One announced a proposed MGO for Kian Joo at RM3.10/share, a 52.7% premium to last close. This required Can One shareholders’ approval which was received on the 14 February. Can One’s current 33% stake in Kian Joo accounts for ~86% of its market cap. The offer doc should be out, on or before the 7 March, with payment either late March (along with the first close of the Offer), or early April, depending on when the offer turns unconditional. The offer is conditional on 50% acceptance. Both sides are illiquid.
This looks like a decent exit for Kian Joo shareholders. Apart from EPF with 10.1%, former NED Teow China See is the only other shareholder with >5% with 8.9%.
For Can One, this is an aggressive pitch to make Kian Joo a subsidiary amidst an uncertain economic backdrop, while potential synergies may be offset via higher interest costs.
There are still two schools of thought on the HMG restructuring. One is that Glovis/Mobis are merged into a holdco entity. Or Glovis becomes the holdco with Mobis→ HM→ Kia Motors Corp (000270 KS) below. Since late 3Q18, there has been increased speculation on the latter. This has pushed up Glovis’ price relative to Mobis.
Each outcome is beset with its own set of issues. For Glovis to be the sole holdco, it has to come up with nearly ₩2tn to buy Kia’s Mobis stake, probably through new, and burdensome, debt. Glovis may also face the risk of forced holdco conversion, creating an issue with Kia as a “great grandson” subsidiary.
This speculation pushing up Glovis relative to Mobis has yet to be substantiated/justified, suggesting Glovis is overbought. Sanghyun expects a mean reversion, and recommends a long Mobis and short Glovis.
Navitas Ltd (NVT AU) has agreed to extend the exclusivity period granted to the BGH consortium to 1 March (from 18 Feb), in order to allow additional time for BGH to complete a limited set of remaining due diligence investigations.
Netcomm Wireless (NTC AU) has received $1.10 cash offer (53% premium to last close) from Casa Systems (CASA US) via a Scheme. The deal values Netcomm at ~US$114m. The scheme is subject to FIRB and shareholder approval. Stewart David Paul James, a NED, holds 12.3% and is the major shareholder. The announcement states that each Netcomm director intends to vote the Netcomm shares held by them in favour of the scheme – subject to a +ve IFA opinion and in the absence of a competing offer. This includes Stewart’s stake.
MYOB Group Ltd (MYO AU)announced no superior proposal emerged after concluding its ’go shop’ period for rival offers to KKR’s takeover proposal. At a gross/annualised spread of 0.9%/4.8%, assuming early May payment, this looks to be trading a bit tight.
CCASS
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.
Issuance of the new shares and common stock to be delisted from the Tokyo Stock Exchange
C
Japan
Descente
Off-Mkt
14-Mar
Tender Offer Close Date
C
Japan
JIEC
Off-Mkt
18-Mar
Tender Offer Close Date
C
Japan
Veriserve
Off-Mkt
18-Mar
Tender Offer Close Date
C
Japan
ND Software
Off-Mkt
25-Mar
Tender Offer Close Date
C
Japan
Showa Shell
Scheme
1-Apr
Close of merger
E
Japan
U-Shin
Off-Market
17-Apr
Tender Offer Close Date
C
NZ
Trade Me Group
Scheme
5-Mar
First Court Date
C
Singapore
Courts Asia Limited
Scheme
15-Mar
Offer Close Date
C
Singapore
M1 Limited
Off Mkt
4-Mar
Closing date of offer
C
Singapore
PCI Limited
Scheme
February
Release of Scheme Booklet
E
Taiwan
Yungtay Engineering
Off Mkt
17-Mar
Closing date of offer
C
Thailand
Delta Electronics
Off Mkt
26-Feb
Tender Offer Open
C
Finland
Amer Sports
Off Mkt
7-Mar
Offer Period Expires
C
Norway
Oslo Børs VPS
Off Mkt
4-Mar
Nasdaq Offer Close Date
C
Switzerland
Panalpina Welttransport
Off Mkt
27-Feb
Binding offer to be announced
E
US
Red Hat, Inc.
Scheme
March/April
Deal lodged for approval with EU Regulators
C
Source: Company announcements. E = our 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.
ALMOST THREE-MONTH HIGH RECOVERY – The bear market rally is now in its second stage, and the market composite is now 14% above the Christmas Day low. The ‘market value’-based percentage above moving averages almost reached a new three-month on Thursday; the stock count version is lagging as usual.
Source: Japan Analytics
STILL SOME UPSIDE – Using the three-month rate of change in this indicator, we are a few weeks away from generating a short-term sell signal, the last such trigger having occurred on 25th October.
– SECTORS –
LEGEND: The ‘sparklines’ show the three-year trend in the weighted percentage above moving average relative to the Market Composite and the ‘STDev’ column is a measure of the variability of that relative measure. The table also provides averages for the breaks above and breaks below and the positive and negative crossovers.
SECTOR BREAKDOWN – The top six sectors remain domestic and defensive. REITs, Information Technology, Transporation and Utilities continue from our previous review with Restaurants and Healthcare replacing Media and Telecommunications. Equally predictable is the bottom half-dozen – Banks, Non-Bank Finance, Autos, and Metals remain from two weeks ago, with Construction and Retail replacing Chemicals and Other Materials.
– COMPANIES –
COMPANY MOVING AVERAGE OUTLIERS – As with the Market Composite and Sectors, the Moving Average Outlier indicator uses a weighted sum of each company’s share price relative to its 5-day, 20-day, 60-day, 120-day and 240-day moving averages. ‘Extreme’ values are weighted sums greater than 100% and less than -100%. We would caution that this indicator is best used for timing shorter-term reversals and, in many cases, higher highs and lower lows will be seen.
In the DETAIL section below, we highlight the current top and bottom twenty-five large capitalisation outliers, as well as those companies that have seen the most significant positive and negative changes in their outlier percentage in the last two weeks and provide short comments on companies of particular note.
PKSHA Technology (3993 JP) is currently the most extreme large capitalisation positive outlier and an excellent example of a -100 to 100 ’roundtrip’ in under two months. SanBio (4592 JP) is, again, the most extreme negative outlier, having topped the 13th January positive outlier list and is another ’round-tripper’. We also add the chart for ‘cockroach’ stock Leopalace21 (8848 JP) which no longer qualifies for inclusion in our tables, having lost 60% of its value in the last two weeks and 79% in less than a year.
On Friday 22 February 2019 after the close, Nintendo Co Ltd (7974 JP)announced (J) a Secondary Shares Uridashi Offering of 2,428,700 shares by five shareholder banks, with an overallotment of 364,300 shares. This will be a little bit over 2% of shares outstanding.
Applying a hypothetical 4% discount to the last traded price of ¥30,030/share, this is an ¥80bn Offering including greenshoe.
On the same day, Nintendo announced (E) a share buyback program to buy up to 1 million shares or up to ¥33 billion worth (whichever is reached first) to last from the business day immediately following the delivery date of the Offering shares (practically speaking, a day on or between 13 March and 18 March 2019) to 12 April 2019. Based on an average daily volume traded of 2.2mm shares, 10% participation would mean the buyback would take 5 days to complete. 5% would take 9 days. The company also announced (E) it would cancel 10 million shares on 29 March 2019. That may only be 45% of the post-buyback treasury share position, but it leads to another event investors should watch.
This is the first buyback Nintendo has announced in five years. The Nikkei article discussing the situation suggests that the possibility of supply/demand being weak is the reason for the buyback. The stated reason for the Offering as proposed by Nintendo in its Offering announcement, suggested a goal of increasing and diversifying the shareholder base.
The fact that JPX was selling the shares was not important. The reasoning was. And JPX provided an example of how it should be done (as explained in the insight).
My words then still stand.
And JPX provided an example of how it should be done (as explained in the insight). The ramifications are significant.
The ramifications of this Offering are significant too. This is a lot more than just an offering by entities looking to take profits.
On Friday 22 February after the close, NTT Docomo Inc (9437 JP)announced (E) that it would cancel 447,067,906 shares (11.82% of issued shares before the cancellation) of Treasury shares on the 28th of February.
The buyback has already occurred. This is largely technical. But it has an interesting side effect.
An activist has come forward, and the external statutory auditor and lead shareholder (wife of founder) are against the offer, but Kosaido Co Ltd (7868 JP) situation still fits pretty cleanly in the “Too Hard” bucket for now.
Since announcing its foray into the deeper waters of being the fourth Type I Mobile Network Operator in Japan, Rakuten’s shares have taken a mighty hit. But the focus in this insight is on ride-sharing company Lyft. In March 2015, Rakuten CEO Hiroshi Mikitani announced that Rakuten had invested US$300mn in Lyft, giving it a 11.9% stake after Series E round in May 2015. Recent articles suggest that Rakuten remains the top investor.
As best as Travis Lundy can tell, from sources who track this, Rakuten is the single largest shareholder in Lyft, with a holding in the 10.4-12.0% range. That would suggest a position value of US$900mn-$1.2bn based on the last funding round in June 2018. At a $25bn pre-money IPO valuation, that would be worth US$1.5-2.0bn for a likely pre-tax IPO uplift of US$590-800mn.
A report late Thursday Asia time suggested the Lyft roadshow would start the week of March 18th, which would mean the S-1 will be available two weeks before that. Investors will know more about Rakuten’s ownership of Lyft by the end of next week or very early the following week. Travis would want to be long for now.
DHICO announced a larger-than-expected ₩608.4bn rights offer. ₩543bn is expected to be raised through common shares at a preliminary price of ₩6,390; and ₩65bn via RCPS at a preliminary price of ₩6,970. This is a combined 72.56% capital increase a 42.05% share dilution. Concurrently, Doosan E&C announced a ₩420bn rights offer at a preliminary price of ₩1,255, a 15% discount to last close.
For DHICO, Mar 27 is the ex-rights day for both Common and RCPS. Subscription rights (for the Common) will be listed and trade on Apr 19~25. May 2 is final pricing. May 8 is subscription and May 16 is payment. New Common shares will be listed on May 29.
For E&C, the final price will be fixed on Apr 30. Whichever is higher – ₩1,255 or Apr 26~30 VWAP at a 40% discount – will be the final offering price. Mar 27 will be the ex-rights day. Subscription rights will be listed and traded on Apr 18~24. New shares will be listed on May 24.
₩1,255 is a lot more aggressive than generally viewed. DHICO owns nearly two thirds of E&C. With a 20% oversubscription, nearly ₩300bn will likely come from DHICO, essentially buttressing E&C at an even heftier price. Which is probably why the market is being less harsh on E&C relative to DHICO.
The 247-4 Form is out with a tender offer period between 26 Feb-1 April, and payment on the 4th April. The frustrating part is how Delta’s FY18 dividend of Bt2.30 is treated. On one hand, it says the Bt71 Offer price is final unless there is a MAC. Further into the Offer doc, it mentions the Offeror “reserves the right” to reduce the offer price if a dividend is paid. DELTA’s IR believes the dividend will be added, but it is not crystal clear.
Furthermore, there is no minimum acceptance condition, as potentially flagged earlier, which means there is no possibility of fast-tracking payment. Some precedent voluntary offers included a minimum acceptance, which provides an expedited payment should investors who tender shares AND revoke their right to withdraw – provided that minimum is fulfilled.
Shares traded up after the document came out, shrugging off the ambiguity in the document. Currently trading at a gross/annualised return of 1.1%/11%. The dividend is subject to a 10% tax for non-residents.
The previous Friday, the Offerors for M1 announced that their Offer had been declared Unconditional In All Respects as the tendered amount was 57.04% and the total held by concert parties was 76.35%. Axiata Group (AXIATA MK)made an announcement to the Bursa Malaysia that it had accepted the Offer as required because it was a significant asset disposal. Going unconditional has triggered an extension of the Closing Date to 4 March 2019.
If you want to fight this with an appraisal, you can. Travis doesn’t see the point. If you want to hold on to the stock in order to block full squeezeout and play chicken with the big boys, you can, but it requires a relatively big ticket (roughly 6.73% of the shares out).
So Travis recommends taking the money. It was better to take the money in early January and re-deploy, rather than wait for the close of the offer. He would accept now and sees no upside from waiting.
When the Tender Offer / MBO for Kosaido was announced last month, Travis’ first reaction was that this was wrong, concluding this was a virtual asset strip in progress, and suggested that the only way this was likely to not get done is if some brave activist came forward.
Shortly afterwards, an activist did come forward. Yoshiaki Murakami’s bought 5% through his entity Reno KK, and later lifted his stake (combined with affiliates) to 9.55%. Travis thought the stock had run too far at that point (¥775/share). While still cheap, he did not expect Bain to lift its price by 30+%, nor a white knight to arrive quickly enough.
This week a media article suggested longstanding external statutory auditor Mr. Nakatsuji and lead shareholder Sakurai Mie were against the takeover.
The possibility this deal fails because the “put protection” of the deal price at ¥610 is no longer solid has gone up. Conversely, the probability that Bain and the MBO have to come in with a price adjustment higher has gone up. Travis is inclined to remain bearish in the medium-term as there is a significant likelihood there is no alternative solution during the Tender Offer period itself.
After announcing earlier this month a number of indicative non-binding bids were received for a “whole of company transaction”, the AFR is now reporting (paywalled) that Lone Star has also joined the battle for Aveo Group (AOG AU). (A Case for Privatising Aveo)
Saputo Inc (SAP CN) and Dairy Crest announced an all-cash deal where Saputo will buy Dairy Crest for 620p/share, to be implemented through a Scheme of Arrangement with an expected close in Q2 2019. This appears to tick all the necessary boxes. Friendly, horizontal integration, and limited job losses. Shares are trading through terms early (he published at 628.5p), perhaps on expectations the wide open register means shareholders can try to hold out for a higher price.
At almost 14x EV/EBITDA on a TTM basis and a bit lower on a March 2019 FY-end basis, it is a high enough multiple to not be insulting for a dairy company, and may keep other suitors away.
Dairy Crest’s directors have given irrevocable notice to accept, and the directors’ advisors (Greenhill & Co) have deemed the Offer “fair and reasonable.”
One extra turn of EV/EBITDA would lift the takeover price just under 10%. That would clear out most of the naysayers who bought in the frothier “we’re going to be an asset-light branded goods company” days of 2015-2017. Doable, but as it is an agreed deal, Travis doesn’t see the need to push it.
In its prior letter to Ophir on the 14 January, Petrus recommended selling the South-East Asian (SEA) assets to Medco, with a low-end fair value, before synergies, of £0.64/share, through to £1.42/share on a blue sky basis. It also argued that Ophir should negotiate with the Equatorial Guinea ministry (the regulator that terminated the Fortuna license, resulting in write-offs of US$610mn) to be compensated for its $700mn investment and the unfair seizure of the license, otherwise it would set a precedent for other international operators doing business in EG.
Petrus has now rounded on Schrader over perceived mismanagement of the EG licence, and a lack of professionalism in not soliciting and considering offers for Ophir from other buyers. Petrus’ beef is not an outlier – alternative hedge fund Sand Grove has increased its exposure, via cash-settled derivatives, to 17.28% (as at 13 February); while Ian Hannam, who advised Ophir’s board on its 2013 right issue, is understood to have also written to Ophir’s interim CEO Alan Booth and the board saying Medco’s offer is too low.
Overall, Petrus’ assertions that Ophir is being sold at “sub optimal terms” appear valid, most notably on the EG compensation and the illogical operations update earlier this month. The alternative push to sell the SEA assets separately, as that has been Medco’s core focus, not international operations, also makes sense.
Last month, DSV A/S (DSV DC) made a public proposal of a takeover for cash and scrip valued at CHF 170/share, which came at a 24% premium to last and +31% vs 1-month VWAP. The #2, #3, and long-time #4 shareholders are firmly and publicly in the camp of trying to get something done. 45.9%-shareholder Ernst Göhner Foundation is sending mixed signals – do they want a higher price? Or do they want to wait and let Panalpina grow by its own consolidator strategy?
Panalpina has now confirmed that it in preliminary talks with Kuwait-listed logistics company Agility Public Warehouse. A Bloomberg report suggested a deal could be reached as early as this past week for Agility’s logistics business. The same article suggested the Göhner Foundation is supportive of the new talks. Agility’s press release was much more non-committal.
DSV has also announced a new all cash CHF 180/share offer for Panalpina; although the original cash and scrip offer was then worth CHF 184.5/share, which is an even better premium to pre-offer terms. One wonders whether cash-only would suit the Foundation; the DSV press release seemed to respond to that.
It is not clear what would drive the Foundation to give up its control. And Panalpina’s measly share price reaction to the all-cash offer suggest there is considerable skepticism out there. But at some price, Panalpina’s board looks pretty stupid to not accept the cash.
If you do not think a deal with DSV has any chance of getting up, Panalpina shares are a sell here. If they overpay for Agility and cannot improve their own margins well past historical highs in a market trending weaker, then the shares could drop.
Using Curtis’ figures, the implied stub is at its lowest level since a brief downward spike in February 2015, and you would have to go back to April 2014 to find a lower level.
The push back on this setup is that the auto operations have recorded marginally, yet sequential profit declines in FY16 and FY17; while recording three sequential quarterly declines up to December 2018. The big question is whether Mahindra can regain market share as it kick-starts a new model cycle.
In contrast, Sanghyun believes the Holdco is still undervalued relative to the Sub by about 10%. Plugging in Sanghyun’s numbers, I back out a discount to NAV of 45% against a one-year average of 30%, with a 12-month range of -51.5% to 15.5% (premium).
Back on the 13 December 2018, Can One announced a proposed MGO for Kian Joo at RM3.10/share, a 52.7% premium to last close. This required Can One shareholders’ approval which was received on the 14 February. Can One’s current 33% stake in Kian Joo accounts for ~86% of its market cap. The offer doc should be out, on or before the 7 March, with payment either late March (along with the first close of the Offer), or early April, depending on when the offer turns unconditional. The offer is conditional on 50% acceptance. Both sides are illiquid.
This looks like a decent exit for Kian Joo shareholders. Apart from EPF with 10.1%, former NED Teow China See is the only other shareholder with >5% with 8.9%.
For Can One, this is an aggressive pitch to make Kian Joo a subsidiary amidst an uncertain economic backdrop, while potential synergies may be offset via higher interest costs.
There are still two schools of thought on the HMG restructuring. One is that Glovis/Mobis are merged into a holdco entity. Or Glovis becomes the holdco with Mobis→ HM→ Kia Motors Corp (000270 KS) below. Since late 3Q18, there has been increased speculation on the latter. This has pushed up Glovis’ price relative to Mobis.
Each outcome is beset with its own set of issues. For Glovis to be the sole holdco, it has to come up with nearly ₩2tn to buy Kia’s Mobis stake, probably through new, and burdensome, debt. Glovis may also face the risk of forced holdco conversion, creating an issue with Kia as a “great grandson” subsidiary.
This speculation pushing up Glovis relative to Mobis has yet to be substantiated/justified, suggesting Glovis is overbought. Sanghyun expects a mean reversion, and recommends a long Mobis and short Glovis.
Navitas Ltd (NVT AU) has agreed to extend the exclusivity period granted to the BGH consortium to 1 March (from 18 Feb), in order to allow additional time for BGH to complete a limited set of remaining due diligence investigations.
Netcomm Wireless (NTC AU) has received $1.10 cash offer (53% premium to last close) from Casa Systems (CASA US) via a Scheme. The deal values Netcomm at ~US$114m. The scheme is subject to FIRB and shareholder approval. Stewart David Paul James, a NED, holds 12.3% and is the major shareholder. The announcement states that each Netcomm director intends to vote the Netcomm shares held by them in favour of the scheme – subject to a +ve IFA opinion and in the absence of a competing offer. This includes Stewart’s stake.
MYOB Group Ltd (MYO AU)announced no superior proposal emerged after concluding its ’go shop’ period for rival offers to KKR’s takeover proposal. At a gross/annualised spread of 0.9%/4.8%, assuming early May payment, this looks to be trading a bit tight.
CCASS
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.
NextDecade Corp (NEXT US) recently announced that it started offering long-term contracts indexed to the crude Brent in order to attract more LNG buyers. This follows the agreement reached by Tellurian Inc (TELL US) with Vitol back in December to index a long term contract with the Asian LNG price benchmark JKM. While typically US LNG projects are indexed to the Henry Hub, declining crude oil and LNG prices seem to have diminished the appeal of the Henry Hub pricing compared to the oil indexation. This insight takes a look at the latest trends in the LNG markets to assess which companies are taking the lead in the race to bring to FID in 2019 their proposed LNG projects.
Exhibit 1: NextDecade adds Brent indexation to its commercial offering
Source: NextDecade Corporate Presentation February 2019
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.
On Friday 22 February 2019 after the close, Nintendo Co Ltd (7974 JP)announced (J) a Secondary Shares Uridashi Offering of 2,428,700 shares by five shareholder banks, with an overallotment of 364,300 shares. This will be a little bit over 2% of shares outstanding.
Applying a hypothetical 4% discount to the last traded price of ¥30,030/share, this is an ¥80bn Offering including greenshoe.
On the same day, Nintendo announced (E) a share buyback program to buy up to 1 million shares or up to ¥33 billion worth (whichever is reached first) to last from the business day immediately following the delivery date of the Offering shares (practically speaking, a day on or between 13 March and 18 March 2019) to 12 April 2019. Based on an average daily volume traded of 2.2mm shares, 10% participation would mean the buyback would take 5 days to complete. 5% would take 9 days. The company also announced (E) it would cancel 10 million shares on 29 March 2019. That may only be 45% of the post-buyback treasury share position, but it leads to another event investors should watch.
This is the first buyback Nintendo has announced in five years. The Nikkei article discussing the situation suggests that the possibility of supply/demand being weak is the reason for the buyback. The stated reason for the Offering as proposed by Nintendo in its Offering announcement, suggested a goal of increasing and diversifying the shareholder base.
The fact that JPX was selling the shares was not important. The reasoning was. And JPX provided an example of how it should be done (as explained in the insight).
My words then still stand.
And JPX provided an example of how it should be done (as explained in the insight). The ramifications are significant.
The ramifications of this Offering are significant too. This is a lot more than just an offering by entities looking to take profits.
On Friday 22 February after the close, NTT Docomo Inc (9437 JP)announced (E) that it would cancel 447,067,906 shares (11.82% of issued shares before the cancellation) of Treasury shares on the 28th of February.
The buyback has already occurred. This is largely technical. But it has an interesting side effect.
An activist has come forward, and the external statutory auditor and lead shareholder (wife of founder) are against the offer, but Kosaido Co Ltd (7868 JP) situation still fits pretty cleanly in the “Too Hard” bucket for now.
Since announcing its foray into the deeper waters of being the fourth Type I Mobile Network Operator in Japan, Rakuten’s shares have taken a mighty hit. But the focus in this insight is on ride-sharing company Lyft. In March 2015, Rakuten CEO Hiroshi Mikitani announced that Rakuten had invested US$300mn in Lyft, giving it a 11.9% stake after Series E round in May 2015. Recent articles suggest that Rakuten remains the top investor.
As best as Travis Lundy can tell, from sources who track this, Rakuten is the single largest shareholder in Lyft, with a holding in the 10.4-12.0% range. That would suggest a position value of US$900mn-$1.2bn based on the last funding round in June 2018. At a $25bn pre-money IPO valuation, that would be worth US$1.5-2.0bn for a likely pre-tax IPO uplift of US$590-800mn.
A report late Thursday Asia time suggested the Lyft roadshow would start the week of March 18th, which would mean the S-1 will be available two weeks before that. Investors will know more about Rakuten’s ownership of Lyft by the end of next week or very early the following week. Travis would want to be long for now.
DHICO announced a larger-than-expected ₩608.4bn rights offer. ₩543bn is expected to be raised through common shares at a preliminary price of ₩6,390; and ₩65bn via RCPS at a preliminary price of ₩6,970. This is a combined 72.56% capital increase a 42.05% share dilution. Concurrently, Doosan E&C announced a ₩420bn rights offer at a preliminary price of ₩1,255, a 15% discount to last close.
For DHICO, Mar 27 is the ex-rights day for both Common and RCPS. Subscription rights (for the Common) will be listed and trade on Apr 19~25. May 2 is final pricing. May 8 is subscription and May 16 is payment. New Common shares will be listed on May 29.
For E&C, the final price will be fixed on Apr 30. Whichever is higher – ₩1,255 or Apr 26~30 VWAP at a 40% discount – will be the final offering price. Mar 27 will be the ex-rights day. Subscription rights will be listed and traded on Apr 18~24. New shares will be listed on May 24.
₩1,255 is a lot more aggressive than generally viewed. DHICO owns nearly two thirds of E&C. With a 20% oversubscription, nearly ₩300bn will likely come from DHICO, essentially buttressing E&C at an even heftier price. Which is probably why the market is being less harsh on E&C relative to DHICO.
The 247-4 Form is out with a tender offer period between 26 Feb-1 April, and payment on the 4th April. The frustrating part is how Delta’s FY18 dividend of Bt2.30 is treated. On one hand, it says the Bt71 Offer price is final unless there is a MAC. Further into the Offer doc, it mentions the Offeror “reserves the right” to reduce the offer price if a dividend is paid. DELTA’s IR believes the dividend will be added, but it is not crystal clear.
Furthermore, there is no minimum acceptance condition, as potentially flagged earlier, which means there is no possibility of fast-tracking payment. Some precedent voluntary offers included a minimum acceptance, which provides an expedited payment should investors who tender shares AND revoke their right to withdraw – provided that minimum is fulfilled.
Shares traded up after the document came out, shrugging off the ambiguity in the document. Currently trading at a gross/annualised return of 1.1%/11%. The dividend is subject to a 10% tax for non-residents.
The previous Friday, the Offerors for M1 announced that their Offer had been declared Unconditional In All Respects as the tendered amount was 57.04% and the total held by concert parties was 76.35%. Axiata Group (AXIATA MK)made an announcement to the Bursa Malaysia that it had accepted the Offer as required because it was a significant asset disposal. Going unconditional has triggered an extension of the Closing Date to 4 March 2019.
If you want to fight this with an appraisal, you can. Travis doesn’t see the point. If you want to hold on to the stock in order to block full squeezeout and play chicken with the big boys, you can, but it requires a relatively big ticket (roughly 6.73% of the shares out).
So Travis recommends taking the money. It was better to take the money in early January and re-deploy, rather than wait for the close of the offer. He would accept now and sees no upside from waiting.
When the Tender Offer / MBO for Kosaido was announced last month, Travis’ first reaction was that this was wrong, concluding this was a virtual asset strip in progress, and suggested that the only way this was likely to not get done is if some brave activist came forward.
Shortly afterwards, an activist did come forward. Yoshiaki Murakami’s bought 5% through his entity Reno KK, and later lifted his stake (combined with affiliates) to 9.55%. Travis thought the stock had run too far at that point (¥775/share). While still cheap, he did not expect Bain to lift its price by 30+%, nor a white knight to arrive quickly enough.
This week a media article suggested longstanding external statutory auditor Mr. Nakatsuji and lead shareholder Sakurai Mie were against the takeover.
The possibility this deal fails because the “put protection” of the deal price at ¥610 is no longer solid has gone up. Conversely, the probability that Bain and the MBO have to come in with a price adjustment higher has gone up. Travis is inclined to remain bearish in the medium-term as there is a significant likelihood there is no alternative solution during the Tender Offer period itself.
After announcing earlier this month a number of indicative non-binding bids were received for a “whole of company transaction”, the AFR is now reporting (paywalled) that Lone Star has also joined the battle for Aveo Group (AOG AU). (A Case for Privatising Aveo)
Saputo Inc (SAP CN) and Dairy Crest announced an all-cash deal where Saputo will buy Dairy Crest for 620p/share, to be implemented through a Scheme of Arrangement with an expected close in Q2 2019. This appears to tick all the necessary boxes. Friendly, horizontal integration, and limited job losses. Shares are trading through terms early (he published at 628.5p), perhaps on expectations the wide open register means shareholders can try to hold out for a higher price.
At almost 14x EV/EBITDA on a TTM basis and a bit lower on a March 2019 FY-end basis, it is a high enough multiple to not be insulting for a dairy company, and may keep other suitors away.
Dairy Crest’s directors have given irrevocable notice to accept, and the directors’ advisors (Greenhill & Co) have deemed the Offer “fair and reasonable.”
One extra turn of EV/EBITDA would lift the takeover price just under 10%. That would clear out most of the naysayers who bought in the frothier “we’re going to be an asset-light branded goods company” days of 2015-2017. Doable, but as it is an agreed deal, Travis doesn’t see the need to push it.
In its prior letter to Ophir on the 14 January, Petrus recommended selling the South-East Asian (SEA) assets to Medco, with a low-end fair value, before synergies, of £0.64/share, through to £1.42/share on a blue sky basis. It also argued that Ophir should negotiate with the Equatorial Guinea ministry (the regulator that terminated the Fortuna license, resulting in write-offs of US$610mn) to be compensated for its $700mn investment and the unfair seizure of the license, otherwise it would set a precedent for other international operators doing business in EG.
Petrus has now rounded on Schrader over perceived mismanagement of the EG licence, and a lack of professionalism in not soliciting and considering offers for Ophir from other buyers. Petrus’ beef is not an outlier – alternative hedge fund Sand Grove has increased its exposure, via cash-settled derivatives, to 17.28% (as at 13 February); while Ian Hannam, who advised Ophir’s board on its 2013 right issue, is understood to have also written to Ophir’s interim CEO Alan Booth and the board saying Medco’s offer is too low.
Overall, Petrus’ assertions that Ophir is being sold at “sub optimal terms” appear valid, most notably on the EG compensation and the illogical operations update earlier this month. The alternative push to sell the SEA assets separately, as that has been Medco’s core focus, not international operations, also makes sense.
Last month, DSV A/S (DSV DC) made a public proposal of a takeover for cash and scrip valued at CHF 170/share, which came at a 24% premium to last and +31% vs 1-month VWAP. The #2, #3, and long-time #4 shareholders are firmly and publicly in the camp of trying to get something done. 45.9%-shareholder Ernst Göhner Foundation is sending mixed signals – do they want a higher price? Or do they want to wait and let Panalpina grow by its own consolidator strategy?
Panalpina has now confirmed that it in preliminary talks with Kuwait-listed logistics company Agility Public Warehouse. A Bloomberg report suggested a deal could be reached as early as this past week for Agility’s logistics business. The same article suggested the Göhner Foundation is supportive of the new talks. Agility’s press release was much more non-committal.
DSV has also announced a new all cash CHF 180/share offer for Panalpina; although the original cash and scrip offer was then worth CHF 184.5/share, which is an even better premium to pre-offer terms. One wonders whether cash-only would suit the Foundation; the DSV press release seemed to respond to that.
It is not clear what would drive the Foundation to give up its control. And Panalpina’s measly share price reaction to the all-cash offer suggest there is considerable skepticism out there. But at some price, Panalpina’s board looks pretty stupid to not accept the cash.
If you do not think a deal with DSV has any chance of getting up, Panalpina shares are a sell here. If they overpay for Agility and cannot improve their own margins well past historical highs in a market trending weaker, then the shares could drop.
Using Curtis’ figures, the implied stub is at its lowest level since a brief downward spike in February 2015, and you would have to go back to April 2014 to find a lower level.
The push back on this setup is that the auto operations have recorded marginally, yet sequential profit declines in FY16 and FY17; while recording three sequential quarterly declines up to December 2018. The big question is whether Mahindra can regain market share as it kick-starts a new model cycle.
In contrast, Sanghyun believes the Holdco is still undervalued relative to the Sub by about 10%. Plugging in Sanghyun’s numbers, I back out a discount to NAV of 45% against a one-year average of 30%, with a 12-month range of -51.5% to 15.5% (premium).
Back on the 13 December 2018, Can One announced a proposed MGO for Kian Joo at RM3.10/share, a 52.7% premium to last close. This required Can One shareholders’ approval which was received on the 14 February. Can One’s current 33% stake in Kian Joo accounts for ~86% of its market cap. The offer doc should be out, on or before the 7 March, with payment either late March (along with the first close of the Offer), or early April, depending on when the offer turns unconditional. The offer is conditional on 50% acceptance. Both sides are illiquid.
This looks like a decent exit for Kian Joo shareholders. Apart from EPF with 10.1%, former NED Teow China See is the only other shareholder with >5% with 8.9%.
For Can One, this is an aggressive pitch to make Kian Joo a subsidiary amidst an uncertain economic backdrop, while potential synergies may be offset via higher interest costs.
There are still two schools of thought on the HMG restructuring. One is that Glovis/Mobis are merged into a holdco entity. Or Glovis becomes the holdco with Mobis→ HM→ Kia Motors Corp (000270 KS) below. Since late 3Q18, there has been increased speculation on the latter. This has pushed up Glovis’ price relative to Mobis.
Each outcome is beset with its own set of issues. For Glovis to be the sole holdco, it has to come up with nearly ₩2tn to buy Kia’s Mobis stake, probably through new, and burdensome, debt. Glovis may also face the risk of forced holdco conversion, creating an issue with Kia as a “great grandson” subsidiary.
This speculation pushing up Glovis relative to Mobis has yet to be substantiated/justified, suggesting Glovis is overbought. Sanghyun expects a mean reversion, and recommends a long Mobis and short Glovis.
Navitas Ltd (NVT AU) has agreed to extend the exclusivity period granted to the BGH consortium to 1 March (from 18 Feb), in order to allow additional time for BGH to complete a limited set of remaining due diligence investigations.
Netcomm Wireless (NTC AU) has received $1.10 cash offer (53% premium to last close) from Casa Systems (CASA US) via a Scheme. The deal values Netcomm at ~US$114m. The scheme is subject to FIRB and shareholder approval. Stewart David Paul James, a NED, holds 12.3% and is the major shareholder. The announcement states that each Netcomm director intends to vote the Netcomm shares held by them in favour of the scheme – subject to a +ve IFA opinion and in the absence of a competing offer. This includes Stewart’s stake.
MYOB Group Ltd (MYO AU)announced no superior proposal emerged after concluding its ’go shop’ period for rival offers to KKR’s takeover proposal. At a gross/annualised spread of 0.9%/4.8%, assuming early May payment, this looks to be trading a bit tight.
CCASS
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.
NextDecade Corp (NEXT US) recently announced that it started offering long-term contracts indexed to the crude Brent in order to attract more LNG buyers. This follows the agreement reached by Tellurian Inc (TELL US) with Vitol back in December to index a long term contract with the Asian LNG price benchmark JKM. While typically US LNG projects are indexed to the Henry Hub, declining crude oil and LNG prices seem to have diminished the appeal of the Henry Hub pricing compared to the oil indexation. This insight takes a look at the latest trends in the LNG markets to assess which companies are taking the lead in the race to bring to FID in 2019 their proposed LNG projects.
Exhibit 1: NextDecade adds Brent indexation to its commercial offering
Source: NextDecade Corporate Presentation February 2019
INTRODUCTION – Following on from our review of the Market Composite and Sectors, this Insight will cover the cap-weighted Results & Revision Scores for the 328 Peer Groups that comprise our 30 Sectors providing greater depth to our analysis of current business trends. Peer Group definitions reflect both standard SIC/GICS classifications as well as local market conventions. The number of constituents and market capitalisation for each Peer Group varies widely.
RRS/RPS SCORE MATRIX – Combining our Results & Revision Scores (RRS) with each Peer Group’s Relative Price Score (RPS) allows a classification of our Peer Group universe into four quadrants –
‘Contrarian Buy‘ > Low RRS & Low RPS
‘Contrarian Sell’ > High RRS & High RPS
Peak Growth‘ > High RRS & Low RPS
‘Ex-Growth/Turnaround‘ > Low RRS & High RPS
THE ‘QUADRANTS’ – In the two ‘Contrarian‘ quadrants, the market is aligned with the current earnings momentum of the Peer Groups suggesting opportunities exist only for those willing or brave enough to take a contrarian view. For ‘Peak Growth‘ Peer Groups, the market is calling for a downturn in momentum that has yet to be reflected in quarterly earnings. Where the cycle is more prolonged than expected, there are often opportunities for short-term rebounds in what are normally relatively-inexpensive companies. The ‘Ex-Growth‘ quadrant often consists of former ‘Contrarian Sell‘s where the market is reluctant to acknowledge that the cycle has turned. This quadrant can also contain ‘Turnarounds‘ – formerly ‘Contrarian Buys‘ where the market is correctly anticipating a change in fortunes.
In the DETAIL section below, we list the top and bottom twenty Peer Groups ranked by Results & Revision Score and the top and bottom twenty most-changed over the last three months as well the most optimistic and most pessimistic. In our ranked tables we have listed only those Peer Groups with an aggregate capitalisation of over ¥50b.
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.
On Friday 22 February after the close, NTT Docomo Inc (9437 JP)announced (E) that it would cancel 447,067,906 shares (11.82% of issued shares before the cancellation) of Treasury shares on the 28th of February.
The buyback has already occurred. This is largely technical. But it has an interesting side effect.
An activist has come forward, and the external statutory auditor and lead shareholder (wife of founder) are against the offer, but Kosaido Co Ltd (7868 JP) situation still fits pretty cleanly in the “Too Hard” bucket for now.
Since announcing its foray into the deeper waters of being the fourth Type I Mobile Network Operator in Japan, Rakuten’s shares have taken a mighty hit. But the focus in this insight is on ride-sharing company Lyft. In March 2015, Rakuten CEO Hiroshi Mikitani announced that Rakuten had invested US$300mn in Lyft, giving it a 11.9% stake after Series E round in May 2015. Recent articles suggest that Rakuten remains the top investor.
As best as Travis Lundy can tell, from sources who track this, Rakuten is the single largest shareholder in Lyft, with a holding in the 10.4-12.0% range. That would suggest a position value of US$900mn-$1.2bn based on the last funding round in June 2018. At a $25bn pre-money IPO valuation, that would be worth US$1.5-2.0bn for a likely pre-tax IPO uplift of US$590-800mn.
A report late Thursday Asia time suggested the Lyft roadshow would start the week of March 18th, which would mean the S-1 will be available two weeks before that. Investors will know more about Rakuten’s ownership of Lyft by the end of next week or very early the following week. Travis would want to be long for now.
DHICO announced a larger-than-expected ₩608.4bn rights offer. ₩543bn is expected to be raised through common shares at a preliminary price of ₩6,390; and ₩65bn via RCPS at a preliminary price of ₩6,970. This is a combined 72.56% capital increase a 42.05% share dilution. Concurrently, Doosan E&C announced a ₩420bn rights offer at a preliminary price of ₩1,255, a 15% discount to last close.
For DHICO, Mar 27 is the ex-rights day for both Common and RCPS. Subscription rights (for the Common) will be listed and trade on Apr 19~25. May 2 is final pricing. May 8 is subscription and May 16 is payment. New Common shares will be listed on May 29.
For E&C, the final price will be fixed on Apr 30. Whichever is higher – ₩1,255 or Apr 26~30 VWAP at a 40% discount – will be the final offering price. Mar 27 will be the ex-rights day. Subscription rights will be listed and traded on Apr 18~24. New shares will be listed on May 24.
₩1,255 is a lot more aggressive than generally viewed. DHICO owns nearly two thirds of E&C. With a 20% oversubscription, nearly ₩300bn will likely come from DHICO, essentially buttressing E&C at an even heftier price. Which is probably why the market is being less harsh on E&C relative to DHICO.
The 247-4 Form is out with a tender offer period between 26 Feb-1 April, and payment on the 4th April. The frustrating part is how Delta’s FY18 dividend of Bt2.30 is treated. On one hand, it says the Bt71 Offer price is final unless there is a MAC. Further into the Offer doc, it mentions the Offeror “reserves the right” to reduce the offer price if a dividend is paid. DELTA’s IR believes the dividend will be added, but it is not crystal clear.
Furthermore, there is no minimum acceptance condition, as potentially flagged earlier, which means there is no possibility of fast-tracking payment. Some precedent voluntary offers included a minimum acceptance, which provides an expedited payment should investors who tender shares AND revoke their right to withdraw – provided that minimum is fulfilled.
Shares traded up after the document came out, shrugging off the ambiguity in the document. Currently trading at a gross/annualised return of 1.1%/11%. The dividend is subject to a 10% tax for non-residents.
The previous Friday, the Offerors for M1 announced that their Offer had been declared Unconditional In All Respects as the tendered amount was 57.04% and the total held by concert parties was 76.35%. Axiata Group (AXIATA MK)made an announcement to the Bursa Malaysia that it had accepted the Offer as required because it was a significant asset disposal. Going unconditional has triggered an extension of the Closing Date to 4 March 2019.
If you want to fight this with an appraisal, you can. Travis doesn’t see the point. If you want to hold on to the stock in order to block full squeezeout and play chicken with the big boys, you can, but it requires a relatively big ticket (roughly 6.73% of the shares out).
So Travis recommends taking the money. It was better to take the money in early January and re-deploy, rather than wait for the close of the offer. He would accept now and sees no upside from waiting.
When the Tender Offer / MBO for Kosaido was announced last month, Travis’ first reaction was that this was wrong, concluding this was a virtual asset strip in progress, and suggested that the only way this was likely to not get done is if some brave activist came forward.
Shortly afterwards, an activist did come forward. Yoshiaki Murakami’s bought 5% through his entity Reno KK, and later lifted his stake (combined with affiliates) to 9.55%. Travis thought the stock had run too far at that point (¥775/share). While still cheap, he did not expect Bain to lift its price by 30+%, nor a white knight to arrive quickly enough.
This week a media article suggested longstanding external statutory auditor Mr. Nakatsuji and lead shareholder Sakurai Mie were against the takeover.
The possibility this deal fails because the “put protection” of the deal price at ¥610 is no longer solid has gone up. Conversely, the probability that Bain and the MBO have to come in with a price adjustment higher has gone up. Travis is inclined to remain bearish in the medium-term as there is a significant likelihood there is no alternative solution during the Tender Offer period itself.
After announcing earlier this month a number of indicative non-binding bids were received for a “whole of company transaction”, the AFR is now reporting (paywalled) that Lone Star has also joined the battle for Aveo Group (AOG AU). (A Case for Privatising Aveo)
Saputo Inc (SAP CN) and Dairy Crest announced an all-cash deal where Saputo will buy Dairy Crest for 620p/share, to be implemented through a Scheme of Arrangement with an expected close in Q2 2019. This appears to tick all the necessary boxes. Friendly, horizontal integration, and limited job losses. Shares are trading through terms early (he published at 628.5p), perhaps on expectations the wide open register means shareholders can try to hold out for a higher price.
At almost 14x EV/EBITDA on a TTM basis and a bit lower on a March 2019 FY-end basis, it is a high enough multiple to not be insulting for a dairy company, and may keep other suitors away.
Dairy Crest’s directors have given irrevocable notice to accept, and the directors’ advisors (Greenhill & Co) have deemed the Offer “fair and reasonable.”
One extra turn of EV/EBITDA would lift the takeover price just under 10%. That would clear out most of the naysayers who bought in the frothier “we’re going to be an asset-light branded goods company” days of 2015-2017. Doable, but as it is an agreed deal, Travis doesn’t see the need to push it.
In its prior letter to Ophir on the 14 January, Petrus recommended selling the South-East Asian (SEA) assets to Medco, with a low-end fair value, before synergies, of £0.64/share, through to £1.42/share on a blue sky basis. It also argued that Ophir should negotiate with the Equatorial Guinea ministry (the regulator that terminated the Fortuna license, resulting in write-offs of US$610mn) to be compensated for its $700mn investment and the unfair seizure of the license, otherwise it would set a precedent for other international operators doing business in EG.
Petrus has now rounded on Schrader over perceived mismanagement of the EG licence, and a lack of professionalism in not soliciting and considering offers for Ophir from other buyers. Petrus’ beef is not an outlier – alternative hedge fund Sand Grove has increased its exposure, via cash-settled derivatives, to 17.28% (as at 13 February); while Ian Hannam, who advised Ophir’s board on its 2013 right issue, is understood to have also written to Ophir’s interim CEO Alan Booth and the board saying Medco’s offer is too low.
Overall, Petrus’ assertions that Ophir is being sold at “sub optimal terms” appear valid, most notably on the EG compensation and the illogical operations update earlier this month. The alternative push to sell the SEA assets separately, as that has been Medco’s core focus, not international operations, also makes sense.
Last month, DSV A/S (DSV DC) made a public proposal of a takeover for cash and scrip valued at CHF 170/share, which came at a 24% premium to last and +31% vs 1-month VWAP. The #2, #3, and long-time #4 shareholders are firmly and publicly in the camp of trying to get something done. 45.9%-shareholder Ernst Göhner Foundation is sending mixed signals – do they want a higher price? Or do they want to wait and let Panalpina grow by its own consolidator strategy?
Panalpina has now confirmed that it in preliminary talks with Kuwait-listed logistics company Agility Public Warehouse. A Bloomberg report suggested a deal could be reached as early as this past week for Agility’s logistics business. The same article suggested the Göhner Foundation is supportive of the new talks. Agility’s press release was much more non-committal.
DSV has also announced a new all cash CHF 180/share offer for Panalpina; although the original cash and scrip offer was then worth CHF 184.5/share, which is an even better premium to pre-offer terms. One wonders whether cash-only would suit the Foundation; the DSV press release seemed to respond to that.
It is not clear what would drive the Foundation to give up its control. And Panalpina’s measly share price reaction to the all-cash offer suggest there is considerable skepticism out there. But at some price, Panalpina’s board looks pretty stupid to not accept the cash.
If you do not think a deal with DSV has any chance of getting up, Panalpina shares are a sell here. If they overpay for Agility and cannot improve their own margins well past historical highs in a market trending weaker, then the shares could drop.
Using Curtis’ figures, the implied stub is at its lowest level since a brief downward spike in February 2015, and you would have to go back to April 2014 to find a lower level.
The push back on this setup is that the auto operations have recorded marginally, yet sequential profit declines in FY16 and FY17; while recording three sequential quarterly declines up to December 2018. The big question is whether Mahindra can regain market share as it kick-starts a new model cycle.
In contrast, Sanghyun believes the Holdco is still undervalued relative to the Sub by about 10%. Plugging in Sanghyun’s numbers, I back out a discount to NAV of 45% against a one-year average of 30%, with a 12-month range of -51.5% to 15.5% (premium).
Back on the 13 December 2018, Can One announced a proposed MGO for Kian Joo at RM3.10/share, a 52.7% premium to last close. This required Can One shareholders’ approval which was received on the 14 February. Can One’s current 33% stake in Kian Joo accounts for ~86% of its market cap. The offer doc should be out, on or before the 7 March, with payment either late March (along with the first close of the Offer), or early April, depending on when the offer turns unconditional. The offer is conditional on 50% acceptance. Both sides are illiquid.
This looks like a decent exit for Kian Joo shareholders. Apart from EPF with 10.1%, former NED Teow China See is the only other shareholder with >5% with 8.9%.
For Can One, this is an aggressive pitch to make Kian Joo a subsidiary amidst an uncertain economic backdrop, while potential synergies may be offset via higher interest costs.
There are still two schools of thought on the HMG restructuring. One is that Glovis/Mobis are merged into a holdco entity. Or Glovis becomes the holdco with Mobis→ HM→ Kia Motors Corp (000270 KS) below. Since late 3Q18, there has been increased speculation on the latter. This has pushed up Glovis’ price relative to Mobis.
Each outcome is beset with its own set of issues. For Glovis to be the sole holdco, it has to come up with nearly ₩2tn to buy Kia’s Mobis stake, probably through new, and burdensome, debt. Glovis may also face the risk of forced holdco conversion, creating an issue with Kia as a “great grandson” subsidiary.
This speculation pushing up Glovis relative to Mobis has yet to be substantiated/justified, suggesting Glovis is overbought. Sanghyun expects a mean reversion, and recommends a long Mobis and short Glovis.
Navitas Ltd (NVT AU) has agreed to extend the exclusivity period granted to the BGH consortium to 1 March (from 18 Feb), in order to allow additional time for BGH to complete a limited set of remaining due diligence investigations.
Netcomm Wireless (NTC AU) has received $1.10 cash offer (53% premium to last close) from Casa Systems (CASA US) via a Scheme. The deal values Netcomm at ~US$114m. The scheme is subject to FIRB and shareholder approval. Stewart David Paul James, a NED, holds 12.3% and is the major shareholder. The announcement states that each Netcomm director intends to vote the Netcomm shares held by them in favour of the scheme – subject to a +ve IFA opinion and in the absence of a competing offer. This includes Stewart’s stake.
MYOB Group Ltd (MYO AU)announced no superior proposal emerged after concluding its ’go shop’ period for rival offers to KKR’s takeover proposal. At a gross/annualised spread of 0.9%/4.8%, assuming early May payment, this looks to be trading a bit tight.
CCASS
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.
NextDecade Corp (NEXT US) recently announced that it started offering long-term contracts indexed to the crude Brent in order to attract more LNG buyers. This follows the agreement reached by Tellurian Inc (TELL US) with Vitol back in December to index a long term contract with the Asian LNG price benchmark JKM. While typically US LNG projects are indexed to the Henry Hub, declining crude oil and LNG prices seem to have diminished the appeal of the Henry Hub pricing compared to the oil indexation. This insight takes a look at the latest trends in the LNG markets to assess which companies are taking the lead in the race to bring to FID in 2019 their proposed LNG projects.
Exhibit 1: NextDecade adds Brent indexation to its commercial offering
Source: NextDecade Corporate Presentation February 2019
INTRODUCTION – Following on from our review of the Market Composite and Sectors, this Insight will cover the cap-weighted Results & Revision Scores for the 328 Peer Groups that comprise our 30 Sectors providing greater depth to our analysis of current business trends. Peer Group definitions reflect both standard SIC/GICS classifications as well as local market conventions. The number of constituents and market capitalisation for each Peer Group varies widely.
RRS/RPS SCORE MATRIX – Combining our Results & Revision Scores (RRS) with each Peer Group’s Relative Price Score (RPS) allows a classification of our Peer Group universe into four quadrants –
‘Contrarian Buy‘ > Low RRS & Low RPS
‘Contrarian Sell’ > High RRS & High RPS
Peak Growth‘ > High RRS & Low RPS
‘Ex-Growth/Turnaround‘ > Low RRS & High RPS
THE ‘QUADRANTS’ – In the two ‘Contrarian‘ quadrants, the market is aligned with the current earnings momentum of the Peer Groups suggesting opportunities exist only for those willing or brave enough to take a contrarian view. For ‘Peak Growth‘ Peer Groups, the market is calling for a downturn in momentum that has yet to be reflected in quarterly earnings. Where the cycle is more prolonged than expected, there are often opportunities for short-term rebounds in what are normally relatively-inexpensive companies. The ‘Ex-Growth‘ quadrant often consists of former ‘Contrarian Sell‘s where the market is reluctant to acknowledge that the cycle has turned. This quadrant can also contain ‘Turnarounds‘ – formerly ‘Contrarian Buys‘ where the market is correctly anticipating a change in fortunes.
In the DETAIL section below, we list the top and bottom twenty Peer Groups ranked by Results & Revision Score and the top and bottom twenty most-changed over the last three months as well the most optimistic and most pessimistic. In our ranked tables we have listed only those Peer Groups with an aggregate capitalisation of over ¥50b.
Government plans to manage the effects of the consumption tax increase of 2% to 10%, due in October, continue to develop.
As in 2014 when sales tax rose from 5% to 8%, companies are nervous that the increase will lead to a significant downturn in consumption, and the government is chafing under pressure, both from businesses and the opposition.
The latest idea is to pump more money into the economy, while at the same time insisting that Japan’s massive debt levels will fall, partly thanks to stimulus from Japan’s new free trade deal with the EU and its role in the TPP.
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.
An activist has come forward, and the external statutory auditor and lead shareholder (wife of founder) are against the offer, but Kosaido Co Ltd (7868 JP) situation still fits pretty cleanly in the “Too Hard” bucket for now.
Since announcing its foray into the deeper waters of being the fourth Type I Mobile Network Operator in Japan, Rakuten’s shares have taken a mighty hit. But the focus in this insight is on ride-sharing company Lyft. In March 2015, Rakuten CEO Hiroshi Mikitani announced that Rakuten had invested US$300mn in Lyft, giving it a 11.9% stake after Series E round in May 2015. Recent articles suggest that Rakuten remains the top investor.
As best as Travis Lundy can tell, from sources who track this, Rakuten is the single largest shareholder in Lyft, with a holding in the 10.4-12.0% range. That would suggest a position value of US$900mn-$1.2bn based on the last funding round in June 2018. At a $25bn pre-money IPO valuation, that would be worth US$1.5-2.0bn for a likely pre-tax IPO uplift of US$590-800mn.
A report late Thursday Asia time suggested the Lyft roadshow would start the week of March 18th, which would mean the S-1 will be available two weeks before that. Investors will know more about Rakuten’s ownership of Lyft by the end of next week or very early the following week. Travis would want to be long for now.
DHICO announced a larger-than-expected ₩608.4bn rights offer. ₩543bn is expected to be raised through common shares at a preliminary price of ₩6,390; and ₩65bn via RCPS at a preliminary price of ₩6,970. This is a combined 72.56% capital increase a 42.05% share dilution. Concurrently, Doosan E&C announced a ₩420bn rights offer at a preliminary price of ₩1,255, a 15% discount to last close.
For DHICO, Mar 27 is the ex-rights day for both Common and RCPS. Subscription rights (for the Common) will be listed and trade on Apr 19~25. May 2 is final pricing. May 8 is subscription and May 16 is payment. New Common shares will be listed on May 29.
For E&C, the final price will be fixed on Apr 30. Whichever is higher – ₩1,255 or Apr 26~30 VWAP at a 40% discount – will be the final offering price. Mar 27 will be the ex-rights day. Subscription rights will be listed and traded on Apr 18~24. New shares will be listed on May 24.
₩1,255 is a lot more aggressive than generally viewed. DHICO owns nearly two thirds of E&C. With a 20% oversubscription, nearly ₩300bn will likely come from DHICO, essentially buttressing E&C at an even heftier price. Which is probably why the market is being less harsh on E&C relative to DHICO.
The 247-4 Form is out with a tender offer period between 26 Feb-1 April, and payment on the 4th April. The frustrating part is how Delta’s FY18 dividend of Bt2.30 is treated. On one hand, it says the Bt71 Offer price is final unless there is a MAC. Further into the Offer doc, it mentions the Offeror “reserves the right” to reduce the offer price if a dividend is paid. DELTA’s IR believes the dividend will be added, but it is not crystal clear.
Furthermore, there is no minimum acceptance condition, as potentially flagged earlier, which means there is no possibility of fast-tracking payment. Some precedent voluntary offers included a minimum acceptance, which provides an expedited payment should investors who tender shares AND revoke their right to withdraw – provided that minimum is fulfilled.
Shares traded up after the document came out, shrugging off the ambiguity in the document. Currently trading at a gross/annualised return of 1.1%/11%. The dividend is subject to a 10% tax for non-residents.
The previous Friday, the Offerors for M1 announced that their Offer had been declared Unconditional In All Respects as the tendered amount was 57.04% and the total held by concert parties was 76.35%. Axiata Group (AXIATA MK)made an announcement to the Bursa Malaysia that it had accepted the Offer as required because it was a significant asset disposal. Going unconditional has triggered an extension of the Closing Date to 4 March 2019.
If you want to fight this with an appraisal, you can. Travis doesn’t see the point. If you want to hold on to the stock in order to block full squeezeout and play chicken with the big boys, you can, but it requires a relatively big ticket (roughly 6.73% of the shares out).
So Travis recommends taking the money. It was better to take the money in early January and re-deploy, rather than wait for the close of the offer. He would accept now and sees no upside from waiting.
When the Tender Offer / MBO for Kosaido was announced last month, Travis’ first reaction was that this was wrong, concluding this was a virtual asset strip in progress, and suggested that the only way this was likely to not get done is if some brave activist came forward.
Shortly afterwards, an activist did come forward. Yoshiaki Murakami’s bought 5% through his entity Reno KK, and later lifted his stake (combined with affiliates) to 9.55%. Travis thought the stock had run too far at that point (¥775/share). While still cheap, he did not expect Bain to lift its price by 30+%, nor a white knight to arrive quickly enough.
This week a media article suggested longstanding external statutory auditor Mr. Nakatsuji and lead shareholder Sakurai Mie were against the takeover.
The possibility this deal fails because the “put protection” of the deal price at ¥610 is no longer solid has gone up. Conversely, the probability that Bain and the MBO have to come in with a price adjustment higher has gone up. Travis is inclined to remain bearish in the medium-term as there is a significant likelihood there is no alternative solution during the Tender Offer period itself.
After announcing earlier this month a number of indicative non-binding bids were received for a “whole of company transaction”, the AFR is now reporting (paywalled) that Lone Star has also joined the battle for Aveo Group (AOG AU). (A Case for Privatising Aveo)
Saputo Inc (SAP CN) and Dairy Crest announced an all-cash deal where Saputo will buy Dairy Crest for 620p/share, to be implemented through a Scheme of Arrangement with an expected close in Q2 2019. This appears to tick all the necessary boxes. Friendly, horizontal integration, and limited job losses. Shares are trading through terms early (he published at 628.5p), perhaps on expectations the wide open register means shareholders can try to hold out for a higher price.
At almost 14x EV/EBITDA on a TTM basis and a bit lower on a March 2019 FY-end basis, it is a high enough multiple to not be insulting for a dairy company, and may keep other suitors away.
Dairy Crest’s directors have given irrevocable notice to accept, and the directors’ advisors (Greenhill & Co) have deemed the Offer “fair and reasonable.”
One extra turn of EV/EBITDA would lift the takeover price just under 10%. That would clear out most of the naysayers who bought in the frothier “we’re going to be an asset-light branded goods company” days of 2015-2017. Doable, but as it is an agreed deal, Travis doesn’t see the need to push it.
In its prior letter to Ophir on the 14 January, Petrus recommended selling the South-East Asian (SEA) assets to Medco, with a low-end fair value, before synergies, of £0.64/share, through to £1.42/share on a blue sky basis. It also argued that Ophir should negotiate with the Equatorial Guinea ministry (the regulator that terminated the Fortuna license, resulting in write-offs of US$610mn) to be compensated for its $700mn investment and the unfair seizure of the license, otherwise it would set a precedent for other international operators doing business in EG.
Petrus has now rounded on Schrader over perceived mismanagement of the EG licence, and a lack of professionalism in not soliciting and considering offers for Ophir from other buyers. Petrus’ beef is not an outlier – alternative hedge fund Sand Grove has increased its exposure, via cash-settled derivatives, to 17.28% (as at 13 February); while Ian Hannam, who advised Ophir’s board on its 2013 right issue, is understood to have also written to Ophir’s interim CEO Alan Booth and the board saying Medco’s offer is too low.
Overall, Petrus’ assertions that Ophir is being sold at “sub optimal terms” appear valid, most notably on the EG compensation and the illogical operations update earlier this month. The alternative push to sell the SEA assets separately, as that has been Medco’s core focus, not international operations, also makes sense.
Last month, DSV A/S (DSV DC) made a public proposal of a takeover for cash and scrip valued at CHF 170/share, which came at a 24% premium to last and +31% vs 1-month VWAP. The #2, #3, and long-time #4 shareholders are firmly and publicly in the camp of trying to get something done. 45.9%-shareholder Ernst Göhner Foundation is sending mixed signals – do they want a higher price? Or do they want to wait and let Panalpina grow by its own consolidator strategy?
Panalpina has now confirmed that it in preliminary talks with Kuwait-listed logistics company Agility Public Warehouse. A Bloomberg report suggested a deal could be reached as early as this past week for Agility’s logistics business. The same article suggested the Göhner Foundation is supportive of the new talks. Agility’s press release was much more non-committal.
DSV has also announced a new all cash CHF 180/share offer for Panalpina; although the original cash and scrip offer was then worth CHF 184.5/share, which is an even better premium to pre-offer terms. One wonders whether cash-only would suit the Foundation; the DSV press release seemed to respond to that.
It is not clear what would drive the Foundation to give up its control. And Panalpina’s measly share price reaction to the all-cash offer suggest there is considerable skepticism out there. But at some price, Panalpina’s board looks pretty stupid to not accept the cash.
If you do not think a deal with DSV has any chance of getting up, Panalpina shares are a sell here. If they overpay for Agility and cannot improve their own margins well past historical highs in a market trending weaker, then the shares could drop.
Using Curtis’ figures, the implied stub is at its lowest level since a brief downward spike in February 2015, and you would have to go back to April 2014 to find a lower level.
The push back on this setup is that the auto operations have recorded marginally, yet sequential profit declines in FY16 and FY17; while recording three sequential quarterly declines up to December 2018. The big question is whether Mahindra can regain market share as it kick-starts a new model cycle.
In contrast, Sanghyun believes the Holdco is still undervalued relative to the Sub by about 10%. Plugging in Sanghyun’s numbers, I back out a discount to NAV of 45% against a one-year average of 30%, with a 12-month range of -51.5% to 15.5% (premium).
Back on the 13 December 2018, Can One announced a proposed MGO for Kian Joo at RM3.10/share, a 52.7% premium to last close. This required Can One shareholders’ approval which was received on the 14 February. Can One’s current 33% stake in Kian Joo accounts for ~86% of its market cap. The offer doc should be out, on or before the 7 March, with payment either late March (along with the first close of the Offer), or early April, depending on when the offer turns unconditional. The offer is conditional on 50% acceptance. Both sides are illiquid.
This looks like a decent exit for Kian Joo shareholders. Apart from EPF with 10.1%, former NED Teow China See is the only other shareholder with >5% with 8.9%.
For Can One, this is an aggressive pitch to make Kian Joo a subsidiary amidst an uncertain economic backdrop, while potential synergies may be offset via higher interest costs.
There are still two schools of thought on the HMG restructuring. One is that Glovis/Mobis are merged into a holdco entity. Or Glovis becomes the holdco with Mobis→ HM→ Kia Motors Corp (000270 KS) below. Since late 3Q18, there has been increased speculation on the latter. This has pushed up Glovis’ price relative to Mobis.
Each outcome is beset with its own set of issues. For Glovis to be the sole holdco, it has to come up with nearly ₩2tn to buy Kia’s Mobis stake, probably through new, and burdensome, debt. Glovis may also face the risk of forced holdco conversion, creating an issue with Kia as a “great grandson” subsidiary.
This speculation pushing up Glovis relative to Mobis has yet to be substantiated/justified, suggesting Glovis is overbought. Sanghyun expects a mean reversion, and recommends a long Mobis and short Glovis.
Navitas Ltd (NVT AU) has agreed to extend the exclusivity period granted to the BGH consortium to 1 March (from 18 Feb), in order to allow additional time for BGH to complete a limited set of remaining due diligence investigations.
Netcomm Wireless (NTC AU) has received $1.10 cash offer (53% premium to last close) from Casa Systems (CASA US) via a Scheme. The deal values Netcomm at ~US$114m. The scheme is subject to FIRB and shareholder approval. Stewart David Paul James, a NED, holds 12.3% and is the major shareholder. The announcement states that each Netcomm director intends to vote the Netcomm shares held by them in favour of the scheme – subject to a +ve IFA opinion and in the absence of a competing offer. This includes Stewart’s stake.
MYOB Group Ltd (MYO AU)announced no superior proposal emerged after concluding its ’go shop’ period for rival offers to KKR’s takeover proposal. At a gross/annualised spread of 0.9%/4.8%, assuming early May payment, this looks to be trading a bit tight.
CCASS
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.
NextDecade Corp (NEXT US) recently announced that it started offering long-term contracts indexed to the crude Brent in order to attract more LNG buyers. This follows the agreement reached by Tellurian Inc (TELL US) with Vitol back in December to index a long term contract with the Asian LNG price benchmark JKM. While typically US LNG projects are indexed to the Henry Hub, declining crude oil and LNG prices seem to have diminished the appeal of the Henry Hub pricing compared to the oil indexation. This insight takes a look at the latest trends in the LNG markets to assess which companies are taking the lead in the race to bring to FID in 2019 their proposed LNG projects.
Exhibit 1: NextDecade adds Brent indexation to its commercial offering
Source: NextDecade Corporate Presentation February 2019
INTRODUCTION – Following on from our review of the Market Composite and Sectors, this Insight will cover the cap-weighted Results & Revision Scores for the 328 Peer Groups that comprise our 30 Sectors providing greater depth to our analysis of current business trends. Peer Group definitions reflect both standard SIC/GICS classifications as well as local market conventions. The number of constituents and market capitalisation for each Peer Group varies widely.
RRS/RPS SCORE MATRIX – Combining our Results & Revision Scores (RRS) with each Peer Group’s Relative Price Score (RPS) allows a classification of our Peer Group universe into four quadrants –
‘Contrarian Buy‘ > Low RRS & Low RPS
‘Contrarian Sell’ > High RRS & High RPS
Peak Growth‘ > High RRS & Low RPS
‘Ex-Growth/Turnaround‘ > Low RRS & High RPS
THE ‘QUADRANTS’ – In the two ‘Contrarian‘ quadrants, the market is aligned with the current earnings momentum of the Peer Groups suggesting opportunities exist only for those willing or brave enough to take a contrarian view. For ‘Peak Growth‘ Peer Groups, the market is calling for a downturn in momentum that has yet to be reflected in quarterly earnings. Where the cycle is more prolonged than expected, there are often opportunities for short-term rebounds in what are normally relatively-inexpensive companies. The ‘Ex-Growth‘ quadrant often consists of former ‘Contrarian Sell‘s where the market is reluctant to acknowledge that the cycle has turned. This quadrant can also contain ‘Turnarounds‘ – formerly ‘Contrarian Buys‘ where the market is correctly anticipating a change in fortunes.
In the DETAIL section below, we list the top and bottom twenty Peer Groups ranked by Results & Revision Score and the top and bottom twenty most-changed over the last three months as well the most optimistic and most pessimistic. In our ranked tables we have listed only those Peer Groups with an aggregate capitalisation of over ¥50b.
Government plans to manage the effects of the consumption tax increase of 2% to 10%, due in October, continue to develop.
As in 2014 when sales tax rose from 5% to 8%, companies are nervous that the increase will lead to a significant downturn in consumption, and the government is chafing under pressure, both from businesses and the opposition.
The latest idea is to pump more money into the economy, while at the same time insisting that Japan’s massive debt levels will fall, partly thanks to stimulus from Japan’s new free trade deal with the EU and its role in the TPP.
Rakuten Inc (4755 JP) is much in the news for many reasons – one of which being a plunge into the deeper waters of being the fourth Type I Mobile Network Operator in Japan, having officially applied for the license in February 2018 and seeing it approved in April. – the license for which it applied a year ago, with approval received in April 2018. The goal has been to use its initial foray into the MVNO business where it has more than 1.5 million users, and increase its footprint to attract some of its 100+mm Rakuten IDs, 7mm Rakuten Bank accountholders, 3mm Rakuten Securities accountholders, so that it can increase the LTV (LifeTimeValue) of its existing customer base.
The goal is to introduce service this year (also a requirement of the terms of its license), growing steadily to have 15mm subs in 10 years. The estimated hardware spend is said to be ¥600-700bn on base stations and equipment, initially concentrating on areas in and around mass transit stations in urban areas such as Tokyo and Osaka, and then expand outward. The company has signed deals with numerous partners in electricity distribution such as Tokyo Electric Power Co (9501 JP), Chubu Electric Power Co (9502 JP), and Kansai Electric Power Co (9503 JP) to install transmission equipment on these companies’ power poles and other infrastructure.
The shares have suffered mightily since the plan came to light in mid-December 2015, underperforming the TOPIX Info & Communications Sector Index by more than 20% in the fourteen months through yesterday. The sharp drop on the left hand side of the chart was a two-day sell-a-thon by investors convinced the company was about to waste billions of dollars. The Info & Communications Sector Index also dropped sharply on that day on fears that a fourth entrant with a declared goal of dropping monthly charges by 40% would increase churn at the existing Big Three (NTT Docomo Inc (9437 JP), Softbank Corp (9434 JP), and KDDI Corp (9433 JP)) and possibly cause a price war. The shares dropped from about ¥1140 to ¥1020/share, and then slid another 30-odd percent in the next six months to ¥700/share.
The shares have rebounded, fell back in autumn general market weakness, rebounded a tie-up on payments with KDDI announced Nov1 and decent Q3 numbes announced less than 2 weeks later, got crushed in the sharp global selloff in November and December, then had a v-shaped rebound at the start of 2019.
At the end of January Rakuten Mobile Network received blanket licenses to transmit on 1.7Ghz in the major regions covering Tokyo, Kyoto, Osaka, Nagoya and Yokohama from the local Bureaus of Communication, and expects to receive others soon. Last week, Rakuten reported full-year earnings through end-December with revenues up 16.6%yoy to just over ¥1.1 trillion, OP (IFRS) at ¥170.4bn, and Net Income at ¥142bn and on the same day announced Nokia had been granted the contract to deploy a turnkey solution as had been previously tested and speculated.
There are numerous telecom and retailing experts publishing on Smartkarma who have more expertise on Rakuten’s telecom plans and their plans to compete harder against Amazon Japan and Yahoo Japan and others in the e-tailing space.
I am not going to pretend to their level of knowledge on telecom or retailing (I found Kirk Boodry’s piece on the upcoming 5G allocations in March to be particularly informative) but I will note that Rakuten has a) the ability to borrow against the hardware and licenses, b) can roll out hardware quarter-by-quarter, and c) the KDDI/Rakuten deal is important. In it, KDDI will give Rakuten access to its nationwide roaming network, and Rakuten will provide KDDI with expertise on mobile payments – especially relevant as KDDI is now building out au Financial as briefly discussed here.
But There is More NewsFlow To Come, And THAT is Interesting
In March 2015, Rakuten CEO Hiroshi Mikitani announced that Rakuten had invested US$300mm in a then just-become-unicorn ride-sharing company called Lyft Inc (0812823D US), which at the end of the Series E round in May 2015 would leave it with ~11.9% of the company at a ~US$2.4-2.5bn post-money valuation. Recent articles suggest that Rakuten remains the top investor (though a WSJ article 2 weeks ago noted there would be golden shares. Hiroshi Mikitani remains a board member of Lyft.
That becomes important as by all accounts I can find (much more detail below), Rakuten continued investing in the four subsequent funding rounds through last summer, leaving the company as the largest single shareholder in Lyft as it prepares for its IPO later this spring. Lyft confidentially filed its IPO paperwork (a “draft S-1”) with the SEC in early December 2018, leaping ahead of Uber in the race to IPO first so the much larger Uber valuation doesn’t block Lyft’s chances for raising funds.
Reuters carried an article Thursday night Asia time saying Lyft planned to start its roadshow the week of March 18th, with an expected valuation of US$20-25 billion, and the first-mover advantage would allow Lyft to set the metrics it wants to use upon which to be judged and priced (if it waited, it would have to be compared to Uber). That could mean more emphasis on the company’s strong suite of self-driving partnerships (drive.ai, Ford, GM, Jaguar, Nutonomy, Waymo, others). A March 18th roadshow would require a full S-1 filing two weeks prior to that.
A successful IPO story based on picking up market share (reportedly doubled to 28% by end-2018 vs end-2016) might make Rakuten’s other investments look good too (Rakuten led Series B, C, D, and E funding for Spanish-language ride-hailing app cabify from 2014-2018 (and reportedly pushed cabify to merge with Lyft last year) and has invested in multiple rounds in SE Asian version GoJek.
The runup to this IPO and the clarity a filing could provide on ownership could provide a near-term fillip to Rakuten’s share price.
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.
