Brief Australia: Risk of Future LNG Supply Glut as Bubble of New Projects Grows and more

In this briefing:

1. Risk of Future LNG Supply Glut as Bubble of New Projects Grows
2. The Dollar IS the Story; Gold Confounds, A Brexit Rabbit Hole; EUR Punished
3. Drill Results Confirm High-Grade Mineralisation (Flash Note)
4. Screening the Silk Road: (Small-)Mid Cap Free Cash Flow
5. Xenith Is Running Out Of Excuses

1. Risk of Future LNG Supply Glut as Bubble of New Projects Grows

The rapidly improving outlook in the LNG industry over the last few years, reinforced towards the end of 2017 by the unexpected growth of demand from China, has set off a proliferation of new LNG projects especially from the US (Exhibit 1).

In its latest LNG Outlook report, Royal Dutch Shell (RDSA LN) is projecting from 2023 onwards a significant gap between the future LNG demand and the existing supply including the capacity under construction that could require up to 100mtpa of new LNG project sanctions by 2023.

The race to gain market share in the projected LNG demand-supply gap has produced an aggregated capacity of proposed new projects of up to 475mtpa, a number larger than the total LNG traded volume in 2018 of 319mtpa and way above the capacity required to meet the future growth in LNG demand.

Exhibit 1: Funnel of proposed LNG projects getting bigger

2. The Dollar IS the Story; Gold Confounds, A Brexit Rabbit Hole; EUR Punished

• The dollar IS the story
• EUR punished for negative yields
• Chasing Brexit down a rabbit hole
• Gold confounds
• Bitcoin at an interesting juncture

The fact that the dollar has strengthened despite the dovish turn at the Fed this year and the significant fall in US rates and bond yields has confounded many analysts.

3. Drill Results Confirm High-Grade Mineralisation (Flash Note)

• Significant thick, high-grade Zn/Pb intersections with substantial by-products
• X-sections highlight ore thickness variability
• On schedule for maiden Resource mid-June incorporating both S. Nights and Wagga Tank
• Current drill programmes to be completed within a month
• Employing VMS structural and geochemical specialists for future exploration vectoring
• Maintain Speculative Buy Recommendation

4. Screening the Silk Road: (Small-)Mid Cap Free Cash Flow

In April 2018, we published a FCF screen with the sole aim of identifying potential names which could prove to be strong candidates in a Small-Mid Cap portfolio. We move to update this list with a strong bias to the mid-cap stocks appearing.

This screen performs well with markets where the value style is in favour. Given the market appears to be trending back to this style, we believe the Small-Mid Cap universe should capitalise on this over the next 12-months. We identify within the screen some high trading liquidity deep value candidates across the Asia Pacific universe.

Our updated 2019 list of names contains 17 stocks, with a more diversified spread of countries and sectors, compared to April 2018. A point to note is that basic material stocks have strengthened within the composition. Interestingly, the style of stock which has increased its presence amongst the list is the contrarian style, highlighting an opening up in value.

5. Xenith Is Running Out Of Excuses

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

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

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

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

     

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

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