Further to my first article on the above topic (http://fusioninvestor.blogspot.com/2008/10/dont-dig-bigger-hole.html), I have received several email comments and replies, but there is one email reply which stood out in its length, with thought-provoking contents, and may be interesting to retail investors, that I would like to share with you (after receiving the author's permission last night).
Please feel free to leave comments at the end of this article, or the chatbox, although, leaving a comment at this article would allow the original author to check the comments later.
**********
Seng,
I came across your blog accidentally and noticed one interesting topic, “Don’t dig a bigger hole!” I do agree with some points but not to others. Let me share some of my past experience, since I have went thru 1 bull market (1992-93), 1 bear market (1997-98) and recently bull run (2006-08). The question of digging bigger hole or not is all depend on which counters one buying or plan to buy. Record shows that at least 25% of company listed on bursa disappear after 10 to 15 years. Counters like Taiping, Tongka, Omega, Yaohan … and many others which famous at one time all disappear from Bursa today. So those own these kind of co. if not cut loss, had been making very severe loss.
However, if one choose a solid co. and have some sort of monopoly and can be sure that it will continue with it’s business for next 10 years, then the current weak sentiment would be a good time to buy. I will choose TNB as one of counter for this discussion. The reason why I choose TNB is because I have full history record, beside it meet above condition and also my friend was ex TNB staff who bought with Pink Form (IPO).
I was a Dealer during 1992 bull run market. Market was so hot until KLSE reach 1200 – 1300+ in one year time. TNB surged from $6.50 (IPO $4.50) to highest record of $20.00. Then suddenly one day it drop to $15.50 and I advice my friend to sell, but he refused as market rumours it may rise to $25 again. One week later, TNB closed at $10.00. (if one sold at $14 or $15 will consider good deal) My friend sold his TNB at $8, three months later after market drop significantly. However one year later, TNB trade between $7.00 to $10+ and this seem that the decision to sell at $8 was not good deal.
There was one client (Mr L), who started to buy TNB at $9.00 (only small portion). When TNB drop to $8.00, he bought some more. When it drop to $7.00 he bought again but with more lots than before. That time I don’t understand the pattern of this buying method, but later noticed he actually use Cost Average Down method. On 1994 to 1995, people seem to forget about 1993. TNB up to $12+ again and Mr L disposed all TNB after holding for 1 and half years. The question here, is Mr L buy at $9, $8 & $7 consider digging hole?
Now we look at 1997, it all started with currency crisis. On one day morning, rumours came from Thailand and spread over to all Asia countries. During that time, we noticed a group of fund managers start to create panic environment in the country by keep on selling and caused KLSE comp index drop 40 to 50 points in 2 days. We as dealer know what’s happening and their intention. One week later, market started to feel the panic and fall ever more. Add to the worse, Ringgit kept on falling against USD. Some of our clients were so panic, worry and start to dump shares at any price available. One of my clients called and ask if value of share can fall to Zero?
TNB started to fall from some where around $10+. Some clients start to collect at $8, some at $7. One month later, the closing price was $6.50. Then Mr L started his buying order at $6.50 with minimum lots. Some clients who started to buy at $8 or $7 start to give selling order. Still recall, I was told by them that they want to cut loss, as the market not moving in their favour. This was a very funny situation, you know, as a dealer, we saw someone buying and someone selling the same counter. Of course, I can not tell them Mr L started to buy, don’t sell. After all, we want more business to earn commission.
The following few months, Mr L continued place “buy till done order” at $5.50, $4.50, $4, $3.50. The last order I received was Aug 1998, where he put buy order at $2.50 and it was done with $200K, the most compared to previous order. On 1 Sep, 1998, ex PM Mahathir announced several action and economy stipulated package, including peg Ringgit at 3.80 / USD and arrested Anwar. Market suddenly reversed and surged 100+ points. TNB also surged from $4.50 to $5.60. The following day, it closed at $6.40. Very few clients who cut loss earlier bought it again at $2.50 or even $4.00. Also, they have no chance to buy back as the market turn was so unexpected and fast. Question here, is Mr L digging hole? Or if he did not do that, he had no chance to buy at $2.50 as none of us know when was bottom reached.
I am not sure what’s the trigger point for Mr L to buy at $6.50, in fact, I did check with him, but he say it’s just 6 sense. But base on the previous price, seem he actually started to buy when price fall below 50% or more, with Cost Averaging Down. On 2001/02, Mr L, started to disposed TNB with price range $10 to $12 after holding for 3 years plus.
Actually, among all clients who actually making money was less than 10%. Most of them are traders, especially day trade. We like those traders but don’t like Mr L, after all, Dealer want to earn commission as well. But Mr L seem to be in the top list and he do it in very relax way.
All the above happened 10 years ago and Mr L had agreed for me to disclose the above matter to others. However, don’t ask me if Mr L start his buy order today, as this is private and confidential. (Last week we noticed Warren Buffet made announcement say he started to buy America stock, I am not sure what the intention. If you announced to public that you intend to buy something, would you still get it cheap?)
The current market situation is more or less similar to 1997’s financial crisis except it trigger by US. The different I can see is More Internet Trading compare to 1997 and our Interest Rate did not surge to 11%. Also, now Composit Index Counters allow Short Selling and the change of political climate, which I think may give certain impact to overall market.
In the extremely bearish market condition, one should buy low and later (2 years or more) sell with handsome profit. If one would to follow Mr L, he must choose the right company. But we may not know when’s the bottom, that the difficult part, even TA is also hard to tell. The 1997 bear, we saw KLSE closed at lowest of 200+ points. Or one can wait till TNB fall to $2.50, but we don't know if this can happen or not.
Just share my thought.
Cheers!
V
**********
My quick comment:
My guess is that Mr L is probably not the typical chatbox "chatter" who chats here everyday, glued to the screen the entire day, and plays intra-day / contra.
For such a person where trading is not a full-time job, the risk of being out of the market when the stock market recovers is greater. The Asian Financial Crisis recovery was relatively fast, and if you hesitated too long, you run the risk of missing the upside move. Also retailer psychology is such that when the current price is higher than the previous low price, majority will hesitate. That hesitation is normally costly.
However, as a TA practitioner and student of past charts, there are always early warning signals for example, when one looks at the daily candles. You won't catch "the bottom", but you should still be able to catch say 40%-80% of the uprise depending on your skill and level of monitoring. This assumes an above average trader psychology too.
Mr L's approach is an investing approach with little monitoring. It is unclear if all his stock investments is in just 1 stock (TNB), or is diversified. It is unclear what proportion stocks are to his entire net worth. I seriously doubt someone like him would have put his entire net worth into just 1 stock, nor would I consider the latter a prudent practice. It is important to note that when you bet on just 1 stock, the choice of stock is super-critical, unless you don't mind losing money over a prolonged period. And the psychology of that investor, having first bought at say $6, only to see it drop steadily to $5.5, $5, $4.5, ... and finally down to $2.5 ... and still not panic ... - do NOT under-estimate what sort of mental toughness is required to see this happening on a daily basis, especially when we see our $1 million investment shrunk to just less than $0.5 million for example, or $10 million shrunk to just $5 million ... etc. These sort of mental toughness probably does not exist in abundance, although those who has made it to millionaire status and beyond would most likely have undergone similar test(s) to their mental toughness previously.
The author's letter contains many interesting snippets such as "Record shows that at least 25% of company listed on bursa disappear after 10 to 15 years. ", and "Actually, among all clients who actually making money was less than 10%. Most of them are traders, especially day trade. ". Personally, I haven't done the statistical studies myself on Bursa, so, treat these as "anecdotal" for the moment.
There are other parts of the article that is worth commenting, but as time is short, and trading is about to commence, perhaps we can discuss later.
Again, I would like to take this opportunity to thank the author for sharing.
Showing posts with label TENAGA. Show all posts
Showing posts with label TENAGA. Show all posts
Tuesday, October 21, 2008
Monday, June 23, 2008
Confusion? Flip Flop? or Wayang?
What do you make of Khairy's latest proposal here? Full link here - http://themalaysianinsider.com/index.php/home/42-lead-stories/962-khairy-explains-how-to-ease-price-hikes
Khairy explains how to ease price hikes
PARLIAMENT, June 23 — Rembau MP Khairy Jamaluddin broke his no-comment rule and held a press conference in the Parliament lobby in the afternoon to elaborate on his proposal to the government on how to ease the burden of price hikes on the people.
"Any tax goes straight to the federal government (right now). The government should find ways to...take the tax and pass it straight back to Tenaga [1]," he said.
Currently, if the price of gas and coal go up, so do the tariffs [2] on electricity. This, Khairy said, is built into the present power purchase agreements [3].
"What I didn't get to explain earlier...We should have a pooling system. Tenaga should buy from the cheapest supplier. The whole structure should change. The IPPs (independent power producers) should come forward as responsible corporate players [4]," he added.
He refused to entertain other any other questions but confirmed that he was running for the Rembau Youth chief post and was up to face challenges for that position because "Umno is a democracy".
He added that he had not yet decided if he was going to run for the national Youth chief post.
_________________
My comments:
[1] When I first read this article, I am confused!
Without specific proposals, how does one evaluate this press conference which Khairy has called for?
Reading this, it appears that this is just Khairy blabbering in public without the presence of Tenaga and IPP executives. He does not appear to have a specific proposal to announce.
Is he trying to claim credit for something that is a fait accompli later?
Is Tenaga going to benefit, lose or remain neutral from this vague press conference?
Is IPPs going to benefit, lose or remain neutral from this vague press conference?
What about Rakyat?
Will this be another Flip Flop where electricity tariffs is raised and then, later reduced?
[2] I think this is potentially misleading.
Of course, at the end of the day, the government can choose to do what they like.
I believe most analyst understands that when the market prices of gas and coal goes up (or down) daily, the electricity tariffs might stay stable for some time (e.g. a month, maybe longer if the government doesn't approve the tariff adjustment).
I believe (although I'm just guessing) that Tenaga currently don't have an explicit, transparent nor automatic tariff adjustment formula with the government.
Instead, I believe every tariff increase proposal requires explicit government's approval.
Whereas Khairy's statement appears to project the mirage that government's approval is just a formality, and this situation has been and will be the case which is an open question ... I really don't like what I'm reading here.
[3] Is [2] really built into all (or just some) power purchase agreements?
[4] After all these years in trying to get all the IPPs to come out as responsible corporate players and failed, is Khairy now thinking that he alone (via this press conference) will be able to get all the IPPs to agree to a change in the entire structure at lesser cost?
I don't believe the young MP is that naive.
If not, is he trying to pull a "wayang" over the markets eyes?
Knowing the IPPs, the only way Khairy is going to get them to agree to a contractual change is to provide them with better and/or longer compensation period.
I.e. it's going to cost Tenaga more.
And if so, will we end up seeing more Federal and tax monies being used and channeled to further increase firstly IPP profits, secondly Tenaga profits, and perhaps thirdly partly alleviate the burden for the poorer Rakyat?
In other words, all this at the expense of the middle and above middle class?
How much will it cost? Isn't the slippage potentially large?
Rereading the title of the article, I think a more appropriate title should be "Khairy creates more confusion on how to ease price hikes".
Khairy explains how to ease price hikes
PARLIAMENT, June 23 — Rembau MP Khairy Jamaluddin broke his no-comment rule and held a press conference in the Parliament lobby in the afternoon to elaborate on his proposal to the government on how to ease the burden of price hikes on the people.
"Any tax goes straight to the federal government (right now). The government should find ways to...take the tax and pass it straight back to Tenaga [1]," he said.
Currently, if the price of gas and coal go up, so do the tariffs [2] on electricity. This, Khairy said, is built into the present power purchase agreements [3].
"What I didn't get to explain earlier...We should have a pooling system. Tenaga should buy from the cheapest supplier. The whole structure should change. The IPPs (independent power producers) should come forward as responsible corporate players [4]," he added.
He refused to entertain other any other questions but confirmed that he was running for the Rembau Youth chief post and was up to face challenges for that position because "Umno is a democracy".
He added that he had not yet decided if he was going to run for the national Youth chief post.
_________________
My comments:
[1] When I first read this article, I am confused!
Without specific proposals, how does one evaluate this press conference which Khairy has called for?
Reading this, it appears that this is just Khairy blabbering in public without the presence of Tenaga and IPP executives. He does not appear to have a specific proposal to announce.
Is he trying to claim credit for something that is a fait accompli later?
Is Tenaga going to benefit, lose or remain neutral from this vague press conference?
Is IPPs going to benefit, lose or remain neutral from this vague press conference?
What about Rakyat?
Will this be another Flip Flop where electricity tariffs is raised and then, later reduced?
[2] I think this is potentially misleading.
Of course, at the end of the day, the government can choose to do what they like.
I believe most analyst understands that when the market prices of gas and coal goes up (or down) daily, the electricity tariffs might stay stable for some time (e.g. a month, maybe longer if the government doesn't approve the tariff adjustment).
I believe (although I'm just guessing) that Tenaga currently don't have an explicit, transparent nor automatic tariff adjustment formula with the government.
Instead, I believe every tariff increase proposal requires explicit government's approval.
Whereas Khairy's statement appears to project the mirage that government's approval is just a formality, and this situation has been and will be the case which is an open question ... I really don't like what I'm reading here.
[3] Is [2] really built into all (or just some) power purchase agreements?
[4] After all these years in trying to get all the IPPs to come out as responsible corporate players and failed, is Khairy now thinking that he alone (via this press conference) will be able to get all the IPPs to agree to a change in the entire structure at lesser cost?
I don't believe the young MP is that naive.
If not, is he trying to pull a "wayang" over the markets eyes?
Knowing the IPPs, the only way Khairy is going to get them to agree to a contractual change is to provide them with better and/or longer compensation period.
I.e. it's going to cost Tenaga more.
And if so, will we end up seeing more Federal and tax monies being used and channeled to further increase firstly IPP profits, secondly Tenaga profits, and perhaps thirdly partly alleviate the burden for the poorer Rakyat?
In other words, all this at the expense of the middle and above middle class?
How much will it cost? Isn't the slippage potentially large?
Rereading the title of the article, I think a more appropriate title should be "Khairy creates more confusion on how to ease price hikes".
Tuesday, April 17, 2007
TENAGA - News on Dividend Policy
Biznewsdb.com has a post on TENAGA this morning ... over the course of today and tomorrow, I expect more updated news to be posted there ... it should be interesting to watch how TENAGA share price behaves over what is supposed to be "good news" over the next couple of days. If TENAGA share price does not rise further, it's probably a sign that "distribution" has occured, and in the absence of more good news, the more likely immediate trend then would be for the price to head south ... Of course, in real life, things are never equal and rarely that simple - e.g. it is always possible that there could be a sudden large inflow of foreign funds and volume say next week that could push prices up (in the midst of a downtrend), etc. so, all my comments here should be taken within the context of probabilities, rather than certainties.
____________
Tenaga's Profit Soared To Record in 2nd Quarter Updated :
17-04-2007 Media :
Dow Jones Story By : ELFFIE CHEW
via www.biznewsdb.com
KUALA LUMPUR, Malaysia -- Tenaga Nasional Bhd., Malaysia's biggest company by market value, reported a record quarterly net profit for the fiscal second quarter due to stronger foreign-exchange gains, tax writebacks and rising power demand.
The state-owned utility's net profit for the quarter ended Feb. 28 rose to 1.55 billion ringgit ($450.4 million) from 399.5 million ringgit a year earlier, which was above the one billion ringgit to 1.3 billion ringgit forecast range of four analysts surveyed by Dow Jones Newswires.
Revenue increased 18% to 5.68 billion ringgit from 4.83 billion ringgit a year earlier, reflecting higher sales as well as the higher price of electricity from June 1.
Foreign-exchange gains amounted to 437.6 million ringgit, compared with 126.1 million ringgit a year earlier, the company said.
Tenaga also said it aims to return 40% to 60% of its annual free cash flow as dividends, its first-ever dividend-policy guidance. It also declared an interim dividend of 0.10 ringgit a share.
Second-quarter results improved despite higher costs resulting from the commencement of the Tanjong Bin Phase 1 power plant, the company said. Chief Executive Che Khalib Mohamad Noh said that for the first half, the company paid 220 million ringgit for power supplied by Tanjong Bin and will pay 630 million ringgit to buy 85% of the capacity from the first two phases of the plant for the fiscal year ending Aug. 31.
The three-phase, 2,100-megawatt, coal-fired power plant is being developed by independent power producer Malakoff Bhd. The third phase of the project will begin operations in September.
Tenaga said it expects the performance for the rest of the year to "continue to be encouraging" but didn't elaborate.
Mr. Che Khalib said the company should be able to improve on its operating profit in the second-half. Operating profit for the first half was three billion ringgit, compared with 1.73 billion ringgit a year earlier.
He said the higher operating profit will be driven by continued strong demand for power from the industrial sector. "The industrial sector accounted for 50% of Tenaga's total demand [in the first half]."
Mr. Che Khalib said overall power demand for the first half rose 6%, compared with 3% growth a year earlier, and he expects "electricity demand to be sustained in the second half."
Comments:
Most of the content above are largely as reported. For Phase 2 of Tanjung Bin, management naturally opted for the lowest capacity payment (85%, instead of say 100%) due to current excess capacity, and so, the payment of $630M is smaller than what I used to estimate intrinsic value earlier.
To me, the most interesting news from above is the dividend policy. We should be able to estimate roughly how much the dividend might be. To me, the first issue is the definition of "annual free cash flow" since it is not defined in the article. My educated guess would be the "Changes in cash and cash equivalents" in the Consolidated Cash Flow Statement, but to be honest, I can never be 100% sure. I would like to think that what's distributed to shareholders should be after investing (e.g. after capex) and after financing (e.g. after repayment of bank borrowings). This would seem to be a more prudent and responsible way to run a company. Of course one could argue that if operational cash is guaranteed to be strong, then, why can't TENAGA just take new loans to pay dividends, but that is not what I would personally deem to be a prudent way to run a business. Still, it is important to watch how TENAGA management defines it, as it would give important clues as to the thinking of their management.
So, assuming it is the "annual net free cash flow" (i.e. net of investing and financing activities), this gives a H1/07 figure of approximately $2B. Annualize this gives $4B, and taking the mid-point of 40%-60% suggests a possible dividend distribution of $2B. A 10 sen gross interim dividend will cost TENAGA approximately $315M net of tax, so, $2B suggests that the final dividend might be quite generous, perhaps 5 times larger, say 50 sen gross. It will certainly be much larger than the final dividend paid in previous years which is only 14 sen in 2006 and 12 sen in 2005. Of course, my 50 sen final dividend is only a personal guess, and the actual value will depend on a number of variables, such as whether the company adopts a 50% figure, the actual definition, and the actual result and period for the annual free cash flow to be used in the calculation.
If the total dividend figure is 60 sen gross, this would translate to a gross dividend yield of say 5% p.a. (assuming $12 TENAGA share price). It would be interesting to watch how the market reacts to this news. For TENAGA warrant holders, it will be important to look out for the ex-Dividend date since warrant holders do not receive the dividends, but could potentially suffer from a fall in TENAGA prices on ex-Div date, if the prices don't recover immediately.
____________
Tenaga's Profit Soared To Record in 2nd Quarter Updated :
17-04-2007 Media :
Dow Jones Story By : ELFFIE CHEW
via www.biznewsdb.com
KUALA LUMPUR, Malaysia -- Tenaga Nasional Bhd., Malaysia's biggest company by market value, reported a record quarterly net profit for the fiscal second quarter due to stronger foreign-exchange gains, tax writebacks and rising power demand.
The state-owned utility's net profit for the quarter ended Feb. 28 rose to 1.55 billion ringgit ($450.4 million) from 399.5 million ringgit a year earlier, which was above the one billion ringgit to 1.3 billion ringgit forecast range of four analysts surveyed by Dow Jones Newswires.
Revenue increased 18% to 5.68 billion ringgit from 4.83 billion ringgit a year earlier, reflecting higher sales as well as the higher price of electricity from June 1.
Foreign-exchange gains amounted to 437.6 million ringgit, compared with 126.1 million ringgit a year earlier, the company said.
Tenaga also said it aims to return 40% to 60% of its annual free cash flow as dividends, its first-ever dividend-policy guidance. It also declared an interim dividend of 0.10 ringgit a share.
Second-quarter results improved despite higher costs resulting from the commencement of the Tanjong Bin Phase 1 power plant, the company said. Chief Executive Che Khalib Mohamad Noh said that for the first half, the company paid 220 million ringgit for power supplied by Tanjong Bin and will pay 630 million ringgit to buy 85% of the capacity from the first two phases of the plant for the fiscal year ending Aug. 31.
The three-phase, 2,100-megawatt, coal-fired power plant is being developed by independent power producer Malakoff Bhd. The third phase of the project will begin operations in September.
Tenaga said it expects the performance for the rest of the year to "continue to be encouraging" but didn't elaborate.
Mr. Che Khalib said the company should be able to improve on its operating profit in the second-half. Operating profit for the first half was three billion ringgit, compared with 1.73 billion ringgit a year earlier.
He said the higher operating profit will be driven by continued strong demand for power from the industrial sector. "The industrial sector accounted for 50% of Tenaga's total demand [in the first half]."
Mr. Che Khalib said overall power demand for the first half rose 6%, compared with 3% growth a year earlier, and he expects "electricity demand to be sustained in the second half."
Comments:
Most of the content above are largely as reported. For Phase 2 of Tanjung Bin, management naturally opted for the lowest capacity payment (85%, instead of say 100%) due to current excess capacity, and so, the payment of $630M is smaller than what I used to estimate intrinsic value earlier.
To me, the most interesting news from above is the dividend policy. We should be able to estimate roughly how much the dividend might be. To me, the first issue is the definition of "annual free cash flow" since it is not defined in the article. My educated guess would be the "Changes in cash and cash equivalents" in the Consolidated Cash Flow Statement, but to be honest, I can never be 100% sure. I would like to think that what's distributed to shareholders should be after investing (e.g. after capex) and after financing (e.g. after repayment of bank borrowings). This would seem to be a more prudent and responsible way to run a company. Of course one could argue that if operational cash is guaranteed to be strong, then, why can't TENAGA just take new loans to pay dividends, but that is not what I would personally deem to be a prudent way to run a business. Still, it is important to watch how TENAGA management defines it, as it would give important clues as to the thinking of their management.
So, assuming it is the "annual net free cash flow" (i.e. net of investing and financing activities), this gives a H1/07 figure of approximately $2B. Annualize this gives $4B, and taking the mid-point of 40%-60% suggests a possible dividend distribution of $2B. A 10 sen gross interim dividend will cost TENAGA approximately $315M net of tax, so, $2B suggests that the final dividend might be quite generous, perhaps 5 times larger, say 50 sen gross. It will certainly be much larger than the final dividend paid in previous years which is only 14 sen in 2006 and 12 sen in 2005. Of course, my 50 sen final dividend is only a personal guess, and the actual value will depend on a number of variables, such as whether the company adopts a 50% figure, the actual definition, and the actual result and period for the annual free cash flow to be used in the calculation.
If the total dividend figure is 60 sen gross, this would translate to a gross dividend yield of say 5% p.a. (assuming $12 TENAGA share price). It would be interesting to watch how the market reacts to this news. For TENAGA warrant holders, it will be important to look out for the ex-Dividend date since warrant holders do not receive the dividends, but could potentially suffer from a fall in TENAGA prices on ex-Div date, if the prices don't recover immediately.
TENAGA - Quick Comments on Q2/07 Result
TENAGA posted its quarterly earnings results last night. PAT (Profit After Tax) for Q2/07 (Financial Year ending 31 Mar) was a mind-boggling $1.6B, compared to just $0.4B same period last year. On the surface, $1.6B is a huge number. For example, PBBANK reported a comparble $1.7B PAT but for the entire 2006 Financial Year, not 1 quarter. So, I suspect the market will react quite positively (perhaps irrationally) to cheer the latest TENAGA set of results, at least initially.
CONCLUSION.
However, before we all rush out and buy TENAGA and its warrants, it is important to examine if these set of results are sustainable or not, whether the good results have been priced in fully (or not), and if not, what should be a reasonable long-term earnings and Intrinsic Value for TENAGA, based on what we know of TENAGA's business today. I am afraid this means that I need to pour some really cold water on TENAGA's latest hot, hot Q2/07 results first ...
1. Extraordinary currency gains. The $1.6B PAT includes approximately $430M of currency gains which requires some caution in interpreting. It is clear, this currency gain is not expected to be repeated perpetually in future. Yet, there is some expectation that going forward, at least for the next few quarters, that RM will continue to appreciate relative to USD, and TENAGA should be able to continue to benefit somewhat from this trend, due to its relatively high USD debt. For conservativeness, I think taking into account say 10% of the currency gain is probably a closer reflection to a reasonable PAT, than taking into account 100% of the currency gain.
2. Extraordinary tax write-back. In the last 2 quarters for FYE2007, TENAGA has written back approximately $170M worth of deferred tax to reflect the lower tax rates expected in FYE 2007 and 2008. Again, these are not expected to continue to benefit TENAGA perpetually in future, but has a very limited lifetime.
3. Tanjong Bin. The latest set of results, which ended 28 Feb 2007, has not yet reflected the recent commissioning of the second unit of the Tanjung Bin power plant on 28 Feb 2007. As stated in the news recently, we know that one of TENAGA's problems is its excess capacity payments to IPP. For FYE 2007, it is hard to put a precise figure on how much of Tanjung Bin's excess capacity could be actually utilized, but once the unit is commissioned, real costs can be expected to incur. TENAGA expects to incur costs of approximately $700M over the next 2 quarters. In terms of estimating future long-term earnings, it is not unreasonable to prudently assume a percentage, such as 50%-75% (say 67%) of that amount as being a true loss, as quite likely, it will take several years before TENAGA's present excess capacity can come close to being fully utilized in future. Note that 67% is just a rough and ready approximation, I expect the actual loss to be bigger in the immediate quarters (e.g. 100% on Day 1 of commissioning), and gradually reducing over time (e.g. 20%-40% after several years?).
4. Planned land bank sales, recovery of dilinquent accounts. At the start of the year, TENAGA announced that they planned to gain approximately $400M by FYE2007. For Q1/07, they gained $92M, close to $100M per quarter. I have not yet seen the figure for Q2/07. It is probably prudent to assume that there is some gains included in the latest set of results, leaving another $200M to be gained in the next 2 quarters. If it was nil in Q2/07, then, that should be a positive surprise. Again, it is unclear if these set of earnings are sustainable in the long term.
5. Potential additional revenue from 9MP, EGAT, etc. Higher electricity demand arising from the 9th Malaysia Plan projects as these continue to be rolled out. This is over-simplifying it, but steel companies are well known to consume huge amounts of energy in their manufacturing processes. It is hard to put a precise figure on the % increase in revenue that this would translate to TENAGA over the next year or two, but for the moment, it is probably enough to know that the potential additional revenue are more real than a dream.
So, what does this mean to TENAGA long-term sustainable EPS? Let's take a closer look at its historical results (in black). I have projected this to the end of 2007 FY, and the assumed inputs are in blue. In coming up with the projected values, I have tried to adhere to Buffett's principle that "it's better to be approximately right than precisely wrong" ... in other words, I know that my projections are precisely wrong, but the final EPS answer to be close enough to serve as a guide to TENAGA's intrinsic value.
A. Revenue.
It is comforting to see that TENAGA's revenue has been steadily increasing in the last 10 quarters, with a hike in Q4/06 (13%) due to the higher electricity tariff that came in at the start of the quarter. In the absence of fundamental changes (like tariff hike), a steady growth can be expected for TENAGA revenue due to natural GDP growth. So, for Q3/07, I would expect TENAGA revenue to continue to grow at a high rate (vs Q3/06). Then, for Q4/07, for the growth to slow down (as the impact of higher tariff rates are neutralized), but still slightly higher than past natural growth rates due to 9MP. So, I believe my projected revenue growth of 14% and 6% for Q3/07 and Q4/07 are not unreasonable.
B. PBT.
Since the revenue for Q3/07 is close to Q2/07, I have made some adjustments to Q2/07 PBT to derive a suitable long-term, sustainable gross earnings, in order to value TENAGA's business more appropriately. Specifically, I have made adjustments to TENAGA's one-time forex gains and deferred tax write-back as noted in points 1 and 2 above, as well as Tanjung Bin's extra costs (as noted in point 3 above). More specifically, $860M = $1,651 - $430M (forex gains) - $170M (tax write-back) - $350M x 67% (Tanjung Bin loss) + $43 (10% forex gain). On the surface, this looks conservative since $860M is only a bit more than half of the recent fantastic result of $1.6B PBT ... but since our focus is on long-term sustainable earnings for TENAGA, I believe a figure like $0.9B-$1B is probably closer to the truth, than assuming the entire $1.6B PBT.
C. Tax rates.
We saw low tax rates for Q1/07 (7%) and Q2/07 (5%) due to the one-time deferred tax write-back. I am not an accountant by training, but I suspect, going forward, one can reasonably expect the write back to continue for the next 2 quarters. However, long-term, one should not expect future write-backs to continue perpetually. For Q2/07, I noted that tax was $242M, and write-back is $165M or approximately 2/3rds, i.e. if one strips out the write-back, the tax should be roughly 3 times bigger. So, I have assumed tax rates of 15% (= 3 x 5%). I use this instead of 27% (or 26%) tax rates as certain expenses incurred by TENAGA are probably tax deductible, and it is impossible for me as a lay person, to do a full estimation, and probably not worthwhile too. I suspect this assumption is quite debateable.
D. EPS
Based on the above methodology, I obtain an EPS of around $0.35 for H2/07 that factors in points 1, 2, 3, and some of point 5, and ignored point 4. Full year sustainable EPS is probably closer to $0.70, instead of $1.00 if one just adds up the full 2007 FY EPS.
Intrinsic Value Estimation.
To me, TENAGA is a consumer monopoly (no competitor) whose revenue, in normal circumstances, can be reasonably expected to grow at least, in line with GDP rates. Whilst it is a consumer monopoly, it is also a GLC, and it's ability to raise rates is somewhat limited, compared to a true consumer monopoly. Historically, its management calibre, rightly or wrongly, is also widely perceived to be below top corporates (e.g. the misjudgements made on the restrictive conditions set in the past limited-life IPP contracts). Nevertheless, I'm a believer that when average management runs an economically superior business, the economically superior business will eventually come out on top. Therefore, a P/E of 18 to 20 is not unreasonable for a business like this. Historically, I believe TENAGA has been rated at more than 20 times perhaps more often than not, and compared to its regional peers, perhaps even more, but I would feel somewhat uncomfortable personally to assume a P/E higher than 20, as the margin of safety then becomes smaller. Another way to view a suitable P/E is that with current 5 to 10 year government bonds running at 3.5% risk-free, it is probably safe (if one takes a long-term view) to assume that TENAGA's earnings should be valued at 5% interest rate from a security of earnings perspective. This also translates to an equivalent P/E of 20. So, a P/E of 20 looks about right.
This suggests an Intrinsic Value of $14, or maybe a bit higher.
CONCLUSION.
Given the mind-boggling set of results announced last night, I expect the market to cheer TENAGA's share price initially. I would not be surprised if the cheering results in temporarily irrational prices. I will also not be surprised if the current bull run results in TENAGA euphorically shooting past $15 as it gather more pace. Still, the timing of the commissioning of Tanjung Bin power plant seems like a somewhat doubtful management decision (given the substantial excess capacity that remains unabsorbed), and one can name some other problems with TENAGA. However, bottom line is that it is widely expected that the 9MP and Malaysia's reasonable GDP growth (5%-6%) will continue to absorb some of the present excess capacity over time, which should be positive for its revenue and its earnings prospects, that some further upside from the current price of $12.1 can be expected. Technically however, there is a resistance at $12.5-12.6 from the last attempt in Feb. At $12.1, personally, I might consider buying some TENAGA (warrant) this morning if I can get it at the right price (and if I don't have any exposure yet), but I doubt I will be able to get it at an attractive price. Certainly, I don't recommend anyone to chase after a hot stock (especially for new investors who hasn't the experience). Given its doubtful track record in the past (e.g. past management decisions and GLC status), it might not be as attractive as some of the other better stocks to hold for the longer-term (e.g. PBBANK). However, I believe more experienced traders can benefit from playing this stock (and warrant) due to its large market cap and its consistently high liquidity, although there are also better stocks to play.
Disclaimer: As I am writing this in the early hours in the morning, it is possible that I might have missed something. If so, please don't hesitate to point out any factual errors so that I can make the necessary corrections. Thank-you in advance. Even though I tried to be as neutral and objective as possible, it is possible that I might not be completely neutral as I hold some TENAGA-CA warrants.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
