Categories
Articles

Starbucks’ Earnings Warning: Outrageous

I have been saying this since February and if I was a shareholder, I would be asking management why they took so long to admit this to you, rather than reaffirming guidance as recently as May. None of these issue are new, unless they were hoping they would just go away. Incredible.

Shares of Starbucks (SBUX) imploded to a near two year low this morning after CFO Michael Casey, said meeting the top end of its 2007 profit target will be “very challenging.” The company had set a range of earnings of 87 cents to 89 cents a share for the year but Casey, speaking to a conference in Chicago, cited “rising dairy costs and soft transaction growth” as factors that are weighing on the bottom line. Shares were down about 3% at $26.49 in morning action.

In May, when Starbucks was still blowing smoke up your, well you know where, I was saying “Starbucks, which uses an estimated 93 million gallons of milk a year, is looking at a $279 million milk bill in 2007. While it may not seem a lot to a billion-dollar company, it does equate to 36 cents a share, an increase of about 9 cents, or about 10.3% of profits, over 2006. This does not include the price increase to be incurred from changing the percentage of hormone-free milk from 27% to 37%. Starbucks does charge 50 cents more at some locations for this milk, so it must cost considerably more, no? When you are guiding 83 to 87 cents a share and 18% growth, the 10% of that in milk costs is huge.

Then, when management continued the deception with their 2% milk move in “response to our customers requests”, I opined:

“This is all about price and Starbucks doing anything it can to reduce rising costs in the face of stagnant store traffic. According the USDA, 2% milk averages 8 cents a gallon less than whole milk and when you buy almost 300 million gallons a year, 8 cents a gallon adds up real quick. Starbucks can try to gloss over this by saying they are “listening to our customers” but the cold hard reality is they have been making drinks this way for almost two decades now and no one has complained. If they really were listening, they would have eliminated all milk with growth hormones from the stores, but that would be expensive and negatively effect profits. The tell tale sign here is that they are cutting costs, not raising prices like they have in the past. This is perhaps the most public recognition that even they feel they are at the top of the price range and going higher here will cause even more defections to McDonald’s (MCD) than they have already suffered.”

So now the truth finally comes out today and shareholders, down over 20% since January and believing in management are getting killed again today. Shareholders should be outraged and it is not because milk prices or coffee prices are going up, they have no control over that.

They should be outraged because management apparently still believes in the face of all empirical evidence that they exist in an business category of one. When CEO Jim Donald says “we do not really consider our competition” despite stagnant store comps, there is a serious problem. This is painfully obvious when you consider this store growth stagnation directly coincides with product (coffee) improvements at these non-existent competitors.

Shareholders should be outraged because for almost 7 months now management has been in denial about their business and if you believed them, you have lost a boatload of money.

There are two options here for Starbucks and neither one is good. Either they do not know what is happening out there, or they did and lied about it. When some guy in Massachusetts is more honest with you about a company he has no financial interest in than the people you entrust to run it, there is a serious problem.

Categories
Articles

Wendy’s Post: An Answer

I usually ignore things like this but when they cross the line from a well though out rebuttal (like Andy Kern’s Berkshire rebuttal to me that I requested from him and actually posted on my site) to one that takes selective items from a post of mine while ignoring and misstating others to make a point, I need to set the record straight.

In a post, David Cohen states: “Aside from ignoring and/or mis-stating key facts (Bill Ackman is indeed a long term value investor, and Nelson Peltz, who still holds Wendy’s shares, also pushed for the THI spin-off), I think the argument is off-base.” THI is Tim Horton’s International

First things first. I never claimed Ackman was a long or short term investor and as a matter of fact I alluded to him still owning McDonald’s (MCD) saying “he recognizes the bright future there”. What I said was that he had “a short term interest in the company (Wendy’s)”. Ackman first disclosed a Wendy’s stake in April 2005 and by November 2006 (immediately after the Tim Horton’s spin) had liquidated it and yes I consider this short term. Don’t believe me? Let Ackman himself tell you, “We buy things when they are discounted, and once they reach the potential of what we think they are worth, we sell. It could take months, or it could take years. That is our business.” Bottom line? He is “long term” or “short term” depending on the situation and what he wants out of it. Is this any different that what I said?

Nelson Peltz. In my post I said “agitation from activist investor Nelson Peltz and former shareholder William Ackman that action be taken to boost the company’s share price.” I am not sure what the point of restating my comment as though I alluded to something else is.

He continues “Sullivan’s argument is that Wendy’s could be doing much better if it only sold coffee to its customers, as McDonald’s seems to be succeeding in doing. My retort: Can’t Wendy’s (WEN) sell coffee without THI just as it could with THI? What in the world does Tim Horton’s have to do with Wendy’s selling coffee?”

Again this only touches the and I think intentionally misses the core of my argument. It never implied it was the “only” thing they would have to do, just a glaring opportunity they now do not have. Also, the argument was “premium” coffee, not “brown liquid in a cup”. Again to accurately quote my post, “given the overwhelming success McDonald’s (MCD) has had with it’s premium coffee offering.” McDonald’s sold coffee before but the introduction of the premium (Newman’s Own) stuff has lead to an explosion in coffee sales for the chain. Along with the added customer trips come more ancillary sales of food items. There is a reason in every monthly earnings release “breakfast” (coffee) is at the top of the list of reasons for yet another record month at the Golden Arches.

If anyone has been to where Tim Horton’s does business, they are wildly popular, more so than Dunkin Donuts. It is a premium brand in those areas. Are we really going to believe that selling premium coffee at Wendy’s drive thru’s would not lead to increased business? This is true if for no other reason it would stop people from defecting to McDonald’s for a cup and give them a reason to stop at Wendy’s. More customer trips always equal more sales in the fast food business. Selling Tim Horton’s coffee would have assured additional trips to Wendy’s as McDonald’s has proven premium coffee drives business.

Again Mr. Cohen: “I would argue that if the spin-off of THI never happened, then Wendy’s would still be basking in the glory of its well-run THI operation and not focusing on its mismanaged core business. Now that THI exists (and is thriving) on its own, everyone can see how badly Wendy’s is lagging behind McDonald’s and Burger King. With this transparency comes shareholder pressure to improve operations. If the THI spin-off never happened, it never would have been so painfully obvious how badly Wendy’s is managed. With the transparency of the spin-off comes a recognition of problems. While the solutions may not be easy, recognition is the first step.”

Not sure why he “would argue” this after I said “Now holders are stuck with a third rate burger chain that is missing what would have been the fastest growing part of it.” I think everyone new the burger chain was mismanaged and if they did not, they just did not look into the company very well before they bought shares. What Horton’s did was buffer shareholders while they tried to fix it. There seems to be this thought out there that management cannot walk and chew gum. Like the recent Home Depot (HD) sale announcement, it is a short term gain at the expense of long term performance. Neither the Tim Horton’s spin or the Home Depot sale are going to “fix” the problems at the parent nor will they make them any more apparent. They both will make shareholders happy initially and scratching their heads later. Why? Had either Wendy’s or Home Depot fixed what really ailed them and kept the items they sold off, shareholders would have been rewarded in multiples down the road with two thriving businesses that would have had wonderful synergies together.

Now, am I opposed to all spins? No, just the ones done for the wrong reasons. Ones like the Wendy’s and Home Depot spin are like taking diet pills instead of exercising and eating right. You’ll get immediate gratification at the expense of long term benefits. In the post I referenced the Chipotle (CMG) spin by McDonald’s as one that was done right. The two businesses were unrelated (Mexican food vs Burgers and eggs)and the synergies between the two on a retail level were nil. It made sense to cut Chipotle loose to shareholders so they could experience the full benefits of both operations. It was not done to mask problems. Even the recent Altria (MO) spin of Kraft (KFT) was done for the right reason, to fully recognize the full value of BOTH entities, not one.

Mr. Cohen concludes: “Now, shareholders can decide to own either Wendy’s or Tim Horton’s or both. As a shareholder of Wendy’s, you would’ve received your fair share of THI in the spin-off. You can decide to do with that whatever you want, but you can easily create the old Wendy’s/THI conglomerate by just keeping your shares. I don’t understand why having more flexibility in building your position results in a destruction of value.”

I agree, you can own one one, both or neither. You cannot replicate the old conglomerate by owning both, however. You cannot replicate the cost savings of not having two entirely separate corporate structures, the increased purchasing power of the larger combined entity, the savings from combining advertising, the savings from the integration of logistics in getting product to locations and the increased revenue that could be realized from cross selling products with each other.

Having portfolio flexibility and the destruction of value in Wendy’s “Long Term” (which was the title of my original post on my blog) are two wholly unrelated items. This confuses the “price” you received for your shares vs. the “value” in the company. Shareholders had flexibility when they first bought shares and continued to have it as they held them. They could have sold them or added to their position at anytime.

The long term value in the combined entity would have come from what the two businesses could have done for each other to generate earnings for shareholders. My argument was and still is that Wendy’s was better off with Tim Horton’s long term than without.

Categories
Articles

Ethanol Producer Boosts Earnings Estimate

I though high corn prices were supposed to be hurting ethanol producers?

Andersons Inc., (ANDE) boosted its 2007 per-share-earnings estimate to a range of $2.80 to $3.05 from $2.35 to $2.60. On average, analysts expect $2.62, according to Thomson Financial.

The company noted that its Plant Nutrient Group has specifically benefited from the increased corn acreage and associated higher volume and margins. Additionally, its new ethanol plant in Clymers has started producing ethanol, and both ethanol plants are realizing better margins and throughput than the earlier projections envisioned.

Commenting on the earnings revision, the company’s President and Chief Executive Officer Mike Anderson, said: “When we last provided guidance, planting progress within our region was behind historical norms. Planting has now been successfully completed. This has had a positive impact on the earnings outlook for our Grain & Ethanol and Plant Nutrient Groups.

Now, granted they are getting a boost from fertilizer sales but they are also experiencing better than expected ethanol production margins.

The anticipated margin decline was something that has been much touted in calling for an “earnings crunch” for ethanol producers. It seems to be just not happening. Now, this may be on a case by case basis as the better run companies are able to manage their way through the corn price increase so do not extrapolate this out to all ethanol producers. Firms like The Andersons and Archer Daniels (ADM) that have a history of success are the safe bets here.

Categories
Articles

"Fast Money" Picks For Today

Here are “Today’s Trades” from Bolling, Najarian, Adami and Macke.

Share price is Wednesday’s close.

Macke-Columbia Sportswear (COLM) $68.02

Najarian- Terra Industries (TRA) $22.4

Adami- “Short” Dow 30 Proshares ETF (DOG) $59.02

Bolling- NYMEX Holdings (NMX) $137.78

Now, here are yesterdays picks with the results.

Macke- Home Depot (HD)= Open $40.63 close $40.03 Result $.60 loss

Najarian- Boyd Gaming (BYD)= Open $51.00 close $50.35 Result $.65 loss

Adami- Bank of America (BAC)= Open $50.66 Close $49.99 Result $.67 loss

Bolling- News Corp. (NWS)= Open $23.93 Close $23.60 Result $.33 loss

Now, the market was down 146 point yesterday so not much was up so a little leeway here is needed. Let’s see what happens today.

Categories
Articles

Stock Buyback Study

Andy Kern over at Berkshire Ruminations sent me this share repurchase study from 1998 in response to my Home Depot (HD) post. It is very detailed and informative.

The authors found:

– 74% to 82% of firm announcing buybacks actually repurchase the number if shares they originally intend to within 3 years.

– 57% repurchased more than they originally intended to 3 years later

– 30% repurchased more than twice the original amount 3 years later.

You can read it here.

Now, seeing as the current record buyback binge in corporate America is a 21st century phenomenon, I want to see any new studies out there for comparison of the results. Basically, has there been an improvement or a deterioration in the percentage of firms that announce and then complete share buybacks in a reasonable time frame. This one, while very good is from 1998 and covers the time period from 1981-94 and the authors do admit “some information was not available for 141 out of 591 firms before 1984”. I would imagine in today’s information rich era, this is no longer a problem and getting these studies out requires much less time and energy.

If anyone has one please email me or post it to the comments section of the blog.

Thank you

Categories
Articles

Thursday’s Upgrades / Downgrades

Here are the calls from late Wednesday and this morning.

UPGRADES:

Kaiser Alum (KALU)= Buy

Dollar Thrifty (DTG)= Strong Buy

Home Depot (HD)= Buy

Andersons (ANDE)= Hold

Airgas (ARG)= Buy

CNOOC Ltd (CEO)= Outperform

Atlas Pipeline (APL)= Outperform

Symantec (SYMC)= Outperform

DOWNGRADES:

Ensco (ESV)= Hold

Bankrate (RATE)= Hold

Anheuser-Busch (BUD)= Hold

Schlumberger (SLB)= Neutral

Maxwell Tech (MXWL)= Mkt Perform

Compuware (CPWR) = Neutral

Buffalo Wild Wings (BWLD)= Neutral

Home Depot (HD)= Market Perform

Categories
Articles

Congressional Chairs Oppose XM / Sirius

It looks like Congress is getting into the act against the proposed satellite radio merger.

A bipartisan group of 72 Congressional leaders sent a letter Monday to the chairpersons of the Federal Communications Commission, the Department of Justice and the Federal Trade Commission, opposing the merger of the nation’s only two satellite radio companies, XM (XMSR) and Sirius (SIRI) saying “On its face, we believe that sanctioning the marriage of the only competitors in the satellite radio market would create a monopoly which would be devastating to consumers,” the letter said.

Among the Democrats signatories are Budget Committee chair John Spratt of South Carolina, Agriculture Committee chairman Collin Peterson of Minnesota, Rules Committee chairwoman Rep. Louise Slaughter of New York and presidential candidate Rep. Dennis Kucinich of Ohio.

Among the 25 Republicans who signed the letter are former House Speaker Rep. Dennis Hastert of Illinois, Republican whip Rep. Roy Blunt of Missouri and Tom Cole of Oklahoma, chairman of the National Republican Congressional Committee.

Earlier I posted my thoughts on the possibility of the merger based on the reaction to the Whole Foods (WFMI) and Wild Oats (OATS) attempt. This action by Congress all but assumes this one is dead. While not unusual for those in Congress to chime in with their opinion , in this seemingly new era of a market segment anti-monopolistic attitude, I cannot see how they will allow the merger.

Personally, I think the Wild Oats / Whole Foods opposition is laughable but a combination of XM /Sirius does create only one satellite radio company, last time I checked, that was a monopoly.

Categories
Articles

Wendy’s: Tim Horton’s Spin Destroyed Long Term Value

Shares of Wendy’s (WEN) closed down 3.7% at $38.26 Monday after the company cut its full-year earnings forecast and currently sit at $37. Wendy’s also said for the third time since April that it is considering a sale. They lowered 2007 EPS guidance to $1.09-1.23, down from a $1.26-1.32 forecast and below analyst expectations of $1.27. EBITDA is now forecast at $295 million-315 million versus a prior range of $330 million-340 million. Wendy’s, which is facing intense competitive pressure, has also had to contend with agitation from activist investor Nelson Peltz and former shareholder William Ackman that action be taken to boost the company’s share price

Activist investor Bill Ackman, though his Pershing Square Capital hedge fund, owned 6.42 million as of 9/30/2006. By 12/31/2006 after he got the spin he wanted that stake was liquidated. Now holders are stuck with a third rate burger chain that is missing what would have been the fastest growing part of it.

Ackman was instrumental in pushing Wendy’s to spin-off its Canadian Tim Horton (THI), which was completed in Sept. 2006. Given the popularity of the Tim Horton’s coffee and the overwhelming success McDonald’s (MCD) has had with it’s premium coffee offering, one has to wonder how much better off Wendy’s would be if they were serving the coffee in their stores and at their drive-thru’s. One thing is for sure, they would not be any worse AND they would be driving traffic to their stores for the coffee.

This what happens when management caves to somebody who only has a short term interest in the company. Conversely, Ackman’s demands to McDonald’s were essentially rebuffed. Yes, they spun the Chipotle (CMG) chain but that was rumored in the works before Ackman stepped in. He then wanted a sale of the corporate owned stores and real state sales but was denied by management. Where is McDonald’s sitting now? At an all time high with a future as bright as it has had in decades. It should be noted that Ackman, even though he was denied his proposed changes, is still a McDonald’s shareholder, apparently even he sees the bright future there.

Categories
Articles

Wal-Mart’s Moneycenters, A Winning Idea

Wal-Mart (WMT) announced today it will open 1,000 Wal-Mart MoneyCenters covering a quarter of its stores by the end of 2008. The company will also broaden its menu of financial products and services, beginning with the launch of the Wal-Mart MoneyCard, a reloadable prepaid Visa rolling out nationally with GE Money and Green Dot.

Wal-Mart says it’s MoneyCenters “will assist customers who are outside mainstream banking with convenient, nationwide access to low-cost money services, including check cashing, money orders, bill payment and money transfers. Together with the
Wal-Mart MoneyCard, which provides many of the advantages of a checking account
in your pocket — an easy, safe and convenient way to manage money, pay bills and
make purchases.”

Wal-Mart MoneyCenters
*Convenience — One-stop shopping with extended hours, seven days a week
*Safety — Well-lit, safe and secure area to cash checks, pay bills and transfer money
*Savings — With Wal-Mart’s every day low pricing, customers can save 25 to 50 percent or more over other leading money service providers.

Wal-Mart MoneyCard
*Convenience — Use at all locations where Visa(R) is accepted and at ATMs worldwide. Shop and pay bills by phone or online, pay at the pump.
*Safety — No need to carry large amounts of cash and funds are protected if card is lost or stolen. Online access to track your activity.Daily balance alerts on your cell phone or email
*Savings — No over limit fees. Designed so customers can minimize or avoid usage fees

Wal-Mart currently conducts more than two million money services transactions
each week. Last year, customers using these services saved an average of
$450 per year (or almost $40 per month). With the opening of additional Wal-Mart
MoneyCenters, the total savings are expected to grow dramatically this year, putting
over $320 million back into customers’ pockets.

This is a natural move for Wal-Mart. By giving their stores more one stop functionality, they are creating additional traffic. More traffic will inevitably lead to more sales and profits. There is also a loyalty element to this that is hard to put a price tag on. People who are saving money via these transactions at Wal-Mart are more likely to spend that savings there. I don’t see a scenario where these people go to Wal-Mart, cash a check and then go someplace else to shop, won’t happen. Both sides here come out a winner.

This is a great move for Wal-Mart and hopefully a sign of more to come now that they seem to have taken their foot off the accelerator with their growth obsession.

Categories
Articles

Wednesday’s Upgrades and Downgrades

Late Tuesday and this mornings activity:

Upgrades:

Build-A-Bear Workshop (BBW)= Hold

Sempra Energy (SRE)= Buy

NYSE Euronext (NYX)= Market Perform

Time Warner Cable (TWC)= Outperform

Downgrades:

Marathon Oil (MRO)= Hold

Finish Line (FINL)= Neutral

Freeport-McMoRan (FCX)= Hold

Isle of Capri (ISLE)= Sell

American Railcar Industries (ARII)= Buy

Occidental Petroleum (OXY)= Hold

Categories
Articles

Stunning Ethanol Production Breakthrough

We all had to know it was coming, right? Perhaps both OPEC and the US oil companies caught wind of this and that was the genesis of their saber rattling lately?

With U.S. biodiesel production at an all-time high and a record number of new biodiesel plants under construction, the industry is facing an impending crisis over waste glycerin, the major byproduct of biodiesel production. New findings from Rice University suggest a possible answer in the form of a bacterium that ferments glycerin and produces ethanol, another popular biofuel.

“We identified the metabolic processes and conditions that allow a known strain of E. coli to convert glycerin into ethanol,” said Ramon Gonzalez, the William Akers Assistant Professor in Chemical and Biomolecular Engineering. “It’s also very efficient. We estimate the operational costs to be about 40 percent less that those of producing ethanol from corn.”

Gonzalez said the biodiesel industry’s rapid growth has created a glycerin glut. The glut has forced glycerin producers like Dow Chemical (DOW) and Procter & Gamble (PG) to shutter plants, and Gonzalez said some biodiesel producers are already unable to sell glycerin and instead must pay to dispose of it.

“One pound of glycerin is produced for every 10 pounds of biodiesel,” Gonzalez said. “The biodiesel business has tight margins, and until recently, glycerin was a valuable commodity, one that producers counted on selling to ensure profitability.”

Researchers across the globe are racing to find ways to turn waste glycerin into profit. While some are looking at traditional chemical processing — finding a way to catalyze reactions that break glycerin into other chemicals — others, including Gonzalez, are focused on biological conversion.

In biological conversion, researchers engineer a microorganism that can eat a specific chemical feedstock and excrete something useful. Many drugs are made this way, and the chemical processing industry is increasingly finding bioprocessing to be a “greener,” and sometimes cheaper, alternative to chemical processing.

In a review article in the June issue of Current Opinion in Biotechnology, Gonzalez points out that very few microorganisms are capable of digesting glycerin in an oxygen-free environment. This oxygen-free process — known as anaerobic fermentation — is the most economical and widely used process for biological conversion.

“We are confident that our findings will enable the use of E. coli to anaerobically produce ethanol and other products from glycerin with higher yields and lower cost than can be obtained using common sugar-based feedstocks like glucose and xylose,” Gonzalez said.

Find article here:

Annual consumption of glycerin in the United States has ranged between 400 million and 450 million pounds for the past three years (2003-2006). Domestic production figures show that approximately 400 million pounds per year was produced heading into the turn of the century.

The U.S. biodiesel industry is expected to produce an estimated 1.4 billion pounds of glycerin valued at $289 million between 2006 and 2015, according to an economic study by John Urbanchuk, director of LECG Inc. According to projections gleaned from NBB estimates, the industry could produce as much as 200 million pounds this year alone. Crude glycerin that once fetched between 20 and 25 cents per pound is now edging closer to 5 cents and lower. This is down from the high of $1.08 in 1996. The glut and pricing pressure have led Dow to close it’s 150 million pound per year facility in Freeport, Texas.

Ethanol giants like Archer Daniel’s (ADM) had previously put glycerin facility plans on hold at the turn of the century as prices collapsed. ADM will produce an estimated 250 mmgpy of biodiesel in the US by the end of 2007 which equates to 25 mmgpy of glycerin. At ethanol production costs of 40% less than corn, anyone want to bet the glycerin facilities plans that are on hold will be jump started?

More information when I get it as I have requests out.

Categories
Articles

Going for the Gold(man) (GS)

I just cannot find a reason not to buy shares in Goldman Sachs (GS).

Overview:
A global investment banking, securities and investment management firm who provides a wide range of services to corporations, financial institutions, governments and high-net-worth individuals. GS operates through three core businesses: Trading and Principal Investments, Investment Banking, and Asset Management and Securities Services.

The Trading and Principal Investments business (68% of 2006 net revenues) facilitates customer transactions with corporations, financial institutions, governments and individuals, and takes proprietary positions through market making in, and trading of, fixed income and equity products, currencies, commodities and derivatives. The activities of this business can be grouped under three segments: Fixed Income, Currency and Commodities (FICC);Equities; and Principal Investments.

The FICC business makes markets in and trades interest rate and credit products, mortgage backed securities, loans and other asset-backed securities, currencies and commodities. The Equities business makes markets in, trades, and acts as a specialist for equities and equity-related products. It generates commissions from executing and clearing client transactions on major stock, options, and futures exchanges worldwide through its Equities customer franchise and clearing activities.

The Principal Investments business primarily represents net revenues from corporate and real estate merchant banking investments. These net revenues are from three primary sources–returns on corporate and real estate investments, its investment in the convertible preferred stock of Sumitomo Mitsui Financial Group, Inc. (SMFG), and overrides. Overrides represent net revenues from the increased share of the income and gains derived from it’s merchant banking funds when the return on a fund’s investments exceeds certain threshold returns.

The Investment Banking business (15%) provides investment banking services to corporations, financial institutions, governments, and individuals. Investment Banking business is divided into two segments: Financial Advisory and Underwriting. The Financial Advisory segment includes advisory assignments with respect to mergers and acquisitions, divestitures, corporate defense activities, restructurings, and spin-offs, while the Underwriting segment includes public offerings and private placements of equity and debt instruments.

The Asset Management and Securities Services business (17%) offers investment strategies, advice and planning to institutions and individuals worldwide, and provides prime brokerage, financing services and securities lending services to mutual funds, pension funds, hedge funds, foundations, and high-net-worth individuals. GS’s assets under management increased 27% in 2006, to $676 billion.

MANAGEMENT. In June 2006, Lloyd C. Blankfein was named as chairman and chief executive officer. The management change was due to Henry (Hank) M. Paulson, Jr., GS’s then chairman and CEO, becoming U.S. Secretary of the Treasury.

FINANCIAL. At the end of FY 06, GS’s net revenues had increased 51%, to $37.3 billion, driven by improvements of more than 50% at both the Investment Banking and Trading and Principal Investments businesses. Investment banking benefited primarily from underwriting volume, up 73% year to year, while the trading business saw a 60% improvement at its FICC desk. Operating expenses increased 38%, to $22.7 billion, more than offset by the growth in net revenues. Net earnings registered a robust 70% increase, to $9.4 billion and EPS rose to $19.69, from $11.21. Assets under management were 27% higher than a year earlier at $676 billion.

The most recent quarter saw EPS of $4.93 vs. $4.78 in 2006 and was shy of $5.35 estimates and 6 month EPS $11.61 vs. $9.86 in 2006. Top line was hurt by exposure to sub-prime mortgages, although equity and investment banking results were strong. Margins were pressured somewhat by continued global expansion and high levels of business activity.

It’s main competitors are Merrill Lynch (MER), Morgan Stanley (MS) and JP Morgan (JPM)

Alumni include CNBC’s Jim Cramer, Sears Holdings (SHLD)Eddie Lampert, White House Chief of Staff Josh Bolton, NJ Governor John Corzine and Former Treasury Secretary Robert Rubin .

Here is the thing, Goldman is undoubtedly the king of this sector yet it trades at a discount to it’s competition. At only 10 times earnings, it is just too cheap to pass up. Rather than jump at the new Private Equity companies that are rushing to go public and will soon see their tax rates soar, why not take a run with the unquestioned leader in the field?

I am…..

Categories
Articles

Home Depot Buyback: Great, But, When?

So the Home Depot (HD) made a splash this afternoon with the announced $22.5 billion buyback. But they failed to answer one little question… when?

The board of directors authorized a $22.5 billion increase in its share repurchase program and stated their intent to repurchase up to $22.5 billion in shares as soon as practicable. It will be funded with the proceeds from the sale of HD Supply, existing cash on hand and proceeds from an anticipated $12 billion issuance of senior unsecured notes. The $22.5 billion share repurchase may be in the form of a tender offer, open market repurchases or accelerated share repurchases, the details of which will be announced at a later date.

“Our planned recapitalization is transformational for our company. While we continue to invest heavily in the five priorities focused on our core retail business, this recapitalization plan allows us to return significant capital to our shareholders, improve the efficiency of our balance sheet by lowering our cost of capital, while at the same time retaining strong financial and operational flexibility,” said Carol Tome, CFO and executive vice president – Corporate Services.

“As soon as practicable?” When is that? 3 years? 13? Stuff like this drives me crazy, if you are going to announce something that big so you make headlines, give us some sort of time frame. The time frame of the buybacks is the only thing that really matters when it comes to their impact. Over the next decade I would expect them to come close to that amount, if they are going to do it in the next 3, that is something entirely different.

Details boys… details….

Categories
Articles

HD Supply Unit To Be Sold For $10b To Private Equity

Looks like Home Depot (HD) CEO Frank Blake caved to activist shareholders and now officially deserves the moniker, “Bend over Blake.”

In February I contemplated buying HD shares but wanted to see what was going to happen to the only division in the company actually growing, the Supply unit. Later, when it looked like the unit might remain a member of Home Depot, I backed off Blake and decided to take a “wait and see” approach. It now looks like my initial assessment was correct.

CNBC today announced “Home Depot Inc. agreed to sell its Home Depot Supply
business to a consortium of private equity companies for more than $10 billion,
the New York Times reported in its online edition on Tuesday. Citing people
briefed on the talks, the paper said Home Depot will announce the deal later
today with Bain Capital, the Carlyle Group and Clayton Dubilier & Rice.”

At least the folks at the PE companies see the value in the unit. This move is all about Blake trying to appease Relational Investors and jump the stock price today at the expense of long term gains. This smells eerily similar to what happened at Wendy’s last year when Pershing Square’s Bill Ackman demanded a spinoff of the Tim Horton’s (THI) coffee chain. He got what he wanted, cashed in, bolted and now Wendy’s (WEN) shareholders are left wondering what became of their company. How much better would Wendy’s sales and profits be today if they sold Tim Horton’s coffee at their drive thru’s given the success Mcdonald’s (MCD) has had with premium coffee?

Getting rid of the Supply unit will not fix the problems at Home Depot. The problems there are systemic, not financial. The thought that they cannot execute both a retail and a Supply unit only means they have incompetent management there, not that it cannot be done. Is it really that far of a stretch to picture them selling pvc piping to a homeowner vs a business owner? Had they entered the food business, it would make sense to sell it. This is a value destroyer long term…..

Too bad…

Categories
Articles

Best Buy…..Not All Bad

Here are the results for Best Buy (BBY), not good but not really bad either. This one depends on your time frame

Reported Q1 earnings of $0.39 per share, $0.11 below the consensus estimates of $0.50; revenues rose 13.9% year/year to $7.93 billion $6.9 billion last year. Full year guidance lowered for 2008, to $2.95-3.15 vs. $3.16 previous.

Brad Anderson, vice chairman and CEO stated, “Our first-quarter results fell short of our expectations. Strong revenue results from lower-margin products significantly cut into our gross profit rate.” The gross profit rate for the first quarter was 23.9 percent of revenue, a 150-basis-point decline compared with a gross profit rate of 25.4 percent of revenue for the prior-year first quarter. A significant contributor to the year-over-year decline was the inclusion of the China business acquired last June, which carries a significantly lower gross profit rate.

“Yet our customers continued to increase our market share. Our share gains, combined with other indicators we see, show that our core business is healthy. To us, the totality of our results suggests we are on the right track with our strategy, which is aimed at re-defining the customer experience.” He continued, “Early evidence suggests that consumer spending will be more difficult to predict this year – but it appears to be accelerating in lower-margin categories. We are confident that flat-panel TVs, gaming and notebook computers will remain very appealing to our customers.”

In short, more shoppers (my observation that stores were full was accurate) but the newly acquired China biz dragged down earnings. If you want to buy shares, you will get a great chance today as they will get hit hard and are already down $2.50 pre-market.

Fundamentally there is nothing wrong with the business. The repurchased $412 million of stock in Q1 (about 8.6 million shares) and still have $800 million remaining under the current authorization. Expect them to announce an increase soon (if not today, the conference call is at 10am). Why? They said so. “In addition, as seen in the first quarter, we anticipate continuing our increased share repurchase activity.” said Anderson.

How will this affect the rest of retail today? It really shouldn’t. Revenues were good which means folks are still shopping, that is always good for retailers.