Why is Santova so cheap?

(Disclaimer – as at the time of posting this article, I own shares in Santova)

When determining a growth rate in your valuation of a stock, there are essentially two ways in which a company can grow. Through investing into new assets (e.g.: acquisitions) or through improving efficiencies on existing operations. In times of economic slow-down (such as that being experienced globally), cost cutting and improving efficiencies is your go-to option. One such way of doing this is looking at your company’s supply chain. And who can help you do this? Santova.

What is it that Santova does? Amongst other services, they primarily co-ordinate the movement of goods across the entire supply chain for clients from transportation to storage by making use of third-party providers. For example, they will get DHL to move your products from Johannesburg to Durban via truck, put them on a DSV ship to go to Australia and then employ the likes of Aramex to take it from the harbour to your warehouse in Perth. But why use Santova instead of doing this yourself? Santova can achieve economies of scale which individual companies cannot. The process of moving goods across the supply chain is also considerably time consuming which detracts from you being able to focus on your core business.

Santova is also non-asset based. They don’t physically own any trucks/warehouses/ships etc that are used in transporting goods. They make use of third-party providers. This means that their cost structure is almost entirely variable. So, in tough times, there’s very little fixed costs which they have to cover. This allows them to run a lean business, better enabling them to weather most storms.

I also like entities where management have a large stake in the equity. Management hold 19% of Santova’s shares. This means that the decisions they make are probably aligned with those of the shareholders and long-term value creation is at the top of their priorities instead of cutting corners to inflate short term results to meet profit/bonus targets.  

With all the shenanigans going on in South Africa from corrupt politicians to load shedding, many investors are looking to buy into shares which act as a hedge against Rand volatility. You could invest in an offshore ETF, or you could buy shares in Santova. Over 50% of Santova’s revenue is earned in foreign currencies from their operations in the UK, Australia, Europe and Hong Kong.

With a very low debt to equity ratio, being significantly geographically diversified, showing consistent growth and providing a niche service, it’s difficult to see why they’re trading at a PE of 5.21.

So, what is it worth? When doing a valuation, it’s difficult to remain objective and keep your emotions out of it when you go into a valuation with a pre-conceived notion about the company being good or bad. To avoid this, I like to do a bit of a sensitivity analysis/sense check by calculating a ‘worst case scenario’ value to make sure that I’m not getting too carried away. I try being as prudent as I can be and assume the worst. My worst-case scenario value for Santova is R5.28. It’s currently trading at R2.45. This would suggest that it should be at a PE of 11.7, which to me doesn’t seem unreasonable at all, or perhaps I’ve completely lost the plot.

Why is it so cheap? As I mentioned with AdaptIT (see here: https://what-the-finance.com/2019/02/21/why-is-adapt-it-so-cheap/) I believe it boils down to small cap stocks being ‘too risky’ for investors’ appetite in the current market conditions.

With that said, Santova is one of my favourite stocks and I’m trying to pick up as many shares as I can at this price. If you think otherwise, drop me a comment or if you want to see how I got to this value, let me know!

(And a thank you to Michael Casey for the input)

How to value a share?

After my last blog, I’ve had a few people ask me how to actually value a share? (when I say a few, I really mean two). However, two caveats before we get started:

  1. Thousands of research papers, University seminars and online courses dedicated to valuations and corporate finance indicate just how topical valuation methodologies are. Therefore, I’m just going to cover the absolute basics to give a high-level overview of valuations.
  2. There’re plenty of ifs and buts in valuations and there is no right or wrong answer. If there were, that would mean we live in a perfect market…which we don’t. It’s also not rocket science, just keep it simple!

I’ve also included a link at the bottom of this blog to an excel document I’ve put together which illustrates a very basic valuation using everything I discuss below.

With that said, let’s get stuck into it:

Valuation Techniques

There are several techniques you can use to value a stock. One of the most widely used ones (and arguably the most accurate) is known as a discounted cash flow (DCF) which discounts free cash flows to equity investors and that is what the rest of the blog is going to cover.

In doing a DCF, you predict the entity’s free cash flows into the future. Then discount those cash flows back to today by using a rate you would expect to earn on this stock as an investor. This gives you the value of the entity’s equity which you divide by the number of shares and voila, there’s your value per share.

Why free cash flows (FCF’s) you may be asking? FCF’s to equity investors are essentially the core output of the entity’s operations. It’s what’s left over to pay to shareholders. Everything the entity does on a day to day basis results in cash flows.

Here are the 8 things you will need:

  1. The entities latest financial statements

How do you get the FCF’s? Financial statements have to comply with certain accounting rules (broadly known as IFRS – International Financial Reporting Standards). To get to the FCF’s of an entity, you first need to remove all the accounting quirks. The simplest way is to start is with a figure called net income which you will find in every entity’s financial statements. You then add back the accounting quirks such as depreciation which are non-cash items.

Now in this net income figure, there are certain numbers which are not included which we must add/deduct to get to the entities FCF’s. These range from movements in working capital (e.g.: when debtors reduce, that means a debtor has paid me, which means I’ve received cash) to capital expenditure (e.g.: when I buy a new computer for my company, that will result in a cash outflow).

In the attached excel workbook at the bottom of the page, I’ve listed a few common ‘quirks’ you need to add/deduct from the net income figure to get to your FCF’s.

2. Growth rate

Now that you have your FCF’s, you need to predict by how much they will grow by in the future. This is where a lot of ifs and buts come into valuations. You will have to use your own judgement to determine this. A good starting point is to look at the entities historical compounded annual growth rate (CAGR) of revenue (once again, there are far more accurate ways of doing this, but a historical growth rate is used for the sake of simplicity).

You can then start adjusting this figure for various scenarios. For example, is the company launching a new drug soon? Is the new CEO the next Steve Jobs? Do you believe the new competitor’s product is far superior? Just on a side note; try not to get too carried away with adjusting your growth rate. Fiddling too much with your rates/cash flows is where things can start to go very wrong!

3. Risk free rate

As I mentioned earlier, you need to discount the future FCF’s at a rate you would expect to earn on this stock as an investor. But what is this rate?

Well a good starting point is by looking at a risk-free rate. What rate of return would you be willing to accept if there were zero risk associated to the investment? The benchmark for a risk-free rate is government bonds (e.g.: in South Africa, one of the common bonds is known as the R186). Why government bonds? Your returns are almost guaranteed, and thus “risk-free”.

Now that you have a risk-free rate, what additional return would you expect for taking the risk of investing in this stock? This is known as an ‘equity risk premium’ (see point 4 below).

(Food for thought, are government bonds really risk free if there’s a chance that a government can default on their debt? Think the Greek government debt crisis in 2008).

4. Equity Risk Premium

One of the core principles of valuations is risk vs return. If you invest in something ‘riskier’, you would expect a higher compensation for taking on this risk, right? The equity risk premium is a measure of ‘how much’ extra return you would expect as a return for a riskier investment, or, the return you expect less the risk-free rate.

To get this rate, you can either look backwards or forward. Looking backwards is probably the easiest (although not the most accurate). If you take historical market returns (i.e.: what has the JSE returned historically), less the risk-free rate, you end up with your equity risk premium.

Please note that there are arguably far more accurate ways to determine an equity risk premium (i.e.: taking mature market risk free rates and adjusting these with country specific risk based on credit default swaps).

5. Beta

Beta is essentially a measure of relative risk. It tells you how risky a stock is relative to an average risk stock. It’s calculated by running a regression on the returns of a stock vs the returns on a market index. A high beta stock (i.e.: greater than 1) means it’s more volatile than the market. A lower beta stock (i.e.: less than 1) means it’s less volatile than the market.

There are alternate ways to determine beta (which take into account the industry, entity debt levels, proportion of fixed costs to variable costs, etc) and I’m fairly adverse to using regression beta’s, but it’s the simplest way to determine beta.

6. Cost of Equity

The cost of equity is the rate that you’re going to use to discount your future cash flows to todays date. The simplest model to determine the cost of equity is known as CAPM – Capital Asset Pricing Model. It’s denoted as:

Cost of equity = risk free rate + beta (market risk premium-risk free rate)

All the inputs into this calculation have been discussed above.

7. Terminal value

If we grow the entity’s FCF’s at the growth rate determined from point 2 above forever, the entity would be come unrealistically big. Think of it this way, if your growth rate is larger than the growth rate of the economy, it will reach a point where the company you’re valuing is larger than the South African economy (highly unrealistic).

Therefore, after we’ve predicted our future FCF’s for a period of 5 years (5 years is a rule of thumb) at the growth rate we determined, we grow the remaining cash flows into perpetuity at a stable growth rate. This figure gives us the ‘terminal value’.

8. Number of entity’s shares

You will be able to find the number of issued ordinary shares in the entity’s financial statements.

Putting everything together

If you’ve reached the end of this post and are still reading, well-done!

To see how to put all the information from 1-8 above into a DCF calculation, see the attached excel document here:

You might also be asking yourself, “Daniel this is all good and well, but where do I find this information?” As I feel like this post is already becoming a bit lengthy, I will cover this in another blog.

And as usual, if you have any questions, comments or critiques, please do let me know!

Bitter Taste Holdings

In my last blog on Motus (see here: https://what-the-finance.com/2019/02/22/maybe-motus/ ) I mentioned why I don’t like entities that take on too much debt. And Taste (which went from trading at R5 to R0.1) is a prime example why. So, lets have a closer look at what happened.

Taste has two main divisions, namely luxury goods (NWJ, Arthur Kaplan and World’s Finest Watches) and food (licences Starbucks and Dominos and owns The Fish & Chip Co and Maxis) with the main shareholder being the Riskowitz Value Fund. The rest of this blog is mainly going to cover Starbucks and Dominos as this is where things started going a bit pear shaped.

Starbucks

Being a coffee addict, the news that Starbucks was coming to South Africa got me very excited. But Starbucks hasn’t been doing too well. Why? Well firstly, to set up a store, it requires a considerable capital outlay of approximately R15mil. Starbucks success is also based on the concept of it being a place people will be when they’re not at work or at home. Their cafes have lovely décor, relaxing music and fantastic free Wi-Fi which you can walk into on your way to work. But does this work in South Africa? Starbucks target market are working individuals, most of whom in South Africa drive to work (and don’t walk past a Starbucks on their way to work). Now I don’t know about you, but I’m not going to stop at Mall of Africa on my way to work, pay R10 for parking, spend 20 mins getting lost in the mall to find Starbucks and pay a premium for a coffee which doesn’t taste (no pun intended) any better than a coffee at Seattle or Vida.

Domino’s

One of the main reasons to Domino’s success was the ease of which one could order a pizza off their mobile app. Over the years they’ve built considerable customer loyalty and brand reputation. It also hasn’t been doing too well in South Africa, but why? Well before Domino’s came to South Africa, we already had the likes of Mr. D and Debonairs (and more recently, Uber Eats). So, if Domino’s isn’t competing on ease of delivery and their pizza doesn’t taste any better than the likes of Debonairs, then why would I pay a premium for their pizza?

Going forward…maybe

Now based on the above, Taste took on too much debt to try and fund rolling out Starbucks and Domino’s which they could not afford with their existing cash flows. This ended up with them having to make a rights issue of R398mil to settle their debt (after breaching covenants), restructure their Board of Directors and relook at their strategy. Will this work? Their latest SENS announcement states that they need R700mil over the next 7-8 years before they start generating “positive” free cash flows! They also mention that they’ll need 150-200 Starbucks Cafes and 220-280 Domino’s Restaurants. With a company that can’t generate any positive cash flows from their operations, where are they going to a find a minimum of R1.5 billion just to establish 150 Starbucks Cafes alone? I doubt any bank will want to finance them, another rights issue seems unlikely and just how deep is the Riskowitz Fund’s pockets to keep on financing them? A delisting is becoming to seem inevitable.

Valuation

Valuing Taste is a seemingly impossible task, but I’m going to give it a go. Valuations of entities with negative earnings become a bit more tricky. We have to start making assumptions that the entity will resolve all it’s problems or whether it will go bankrupt. Assuming the Board of Directors will miraculously be able to turn it around, I’ve come up with the following:

I’ve determined a cost of equity using a beta of 1.5 (beta is essentially a measure of relative risk. It tells you how risky a stock is relative to an average risk stock) a risk-free rate of 6.21% (the RSA186 bond rate adjusted for default risk) and applied a country risk premium for South Africa of 3%. Assuming positive free cash flows will be generated, and revenue growth/margins will normalize after 7 years, I’ve come to a value of 3 cents per share. This is a lot less than the current share price of 14 cps.

Conclusion

It’s always easier to see where things went wrong with the benefit of hindsight. Would I buy shares in Taste? No. Perhaps I’ve missed something in the valuation above, but I just don’t see how they’re going to turn this one around.

If you have any ideas, comments, recommendations or any questions on how I did the valuation, let me know!