Tag: Diploma

Holmes Sentence, Diploma Results, TRIG Announcement, Office Space Surplus and Gamification of Trading

It was good to see that on Friday Elizabeth Holmes, former CEO and founder of Theranos, was sentenced to 11 years in prison for fraud. The US company claimed to have a revolutionary blood testing device and raised $900 million when the product never worked and investors and customers were deceived. This is the kind of sentence that we should see in the UK but never do for companies that mislead investors.

This morning Diploma (DPLM) published their Final Results for last year. Both revenue and profits were ahead of forecast. This is a diversified engineering company which has grown both by acquisitions and organic expansion. With a bland company name and a low profile, this can be an under-appreciated business while it also benefited from a high proportion of export sales last year (a 5% benefit to revenue from foreign exchange movements).

Another announcement this morning was from The Renewables Infrastructure Group (TRIG) which is one of those alternative energy suppliers which the Chancellor recently targeted with a new tax as they were making too much profit. The detailed impact is now spelled out.

The new tax is a 45% levy on revenues in excess of £75/MWh. TRIG estimates this will reduce the company’s NAV per share by 8.3p per share, i.e. about 6%. But the company expects electricity price increases to more than offset that. The company will also see a positive impact from inflation but that is offset by a similar decrease in asset valuations which are discounted at a higher rate as a result.

The overall impact on the share price today at the time of writing is negligible but many of these changes were already forecast of course. This is an example of the problem of investing in companies or sectors where the government is interfering in the market. In this case the government decided to incentivise renewable electricity generation but then decided that companies were making too much money as a result.

An interesting article in the FT has highlighted the rise in empty office space as working patterns changed with more people working partly or fully from home. Occupancy levels have plateaued at about half pre-Covid levels and new construction has slowed. Offices can be repurposed to meet the housing shortage but that is not always easy the article reports. You can see why the commercial property sector is in the doldrums and that is surely not likely to change soon. I doubt people will return to the old working patterns now they have enjoyed the benefit of a lot less commuting, particularly in London. Personally I always hated commuting and avoided it so far as possible. Even after setting up a business initially in the West End, that was soon moved out to the suburbs freeing up two or more hours extra working time.

Lastly the FCA has warned against the “gamification” of trading apps. This is where product features are added to encourage activity. The FCA is right to look at this issue but as usual it is closing the stable door after the horse has bolted. It has been clear for many months that some share trading platforms are encouraging speculation as opposed to long-term investment.

Note: I hold shares in DPLM and TRIG.

Roger Lawson (Twitter: https://twitter.com/RogerWLawson  )

You can “follow” this blog by entering your email address below. You will then receive an email alerting you to new posts as they are added.

Strategic Investment Review

As it is a new Tax Year when one can put another £20,000 in one’s ISA I have reviewed my investment portfolio and tax position. To become an ISA millionaire and maximise the tax advantages of saving via ISAs you need to put the maximum in each year if possible and the sooner during the year the better.

One thing that has occurred to me is that with my portfolio showing good returns in the last few years I need to increase the amount in my will that I give to charity so as to reduce my IHT bill. The rate of Inheritance Tax is reduced by 10% — from 40% to 36% — where at least 10% of the net estate is left to charity. So I shall add a codicil to my will to amend the figure I give to Leicester University who are doing some good work on kidney disease.

In the short term we are also donating to the DEC Ukraine Humanitarian Appeal – see https://www.dec.org.uk/ . I recommend it because it looks like the war will continue for some time and the need for basic support such as food and shelter is urgent.

As regards investment strategy, with inflation rising I think property companies are good bets. They often have indexed linked rent reviews and some sectors of the commercial property market such as warehouses and self-storage companies have been doing well. I expect those trends will continue and property is a defensive investment in the current uncertain financial environment. But I will avoid retail property investments unlike my local Bromley Council who I have just discovered are overweight in them in an investment fund. It seems like other Councils they saw investment in property as a way to increase income at little risk – Croydon came seriously unstuck with this strategy and effectively went bankrupt as a result eighteen months ago.

Another area which is surely worth adding to is the renewable energy sector following the publication of the Government’s energy strategy. The AIC have published an interesting note on this subject which gives the performance of Alternative Energy Trusts over the last few years. Most have done well over the last 5 years and have good yields. I own several of the companies listed in the AIC note and am likely to increase my holdings in them.

The comments of some of the fund managers on nuclear energy are unfortunate. It is a relatively safe technology and one of the few alternatives that can supply a good base load while wind and solar are so intermittent which batteries can only help with to a degree. But the Government is moving much too slowly in building new nuclear plants.

The AIC press release is here: https://www.theaic.co.uk/aic/news/press-releases/must-do-better

Am I giving up on technology stocks? No because many of them have pricing power that can protect their profits against inflation. Software companies for example are not affected by inflation in commodity prices and should have no supply chain difficulties although staff costs can rise. I will simply be selective about new investments in technology companies.

A good example of the defensive quality of some technology companies was given by a trading statement from Diploma (DPLM) this morning. They said “The Group’s trading performance so far this year has been strong, with double digit underlying growth in Q2 (consistent with Q1) driven by our organic revenue initiatives, market share gains and robust demand”. The share price is up over 10% at the time of writing and there is a positive “outlook statement”. But the share price is still less than it was last year when technology stocks were all the rage.

Having lived through the 1970s I do not fear inflation. But it’s clear that it is best to invest in assets even by borrowing to do so as inflation will wipe out your debts. But I won’t be borrowing to invest in the stock market which can be called “gambling with other people’s money”. This is not the time to gear up a portfolio in my view. Maybe I should buy a new car?  Average rates on car loans are still low.

Roger Lawson (Twitter: https://twitter.com/RogerWLawson  )

You can “follow” this blog by entering your email address below. You will then receive an email alerting you to new posts as they are added.

It’s Impossible to Value Companies at Present!

The stock markets rose sharply yesterday and this morning, allegedly on the news of the $2 trillion economic support package announced in the USA. But the company news is consistently bad where it is available.

In the company announcements I have read, they seem to fall into two kinds: 1) We are shutting down all or part of our operations and managing the cash but our balance sheet strength is such that we can survive this for weeks and won’t go out of business (Greggs, Dunelm, Next and Victoria for example); or 2) Only minor impacts so far but it is too early to judge the wider impact of a possible economic recession on the business (Diploma for example).

Nobody is giving forecasts and it’s impossible to work them out for oneself. The result is that individual stock prices are bouncing up and down, and the whole market is also gyrating. I have no confidence that the recent market bounce is an indication that we have passed the bottom. It’s simply impossible to value companies at present with any accuracy.

One could perhaps say one can value them because the coronavirus crisis may only last a few weeks while company valuations should be based on years into the future, but there is no certainty on the duration of the epidemic, how many people will die and when the economy will be back to normal.

Here’s a useful quotation from the Victoria (VCP) announcement today: “….the Group goes into the uncertainty of the next few months from a position of considerable strength. However, as Darwin stated, those who survive ‘are not the strongest or the most intelligent, but the most adaptable to change.’ Therefore, our managers have been willing to think the unthinkable and act decisively and promptly to protect their business – particularly its cash position – as the impact will, in the short term, be significant”.

Some of the companies mentioned above have seen an immediate impact on their businesses while others are less affected. Those who run “non-essential” businesses such as General Retailers and Hospitality operators are the worst hit, but I suspect others will see the impact in due course as the economy slows. It’s OK for Governments to pump money into the economy to try and keep it afloat but the future profits of many companies will surely be wiped out this year.

The impact might be wider than we expect. For example, one of the on-line retailers I use has closed down its web site today presumably because of the difficulty of packing and shipping orders. On the other hand, office productivity might suddenly improve if everyone is working from home – less time will be spent gossiping or flirting with others or wasted on commuting.

As an investor does one simply sit on one’s hands in the expectation that the crisis will pass in due course and the markets will rebound?  There was an interesting article by Chris Dillow in last week’s Investors’ Chronicle. He pointed out that research tells us that when there is bad news, investors tend to look at their portfolios less often. It’s the equivalent of not going to the doctor because their diagnosis might be bad news. Not reviewing your portfolio regularly is surely a habit to be avoided. I do it every evening as a matter of routine.

I know exactly the value of all my portfolios and the movements of individual holdings over the day. It’s made for gloomy reading of late. I also get alerts during the day of share prices that have moved significantly from previous levels and review them at the end of the day also. I use software products such as ShareScope and Stockopedia to provide this information. As a man of action, I do react to what I see happening in the market and to individual shares. I manage my portfolio to reduce exposure to the market when it is falling. And I make changes to my individual holdings dependent on the latest news and current prospects.

But it’s easy to waste a lot of money by over-trading, and waste a lot of your personal time, so I try not to make changes unless trends are very clear. My habits have developed over many years of investing in the stock market and have worked out reasonably well. But others might take a different approach. There is no one “best solution” but hiding behind ignorance of what is happening in the market is surely a recipe for poor portfolio performance.

Roger Lawson (Twitter: https://twitter.com/RogerWLawson )

You can “follow” this blog by clicking on the bottom right in most browsers or by using the Contact page to send us a message requesting. You will then receive an email alerting you to new posts as they are added.

 

© Copyright. Disclaimer: Read the About page before relying on any information in this post.

 

 

Objections to Pay at Diploma and the Cost of Zero Carbon

My previous blog post covered the subject of criticism by Slater Investments of many current pay schemes. That at Diploma (DPLM) is a typical example. But at their Annual General Meeting yesterday, which I unfortunately was unable to attend in person as a shareholder, there was a revolt.

The votes cast as disclosed in an RNS statement today were 20% against their new Remuneration Policy and 44% against their Remuneration Report. I voted against both of them of course personally. The board has acknowledged the concerns of shareholders and they will consult further with shareholders plus provide an update within six months.

What is wrong with their remuneration scheme? First pay is simply too high. Over £1 million last year for the CEO when profits were only £62 million and that does not include any LTIP benefits as he is recent joiner. But the CFO got £1.6 million in total. The CEOs pay scheme includes base salary, pension, short term bonus of up to 125% of base (90% achieved) and an LTIP that awards up to 250% of base salary. The Remuneration Report consists of 14 pages when Slater suggests a maximum of two would be sensible. I could go on at length of this subject but in essence the remuneration scheme at Diploma is simply unreasonable and too generous. It displays all the faults that Slater complained about.

I have previously criticised the Government’s commitment to achieving net zero carbon emissions on the grounds of cost. Well known author Bjorn Lomborg has published a good article on this subject in the New York Post. Almost no Governments making similar promises are willing to publish any real cost-benefit analysis. The only nation to have done this to date is New Zealand: the economics institute that the government asked to conduct the analysis found that going carbon neutral by 2050 will cost the country 16% of GDP. If the small nation follows through with the promise, it will cost at least US$5 trillion with negligible impact on temperatures. Just imagine what the cost will be in the UK, for a much bigger economy! See this article for more information:  https://nypost.com/2019/12/08/reality-check-drive-for-rapid-net-zero-emissions-a-guaranteed-loser/

Roger Lawson (Twitter: https://twitter.com/RogerWLawson )

You can “follow” this blog by clicking on the bottom right.

© Copyright. Disclaimer: Read the About page before relying on any information in this post.

Bogle Death, Patisserie and Diploma AGM

The death of John Bogle has been announced at the age of 89. He wrote several very informative books on investment and was the founder of Vanguard which has grown into one of the largest mutual fund managers by promoting index fund management. He also promoted the idea that the investors should own the fund manager. He suffered from heart attacks from a young age, the first at age 31, and actually had a heart transplant in 1990. So in some respects he was a medical success story as well as an investment one. His books are well worth reading even if you are not a fan of index tracking (I am not).

More bad news from Patisserie (CAKE) with two more non-exec directors resigning and an “update” saying there were thousands of false entries in the accounts. KPMG have been called in to review what to do next and the company’s bankers have been asked to extend the “standstill of its bank facilities”. I suggest investors mentally write off the value of their holdings in this company.

I attended the Annual General Meeting of Diploma (DPLM) yesterday (on the 16th Jan). This is a business that owns a ragbag of technology companies from multiple acquisitions but grew into a financial profile I like to see under the former CEO Bruce Thompson. He led it for 20 years. Consistent growth in profits, good return on capital (about 24%), and good cash flow with rising dividends. Unfortunately, the new CEO they appointed did not work out for some reason and left in August after only a few months. The Chairman, John Nicholas, took over temporarily and they have just appointed a new CEO named Johnny Thomson who was present at the AGM. He used to work for Compass Group which is a much bigger business so I asked him why he joined Diploma. Was he disappointed about not getting the CEOs job at Compass perhaps (the CEO there died in a plane crash)? His answer was that he had spent a long time at Compass and it was time for a change. Was he disappointed? Perhaps, is a summary of what he said.

The company issued a trading statement on the day, which said reported revenues up by 9% in the first quarter, and was otherwise positive. Thank god for such boring companies in these turbulent financial times. I asked a question in the meeting on the possible impact of Brexit and US/China trade wars. The answer was in essence not much so long as US tariffs don’t rise much further (they do import much from China to their US operations).

A poorly attended AGM but useful nevertheless from a company that keeps a low profile.

Roger Lawson (Twitter: https://twitter.com/RogerWLawson )

You can “follow” this blog by clicking on the bottom right.

© Copyright. Disclaimer: Read the About page before relying on any information in this post

Steps Down With Immediate Effect – Diploma and IDOX

The phrase “stepped down with immediate effect” is used by companies to announce the instant departure of a director. It usually simply means they have been fired. It is of course frequently bad news as it often follows past uninspiring events and it means that the company has to scratch around for a replacement or ask another director to step into the breach.

This week I saw such announcements on a couple of my holdings. The first was Diploma Plc (DPLM) where the CEO Richard Ingram was the victim. The announcement also said “the Board believes that a change in the CEO is in the best interests of the Company and its shareholders”. The surprising aspect here was the Mr Ingram had only joined the company a few months ago and the trading announcement issued on the same day was positive. Mr Ingram had been recruited to replace long-serving CEO Bruce Thompson who retires at the end of September. Clearly the recruitment process seems to have failed but there is always a high chance of failure when recruiting a senior position from outside. John Nicholas, the Chairman, is taking over on an interim basis rather than Mr Thompson. Better to admit a mistake sooner rather than later.

The share price initially dipped on the morning of the announcement, but then rose as much as 4% during the day. Clearly some investors saw it as good news.

This morning there was a similar announcement this morning from IDOX (IDOX). Long-serving CFO Jane Mackie has resigned and leaves the board with immediate effect. That’s perhaps not greatly surprising as she was the CFO in the period when IDOX had to back-track on some rather aggressive revenue recognition practices. A new CEO has recently been appointed so a change in CFO was not surprising. However Ms Mackie is not actually leaving the company until February 2019 which certainly gives the company plenty of time to find a replacement.

The share price of IDOX has fallen by 1.8% today at the time of writing, but I rather judge this as positive news so it might recover I suspect in due course unless there is other news announced. The departure of a finance director sometimes means they have just given some unexpected bad news to the board. I do recall in my early career to suddenly finding my finance director boss was departing for that very reason after a stormy board meeting. He was rather easy going so it was great to be junior to him, but that character defect did not impress the board.

Let us hope that is not the situation at IDOX.

It is unfortunate for investors that such announcements tend to be somewhat cryptic in nature. Often a “settlement agreement” with the departing individual has yet to be proposed or agreed so they don’t want to prejudice the legal negotiations by saying more. But of course they might well inform their major investors while private investors are left guessing.

Roger Lawson (Twitter: https://twitter.com/RogerWLawson )

You can “follow” this blog by clicking on the bottom right.

© Copyright. Disclaimer: Read the About page before relying on any information in this post.

Diploma (DPLM) and Return on Capital

Diploma Plc, a supplier of specialist technical products, issued its preliminary results for the year to the end of September today (20/11/2017). This company may not be a household name and hence can fall under the radar of investors. But it has demonstrated a consistent track record in recent years. Today was no exception. Adjusted earning per share were up 19%, and revenue was up 18%, although a significant proportion of the improvement was down to currency movements (they are a very international business and the falling pound has no doubt helped). The share price has risen 10% on the day at the time of writing.

But why do I like this company? Apart from the track record, the directors have a strong focus on obtaining a good return on capital both from their on-going businesses and from acquisitions. But which measure do they use (Return on Equity – ROE, Return on Assets – ROA, or Return on Capital Employed – ROCE. These are all useful measures, and you can no doubt look up their definitions on the internet. But they use none of the above. They actually report “Return on Adjusted Trading Capital” – ROATCE. This they report as improved to 24% (their target is to exceed 20% which they have beaten in the last five years – that’s certainly the kind of figure I like to see).

How do they calculate this figure? I quote from the announcement: “A key metric that the Group uses to measure the overall profitability of the Group and its success in creating value for shareholders is the return on adjusted trading capital employed (“ROATCE”). At a Group level, this is a pre-tax measure which is applied against the fixed and working capital of the Group, together with all gross intangible assets and goodwill, including goodwill previously written off against retained earnings.”

Personally, I don’t think one measure of return on capital is particularly better than another. Return on Assets is good enough for me although it certainly helps that the company has added back write-offs of goodwill from past acquisitions to save one working it out for oneself. For a company that does repeated acquisitions, these “disappearing” assets are worth bearing in mind. Return on Equity might be considered by some as the most important for equity investors, but using that as a target by management can result in risky behaviour such as gearing up with debt. Bank directors were often keen to talk about that number before the 2008 crash.

Why is return on capital so important? Because when one invests in a company, you are investing in the expectation of a future return. How much they can generate in returns from the assets under their management is a key measure (that’s ignoring the profits from investment from getting a greater fool to buy your shares in a game of “pass the parcel”). I learned this was the best measure of the quality and performance of a company when I went to business school, and I never forgot it when I ran a business. In the modern world, it can be easy to borrow capital and blow it on expansive plans. This can help the management increase their salaries. But for equity investors, it dilutes your returns and you lose the benefit of compounding the retained profits.

The best, and shortest book, that explains this in layman’s terms is Joel Greenblatt’s “The Little Book That Beats The Market”. He uses return on capital (as he defines it) in a calculation of a “Magic Formula” for success. But of course using a simplistic formula has its dangers. If everyone followed it, prices might be driven up to unreasonable levels on the stocks chosen by such a formula. In addition I just looked at the stock list that Stockopedia suggests would be “buys” using the Magic Formula. It results in a mixed bag of shares. For example, it includes Safestyle which I also own when that company’s share price has been falling of late due to concerns about the retail market for large general merchandise items (they sell replacement windows). It might be a “BUY” now but it could also be a share where you could wait a long time for it to return to favour. So the moral is, use return on capital as one measure of the merit of a company, but look at other factors also. In addition, bear in mind that sometimes the market can favour other companies, such as those with little profits in a go-go bull market, or those with massive, if underutilised, assets in a gloomy bear market. So the Magic Formula is best applied to a basket of shares and you might need patience over some years to see the benefits realised.

Lastly, financial numbers do not tell you everything about a company. The historic numbers can be inflated by clever, or false accounting. And they can ignore major strategic or regulatory challenges that a company faces that might not be reflected in historic numbers.

But a company whose return on capital is low is certainly one I like to avoid. It is also helpful when the management talk about return on capital as having importance in their business strategy, and Diploma certainly do that. I consider that a positive sign because if they stick to it, then it should ensure the overall financial profile of the company remains positive and that profits will grow.

Roger Lawson (Twitter: https://twitter.com/RogerWLawson )

You can “follow” this blog by clicking on the bottom right.

© Copyright. Disclaimer: Read the About page before relying on any information in this post.