Thursday, March 10, 2011

Opensys - attractive but are they up to it?

Today I am going to introduce a sub RM20 million market capitalised company. Usually, these types of companies are not worth looking at. However, sometimes we can find a gem among worthless stones. I found one which looks rather interesting. The company is Opensys.

In studying the financials for Opensys, one should not just look at the revenue and PAT, but instead look through the Balance Sheet and Cashflow Statement. This is because income statement is much easier to dress in terms of financial presentation as compared to cashflow statement and balance sheet.

Below are the summary on the important numbers for the company.



Based on the numbers, we can summarize as follows:
- its revenue and PAT have not been showing eye-catching growth between 2003 to 2010;
- the company faced high gearing problem during 2005 to 2008;
- development expenditure was way too high as compared to its revenue between 2005 to 2008;
- from 2007, its debt was reduced substantially from RM33 million to RM11.5 million in 2010. I believe the gearing will reduce further in upcoming years looking at the trend. So are the development expenditure;
- in the initial years it was facing negative free cash flow (cashflow from operations – capital expenditure). Its cashflow however improved to much healthier note in the last 3 years in operations;
- if the trend continues, it will show much healthier balance sheet and dividend payment capabilities;
- with the reduction in PP&E, development expenditure and borrowings, in the long run the Earnings before tax will naturally improve as well.

Why are the numbers as such?
- Can see that the company is trying hard to register profit numbers each and every year which is probably why they have capitalised quite a bit of the capital purchase and expenses between 2005 to 2007 (Note that by capitalising your expenses, it will be shown as asset rather than a cost shown in the income statement);
- It was facing high gearing problem between 2005 to 2008, hence was seriously short of funds. Their total debt to cash was between 10x to 15x during those period;
- Business nevertheless improved substantially, can witnessed from the cashflow and where they reduced the net debt. Its reduction in debt are paid off from free positive cashflow;

With the weak balance sheet in the earlier years between 2005 to 2007, you will see that its PAT has not improved even though balance sheet became healthier. (Note that they did not raise any equity fund except for the IPO in 2004)

One thing to note however, at RM0.09 per share, its market capitalisation is at RM18.99 million which is equivalent to 1.93x of its free cashflow generating capability for FY2010.

While the financial numbers are very attractive - whether it is an investible company, one should look at their business i.e. are their earnings sustainable. If the fundamental of its business is strong as seen in the last 3 years, the share price then should improve from the current level.

Business wise, they offer services to two main sector i.e. banking and utility. It claims that it has an 80% market share in the back-end cheque processing business from the banks. It is worthwhile to note that Bank Negara imposed a faster cheque processing turnaround time since July 2009. And Opensys has gotten the bulk of the business from the banks. Another of its competitor, Symphony House, a Business Process Outsourcing house has a different proposition to Opensys. Symphony House (under Azman Yahya) does physical processing on the cheques while Opensys computerise those processes.

As for the utility sector, Opensys provides the kiosk payment solution for some of the larger utility companies such as Celcom, Maxis and TM.

Based on that, it does have a serious, sustainable business to go with. However, as the company is small, most investors might not have interest in such small company. Hence, what Opensys must be able to do is to continue to do what it does best. Time will then only be its friend as fundamental will over time take over the pessimists.

Monday, February 28, 2011

How do you trace a problem that may appear in the stock you buy?

As in any investment, I always recommend you to do homework - be it investment into properties, stocks or even cars. Have you ever heard of property investors losing money in houses that they have bought which the developer did not complete - example some of the properties that Talam built, just to name one of them. The tip is if you ask around or look at Talam's books before making that decision to buy, you may end up not taking that risk, as they may not have the funds to finish a project.

Tonight, I was looking through announcements on Bursa since this is the final day for companies that have either March, June, Sep and Dec year-end to announce their quarterly results. What pissed me off is that as I was glancing through one of the companies that I remember approached me to raise some funds few years ago - I knew their numbers may not be real, during then. I know that these companies through accounting loopholes or rather the eagerness of their auditors to just earn fees. Or rather too many inexperience auditors around, allow this things to go through!

Here I am showing a simple example (from that company I mentioned), but yet many investors just fall into that trap.






Just look at the trend, nice results from FY2005 to FY2008, showing a healthy trend in its P&L. Then came FY2009, it shows a sudden loss (you may think probably due to the crisis.) Well I do not think so. Look further! The balance sheet or a cashflow trend would probably tell you the answer. (I normally treat P&L as the last thing to look at - however, not for all companies though.)



True enough, if you look at the receivables it is more that 1.5 times of the revenue preceding year. Total revenue last year was around RM160 million while the receivables was RM257 million. Now tell me what type of company cannot collect its debt that is already more than 1-1/2 years on average. Or probably this company will not be able to collect that debt, anyway. They could just be playing with the auditors, as these revenue were never there anyway. If it can collect, I would not be investing into a company that has poor collection record, anyway. Another big number if you noticed is the "amount due from customer for contract work" - RM360 million. I wonder who is their auditor? BDO. Not a big four, but large enough to have that probing mind among their partners.
(Well, I am not going to name this company, but this is a post to allow you not to fall into this trap. This company was enjoying a run in its share price from 2005 to 2009 - Some people may already have fallen into their trap.)

Sunday, February 27, 2011

Berkshire Hathaway's Annual Report 2010

To be an investor or any inspiring one, if you could not find the time - do still find the time in reading the Annual letter to shareholders by Warren Buffett. This usually 30+ page letter (this year the same) provides a lot more investment wisdoms than we spend months watching CNBC or even Bloomberg.

Example: talking about his management style
To start with, the directors who represent you think and act like owners. They receive token compensation: no options, no restricted stock and, for that matter, virtually no cash. We do not provide them directors and officers liability insurance, a given at almost every other large public company. If they mess up with your money, they will lose their money as well. Leaving my holdings aside, directors and their families own Berkshire shares worth more than $3 billion. Our directors, therefore, monitor Berkshire’s actions and results with keen interest and an owner’s eye. You and I are lucky to have them as stewards.

This same owner-orientation prevails among our managers. In many cases, these are people who have sought out Berkshire as an acquirer for a business that they and their families have long owned. They came to us with an owner’s mindset, and we provide an environment that encourages them to retain it. Having managers who love their businesses is no small advantage.

Cultures self-propagate. Winston Churchill once said, “You shape your houses and then they shape you.” That wisdom applies to businesses as well. Bureaucratic procedures beget more bureaucracy, and imperial corporate palaces induce imperious behavior. (As one wag put it, “You know you’re no longer CEO when you get in the back seat of your car and it doesn’t move.”) At Berkshire’s “World Headquarters” our annual rent is $270,212. Moreover, the home-office investment in furniture, art, Coke dispenser, lunch room, high-tech equipment – you name it – totals $301,363. As long as Charlie and I treat your money as if it were our own, Berkshire’s managers are likely to be careful with it as well.

(FYI, Berkshire is a USD200 billion market cap company.)

Serious Investing!

AEON - One long term investment to consider

I have always been interested with quality management, a board that respects its shareholders, a company that continues to bring value to its customers and stock holders. AEON is to me that company. (For the first look at its business, for the 2nd and 3rd look at its annual report - then you will know what I mean)

Besides consistently showing improved performance every year, it continues to provide higher dividends to its shareholders. I am disappointed that I did not notice this stock until recently.

AEON has no debt - amazingly, it continues to expand (buying land and build the stores) using its cash flow from operations. If you notice, AEON is one company that whenever it decides to operate in your neighbourhood, it enhances the property value in that area - pretty much a McDonald's trait.

It gives out good dividend as well - consistently at 2 - 3% yield depending at the share price during the period.

At the same time, it still finds room for growth. In an industry where the larger players continue to thrive, AEON is that winner. If you notice, in this space where are the Oceon, The Store, Hankyu, Hiong Kiong etc? They are gone or some almost. There are of course several players i.e. Cold Storage, Parkson or the hypermarts such as Tesco, Carrefour and Giant but AEON is one that manages to find its niche.

On the business side, I like AEON (or rather Jaya Jusco) for its neat store. You can basically bring your child and facilities for children that are offered are a lot better than other players especially the hypermarts. In this respect, you often find that it will always manages to find its space in the business. (Of course I like one hypermart out of the 3 in Malaysia, i.e. Tesco and if it is a listed company - it will interest me as well - I suggest looking at Tesco UK if you are willing to explore investment overseas.)

On the financial point of view, PAT grew from RM73 million in 28 Feb 2006 to RM164 million in 31 December 2010 - more than doubled over a 6 years performance. The fact that its performance has been consistent is important i.e. does not experience the ups and downs of a property or any cyclical counter. Having that, you can be pretty sure that it does not have to play around with its numbers as consistency counts in this stock rather than a short term view. (This blog is not about guessing what the owner, CEO and CFO wants to do with their company's stock price.)

This is one investment that you can basically have a sound sleep and do not have to guess where the real estate market is heading over the next 6 months or whether any particular bank is overly exposed to any particular sector - etc. Know what I mean!

Its current price at RM6 is not expensive and as in buying anything, you will pay decent money for a good company.

Serious Investing!

Wednesday, February 23, 2011

KFC - revaluing its properties. Is it needed?

While I like KFC as a business and brand, I hate the wastages that the BOD has a hand in wasting company's funds. Do they really need to revalue their assets? If they need to revalue because they wanted to sell the business, they can always do it once the sale is confirmed (i.e. due diligence) Just because they want to improve the balance sheet, they do this in wasting shareholder's funds. Will the revaluation change the fundamentals of the company. By doing revaluation, you think more people will eat KFC's fried chicken?

I am wondering whether anyone is related to First Pacific Valuers Property Consultant, the company that was appointed to do the revaluation.

Johor Corp must learn how to be a majority shareholder.

See the announcements below
The Board of Directors of KFC Holdings (Malaysia) Bhd (“KFCH” or the “Company”) wishes to inform that it has carried out a revaluation exercise on all its properties as per attached.

(a) Rationale for the revaluation

The revaluation was conducted to determine the current market values of all its properties as per its accounting policy where the Group revalues its properties comprising land and buildings every five years and at shorter intervals whenever the fair value of the revalued assets is expected to differ materially from their carrying value. The Group had previously revalued all its properties on 24 August 2005.

(b) Revaluation surplus

The details of the revaluation surplus/impairment losses are as per attached.

(c) The effect of the revaluation surplus on the net assets per share of the group

The revaluation exercise has resulted in an increase in the net assets per share of the Group by 11 sen.

(d) The name of the valuers

The valuations of all the properties were carried out by independent professional valuers, First Pacific Valuers Property Consultants Sdn Bhd.

(e) The date of valuation

The date of the revaluation was 15 December 2010.

Serious Investing!