A year ago we had about 6.9m shares shorted. Then in June they announced the Convert Offering and an additional 3m shares were shorted, presumably to hedge their investment. Assuming this is true with the new short interest figures out now showing in essence the exact same figure as a year ago, it means we lost 3m shares that were true bears rather then hedgers.
While I like the possibility of the short squeeze, it does tell us the street is becoming less Bearish.
But a modest buyback would still be prudent....
This is a dog with fleas. Gabelli and Icahn believe in the segment but they don't understand the legacy issues with NAV. When all of your profits come from Parts Sales and you just decided to stop making your largest profit parts moving forward, you are doomed. This wont go to zero over night, but it will be a slow slow death spiral.
So to summarize, you are against the buyback because I am a self important narcissist that throws infantile tantrums and I repeat myself. Not because of any sound financial logic? In other words, spite. Pot meet kettle.
Well at least we got you on board for a buyback.
I am a long term shareholder of the company and I will continue to speak up when I believe management is heading in the wrong direction. I wish more shareholders would. I wish Dr. Patrick would speak up. I wish Invesco would have. I would wish Franklin Resources would. Silence is what has doomed this company for the past 3 years. We need more active shareholders not less. I encourage everyone to speak up loudly and demand change. Those that sit by idly and bless managements inaction are the cause of our slide, and regrettably infantile tantrums (although I think thats a bit harsh and sensitive) may be our last resort.
So in essence, you know agree with all of us. You just like instigating. No one here is arguing they do a $50m buyback. A $20m+/- buyback is easily funded by cashflow and does not interfere with them running their business as is. It is not hasty - it is opportunistic. When your shares are valued at next to nothing and your growth prosepcts appear strong and cash is ample, then that is a good time for a modest buyback. It is not a very controversial statement. And I don't care if Carl Icahn - a short term trader says it - or Warren Buffett a long term trader says it. Still holds true.
1) "I would rather they sit on the cash and carefully deliberate" - they didnt carefully deliberate in the past? Now they have learned how to carefully deliberate? Stop being an apologist for this negligence
2) Hasty Buyback - Hasty? The stock trades at 3-4x EBITDA - how on earth is buying something at 3-4x EBITDA and has traded there for months hasty? Your real name is Bennett isnt, maybe your uncle? you cant be this gullible.
3) Are you suggesting AAPL, PG, LUV, IBM, EMC, BA, etc. only do buybacks to offset dilution from mgmt comp? Cmon man, Really. You really arent that naive.
4) Of course buybacks dont always create value. Would I be advocating a buyback if we were at $12, no. Would I be advocating a buyback if we didnt have $6 of cash on hand, no. But the combination of excess cash and low valuation = buyback. Finance 101. They skipped it in your GED class. Buybacks create value when you buy low and sell high. How much lower do you think the stock price is going to go? It cant go any lower. In case you havent noticed we were trading at $5 a month ago. If mgmt doesnt think this stock was a buy at $5.80 then what does that tell you? If they arent willing to buy shares at 3.5x EBITDA, then that is pretty scary about what they feel the prospects of the company are?
5) Finally, the $20 buyback wasnt done to return capital to shareholders. It was done to fend off a buyout to save their jobs and their wallets. No other reason. These guys looked out for themselves rather than shareholders and we are paying for it.
If you can tell us why buying shares at $6.25 and then seeing the stock go to $8.25 is bad for short and long term investors alike, then I will concede you are all knowing. But whether I hold my shares for 5 minutes or 5 years, reducing the outstanding float of stock that is massively undervalued is always good. After listening to your twisted logic, its no wonder we have seen the stock lose 70% of its value in the last 3 years during a bull market.
Our stock has now risen about 15% over the last month which normally is cause for celebration. And no doubt, It is better than a poke in the eye. But seeing that our stock still trades at 4.1x EBITDA, which is mind boggling low, we still have no reason to be happy.
The company still refuses to invest in its own cheap stock. As a side note, management also is not investing in its own stock. I am not sure how you could justify investing in the stock when it was at $20, but not when it is at $7. That is some twisted logic.
We are not asking you to leverage the company beyond any norms of conservatism, but spending $15-25m over the next year on stock valued at 4x EBITDA is a fairly conservative move and well within your cash flow. I would also remind you that any acquisition would be highly dilutive since you most certainly will be paying a far higher multiple than our own stock trades at. This must not occur and would highlight mgmts. tone deafness.
Finally, I still believe shareholders, management, employees and the company are better served with a PE owner. The amount of time and money wasted on public market compliance is far too great for this small company. $10.50 would be wonderful and PE firms would do it in a heart beat (you probably could get $12).
Do the Right Thing. Reward shareholders finally. Show confidence in your firm. The operations of this company justify this confidence.
Correct MAVH and keep in mind the losses in Q1 and Q2 become smaller on a PPS basis therefore increasing the overall EPS.
Also, JJ, you are assuming the people covering are Converts. I am sure some are, but I would argue most are not. The converts shorted back in July 2014 and have kept their shorts on and will keep it on until they ultimately convert. The people providing resistance the past few months were simply short sellers who were not also convert holders. So I do not believe you will see some major reshorting by the converts occur. We will only see the shorts massively return again unless a) they do an acquisition or b) they have a bad quarter.
This stock is still trading at a little over 4x EBITDA. Its still a joke. We have been starved for so long and small movement seems like a win. Keep in mind last October we were at $8.20 before all hell broke loose.
No its not a big drop. And he said he would load up if it did. If he didn't like the company, he wouldn't tell people to load up. Try scaring some others...
Hmm worry about short term phenomenon or focus on the fact that they can open 5000 more stores.
I think Ill focus on the latter....
SGT - What happened the last time mgmt. had access to a bundle of cash? Did they create long-term prosperity?
In case you forgot, they blew it on acquisitions and a stock buyback at $20/share.
Returning cash to shareholders is by far the best way to create long-term prosperity. It eliminates mgmt. from doing silly things and it is the best use of funds. Again, if they bought shares at $6, they could have grown their investment by 20%.
Dividends and buybacks aren't short term hits. IF they were all of the S&P 500 wouldn't be doing them regularly. It just so happens our mgmt. team has also proven to be irresponsible.
You are a forgiving person if you think your money is better left inside this company given the mismanagement. Look no further than the lawsuit they are currently settling.
I am not sure why this lawsuit grabbed this guys attention so much. Its ancient history. And if indeed they are putting procedures in place to force mgmt. to act more rationally or perhaps to save themselves from themselves, I guess that's better than nothing. But kind of sad that we need these steps to begin with.
Its a non-issue other than reminding us of the lack of talent in the C-Suite.
What other possible use of cash would generate a 20-50% return? What if they were buying shares when the stock was at $6 - that would be a 20% return now. That's money well spent.
You prove to the investment community that shares are undervalued by buying shares. If the stock trades at 3-4x EBITDA and you aren't buying, what kind of a message does that send? It tells me either mgmt. is stupid or lacks complete confidence in the prospects of the firm.
While I am glad there is a Bull in the crowd, the ignorance displayed by his logic regarding buyback destroys all his credibility. This is the same twisted logic Bennett has been following for years.
The author gives several bogus and naive reasons for no buyback:
1) Past history of needing cash - Listen, if we are doomed to no buyback or creative thinking on anything because of their wide history of bungles, then we are doomed. If mgmt actually thinks there is a likelihood they have a liquidity crisis based on their current financials or the forecast with no debt payments due for 3 years, then we have a real problem with mgmt. Cmon, Thats not a reason, thats an excuse. Are you suggesting the company with $60m of EBITDA and ample Working Cap would not be able to find financing if needed?
2) GE Line of $75m - The author correctly points out the line is based on the amount of working capital or AR in the business and may not always be $75m. However, when AR is high, the $75m line will be fully available. When AR is low, the Line may be 50% of that (say Q4), but Cash will be massive and there is no need for the Line. Be smart Mr. Author.
3) Finally, the author states most of the cash is in foreign subs and their will be tax implications to bringing it back. First, there will be no tax holiday on repatriating earnings. You cannot wait for changes in laws. Second, they have enough Tax Assets unrecorded to shield the entire amount of tax to bring the cash back. They can easily bring back $20m and suffer no tax consequences. Cmon man - be smart.
Again, no one is advocating a $50/100m buyback. Most buybacks are 0-5% of shares outstanding which would be $7m. So how about a $15m buyback. They have the cash and there is no risk. There is no better investment available to the mgmt team. And remember, they can announce a buyback now and carry out over a period of time when liquidity is greatest. There is nothing requiring them to go out and buy back all stock immediately
So what does your chart say to do after announcing blockbuster earnings?