A Form 13G was filed on 11/11 (we all missed this one!) by Meridian OHC Partners of New Canaan, CT.
Meridian reported holding a stake of 5.7% of CYAN's outstanding shares: 315,019 owned.
On my Bloomberg HDS page, they are listed as Blueline Holdings and the filing is showed as "no change in position." Blueline is a name in the filing.
Interesting. Do you remember where the article was? Link, praytell?
More typically, this type of target would be calaculated as a "CCCAGR" (Compound Annual Growth Rate) by a financial analyst using their HP-12C calculator, which has more computing power than the Apollo astronauts had onboard in space. In taht set of calculations, the dollar amount of revenue growth would increase each year in the projection.
Under your calculation methodology, which has no flaw, the result is a declining rate of percentage growth each year.
The real question are:
* How much operating leverage can they achieve on higher revenues (i.e. how "fixed" are SG&A and R&D costs in dollar amounts, and
*How much margin expansion from getting a better price through the proprietary branded product channel will they be able to achieve.
Apparently, Lake Street Capital Markets (I have never heard of them before),
has initiated on PLNR with a Buy and an $8.50 target price that is 15x their
pro forma e.p.s. estimate of 56 cents per share for FY16...yes, 16, not 15.
That may have been yesterday morning's "pop" at the opening.
The odds of finding material error in the 2013 books is much higher as a result of the errors found in the 14Q1 and 14Q2 books.
In fact, it is my understanding that the same errors made in 14Q1 extends back quite a bit further. However, in those periods the size of the error was significantly smaller, helping it to escape earlier detection.
And as I have noted elsewhere, the real issue is that the Cole Capital business will have difficulty originating new business until after this is all put to bed. The longer that doesn''t happen, the more significant the negative LT impact.
Don't you realize that
1) The company has said that this audit cannot be relied upon?
2) Most of the real estate was not on the balance sheet at 12/31/2013 since the Cole merger had not yet closed?
Those are remarkable omissions from your thought process.
I was not sure of the precise amount but I thought it was slightly into double digits.
In any event, it is likely to be that without that income (and precluding losses there),
the dividend at the current rate may be slightly larger than current rate AFFO.
I was unable to back into the company's claim of earnings 25 cents per share without legal expenses as claimed in the earnings report based on the information they gave.
It is also unclear how much of the sales from the quarter were of any unusual nature.
That being said, if the company's statement of the earnings power is on the mark, and the production capacity can support the revenue achieved in the recent quarter on a sustainable basis (let's exclude temporary weather impacts), then, given the resolution of the legal actions, the stock does now seem undervalued to me in the low 6s.
This ignores the elephant in the room.
The elephant is the capital-raising acitivities of Cole capital, the unit that was to be sold to RCAP.
This is essentially a "brokerage firm" where the sales people sell real estate investments to mom and pop investors. Typically, these are people who had an investment property, sold it, and invested in some sort of 1031 Exchange product that aggregated multiple investors into a single entity. Those entities are then aggregated into holdings in private REITS, with each step of the way being transacted as 1031 exchanges so that the mom & pops defer their income tax liabilities on their original properties.
However, as a result of this "scandal" (and I use quotes because I do believe at this point that it is making a mountain out of a molehill, as Ed Rendell said), the financial advisors who sell to the mom and pops are now refusing to sell any property related to ARCP or sold through Cole Capital. This means that this part of Cole Capital's income stream is likely to have been completely eliminated. CC still has revenue/income from the fees it earns as a property manager, but the cream has been skimmed off the top with sales of new products in the doghouse.
THAT is where the value destruction within ARCP has taken place, and it is the reason why RCAP cancelled its purchase of Cole and why ARCP is suing RCAP.
So, when someone tells you that "Oh, the dividend is safe" and the properties still have the same value, they are only half right. Yes, the properties still have the same value, but no, the dividend is not safe if the business at Cole Capital is permanently impaired by these events. IT REMAINS TO BE SEEN if the ability of Cole Capital to sell is permanently impaired. If the re-audit process demonstrates that there is no additional bad news, and it is resolved within a reasonable amount of time (before Jan 5) the more likely recovery of CC profit is.
The credit ratings were assigned in February when they issued bonds and the merger with Cole closed. There is no political correctness, just much higher leverage than the others. That is the definition of weaker credit.
The bank credit line may be unsecured, but it requires them to maintain $10 billion in "unencumbered" assets" for a credit line of less than $5 billion. That effectively makes it secured in all but name.
I have a very similar background to you and currently analyze REIT credit for a living, among other things.
This is NOT a stronger credit than NNN or O.
It is ESPECIALLY not a stronger credit after losing access to $1 billion of its credit line ($600mm
permanently, and $400 million until they file their financials).
Although you claim that it is a stronger credit, Moody's and S&P both disagree with you, and not by one notch, but y two full notches.
For that matter, bond spread levels disagree with you. And dividend yield differentials wildly disagree with you.
If you want to make a claim like that, you need to back it up with an actual rationale, not with the excuse that "oh, their dog ate their homework wile they were doing the books." For example, try looking at the ratio of Total Debt to Operating Income at each company: ARCP about 14x LTM; NNN about 7.5x, OO about 10.5x.
Is it a temporary difficult period of transition? Certainly. Will ARCP emerge as a stronger credit than either NNN or O. Certainly not.
Even so, I am long ARCP, but I am not deluding myself in the process.
Good catch, Rllayton.
The wording of the dividend declaration press release is distinctly different from the previous one and from those made in earlier months (I just looked at the June one).
The "annualized $1.00 rate" language is gone.
Nicholas Schorsch, I think it is fair to guess, is NOT participating in virtually any Board activities at ARCP at the present time, since all of the activities of the board (except maybe approval of transactions) involve.....Nicholas Schorsch.
it looks likely to be the day before Thanksgiving. or, perhaps they will want to take advantage of nobody being in the office and do it on Friday. yeah, that sounds more likely.
"Seeking Al;hoa" is a joke, but you haang out on Yahoo! message boards.
Look, this is in theory a real HF outfit with a real short thesis: channel stuffing.
They are not necessarily right, but their opinion is valuable to know, even if you are long the stock.