I saw an article that said the debt was not callable for 2.5 years. Tried to post a link, but I think the post got deleted. Anyway, I figure 2.5 years will cost about $20 million in interest after tax, about $4.50 per share. If the board foresees 15% - 20% annual growth in earnings over the next 5 years excluding interest expense, maybe it makes sense to take the interest expense hit, then pay down the debt some and refinance later down the road. 15 - 20% growth could double earnings in 5 years. So, then maybe you are looking at $5 to $6 earnings less an interest expense that is hopefully materially reduced. In the meantime, you get a $26 dividend. There's is also the potential of a windfall if they get some big company to sell more of there hotdogs. Although it's more of a long shot, one could imagine some fast food giant like Burger King offering up their hotdogs. I'm speculating someone tried to buy them out at $100 - $120, and they think the company is worth $150 - $200. Just shooting from the hip like everyone else here though. What is frustrating to me is that they could have bought back half the company with cash on hand and much less debt last year with more dutch offerings, but they sat on their hands. Imagine share count cut in half and eps $5.50 now...A p/e of 30 would put the price today at $165.
Thanks. Over the years, I've owned several stocks that were bought out. It's nice to get a quick run-up in the share price, but I probably would have been better off long term if most of the companies were not bought out. I can understand if they foresee some significant earnings growth coming over the next few years as you speculated. I think I'm going to give them a few months to refinance this debt before I do anything. I can't imagine any other "legal" scenario that wouldn't hurt "Lorber and company" worse than the rest of us. When they were trying to get out of the old license agreement with SMG there was a lot of litigation, and they paid a significant price...it wasn't exactly clear at the time why they were doing this, but in hindsight it's apparent they knew there was a windfall to be made with a new agreement. Hopefully this is a similar situation. We should see some kind of news soon just to clarify the dividend details...hopefully we get a some more useful information.
You've literally echoed the thoughts in my head except for one thing. I can't figure the volume. I never really pay a whole lot of attention to volume on stocks in general, but it seems very thin here, especially given the news. Has the market really spoken on such low volume? Seems the market has been blind to nathans for a long time. Never been a single analyst covering.
Death and taxes will catch up with u eventually. I have no marriage to management, but I think u have to try not to go tripping over $100 bills picking up pennies when analyzing this. Management is not perfect, and has made mistakes, but they've also grown the company over 1000% in the last 10 years. I'd bet the dividend far exceeds what most here paid for the stock. I'd be surprised if we don't see a refi of the debt.
I understand your comment, and tax concern. I've been long some shares since the 90's...but it just doesn't jive that they are not looking out for shareholders. Based on Yahoo Howard Lorber owns close to a million shares, an gets paid 616k. Why would he care about saving his 616k annual job when he holds $80 million in stock. Seems it would be in his best interest to maximize shareholder value. My best guess is they got buyout interest or hint of it, and got defensive. To the best of my knowledge the dividend will be taxed like a long term capital gain.... However, if the gain is "too big", it could thrust u into a new tax bracket.
Also, interesting to note are the major holders. Board member Howard Lorber holds close to a million shares. I don' t think he would want to shoot himself in the foot. It seems Mario Gabelli 's funds also hold as many shares as they can .
I'm trying to put myself in the board's shoes. In all likelyhood next quarter eps would be about the same as the last. That would put eps at or above $2.70. A p/e of 40 is conservative based on most other takeovers I've seen of late. That would put the price at $108. Add $9 - $10 in cash per share sitting on the balance sheet, and you're pushing $120 per share. How are u going to negotiate this when the market price is so low/undervalued?
I thought the steel partners exchange was weird when I read about it too, but never really understood it fully, and I'm not sure if it's relevant, or just a coincidence in timing. Re, the poison pill, I'm not sure u can just amend a poison pill that quickly, can u? Just seems more realistic that there was a private equity firm knocking at the door, and as a result urgent action was taken to prevent a buyout at what the board considered an unfair/undervalued price. I think they will refinance the debt sooner than later.
Thinking about this a little more, and it could also be a defensive measure by the board. Maybe someone knocked on their door and offered $110 per share. If you back out the cash, and factor in next quarters expected eps, that would put the p/e in the mid 30's. The current poison pill price is $100. They may have issued the debt in a panic to prevent a takeover figuring they could easily refinance with a bank at a much lower rate later given a reasonable amount of time. After a big dividend the $100 poison pill will be more potent.
I tend to agree with you on the Bagl comparison. I actually owned bagl long before all the " hoopla". My guess is someone is after Nathan's. As we well know, this is not a modest growing fast food chain as the ultra corrupt Moody's and short shill seeking alpha articles have tried to paint it. 100% growth this year and the ~20% annual growth in the decade prior is not modest. This stopped being a fast food company long ago. This is a monstrous non cyclical consumer brand now, that dwarfs the brand stature of bagl, caribou and even Peets. It has been growing like a weed and there's still more room to grow. The stock has lagged the market horribly with absurdly low volume given the eps growth. I speculate someone will eventually come out of the wood work with enough cash to pay off all the debt and seize the company. With bagl the shareholders ended up doing all right, hopefully the same will happen here.
Remember your posts from those crazy days long long ago. Watching from the sidelines these days, but sometimes it seems I blinked and 20 years went buy, and this is up 360000%. Best of luck to you.
Nice design Yahoo, hiding anything older than 3 months old by default.
Well , if you want to focus on the one part of the business that has been stagnant for years and down play the 100% growth this is the article for you. Looks like the same guy who wrote articles for this same site who was completely unaware and ignored the new license agreement. Also, conveniently leaves out the $9 cash per share, and the effect that skyrocketing beef prices have had on earnings. Any stability or drop in beef prices could translate into significant additional growth. But if you feel like betting against a management that has grown the company exponentially over the last decade, more power to you.
Wow. First post of the year on the message board. I think it's safe to say nobody is aware of this stock/story...I wouldn't dig deeper for a reason. If you back out the cash, we're barely holding 30 times eps in a market where stocks with much less growth routinely sport p/e's close to 50. We've got a couple of more quarters in which the new agreement should spike earnings, and it also sounds like beef prices might finally stabilize or drop....maybe some more investors will take notice.
Seems stock buy backs have been very limited this year. Looks like they bought back less than 6000 shares last quarter, so I don't think this has had any affect on price this year.
During the twenty-six-week period ended September 28, 2014, we repurchased 37,661 shares of common stock at a cost of $1,916,000.
During the thirteen-week period ended June 29, 2014, we repurchased 31,860 shares of common stock at a cost of $1,559,000.
I think people are just plain unaware of the stock. Tons of cash, Huge growth in earnings, and a consumer product with a giant footprint, and there is not even one analyst covering the company, and only a few thousand shares trade per day. You could go nuts trying to figure out what is causing the price to move. If this were an IPO with a lot of press it would be selling for $150 per share.