31 March 2009

TDW: Look Ahead to March 2009 Quarterly Results

The GCFR Overall Gauge of Tidewater Inc. (NYSE: TDW) increased from 34 to 56 points of the 100 possible points in the December 2008 quarter, which was the third of company's fiscal 2009.  Our analysis report explained in some detail how this score was attained.  (Recent tweaks to our gauges bumped up Tidewater's current score by two points to 58.)


We have now modeled Tidewater's Income Statement for the March 2009 quarter.  The intent of this exercise was to produce a baseline for identifying any deviations, positive or negative, in the actual data that the company will announce in early May.  GCFR estimates are derived from trends in the historical financial results and guidance provided by company management.


First, we present some background information.

Tidewater Inc. owns 431 vessels, the world’s largest fleet of vessels serving the global offshore energy industry.   Headquartered in New Orleans, the company has spread far beyond its Gulf of Mexico origin.  Revenues generated from international operations in fiscal 2009 to date were 87 percent of total Revenues. 

Global economic weakness has reduced demand for crude oil and natural gas.  Lower energy prices will lead to less production in expensive offshore areas, and this will diminish the need for maritime support services.   A greater number of idle vessels, and reduced lease rates for those that remain active, would presumably lower the market value of Tidewater's fleet.   However, if the effects are localized, Tidewater can move its vessels from slower to busier regions.

Tidewater is substantially expanding and modernizing its fleet with annual investments between $300 million and $500 million.  As of 31 December 2008,  Tidewater is obligated to purchase 56 new vessels at a total cost of about $1.1 billion.  Delivery of these vessels will take place between now and July 2012.  In the current economic environment, this is somewhat risky.   David Phillips (a/k/a the 10-Q Detective, which we highly recommend) has asked whether Tidewater would be able to find alternative funding sources to meet its capital commitments if Cash Flow from Operations falls short of the company's expectations.

Despite large capital expenditures, Tidewater management was optimistic enough back in May 2008 about cash flows to raise the dividend by 67 percent.  In addition, the company's board authorized $200 million of share repurchases.  However, the most recent 10-Q reports that none of $200 million has, as yet, been spent.  Tidewater is holding onto cash "[d]ue to the distress in the capital and liquidity markets" and to "maximize available liquidity for all investment opportunities."



There were two main reasons Tidewater's results in the December 2008 quarter caused the Overall Gauge score to jump.  The first reason was that the Growth Gauge responded positively to improvements in Revenue, Cash Flow, and Net Income.  Revenue in the quarter was 15.3 percent greater than in the year-earlier period.  Cash Flow from Operations was up 29 percent, and Net Income was 31 percent higher.

The second reason was that the Value Gauge heartily approved of the combination of good operating performance and a 27 percent drop in the price of Tidewater's shares during the quarter, from $55.36 to $40.27.  The Value Gauge came within one point of a perfect 25-point score.

Tidewater provides neither Revenue, nor Income, guidance.  However, cost expectations for the March quarter were discussed during the 28 January 2009 conference call with financial analysts.  The transcript from this call is, thankfully, available at SeekingAlpha.com.

Chairman and CEO Dean Taylor remarked that the company has observed "some of our customers change their attitudes towards spending."  Given that lower energy prices results in reduced cash flows for Tidewater's customers, many have become "conservative in their spending decisions."  Mr. Taylor noted that "there have been instances" when customers asked that lease rates on existing contracts be reviewed.


Revenue depends on the number and types of vessels Tidewater owns, the utilization of these vessels, and the amount Tidewater can charge (typically expressed in dollars per day) for leasing them.  The utilization rate can be negatively affected by maintenance, moving vessels between operating locations, and new vessels entering the fleet.

Our working estimate for Revenue in the March 2009 quarter is $357 million.  The estimate is especially uncertain given the weak economy and lower energy prices.  The targeted figure is 7.8 percent greater than Revenue in the March 2008 quarter, and the year-over-year Revenue growth rate would be about 10.7 percent.


Management's guidance for Vessel Operating Costs is $165 million.  We assume that the Cost of Other Marine Revenues will be about $10 million; the combination of these figures results in a forecast for Cost of Goods Sold of $175 million.  The CGS estimate is 49 percent of our $343 million Revenue estimate, equating to a Gross Margin, as we define it, of 51 percent.

Depreciation has been $30 million to $32 million per quarter for the last couple of years.  Given the number of new vessels entering the fleet, we will assume a $34 million Depreciation expense (9.5 percent of Revenue) for the March quarter. 

We will assume another $34 million for SG&A expenses.  This figure is consistent with company guidance and past results.

If our estimates hold true, Tidewater will attain an Operating Income, as we define it, of $114 million.  This would be a 17.5 percent increase over Operating Income in the year-earlier quarter.

Tidewater management didn't estimate gains on asset sales, so we will use the recent average of about $5 million.  Similarly, we assume Net Interest income will be $6 million.  These figures would lift pre-tax income to $125 million.

If the effective income tax rate is 17.5 percent, which is consistent with management's guidance for the year, Net Income will be $103 million (about $2.02 per share).  This is 21 percent above the amount earned in the March 2008 quarter.

Please note that the tabular format below, which we use for all analyses, can and often does differ in material respects from company-used formats.  A common difference is the classification of income and expenses as Operating and Non-Operating.  The standardization is simply for convenience and to facilitate cross-company comparisons.


http://sheet.zoho.com/public/ncarvin/tdw-income-statement-2009q1?mode=html


29 March 2009

COP: Look Ahead to March 2009 Quarterly Results

The GCFR Overall Gauge of ConocoPhillips (NYSE: COP) fell from 52 of the 100 possible points to 44 in the fourth quarter of 2008.  Our original and updated analysis reports explained how this score was attained in some detail.  (Recent tweaks to our gauges bumped up the current score and the previous result at ConocoPhillips by two points each.  The Overall gauge now reads 46 points.)


We've now modeled ConocoPhillips's Income Statement for the March 2009 quarter.  The intent of this exercise was to produce a baseline for identifying any deviations, positive or negative, in the actual data that the company will announce on, or about, 23 April 2009.  GCFR estimates are derived from trends in the historical financial results and guidance provided by company management.


First, we present some background information.

Conoco, Inc., and Phillips Petroleum combined in August 2002 to form ConocoPhillipsBurlington Resources, with its extensive natural gas operations, was added to the mix in March 2006.  The combination produced a behemoth that is number five, when sorted by annual Revenues, on the Fortune 500 list of the largest U.S. corporations.  When stacked up against other global oil and gas major companies, ConocoPhillips has the seventh-most Market Capitalization.

The weak economy worldwide in late 2008 reduced demand for oil and gas, which caused prices for energy products to fall dramatically.  At ConocoPhillips, Revenue in the fourth quarter of 2008 was 15.5 percent less than in the fourth quarter of 2007.  Lower prices also meant that Conoco's assets weren't worth as much as they once were.  The company decided to reduce the carrying value of its intangible assets and investments by $35 billion, which was about 19 percent of the company's Total AssetsAsset impairment charges led to a Net Loss of $31.8 billion (minus $21.37 per share) in the fourth quarter. 

ConocoPhillips shares fell 29 percent, from $73.25 to $51.80, during the last three months of 2008.  The decline has continued in 2009, and the share price is now close to $40.
 
ConocoPhillips owns 20 percent of LUKOIL (OTC: LUKOY), which is responsible for more than 18 percent of Russia's oil production.  LUKOIL's shrinking market value was responsible for $7.4 billion of the fourth quarter's impairment charges.  Note that the LUKOIL charge is significantly greater than the one Conoco recorded in 2007, when troubles with the Venezuelan government resulted in a $4.5 billion charge for expropriated assets.

Berkshire Hathaway, Inc. (NYSE: BRK.A), run by super-investor Warren Buffett, and its affiliates owned about 79 million shares of ConocoPhillips on 31 December 2008, up from 17.5 million shares on 31 March 2008.  Buffett recently characterized the purchase of these shares, when energy prices were soaring, as his biggest mistake in 2008.

In October 2008, Conoco and Australia's Origin Energy, Ltd., (ASX:ORG) formed a 50/50 joint venture named Australia Pacific LNG.  The new company "will focus on coalbed methane production from the Bowen and Surat basins in Queensland, Australia, and LNG processing and export sales."



At its annual meeting with financial analysts on 11 March 2009, Chairman and CEO Jim Mulva described the company's plans and objectives for 2009.  ConocoPhillips will make capital investments totaling $12.5 billion in 2009.  Capital spending was a heftier $19.1 billion in 2008; however, $4.7 billion was dedicated specifically to the Origin Energy deal.


The fourth quarter earnings announcement included the following limited guidance for the first quarter of 2009.

“We have created a self-sustaining, competitive international integrated energy company, and our long-term strategy remains unchanged.  Through organic growth and prior business transactions, we have the resources and opportunities for long-term growth.  Our existing portfolio of high-quality assets enables us to replace reserves, maintain current production levels, and responsibly deliver energy to consumers in a low price environment.  In light of the current business environment, we are reducing our cost structure and constraining capital to live within our means.
“We anticipate the company’s first-quarter [Exploration and Production] segment production will be near fourth-quarter 2008 production, and we expect exploration expenses to be around $400 million for the quarter.  Downstream, we anticipate the worldwide refining crude oil capacity utilization rate in the first quarter to be in the low-80-percent range due to planned turnaround activity in the United States and continued economic run reductions at the Wilhelmshaven refinery.  Turnaround costs are expected to be approximately $225 million before-tax for the quarter."
[Emphasis added.]



Conoco's Revenue depends on factors such as, but not limited to, how much oil and gas the company produces, the prices at which it this output is sold, how much crude oil is processed by its refineries, and the price difference between crude and refined oil products.  The Refining and Marketing segment provided 68 percent of the company's total Revenue in 2008, and the Exploration and Production segment was responsible for 29 percent.

As we've seen, geopolitical and natural forces can have a significant effect on productivity and prices. 

The average daily price of a barrel of Light Sweet Crude oil was 25 to 30 percent lower in the first three months of 2009 than in the last three months of 2008.  If production was constant, as implied by the company's guidance, Revenue at the Exploration and Production segment could be down 25 to 30 percent from the fourth quarter of 2009.

Revenue at the Refining and Marketing Segment will also be negatively affected by the lower energy prices, but other factors must also be considered.  Refining margins rebounded strongly in the U.S. in early 2009, but were down elsewhere.  BP's Global Indicator Margin, which represents an average of a sort, was up 24 percent at last check from the fourth quarter of 2008.  ConocoPhillips won't, however, realize the full benefits of the higher margin because its capacity utilization rate is expected to be down from about 93 percent to the "low-80-percent range."

Considering lower prices, a higher margin, and lower capacity utilization, we estimate that Revenue at the Refining and Marketing segment will be down 20 percent from the fourth quarter of 2008.

If Refining and Marketing revenue was down 20 percent, Exploration and Production revenue was down 27.5 percent, and revenue from all other segments was flat, then total Revenue would be down 24.6 percent in the first quarter of 2009 relative to the fourth quarter of 2008.  Since Revenue in the December 2008 quarter was $44.5 billion, our Revenue estimate for the first quarter of 2009 is (1 - 0.246) * $44.5 billion = $33.6 billion.


ConocoPhillips' Gross Margin in 2008 was 25.1 percent.  While the trend was somewhat downward, we expect the margin will be hold the 25 percent level in the first quarter.  In other words, we're estimating that the Cost of Goods Sold [i.e., purchased crude oil, natural gas and products + Production and operating expenses] will be (1 - 0.25) * $33.6 billion or $25.2 billion.

We'll also assume, based on historic data, a Depreciation expense of 6.5 percent of Revenue, or $2.2 billion.  Similarly, we'll estimate SG&A expenses (mostly non-income taxes) at 12 percent of Revenue, or $4.0 billion.  We will then add $400 million for Exploration expense per company guidance and $100 million for non-recurring operating charges.

These figures would result in an Operating Income of $1.7 billion, down 72.5 percent from the March 2008 quarter when energy prices were sky high.

We then need to consider non-operating income and expenses, such as equity in the earnings of affiliates and interest.  Considering past results, we will set our expectation for net non-operating income at $720 million.  This pushes our estimate of pre-tax income to $2.4 billion.

ConocoPhillips' effective income tax rate is quite variable from quarter to quarter.  A rate of 44.0 percent would lead to provision for income taxes of $1.1 billion.  This should be close if there aren't too many special tax matters in the quarter.

After subtracting $20 million for Minority Interests, our estimate for Net Income becomes $1.3 billion ($0.88 per share).

Please note that the table format below, which we use for all analyses, can and often does differ in material respects from company-used formats.  A common difference is the classification of income and expenses as Operating and Non-Operating.  The standardization is simply for convenience and to facilitate cross-company comparisons.


http://sheet.zoho.com/public/ncarvin/cop-income-statement-2009q1?mode=html


28 March 2009

PEP: Look Ahead to March 2009 Quarterly Results

The GCFR Overall Gauge of PepsiCo (NYSE: PEP) rose from 31 to 47, of the 100 possible points, in the super-sized fourth-quarter of 2008, which consisted of the 16 weeks that ended on 27 December 2008.  Our original and updated analysis reports explained this result in some detail.

The recent tweaks to our gauges bumped up the Overall score by three points to 52.

PepsiCo's fourth-quarter results were adversely affected by the implementation of cost-cutting initiatives and by the stronger U.S. dollar.  Differences in currency exchange rates reduced Revenue growth by 5.5 percent.   A more enduring concern, however, might be the flat performance of PepsiCo's Food and (especially) Beverage operations in the Americas.  These businesses are supposedly more immune than most to economic swings.

Why did our Overall assessment of PepsiCo improve?  The main reason is that the contrarian Value gauge jumped in response to PepsiCo's share price falling from $71.27 to $54.77 during the last three months of 2008.  The lower price made the valuation metrics we track significantly more appealing.  The second explanation is that the Profitability gauge was impelled upward by a higher ROIC, greater Free Cash Flow to Invested Capital, and a lower Accrual Ratio.  The latter metric suggested better quality of earnings.



To look ahead, we've modeled PepsiCo's Income Statement for the 12 weeks that ended on 21 March 2009.  The intent of this exercise was to produce a baseline for identifying any deviations, positive or negative, in the actual data that the company will announce on, or about, 23 April 2009.  GCFR estimates are derived from trends in the historical financial results and guidance provided by company management.


First, we present some background information.

PepsiCo, Inc., is a leading global purveyor of beverages and snacks.  The company is well regarded for good management, steady growth, significant international exposure, and the defensive characteristics of the food industry.  While famously locked in a battle with Coca-Cola (NYSE: KO) for the soft-drink market, PepsiCo's snack food business diversifies the company.  The Frito-Lay North America division takes in more Revenue, and it contributes more to Operating Profit, than the PepsiCo Americas Beverages unit.

The company is reducing its workforce and number of plants.  This plan, under the banner "Productivity for Growth," led to pretax charges in the fourth quarter of 2008 totaling $543 million.  Additional related charges of $32 to $57 million are expected in fiscal 2009.

The fourth quarter of 2008 was the first to include financial results for the recently acquired potato-chip maker Marbo in Serbia and the juice-maker Lebedyansky in Russia.  The latter was a joint acquisition with Pepsi Bottling Group, Inc. (NYSE: PBG).


For 2009, PepsiCo shuffled some international businesses from one reporting segment to another.  The company also changed how it reports "bottler case sale" volume in North America.  Neither change affect GCFR analyses.



PepsiCo's press release announcing fourth-quarter 2008 results included the following guidance for 2009:

2009 Guidance

PepsiCo is confident in the underlying strength of its business and in its ability to generate solid top- and bottom-line performance in 2009 on a constant currency basis. However, with all of the uncertainties in the current macroeconomic environment, the company believes that it is prudent to offer a much wider range in our guidance than it has in the past. PepsiCo is therefore providing full-year 2009 guidance for both net revenue and core EPS of mid- to high-single-digit growth on a constant currency basis. The company anticipates foreign exchange, at current spot rates, would adversely impact constant-currency core EPS by approximately 8 percentage points.
 
In 2009, given current market conditions, the company does not anticipate selling shares of its anchor bottlers, The Pepsi Bottling Group (PBG) or Pepsi Americas, Inc. (PAS). PBG and PAS share sales collectively added $0.06 to PepsiCo’s full year 2008 core EPS, and the assumption that shares will not be sold in 2009 has been factored into 2009 guidance.
 
The company expects the first half of 2009 — and the first quarter in particular — will present the most difficult year-over-year comparisons, in part reflecting commodity costs and foreign exchange rates.
 
PepsiCo will make a discretionary $1 billion contribution to its pension fund ($640 million after-tax cash impact). Excluding this item, cash from operating activities is expected to be about the same as 2008. The company expects a high-single-digit decrease in net capital spending.
 
In addition, the company intends, subject to market conditions, to spend up to $2.5 billion repurchasing its shares in 2009. The company expects its full-year reported and core tax rates to be about the same as the core tax rate in 2008.

[emphasis added in text]



To establish a Revenue target for the first quarter of 2009, we start with the company's guidance for a Revenue percentage growth rate for the year, on a constant currency basis, in the mid- to high-single digits.  This is suggestive of a range between, say, 5 and 9 percent.  The statement that the first quarter will be particularly challenging lowers our sights towards the bottom half of the range, although commodity costs will degrade Earnings more than Revenue.

The effect of foreign exchange on Revenue is a major concern because PepsiCo's operations outside of the U.S. generated 48 percent of Revenue in 2008.  PepsiCo, of course, operates in many different currencies.  The company also takes certain steps to reduce its exposure to exchange rate changes.

We can't possibly model this complexity, so we will make the crude assumption that the Euro can stand as a proxy for the various currencies handled by the non-U.S. half of PepsiCo.  The Euro's 14 percent decline (OANDA was especially helpful in determining this figure) from the first quarter of 2008 to the first quarter of 2009 would, in this construct, cut PepsiCo's Revenue by about 7 percent.

Given the expectation for constant-currency Revenue growth of 5 to 7 percent (i.e., the bottom half of the range above), PepsiCo's overall Revenue growth could be flat to minus 2 percent.  We'll pick minus 1 percent as our target.

In the first fiscal quarter of 2008, PepsiCo's Revenue was $8.33 billion.  Our estimate for the first 12 weeks of 2009 is, therefore, 0.99 * $8.33 billion = $8.25 billion.

PepsiCo's Gross Margin has averaged 52.9 percent in 2008, down 1.35 percent from 2007.  We estimate it will be 52.5 percent in the first quarter of 2009.  In other words, we're projecting the Cost of Goods Sold to be (1 - 0.525) * $8.25 billion = $3.9 billion. 

In the first fiscal quarter of the last five years, SG&A expenses averaged 36.4 percent of Revenue.  Therefore, our assumption for these costs is 0.364 * $8.25 billion = $3.0 billion.

We'll assume a $15 million charge for amortization of intangible assets.  This estimate is based on quarterly charges in the last couple of years.

These assumptions would lead to Operating Income, as we define it, of $1.3 billion.  This would be a 15.5 percent below the equivalent figure in the year-earlier quarter.  Note that this estimate for Operating Income does not include Productivity for Growth, nor mark-to-market commodity hedge costs.

Bottler equity income will probably be down given that the company indicated that it would not be selling shares in its bottling operations.  We will set $50 million target.

A $75 million charge for net Interest Expense seems reasonable given recent history.  This would result in pre-tax income of $1.3 billion.

We're using 27 percent for the fourth-quarter income tax rate, which is consistent with the company's full-year guidance.  This rate would result in a tax provision of $350 million.  The rate can be volatile from quarter to quarter.

Rolling up these figures, we're looking for Net Income of $940 billion ($0.60/share).  The absolute and per-share figures are -18 and -14 percent, respectively, less than in the March 2008 quarter.


Please note that the table format below, which we use for all analyses, can and often does differ in material respects from company-used formats.  A common difference is the classification of income and expenses as Operating and Non-Operating.  The standardization is simply for convenience and to facilitate cross-company comparisons.


http://sheet.zoho.com/public/ncarvin/pep-income-statement-2009q1?mode=html

22 March 2009

NOK: Look Ahead to March 2009 Quarterly Results

The GCFR Overall gauge of Nokia dropped from 49 to 38, of 100 possible points, in the fourth quarter of 2008.  The evaluation was explained fully in this analysis report.  

The recent tweaks to our gauges bumped up the Overall score by four points to 42, but this change didn't alter the decline from the previous quarter.


The market for cellular/mobile telephones contracted more than Nokia had first anticipated in the last three months of 2008.  The company's Revenue dropped 19 percent from the equivalent period in 2007.  Operating Income fell by 80 percent, and Net Income was down 69 percent.  A "favorable high tech qualification assessment in China" and certain other tax benefits resulted in a substantial (€200 million?) income tax credit and prevented fourth-quarter earnings from being even worse.  (We're curious as to why the Chinese matter affecting taxes is mentioned in Nokia's fourth quarter report, but not in the 20-F annual report.)

The Cash Management and Growth gauges were especially weak after the fourth quarter, with Growth sinking to zero of the 25 possible points.  The contrarian Value gauge, which tends to move in the opposite direction of the share price, remained respectable at 16 points. 

The price of Nokia ADRs fell 59 percent in 2008.

To look ahead, we've modeled Nokia's Income Statement for the first quarter of 2009.  The intent of this exercise was to produce a baseline for identifying any deviations, positive or negative, in the actual data that Nokia will announce on 16 April 2009.  GCFR estimates are derived from trends in the historical financial results and guidance provided by company management.


First, we present some background information.

Headquartered in Espoo, Finland, Nokia sells mobile phones and network infrastructure.  Nokia shipped 468 million mobile devices in 2008, which was, according to company estimates, approximately 39 percent of the global market.  Nokia claims to have been the worldwide market share leader since 1998.  However, Nokia's share of the North American market is more limited, according to Fortune Magazine

Nokia's rivals include Samsung (SEO: 005930), Motorola (NYSE: MOT), LG Electronics (SEO: 066570) and Sony Ericsson.  At the high end, Nokia also faces competition from Apple's (NASDAQ: AAPL) iPhone and Research in Motion's (NASDAQ: RIMM) Blackberry.  Nokia responded to Apple by establishing its own online music service.

Nokia's portfolio of hand-held devices ranges from modest phones with tight profit margins to units that are stylish, feature-laden, and expensive.  The market for these devices, which until recently had been growing at a rapid pace, is highly competitive, and product development cycles are short.  This environment can produce sudden changes in the relative fortunes of the various manufacturers (cf., Motorola).

In February 2009, Nokia decided to use chips made by Qualcomm (NASDAQ: QCOM) in its 3G phones.  The two companies resolved a long-running patent dispute last summer that resulted in Nokia paying Qualcomm €1.7 billion.

To better compete in the network infrastructure market, Nokia and Siemens (NYSE: SI) formed a 50/50 partnership in April 2007.  The new company was named, with little imagination, NokiaSiemens Networks.  NSN had sales of €15.3 billion in 2008 (about 30 percent of Nokia's total annual revenue), and NSN's results are fully consolidated into Nokia's financial statements.  This presents a comparability challenge because Nokia's financial statements before April 2007 don't include the businesses the German powerhouse contributed to the partnership.


Nokia said in January it would cut costs because of the weak economy.  Details emerged in February when "voluntary measures aimed at reducing personnel-related costs" were announced.  Just one month later, Nokia reported that it would scale back its staff by approximately 1700 people "to match the pruned portfolio and global consumer demand; address the marketing and other activities that will no longer be integral following the Symbian acquisition; streamline the Devices R&D organization; and increase efficiency in certain global support functions."
Further cost-cutting actions might be necessary at Nokia because the mobile phone market has become much more mature.

Nokia, when it reported results for the fourth quarter of 2008, also described its first-quarter 2009 outlook for the industry, in general, and for the company, in particular.  The outlook did not include specific Revenue or Earnings guidance, but the information nevertheless helps us understand management's expectations for the operating environment and how well the company's different businesses will perform in it.

Although Nokia sells services and non-mobile devices, we use data characterizing the mobile phone market to estimate the company's overall Revenue. 

The company indicated that it expects the total number of mobile phones sold worldwide to decline by 10 percent in 2009, with the decline steeper in the earlier part of the year.  Nokia is evidently anticipating that business conditions will stabilize in mid-year.  This forecast might prove optimistic, but only time will tell.  If the number of units sold in the first quarter of 2009 falls by, say, 12 percent, and the average price per unit declines by 14 percent, which was the case in the fourth quarter of 2008, Nokia's first quarter Revenue will be 0.88 * 0.86 = 76 percent of the €12.7 billion in Revenue during the March 2008 quarter.

This results in a rough €9.6 billion estimate for Revenue in the first quarter.  The calculation doesn't include the effects of currency exchange rate fluctuations, which might be substantial.

Nokia's Gross Margin was 34.3 percent in 2008, but it was only 32 percent in the fourth quarter.  We expect it to fall further, maybe as low as 30 percent, in the first quarter because Revenue will be much less.  Therefore, our estimate for Costs of Goods Sold in the quarter is (1 - 0.3) * €9.6 billion = €6.7 billion.

Research and Development and Sales, General and Administrative expenses are normally between 10 to 12 percent of Revenue.  Nokia has indicated its intent to cut costs, but we doubt the cost reduction will match the decline in Revenue.  For the first quarter of 2009, we will assume that each expense will be 10 percent less than in the March 2008 quarter.  If true, these expenses would each be about 12.8 percent of estimated Revenue.  

It's hard to even guess at what other operating items (e.g., restructuring charges, workforce reduction expenses, asset impairment) Nokia might report in the first quarter.  We will simply use 2008's average special charge per quarter, which was almost €200 million.

With these figures, our estimate for Operating Income is €247 million.  This value is 84 percent less than Operating Income in the first quarter of 2008.

Miscellaneous non-operating items (e.g., interest) were historically, in the aggregate, a minor source of income.  In late 2008, this category became a small net expense.  For the first quarter, we will assume the figures balance out.  If we assume an effective 26 percent tax rate, and €25 million for Minority Interests (the 2008 average), our prediction for Net Income is €207 million (€0.06/share).  This estimate is down 83 percent from the year-earlier quarter.


Please note that the table format below, which we use for all analyses, can and often does differ in material respects from company-used formats.  A common difference is the classification of income and expenses as Operating and Non-Operating.  The standardization is simply for convenience and to facilitate cross-company comparisons.


http://sheet.zoho.com/public/ncarvin/nok-income-statement-2009q1?mode=html




21 March 2009

MSFT: Look Ahead to March 2009 Quarterly Results

The GCFR Overall gauge of Microsoft (NASDAQ: MSFT) increased to 68 of the 100 possible points -- up a healthy 9 points -- in the December 2008 quarter.  The full evaluation that led to this score was explained fully in this analysis report.

The recent change to our analytical methods bumped up the Overall score to 71 points.


In the December quarter, Revenue disappointed as a substantial deceleration of personal computer sales growth, coupled with a greater proportion of low-cost netbook PCs, led to decreased sales of Microsoft Windows.   This period also included a $400 million loss on derivatives and a $350 million loss on "foreign currency remeasurements."  These factors contributed to Net Income in the quarter falling 11.3 percent less than last year's value.

These results explain the significant drop in the Growth gauge.  However, a plunge in Microsoft's share price produced a sharp rise in the Value gauge, which more than compensated for the weaker operating performance.  The soaring Value gauge, therefore, explains the increase in the Overall score.

To look ahead, we have modeled Microsoft's Income Statement for the March 2009 quarter, which is the third quarter of the fiscal year.  The intent of this exercise was to produce a baseline for identifying any deviations, positive or negative, in the actual data that Microsoft will announce on, or about, 23 April 2009.  GCFR estimates are derived from trends in the historical financial results and guidance provided by company management. 



Microsoft Corp., best known for operating system and application software, also sells video game consoles, music players, and computer peripherals.  In recent years, Microsoft has increased its role in the online advertising business, in direct competition with Google Inc. (NASDAQ: GOOG)

In early 2008, Microsoft offered $40+ billion to acquire Yahoo! Inc. (NASDAQ: YHOO).  The bid was withdrawn in May when Yahoo's management resisted.  There have been, ever since, numerous reports that Microsoft remains interested in acquiring Yahoo's search business or partnering with it.  Just days ago Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer made comments confirming his interest in Yahoo.

In September, Microsoft joined the elite ranks of non-financial entities with AAA bond ratings, which is the highest S&P grade.  After Microsoft's board authorized as much as $6 billion worth of debt, the company established a program allowing issuance of $2 billion of short-term commercial paper.  Microsoft also opened a $2 billion revolving credit facility.

Microsoft also authorized its second $40 billion share repurchase program in September 2008, and the company increased its quarterly dividend by 18 percent.



In the press release reporting the results from the December period, Microsoft discontinued its previous practice of providing quantitative guidance for Revenue and Earnings Per Share in future quarters of the fiscal year.  The company attributed this decision to "the volatility of market conditions going forward."  Management did indicate that operating expenses in the fiscal year ending 30 June 2009 will be approximately $27.5 billion.

Microsoft's Revenue in the March 2009 quarter will be adversely affected by the weak global economy.  Gartner warned that 11.9 percent fewer personal computers will be sold in 2009 than 2008, with mini "netbooks " that aren't especially lucrative for Microsoft the only bright spot.   Tech Trader Daily reported that Morgan Stanley analyst Adam Holt forecast that PC units will decline by 11 percent in 2009 and that the average price of Windows sold to manufacturers will fall 15 percent.

It is important to remember that Microsoft's diverse businesses give it some protection for the drop off in computer sales.

Yahoo Finance indicates that 25 analysts expect Microsoft's Revenue in the March quarter to vary between $13.66 billion and $14.56 billion.  The lower figure is 5.5 percent below Revenue in the March 2008 quarter.  The higher figure would be an increase of 0.7 percent.

Given this sketchy information, we are, with much uncertainty, setting a $13.85 billion target for Microsoft's Revenue in the March 2009 quarter.  This figure is 4.2 percent below Revenue in the year-earlier quarters.

Microsoft typically achieves a Gross Margin of 80 percent, give or take a few percentage points.  We expect the margin to be towards the lower end of the range, if not below it, given the weaker sales environment and the lower profitability of software for inexpensive computers.  Our specific target is for a Gross Margin of 76 percent.  (Microsoft's Gross Margin has exceeded 76 percent in 85 of the last 98 quarters, as best we can determine.)  This ratio translates into a Cost of Goods Sold of (1 - 0.76) * $13.85 billion, or $3.3 billion. 

The company's guidance for Operating Expenses in fiscal 2009 of $27.5 billion covers R&D expenses and SG&A expenses.  (Microsoft breaks the latter category into Sales & Marketing and General & Administrative.)  Given the actual figures for these expenses in the first half, we estimate that the values for the March quarter will be about $2.4 billion for R&D and $4.8 billion forSG&A.

The estimates above would result in Operating Income of $3.38 billion for the current quarter.  This figure is 23.4 percent below Operating Income in the March 2008 quarter.

We assume Investment and interest income will be about $300 million.  This would lead to Pre-Tax Income just below $3.7 billion.

We'll also assume an income tax rate of 26 percent, which leads to a Net Income value of $2.72 billion ($0.31/share).  This is 38 percent below Net income in the year-earlier quarter.

Our Net Income prediction is quite a bit below the consensus estimate reported on Yahoo Finance.  This is probably because of Revenue and Gross Margin estimates were conservative.

Please note that the tabular format below, which we use for all analyses, can and often does differ in material respects from company-used formats.  A common difference is the classification of income and expenses as Operating and Non-Operating.  The standardization is simply for convenience and to facilitate cross-company comparisons.

http://sheet.zoho.com/public/ncarvin/template-income-statement-2009q1-1?mode=html


19 March 2009

PRGN: Financial Analysis through December 2008

Paragon Shipping (NASDAQ: PRGN) has announced its results for the fourth quarter of 2008 and for the full year.  

This post provides an abbreviated GCFR analysis of the financial statements.  Paragon, which was established in 2006, is too new to determine credible gauge scores, but we have calculated many of the financial metrics that drive our gauges.


Paragon Shipping, Inc., is a dry bulk cargo transporter officially registered in the Marshall Islands but with headquarters in Voula, Greece.  The company owns a fleet of 12 carriers of three different types for shipping dry goods in bulk.  The twelfth vessel, the Friendly Seas, was purchased on 5 August 2008 for $79.25 million.

Michael Bodouroglou, Paragon's CEO, is also the sole shareholder of Allseas Marine S.A., which manages Paragon's fleet.

The company went public in August 2007 when it sold almost 11 million Class A common shares in an IPO.  At $16 per share, less expenses of $1.04 per share, Paragon brought in $164.5 million.  These funds, along with $318 million in debt assumed in 2007, have been used to expand the company's fleet.

Paragon shares are now trading at a price below $4.00.  The plunge in value reflects the collapse, which began in June 2008, of the Baltic Dry Index of shipping rates.  Since Paragon had long-term contracts with the customers that had chartered its vessels, Paragon's Revenue has not followed the industry-wide falloff in rates.  However, when contracts expire, it appears now that Paragon will have to slash its charter rates to keep its vessels active. 

The downturn in global trade not only cuts shipping activity and shipping rates, it also reduces the value of the vessels themselves.  Shippers with sufficient financial resources (and a willingness to take a risk) can expand their fleets for low prices, relative to recent trends.

Before we examine the financial metrics associated with GCFR gauges, we will review the latest quarterly Income Statement.  Paragon's financial statements are prepared in accordance with U.S. GAAP.  The currency is U.S. Dollars. 

We didn't make any projections for the quarter.

Please note that the tabular format below, which we use for all analyses, can and often does differ in material respects from company-used formats. A common difference is the classification of income and expenses as Operating and Non-Operating. The standardization is simply for convenience and to facilitate cross-company comparisons.

http://sheet.zoho.com/public/ncarvin/prgn-income-statement?mode=html






Revenue in the fourth quarter was 2.1 percent more than in the third quarter, and it was 45.2 percent more than in fourth quarter of 2007.  Revenue in all of 2008 exceeded than Revenue in 2007 by 120 percent.  The average number of vessels in the Paragon's fleet rose from 7.2 in 2007 to 11.4 in 2008.
 
The Cost of Goods Sold -- i.e., Voyage expenses + Vessel operating expenses + Dry-docking expenses -- was 13.5 percent of Revenue in the latest quarter, which translates into a Gross Margin of 86.5 percent.  In the year-earlier quarter, the margin was 82.0 percent. 

Voyage expenses changed from a $225,000 expense in the fourth quarter of 2007 to a $13,000 credit in the fourth quarter of 2008.  Paragon defines Voyage expenses as "primarily ... port, canal and fuel costs that are unique to a particular voyage, as well as commissions."  It's not clear how these expenses could be below zero (i.e., a credit).

Depreciation increased in dollar terms from last year, but this expense dropped from 22.6 percent of Revenue in the December 2007 quarter to 20.7 percent in December 2008.

Sales, General, and Administrative (SG&A) expenses, in which we include related-party management fees, were 10.8 percent of Revenue.  These expenses were 16.6 percent of Revenue one year earlier.

Operating Income grew by 87 percent relative to the year-earlier quarter.  Operating Income was, however,  3 percent less than in the sequentially preceding quarter (September 2008).

Non-operating expenses soared 184 percent.  A significant proportion of this increase was due to a $8.8 million loss in the December 2008 quarter on an interest rate swap.  The loss on this swap was only $1 million in the fourth quarter of 2007.

Paragon paid no income taxes in either period.

Net Income was 28.5 percent greater than in the December 2007 quarter.


Cash ManagementDecember 2008
3 months prior
12 months prior
Current Ratio1.0
2.0
1.5
LTD/Equity
108%
119%112%
Debt/CFO
4.6 years
5.1 years
7.4 years
Inventory/CGS
N/A
N/AN/A
Finished Goods/Inventory
N/A
N/AN/A
Days of Sales Outstanding (DSO)2.5 days
1.5 days
3.8 days
Working Capital/Invested Capital 0.5%
5.3%
2.1%
Cash Conversion Cycle Time (CCCT)
-25 days
-32 days-27 days

Paragon raised cash by selling common shares to the public and with debt offerings.  The cash was used to acquire ships that were leased to firms transporting dry-bulk cargoes.  Each new ship put into service brings in Cash Flow from Operations that makes the debt level easier to bear.  The danger is that the pull back in global trade will reduce shipping levels to such an extent that no firms will want charter Paragon's ships when current leases expire, but the debt payments will still have to be made.

Paragon had $68 million in cash and cash equivalents when 2008 ended.  This would cover the $53 million of long-term debt that has to be repaid or refinanced (if such a thing is possible) in 2009.  The company has $334 million of other long-term debt.


GrowthDecember 20083 months prior
12 months prior
Revenue growth
120%
203%
N/A
Revenue/Assets
21.7%
19.8%
11.1%
CFO growth
95%
188%
N/A
Net Income growth
1300%
N/A
N/A

Note that the growth rates above for 2008 surpass the 58.8 percent increase from 2007 in the average number of vessels in Paragon's fleet.  We don't expect to see a growth rate that large in 2009, but it is possible Paragon will take advantage of the weak economy to buy ships at distressed prices.


ProfitabilityDecember 20083 months prior12 months prior
Operating Expenses/Revenue
41.2%
43.3%79.4%
ROIC 15.1%13.1%1.6%
FCF/Invested Capital
0.5%-28.6%-66.8%
Accrual Ratio
8.6%33.2%58.9%

Free Cash Flow is turned positive because Cash Flow from Operations was up significantly and capital expenditures to acquire vessels were down greatly.  The lower Accrual Ratio signifies a higher quality of earnings.


ValueDecember 20083 months prior12 months prior
P/E 1.9
3.598
P/E to S&P 500 average P/E 11%
19%550%
PEG 0.0
0.0
0.0
Price/Revenue 0.8
1.66.6
Enterprise Value/Cash Flow (EV/CFO)
5.4
7.317.9

Paragon's valuation ratios can be compared with other companies in the Shipping industry.  The metrics above seem to suggest that Paragon shares, which fell in price by 74 percent in 2008, are deeply undervalued.  The earnings growth rate is so high that the PEG is zero.

Despite the economy, 2009 could be OK for Paragon because its vessels are under contract for 98 percent of the possible days.  However, Paragon will have to enter in many new chartering arrangements in 2010 and 2011.  If these arrangements were made today, they would almost certainly be on terms that include much lower day rates. 

It was reassuring that Paragon's CEO stated that the companies that charter Paragon's ships "are meeting their contractual obligations."  One can easily imagine circumstances in which financially distressed customers seek relief from, or even walk away from, long-term contracts negotiated in times when rates were much higher.