giofranchi Posted June 10, 2015 Share Posted June 10, 2015 Does anyone know when it is going to resume trading on the LSE? Is anyone on the board interested in buying it after the trading resumes? Thank you! Gio Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bagehot Posted June 10, 2015 Share Posted June 10, 2015 If it is like Platform, it won't trade in London anymore, but will relist in the US sometime soon. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
giofranchi Posted June 23, 2015 Author Share Posted June 23, 2015 NHL has started trading again on the LSE today. Cheers, GioNomad_Investor_Presentation_6-5-15.pdf Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
giofranchi Posted June 23, 2015 Author Share Posted June 23, 2015 I am going to buy this company in a few days: you could have been skeptical about Jarden Corp. and you could have been skeptical about Platform Speciality Products… To be skeptical about NHL would be imo a serious mistake of omission! ;) Cheers, Gio Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
magno111 Posted June 23, 2015 Share Posted June 23, 2015 NHL has started trading again on the LSE today. Cheers, Gio IF the stock is up 75% today and PSH has 20% stake, why is it only up 0,5%? market inefficiency? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
giofranchi Posted June 23, 2015 Author Share Posted June 23, 2015 IF the stock is up 75% today and PSH has 20% stake, why is it only up 0,5%? market inefficiency? We will see what NAV per share PSH posts at the end of the week! ;) Gio Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gfp Posted June 23, 2015 Share Posted June 23, 2015 It appears to only be a 3% or thereabouts weighting in Pershing Square's portfolio - and that is after the pop in price. 20% of Nomad is still less than $650 million USD if I have the correct numbers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
giofranchi Posted June 23, 2015 Author Share Posted June 23, 2015 It appears to only be a 3% or thereabouts weighting in Pershing Square's portfolio - and that is after the pop in price. 20% of Nomad is still less than $650 million USD if I have the correct numbers. Yes! That should be the reason why PSH is practically unchanged today. Gio Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
giofranchi Posted June 26, 2015 Author Share Posted June 26, 2015 Opened a 5% position today. Cheers, Gio Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
giofranchi Posted July 9, 2015 Author Share Posted July 9, 2015 Results of placing new ordinary shares. GioResults-of-Placing-July092015.pdf Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Laxputs Posted July 9, 2015 Share Posted July 9, 2015 Anyone offer a write-up and valuation? Thanks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
giofranchi Posted July 10, 2015 Author Share Posted July 10, 2015 They earned $1.25 per share during the LTM, before the placement of new shares. A multiple of 17-18x is imo a fair price for a business that: 1) Is led by an entrepreneur with a phenomenal track record (45x at JAH since 2001, 14 years); 2) Whose method is sound and repeatable (see JAH, Justice Holdings, and PAH); 3) In a predictable business (food). This morning I have just bought more. Cheers, Gio Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
giofranchi Posted July 13, 2015 Author Share Posted July 13, 2015 A new company presentation. Gionomad-foods-company-presentation-070715.PDF Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arden Posted July 13, 2015 Share Posted July 13, 2015 It seems sales have recently declined, is there any other reason besides the manager's track record that makes you think we should suddenly expect high growth? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
giofranchi Posted July 13, 2015 Author Share Posted July 13, 2015 It seems sales have recently declined, is there any other reason besides the manager's track record that makes you think we should suddenly expect high growth? Yes, they recently have. Imo Franklin operates in a way similar to 3G Capital: he identifies businesses that are in good industries, but which are temporarily suffering because of weak management, buys them at a discount, and then proceeds to fix the problem (in fact he already has: EBITDA margin was 2.5 points higher in Q1 2015 than in Q1 2014). I think he is very conscious organic growth has to resume soon, and I think he might be successful in implementing the necessary changes to reach that goal. On top of organic growth of course you should add any external growth through acquisitions that Franklin might be able to engineer in the future: though organic growth is indispensable, it is usually the external growth through acquisitions that adds the most value. Gio Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phaceliacapital Posted July 15, 2015 Share Posted July 15, 2015 Holders of our Founder Preferred Shares are entitled to receive an annual dividend, payable in Ordinary Shares or cash, at the sole option of the Company. Provided our volume weighted average ordinary share price is above $11.50 for the last 10 trading days of the 2015, the amount of the first dividend will be equal to 20% of the increase in the market price of our Ordinary Shares over our initial public offering price of $10.00 multiplied by 140.2 million share. In subsequent years, the annual dividend amount will be calculated based on the appreciated stock price compared to the highest price previously used in calculating the Founder Preferred Share dividends. Dividends are paid for a duration of seven years (which may be extended by the Board), as long as Founder Preferred Shares remain outstanding. Each Founder Preferred Share is convertible into one Ordinary Share at the option of the holder 20%*(21.45-10)*140.2 = 321 mn in dividend for 2015 (currently) on a mcap of 3.3 bn.. holy shit Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Liberty Posted July 15, 2015 Share Posted July 15, 2015 Holders of our Founder Preferred Shares are entitled to receive an annual dividend, payable in Ordinary Shares or cash, at the sole option of the Company. Provided our volume weighted average ordinary share price is above $11.50 for the last 10 trading days of the 2015, the amount of the first dividend will be equal to 20% of the increase in the market price of our Ordinary Shares over our initial public offering price of $10.00 multiplied by 140.2 million share. In subsequent years, the annual dividend amount will be calculated based on the appreciated stock price compared to the highest price previously used in calculating the Founder Preferred Share dividends. Dividends are paid for a duration of seven years (which may be extended by the Board), as long as Founder Preferred Shares remain outstanding. Each Founder Preferred Share is convertible into one Ordinary Share at the option of the holder 20%*(21.45-10)*140.2 = 321 mn in dividend for 2015 (currently) on a mcap of 3.3 bn.. holy shit That kind of stuff worked at PAH, so why not keep getting way more than common shareholders on top of already generous regular compensation, options, and other perks... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
giofranchi Posted July 15, 2015 Author Share Posted July 15, 2015 20%*(21.45-10)*140.2 = 321 mn in dividend for 2015 (currently) on a mcap of 3.3 bn.. holy shit But the company doubled in market cap during the last twelve months... A $1.6 billion gain out of a company that had a capitalization of $1.6 billion... How have you exclaimed?... Holy shit!! ;) Liberty, They have been working for 15 years now: evidence enough for me! Cheers! Gio Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Liberty Posted July 15, 2015 Share Posted July 15, 2015 20%*(21.45-10)*140.2 = 321 mn in dividend for 2015 (currently) on a mcap of 3.3 bn.. holy shit But the company doubled in market cap during the last twelve months... A $1.6 billion gain out of a company that had a capitalization of $1.6 billion... How have you exclaimed?... Holy shit!! ;) I'm sorry, but being paid a third of a billion dollars in cash straight from the shareholders' wallet on top of already generous compensation and large equity holdings for making a deal that we don't even know yet if it'll be a good one rubs me the wrong way. The man's a big shareholder. If his deals are good, he'll benefit along with other shareholders. Why does he need to extract so much cash so quickly from the company? Wouldn't that cash compound for all shareholders inside the company rather than just benefit Mr. Franklin in his personal account? As I already said, I'm not against big compensations when deserved, but there's a limit to how far I'm willing to go... Liberty, They have been working for 15 years now: evidence enough for me! Cheers! Gio Good luck! Maybe it'll turn out wonderfully. But I skip companies that I think will probably do wonderfully all the time because of red flags, and so far it's been worth saving myself for my true 'soulmate' companies... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
giofranchi Posted July 15, 2015 Author Share Posted July 15, 2015 Liberty, I am not here to judge what rubs people well and what doesn't. Each manager has his own way of doing things. Some make money for their shareholders, while the great majority does not. And I am here only to make money. Mr. Franklin imo is one of the managers who has made the most money for his shareholders during the last 15 years. As I have said, that's enough for me. Then of course no one knows what the future might bring! ;) Cheers, Gio Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Liberty Posted July 15, 2015 Share Posted July 15, 2015 Liberty, I am not here to judge what rubs people well and what doesn't. Each manager has his own way of doing things. Some make money for their shareholders, while the great majority does not. And I am here only to make money. Mr. Franklin imo is one of the managers who has made the most money for his shareholders during the last 15 years. As I have said, that's enough for me. Then of course no one knows what the future might bring! ;) Cheers, Gio Don't get me wrong, this is not a moral crusade, it's because I want to make money that I don't want to partner with people who I don't fully trust. Cheers! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
giofranchi Posted July 16, 2015 Author Share Posted July 16, 2015 it's because I want to make money that I don't want to partner with people who I don't fully trust. Personally, I think the word “trust” is very often misused. Especially for people we have never seen, nor talked to, nor worked with! My experience is that I am still sometimes baffled by the behavior and choices of people I have been working with for 10 years now… Therefore, I really do not think a checklist might go a long way in helping you to judge people’s character correctly. So, which kind of “trust” might be justified? I trust the ability of a manager to put into practice what he has said his shareholders he is going to do. Show me not only that your reasoning and method are sound, but also that you are able to deliver the results you have promised. Period. I don’t go farther than that, because I don’t think I can. Those managers are all multi-millionaire, if not billionaire. They don’t work for the money (hey! I almost don’t either!). They work because: 1) they relish a job well done and/or 2) they relish being respected and admired. In either cases I think it is reasonable to expect them to do what they think is right. Some think it is right to work for free, other think it is right to get paid for their services. As I have said, I am not here to judge… But, if you ask me, I believe it is right to get paid for our work. By the way, last time I checked Maffei got a paycheck of $98 million for 2014. Yet, LMCA has practically made no money for its shareholders for more than a year. I am just curious to know if that’s fine with you and, if so, why. Thank you. Gio Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phaceliacapital Posted July 16, 2015 Share Posted July 16, 2015 Those managers are all multi-millionaire, if not billionaire. They don’t work for the money (hey! I almost don’t either!). They work because: 1) they relish a job well done and/or 2) they relish being respected and admired. In either cases I think it is reasonable to expect them to do what they think is right. Some think it is right to work for free, other think it is right to get paid for their services. As I have said, I am not here to judge… But, if you ask me, I believe it is right to get paid for our work. By the way, last time I checked Maffei got a paycheck of $98 million for 2014. Yet, LMCA has practically made no money for its shareholders for more than a year. I am just curious to know if that’s fine with you and, if so, why. Thank you. That's not always true. BTW the long term plays for both PAH as Nomad look to me as being sold in 3-5 years. If Nomad successfully builds a frozen food platform they will probably sell to Nestle. PAH is in an industry that I consider outside my circle. By the way, last time I checked Maffei got a paycheck of $98 million for 2014. Yet, LMCA has practically made no money for its shareholders for more than a year. I am just curious to know if that’s fine with you and, if so, why. Thank you. 98 is too much money but looking at a year of stock performance is very short term. With Nomad you are basically saying that you are willing to pay someone +/- 25% of your capital gains, on top of everything else.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
giofranchi Posted July 16, 2015 Author Share Posted July 16, 2015 BTW the long term plays for both PAH as Nomad look to me as being sold in 3-5 years. If Nomad successfully builds a frozen food platform they will probably sell to Nestle. That might be your view… Fine! Anyway, what’s wrong with that?! With Nomad you are basically saying that you are willing to pay someone +/- 25% of your capital gains, on top of everything else.. If I still get a 15% annual compounded, you bet I am willing! ;) Cheers, Gio Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Liberty Posted July 16, 2015 Share Posted July 16, 2015 LMCA has practically made no money for its shareholders for more than a year. A year! Oh no ;) In that time SIRI has been growing quicker than anyone expected, having trouble staying levered to target because they generate so much FCF in fact, CHTR is buying TWC and BHN in a blockbuster deal, etc.. I care more about the value being created in the past year than about what the stock has been doing. The difference with Franklin is that the plethora of companies that Greg Maffei directly and indirectly oversees and advises strategy for are probably worth over 100 billion dollars, and he's still getting just 1/3 of just the "founder's dividend" that Franklin is getting (not to mention everything else) from his brand new, unproven low-single-digit-billion small cap... And I think that Maffei's compensation is probably a little high too, but this no doubt comes from Malone's soft spot for talented managers since he was grossly underpaid for a long time for what he did at TCI. Also note that Maffei's compensation figures are cumulative for all the companies where he's CEO/chairman (5-6 of them I think), while Franklin is getting a huge packaged from every company he runs. In either cases I think it is reasonable to expect them to do what they think is right. Some think it is right to work for free, other think it is right to get paid for their services. As I have said, I am not here to judge… But, if you ask me, I believe it is right to get paid for our work. This is a total strawman. I'm not advocating working for free. This is about how much, and respect for the shareholders, because it's the shareholders' money. It's not the CEO's money that he can deign leave for the shareholders if he feels like it, it's the shareholders money. Managers who use companies as their own personal piggybanks send me the signal that they put themselves way above the shareholder, and when push comes to shove, that can't be a good thing if I'm a shareholder. It's the principal–agent problem. Saying that Franklin doesn't do it for the money is ridiculous, just like saying that Biglari isn't acting greedily. But we all know that you're fine with that stuff, so let's move on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now