Myth465 Posted August 10, 2012 Share Posted August 10, 2012 Congrats, now if only we could get this and SD both up to $8.50. When I think about both have done quite well given the hand they were dealt. If ATSG had not lost the BKS business they would be at $9 or $10 considering all of the growth they put together over 2010 / 2011. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bathtime Posted October 8, 2012 Share Posted October 8, 2012 I don't see any new negatives since the BKS news, so I'm nibbling on this one here to become more familiar with it. I listened to the September presentation and my initial impression of management was that I was... impressed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Myth465 Posted October 9, 2012 Share Posted October 9, 2012 This has happened 3 or 4 times. 1 was the lose of the BKS business, downturn was warranted. 2 was related to the trouble getting contracts started on time and the down-drift in the forecast. I think the downturn in the short term was warranted, but predict a sustainable recovery. 3 and 4 were both just random downturns in the stock price. Earnings were good and the stock rallied quite a bit after earnings. I think and am hoping this is similar, but am a bit over invested. I think ATSG makes the perfect trading stock, but I always seem to hold my position. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bathtime Posted October 9, 2012 Share Posted October 9, 2012 Thanks myth, I read through this thread today to catch up. Have you seen kuppy's writeup on AYR? They have a similar business model from what I can tell, but are focused on leasing to emerging markets: http://adventuresincapitalism.com/post/2012/09/10/Castles-In-The-Sky.aspx Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Myth465 Posted October 10, 2012 Share Posted October 10, 2012 I saw it when it was posted and liked that he is moving into the space. I havent had time to really research the key differences. It appears that they have that emerging market niche, and ATSG is focusing on plane efficiency vs. older more expensive models. Either way its good to see him entering the space. I really like management, but am unsure what the right multiple for ATSG. I do wise they would do something relating to the capital structure vs. buying new planes... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Packer16 Posted October 11, 2012 Share Posted October 11, 2012 I have taken a look and this looks like an interesting situation. For all you ATSG followers, do you know how old the planes are they own and what there expected lives are? TIA. Packer Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
txlaw Posted October 25, 2012 Share Posted October 25, 2012 Well, I've dipped my toes back into the ATSG water. Now watch it tank even further due to the macroeconomy, a big customer leaving, or Hete vowing to make more capex commitments despite the precarious business environment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Myth465 Posted October 25, 2012 Share Posted October 25, 2012 LOL im interested in seeing earnings. You always wonder when it tanks like this. TX you have good timing, let me know when you sell... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rmitz Posted October 25, 2012 Share Posted October 25, 2012 LOL im interested in seeing earnings. You always wonder when it tanks like this. TX you have good timing, let me know when you sell... As you'll recall, though, Myth, we've seen both kinds of responses...tanking before earnings that turn out to be bad and tanking before good/great earnings when the stock jumps hugely after... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
txlaw Posted October 25, 2012 Share Posted October 25, 2012 LOL im interested in seeing earnings. You always wonder when it tanks like this. TX you have good timing, let me know when you sell... CLWR, MBI, BAC, RIM, DELL -- great examples of how my timing appears to be as good as Bruce B's ;D Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
abcd Posted November 8, 2012 Share Posted November 8, 2012 http://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20121108006940/en/ATSG-Reports-Results-Quarter-2012 Quote But when setting our $170 million target for Adjusted EBITDA for 2012, we had assumed no further delays in our projections of aircraft deployments," he said. "Unfortunately, those delays have continued beyond what we projected in August. We now expect our Adjusted EBITDA for 2012 to approximate $160 million, including approximately $40 million in the fourth quarter Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Myth465 Posted November 8, 2012 Share Posted November 8, 2012 I will have to look at the report in detail and cant wait to hear the call. 2012 was a write off. Hopefully they stop buying planes now, and come up with a plan for the cash flow that includes buybacks, debt / pension pay downs, and maybe a dividend.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
writser Posted November 11, 2012 Share Posted November 11, 2012 I have taken a look and this looks like an interesting situation. For all you ATSG followers, do you know how old the planes are they own and what there expected lives are? TIA. Packer I spent a couple of hours reading up on this. Their main fleet consists of 43 Boeing 767-200's, built roughly between '82 and '89, modified for cargo flights (three of these are 'new' and are currently being modified / upgraded. They also have 5 Boeing 757's (two of them currently being modified) and a bunch of older planes that will be replaced and are for sale: 4 Boeing 727's and 6 DC-8's. Book value is 4.5m$ for the older planes, 735m$ for the new ones. I did some scuttlebutting online (nice read about plane life expectancy). This old Boeing press release suggests a 40yr lifecycle so my estimate would be that they have ~11 years left on average. I am definitely no aircraft expert. Surely there must be one on this forum who can enlighten us. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Packer16 Posted November 11, 2012 Share Posted November 11, 2012 Thanks for the research it confirms the company's response. I e-mailed the company about this and they retuned my e-mail the next day and said after the mods the planes are good for 15 years. Packer Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
writser Posted November 11, 2012 Share Posted November 11, 2012 Asking IR was the easier option :) Did you end up initiating a position? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Packer16 Posted November 11, 2012 Share Posted November 11, 2012 Yes I did. The only concern I had was the idle plances from the conf call but even at a level of $160 m EBITDA (assuming idle planes) FCF was still $100 m. So the multiples of EBITDA and FCF are compelling, managment has lived through some stress and done well and is responsive to inquires. Packer Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hielko Posted November 19, 2012 Share Posted November 19, 2012 Decided to take a quick look at ATSG, see for my thought my blog @ http://alphavulture.com/2012/11/19/air-transport-services-group-atsg/ I expect that you will disagree with me since I don't think ATSG looks particularly attractive at the moment, but hopefully you'll be able to convince me that I'm wrong :). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Packer16 Posted November 19, 2012 Share Posted November 19, 2012 I think your analysis is mostly correct except for the D & A calc. The calc for leased aircraft is based upon the lessor of lease term (typically 5 - 7 years) or expected life (15 years). Therefore, based upon the CAM deprecation of $54 million and accelerated depreciation of about 2/3 gives us an add back of $35 - $40 million. This about doubles your FCF yield to the mid 20s which is pretty cheap. Packer Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
writser Posted November 19, 2012 Share Posted November 19, 2012 Packer, I don't understand where you get those numbers from. As far as I can see, the purchase value of all planes on the balance sheet is ~120m$. Divide that by 15 years and you get roughly 80m$ a year in depreciation to maintain the fleet. Which is close to what they report. I just skimmed through the latest quarterly and I couldn't find any information about the accelerated depreciation, they mention everything is depreciated straight-line. Also read a couple of annuals a while ago and don't remember reading about this. I could have missed it though. Or is my calculation too simple? Do I miss some hidden tax advantage or something like that? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hielko Posted November 19, 2012 Share Posted November 19, 2012 I found the following in the latest 10K: Depreciation of property and equipment is provided on a straight-line basis over the lesser of an asset’s useful life or lease term. What would seem logical to me - but might be wrong - that this applies to the planes the company is leasing. So all the planes that the company owns are depreciated over the estimated useful life, and only the upgrades & maintenance on the few planes that the company leases are depreciated over the lease term of these planes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Packer16 Posted November 19, 2012 Share Posted November 19, 2012 They are leasing all their planes either to external customers or to an internal division. Given the total net PP&E is about $750 million and the depreciation is $90 million it implies a WA life of only 8.3 years. But most of the planes were purchased post 2009 with a 15 year life once the mods are done. They do a pretty extensive upgrade including structural upgrades. So the shorter term of the lease versus life provides a fully depreciated asset a the end of the lease that still has remaining life. That is the nice thing about this business. Bloomberg had a story about how one of aircraft leasing firms started and this aspect of the business is the subject of one of the CEOs comments. Another aspect is that ATSG does not have all of it's planes leased. If it did it would have an additional $40 million in annual revenues. This would be incremental EBITDA and primarily FCF as ATSG does not pay taxes. So with a current FCF yield in the mid 20s with a potential to get in the mid 30s by leasing existing planes. Another way to look at ATSG is base upon its yearly impairment test. Based upon the latest impairment test (Dec 2011), the BV of CAM and ACMI are 25% and 12% lower than thier current fair values. Based upon the disclosure of asset value for each and applyng each % implies an about $200 m value over BV. Given the Q3 BV of $300m plus the $200m implies and equity FV of $500 m versus a curren market cap of $220m. It is an interesting story. Packer Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hielko Posted November 19, 2012 Share Posted November 19, 2012 What do you think about this approach: BV of PP&E was $1,169M before $367M in accumulated depreciation @ Q3 2012. If you would assume that their P&E would have 15 years of useful life you would expect 1169/15=78M in yearly depreciation. That's pretty close to the 85.1M number reported by the company for the TTM, and you would expect that this method underestimates depreciation since they also have some assets with a shorter life expectancy. Using this number you would conclude that the company depreciates their fleet in 13.7 years instead of 15 years, and that the weighted average remaining life of the fleet is 10.3 years. Agree that the results from the impairment test are an interesting data point! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Packer16 Posted November 19, 2012 Share Posted November 19, 2012 You need to look at net PP&E because you have some fully depreciated assets in mix that will be sold in the next few years, this will skew gross FA number (as the gorss number includes obsolete planes that have been purchased in the past - sunk cost). The gross number represent historical cost not current value or cost. The historical cost has less relevance than the current value as represented by the impairment test. Packer Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
writser Posted November 23, 2012 Share Posted November 23, 2012 I Spent some more time on this today. But most of the planes were purchased post 2009 with a 15 year life once the mods are done As far as I understood they bought 17 new planes after 2009, and they had 34 already. Suppose these new ones have 13 years left on average. Let's brush up my math: 13 * 17 + 34 * old plane expectancy = 51 * 8.3. So according to the depreciation model the old part of the fleet is expected to fly for 6 more years approximately. Looks indeed a bit conservative, especially because the model ignores scrap / resale value. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Packer16 Posted November 26, 2012 Share Posted November 26, 2012 Heilko, I think one aspect of ATSG you are missing is that just about every leasing type firm is purchased/valued on an EBITDA basis. Part of the reason is the large amount of upfront investment and the difference between GAAP D&A and economic D&A. This can be large if the timing difference as GAAP is based upon historical cost as economic D&A is based upon the present value to replace the asset. For example if the planes are going to be replaced in 10 years this amount needs to be discounted by lets say 10% per year can result in an discount of 60% for D&A. Based upon the the EBITDA metric, ATSG is significantly cheaper than other leasors (AYR, FLY) or ACMI providers (AAAW). Another factor left out of your calcs is residual values of the planes when the leases are up. Which in many cases could be significant for new planes on 5 year leases. Your analysis does bring up good points about the pension liability but I think the residual values, the impairment test analysis and the CF based valuation of ATSG does imply that ATSG is undervalued. Packer 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