Jump to content

JEF - Jefferies Group


Liberty

Recommended Posts

 

Comp for Oregon LNG

 

 

Sabine Pass has 6 trains and a 2.2B cf/day export license. Leucadia has a license for 1.25B cf/day.

 

From Cheniere's investor presentation, the first 4 trains at Sabine (1.47B cf/day) will result in...

(http://desmogblog.com/sites/beta.desmogblog.com/files/June%202013%20Corporate%20Presentation.pdf)

 

Total annual revenues of $2.55 billion

Total annual expenses of $765 million

Annual EBITDA of $1.79 billion

Annual debt service of $505 million

 

Distributable annual cash flows to parent company of $1.285 billion

 

If you add a bit for the pipeline (50% of which is likely worth $20 million per year - see Cheniere's CTPL in the presentation) and knock off 15% percent because Oregon is that much smaller, then you're left with:

 

 

Annual cash flows distributable to Leucadia of around $1.1 billion.

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 1.6k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Interesting how they've labeled all those operating companies that LUK holds as merchant banking.

 

I don't like that characterization of it, despite maybe it's accuracy.

 

Cummings & Steinberg had always just had a mish-mash of companies they bought cheap and then sold dear or liquidated.  To put it under the merchant banking moniker sounds like LUK will now be measured as a financial services company kind of like Lazard.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Anyone else notice that Homefed trades at a $494mm valuation for its 64% stake but is only carried on the books at $227mm? Are there other examples such as this?

 

Berkadia has roughly a 150mm pretax income run rate, yet is carried for 203mm. 

 

Vitesse Energy is very interesting.  Bob Gerrity souded very legit and mentioned that payback periods for the wells are under one year!  He also said of the most recent deal, they were not the high bid but with LUK backing they won it because they could close the deal in a month.  They own the wells and let other operators run it, the business model seems amazing.  Would not be surprised to see the value of that much higher in 1-3 yrs.

 

Linkem is in a unique position and if what the CEO said is anywhere close to correct they are worth quite a bit more than book value. (Basically Italy has a large legacy copper infrastructure wholly owned by Telecom Italia, and Linkem is both faster and cheaper--gets great customer reviews and good subscriber growth.)

 

Obviously the big horse in the stable is Jefferies and they have an investor day Oct 9th, but I came away from the call quite bullish and happy with my position.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

thoughts on book value in relation to IV for various parts of LUK

 

 

Berkadia is undervalued on the balance sheet, marked at 2.6X annualized 1H2014 Pretax earnings, a mortgage banker's earnings are incredibly lumpy, but Walker Dunlop is a good comp and trades at much higher multiples.

 

Berkadia 50% interest book value: $203MM

Berkadia Pre-tax earnings(2011-2013): $35MM $105MM $135MM, $79MM YTD

"Our share of pre-tax earnings for the first half of the year was $38.4 million and we received $19.4 million in distributions"

 

Garcadia is undervalued on the balance sheet

 

Garcadia book value: $140MM , approximately 65% interest in company + land and real estate rented to dealerships, the ownership structure isn't as clean here since LUK owns a varying % of dealerships but I don't think it's worth $140MM given they've received $80MM of distributions over the past 3 years and their ROE is in 20's and 30's

 

Consolidated (not just LUK's share) revenue          2011-2013: $790MM, $1.1B, $1.5B

Consolidated (not just LUK's share) pretax income  2011-2013: $22MM, $37MM, $47MM

Distributions to LUK: $16MM, $30MM, $40MM

Pre-tax ROE on LUK's interest: 26%, 33%, 32%

 

National Beef may be overvalued at $775MM, tough to tell if the challenges there are just cyclical, they had a good yer or two where they generated like 15% of LUK's basis in cash and then the business just went to shit.

 

The energy projects have no book value, so that's big source of potential growth and optionality

 

The way I look at LUK is

 

I pay $9.3B

 

I get $2.2B of liquid assets;  (net cash, asset management business<--am i the only one that loves the Folger Hill seed??? big scalable multi-manager HF's are fee machines , harbinger + homefed stock at market)

 

I get the next $3.5B or so of pre tax earnings tax free

 

So the remaining $7.1B grows with JEF pre-tax income of 5 or 6 hundo (7-8.5% of the ex-liquid assets book) and with earnings from all the other crap, plus the optionality from stuff like Energy marked at 0)

 

It's definitely not a 50 cent dollar, but perhaps a growing 75 or 80 cent one, with ample liquidity, a bigass tax asset and lots of connections for possibly lucrative investments.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

thoughts on book value in relation to IV for various parts of LUK

 

 

Berkadia is undervalued on the balance sheet, marked at 2.6X annualized 1H2014 Pretax earnings, a mortgage banker's earnings are incredibly lumpy, but Walker Dunlop is a good comp and trades at much higher multiples.

 

Berkadia 50% interest book value: $203MM

Berkadia Pre-tax earnings(2011-2013): $35MM $105MM $135MM, $79MM YTD

"Our share of pre-tax earnings for the first half of the year was $38.4 million and we received $19.4 million in distributions"

 

Garcadia is undervalued on the balance sheet

 

Garcadia book value: $140MM , approximately 65% interest in company + land and real estate rented to dealerships, the ownership structure isn't as clean here since LUK owns a varying % of dealerships but I don't think it's worth $140MM given they've received $80MM of distributions over the past 3 years and their ROE is in 20's and 30's

 

Consolidated (not just LUK's share) revenue          2011-2013: $790MM, $1.1B, $1.5B

Consolidated (not just LUK's share) pretax income  2011-2013: $22MM, $37MM, $47MM

Distributions to LUK: $16MM, $30MM, $40MM

Pre-tax ROE on LUK's interest: 26%, 33%, 32%

 

National Beef may be overvalued at $775MM, tough to tell if the challenges there are just cyclical, they had a good yer or two where they generated like 15% of LUK's basis in cash and then the business just went to shit.

 

The energy projects have no book value, so that's big source of potential growth and optionality

 

The way I look at LUK is

 

I pay $9.3B

 

I get $2.2B of liquid assets;  (net cash, asset management business<--am i the only one that loves the Folger Hill seed??? big scalable multi-manager HF's are fee machines , harbinger + homefed stock at market)

 

I get the next $3.5B or so of pre tax earnings tax free

 

So the remaining $7.1B grows with JEF pre-tax income of 5 or 6 hundo (7-8.5% of the ex-liquid assets book) and with earnings from all the other crap, plus the optionality from stuff like Energy marked at 0)

 

It's definitely not a 50 cent dollar, but perhaps a growing 75 or 80 cent one, with ample liquidity, a bigass tax asset and lots of connections for possibly lucrative investments.

 

I think this is a good analysis, though I do share some of rogermunibond's concerns (though perhaps that's what the market thinks too and why this might be cheapish).  If it was a 50% dollar, I'd be back to a very large position.

 

I did like that the new team immediately shut Sangart.

 

This company is priced just wrong...not quite cheap enough given the unproven team (aside from their Jefferies experience) but just cheap enough to possibly turn out to be a superb investment from these prices.

 

If they can execute on the energy deal in Louisiana that Cummings and Steinberg referenced in their final letter, that would be nice.

 

Excerpt from their last letter, 2012:

 

A Major Future Opportunity

 

After a 10-year effort led by the indomitable and indefatigable Tom Mara, our Louisiana

gasification project is now poised to move into the construction phase. The gasification facility

located in Lake Charles, Louisiana has major off-take agreements in place as well as all

necessary permits. It recently entered into a Memorandum of Understanding with SKE&C USA,

Inc., SK Engineering & Construction Co. Ltd. and Technip USA Inc. pursuant to which they

will provide an industry standard lump sum turnkey construction contract.

Funding for this project will be covered in part by $1.561 billion of tax exempt bonds, a $230

million federal grant for carbon capture and sequestration, and a $128 million federal investment

tax credit. The project will require equity of $400 to $600 million.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Someone post a few notes on Yahoo. Nothing too helpful imo.  Thought this was interesting:

 

"Very interesting -- either Handler or Friedman (or someone) mentioned that they expect to convert the $1.3 billion DTA into cash within the next 3-5 years. If so, that would be astonishing income generation during that period."

 

And I liked his note on asset managers:

 

"They are expanding the asset management business by investing in managers (and management companies), rather than doing M&A deals that would create goodwill -- they believe everything is highly or fairly valued. "

 

I.E. - if they were to get out and buy a GP/asset manager business they would have to pay more than the way they are currently structuring their deals.

 

http://finance.yahoo.com/mbview/threadview/?&bn=19ae4497-92fa-3786-aa7d-551fc38c08ed&tid=1409783681041-ab10dd5f-d556-41c6-af9f-496945789870&tls=la%2Cd%2C0%2C3

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Someone post a few notes on Yahoo. Nothing too helpful imo.  Thought this was interesting:

 

"Very interesting -- either Handler or Friedman (or someone) mentioned that they expect to convert the $1.3 billion DTA into cash within the next 3-5 years. If so, that would be astonishing income generation during that period."

 

Jay, thanks for highlighting the Yahoo notes.  The DTA angle is interesting.  However, the poster's conclusion about income generation in the next 3-5 years isn't necessarily true, as DTA's can be used up through capital gains too....

 

But let's work through the numbers:

JEF did $500m in the last 12 months.  From the recent investor presentation, Berkadia, National Beef, Garcadia, Conwed and Idaho Timber are currently doing around $200m pre-tax.  (A quick calculation, hope I haven't added up the numbers incorrectly).  But that's with National Beef doing c.$60m a year (was $27m in H1:14), versus the $324m it did in 2011. 

 

So if NB can get back to 2011 levels and everything else stays where it is, then yes, you can think about c.$1bn of pre-tax for LUK group.  That would use up c.$350m a year in DTAs (assuming 35% tax rate), within the 3-5 year range given by management.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Some quotes from Mr. G. (Sep 2014)

 

"One example is in how corporations evaluate the probable rate of return on a specific facility and then wonder what the variance on that return might be. That variance is really what the executive committees of corporation are really interested in, Greenspan said, and if a project is supposed to have a 30% yield, but there is a 10% chance of it returning a -10% yield, then the project will be dead in the water."

 

In this kind of environment, corporate tax rates become impossible to estimate, and that results in a serious curtailment of expenditures. When people don’t have a clue what the tax rate will be 20 or 30 years from now, and they have projected income from those years, then it drives up the effective cost of current projects.

 

"“What we see is that construction is dead in the water,” Greenspan said today at an insurance conference hosted by KPMG in New York. That contrasts with other recoveries since World War II, as “every single one of them was led by construction or longer-lived assets,” he said."

 

"“What they are saying is ‘we are so uncertain about the distant future that we are not going to invest,’” Greenspan said.

 

"“The reason inflation is dead in the water now and will be for the immediate foreseeable future is that we are operating at less than full capacity in the world,” Greenspan said today."

 

I think LUK is dead in the water vis-a-vis large construction projects for a while.

 

PS. An excellent write-up on Leucadia and Leucadia Investor Day: http://boards.fool.com/annotated-investor-day-notes-31427733.aspx?sort=postdate

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



×
×
  • Create New...