Berza (dionice i kupovina)

[drug_profi]

Sestru sam nasavjetovao prije nekih dvije godine da ulozi 12 milja koje je stoje na racunu.
I rekao joj sta da uzme.
Cementaru, Telekom i Elektroprivedu.
Vrijednost portfelja joj je danas nesto malo preko 20.000. uz do sada naplacenu dividendu od oko 1500.

Oko 70% profita za oko 20 mjeseci.
A vi samo i dalje razmisljajte. Sada je margina za dobit manja, ali je i dalje ima.

[Diverse]

good point

[korisnicki]

Šta mislite o ulaganju u dionice Telekoma RS? Za sada isplaćuju dobre dividende.
Kakva su predviđanja?

[cabej]

iako isplacuju dividendu, ja sam veliki skeptik spram te dionice.
dividenda je i jedini razlog zašto je ta dionica toliko cijenjena. ali kad pogledam njihovu zaduženost, novce na računu, dugovanja dobavljačima, potencijal za rast, defacto monopol.. ja mislim da je precijenjena

[n+1]

A već je i narasla preko 50% za godinu dana.

[Ci-Nick]

iako isplacuju dividendu, ja sam veliki skeptik spram te dionice.
dividenda je i jedini razlog zašto je ta dionica toliko cijenjena. ali kad pogledam njihovu zaduženost, novce na računu, dugovanja dobavljačima, potencijal za rast, defacto monopol.. ja mislim da je precijenjena

Slažem se sa svim navedenim i jos da dodam...
Ne treba zaboraviti vlasničku strukturu i da je da bi naudio Telemach-u Vučić kupio prava za Englesku premier ligu za ne malih 600 miliona eura, za narednih 5 godina.
To će se morati platiti i dio te egzibicije će vjerovatno platiti i Telekom Srpske.

[Diverse]

iako isplacuju dividendu, ja sam veliki skeptik spram te dionice.
dividenda je i jedini razlog zašto je ta dionica toliko cijenjena. ali kad pogledam njihovu zaduženost, novce na računu, dugovanja dobavljačima, potencijal za rast, defacto monopol.. ja mislim da je precijenjena

Nemaju oni kud i kako vise da rastu, poklopili su sve sto su mogli, Eltu su kupili. Ali taj dug prema dobavljacima i njihova likvidnost nisu problem , ipara ima, razradjen je posao i dividenda nece trpjeti. Ali rasta u perspektivi nema i sigurno je precijenjena. Ako opet padne ispod marke, ali tesko, bilo dobro za kupovinu.

[drndalo]

Ja je sada ne bih kupio, osim ako mi pare stoje na banci sa 0% kamate...

Naravno, ja to gledam sa svog prosjeka kupovine koji je 1.02 po akciji, a zadnju turu sam platio po 0.89/kom... Dakle 11% ispod nominale... I time ispeglao raniju skuplju kupovinu...

Isplata redovna... Kako meni, tako i MTS-u koji to onda knjizi u prihode i svoj zavrsni racun. Tako su ga i otplatili Dodi, na kredit, koji je sam Mtel vracao. Svu konkurenciju u RS su kupili, ne samo Eltu.

Sada ta situacija sa utakmicama takodjer moze znaciti upravo to isto, dio za privlacenje gledaoca koji placaju racune, odatle dividendom pare majci u stek. Gledajuci samo dividendu, vise se isplati nego BH Telecom. Jedino je zadnja tura BH Telecom-a zbog isplate vanredne dividende bila blizu ovoj.

Svako sebi neka odluci... Da opet spadne <1 KM/kom. dodao bih jos komada.

[Diverse]

Sada ta situacija sa utakmicama takodjer moze znaciti upravo to isto, dio za privlacenje gledaoca koji placaju racune, odatle dividendom pare majci u stek. Gledajuci samo dividendu, vise se isplati nego BH Telecom. Jedino je zadnja tura BH Telecom-a zbog isplate vanredne dividende bila blizu ovoj.

Sta bi bila dobra cijena za BH telecom?

[drndalo]

Podijeli dividendu sa cijenom, x100 i dobijes % "kamate". Da li si zadovoljan s njim ili ne je do svakoga da odluci.

[TomANDJerry]

Zar se ranije nije moglo kupovati direktno dionice, bez brokera .... na ovom našem domacem trzistu ???

[drug_profi]

Zar se ranije nije moglo kupovati direktno dionice, bez brokera .... na ovom našem domacem trzistu ???

Mozes na ulici od preprodavaca, ali i onda moras u RVP da zakljucis posao.

[TomANDJerry]

Zar se ranije nije moglo kupovati direktno dionice, bez brokera .... na ovom našem domacem trzistu ???

Mozes na ulici od preprodavaca, ali i onda moras u RVP da zakljucis posao.

Hvala na odgovoru

Dakle, samo kod brokera .... ako necu da se za****vam poslije.

A moze li se kod ovih domacih brokera kupovati i na Banjaluckoj i na Sarajevskoj berzi, ili su jedni tamo-drugi ovamo ... znam da za strane berze je vec tesko, ali kakva je procedura recimo kupiti 5.000KM telekoma srpske i 5.000KM BHTelekoma.

[Diverse]

Podijeli dividendu sa cijenom, x100 i dobijes % "kamate". Da li si zadovoljan s njim ili ne je do svakoga da odluci.

Da, tako i radim. Mislio sam vise na citanje finansijskih izvjestaja i gledanje nekih parametara da bi se procijenila realna cijena. BTW, gdje mogu da se nadju detaljni izvjestaji BH Telecoma, meni iskacu samo neki sturi sa par osnovnih podataka?

[Ci-Nick]

Podijeli dividendu sa cijenom, x100 i dobijes % "kamate". Da li si zadovoljan s njim ili ne je do svakoga da odluci.

Da, tako i radim. Mislio sam vise na citanje finansijskih izvjestaja i gledanje nekih parametara da bi se procijenila realna cijena. BTW, gdje mogu da se nadju detaljni izvjestaji BH Telecoma, meni iskacu samo neki sturi sa par osnovnih podataka?

http://www.sase.ba/v1/Tr%C5%BEi%C5%A1te ... uerNewsTab

Tu su izvještaji.

[Diverse]

Da, tako i radim. Mislio sam vise na citanje finansijskih izvjestaja i gledanje nekih parametara da bi se procijenila realna cijena. BTW, gdje mogu da se nadju detaljni izvjestaji BH Telecoma, meni iskacu samo neki sturi sa par osnovnih podataka?

http://www.sase.ba/v1/Tr%C5%BEi%C5%A1te ... uerNewsTab

Tu su izvještaji.

Hvala!

[drug_profi]

A moze li se kod ovih domacih brokera kupovati i na Banjaluckoj i na Sarajevskoj berzi, ili su jedni tamo-drugi ovamo ... znam da za strane berze je vec tesko, ali kakva je procedura recimo kupiti 5.000KM telekoma srpske i 5.000KM BHTelekoma.

RB radi na obje berze koliko znam, za ostale ne znam.
Procedura je, dođeš, potpišeš ugovor. Licna, cips i broj racuna. Brokerska kuca odradi za tebe otvaranje tr.racuna u RVP itd. Naplati to naravno, ali to je sica.
Kazes sta zelis i koliko ces maksimano da platis. Dobijes racun da uplatis novac. I to je to.

[TomANDJerry]

A moze li se kod ovih domacih brokera kupovati i na Banjaluckoj i na Sarajevskoj berzi, ili su jedni tamo-drugi ovamo ... znam da za strane berze je vec tesko, ali kakva je procedura recimo kupiti 5.000KM telekoma srpske i 5.000KM BHTelekoma.

RB radi na obje berze koliko znam, za ostale ne znam.
Procedura je, dođeš, potpišeš ugovor. Licna, cips i broj racuna. Brokerska kuca odradi za tebe otvaranje tr.racuna u RVP itd. Naplati to naravno, ali to je sica.
Kazes sta zelis i koliko ces maksimano da platis. Dobijes racun da uplatis novac. I to je to.

Hvala na uputama ...

Ako nisam dosadan još jedno pitanje ako znas ... gdje najlakše mogu pronaci informacije o dobiti neke firme i o tome da li isplacuju dividende.
Je li moram ici tamo po dokumentima skupštine i traziti, ili to piše negdje na jednom mjestu.

[drug_profi]

Ne znam da je iko sabrao to kao pregled na jednom mjestu.
Citas finansijske, pa prati odluke skupstina. Nema tih firmi puno koje isplacuju iole valjanu dividendu.
A dividenda i nije najbitnija. Vise je bitan potencijal rasta, tj moguca kapitalna dobit.

[zigzag]

Ima li šta da ima dobru dividenu i moguću kapitalnu dobit?
Da se i mi obogatimo.

[largo25]

Zar se ranije nije moglo kupovati direktno dionice, bez brokera .... na ovom našem domacem trzistu ???

Mozes na ulici od preprodavaca, ali i onda moras u RVP da zakljucis posao.

Dionica je elektronski zapis u računaru.
Samo preko brokera osim ako po zakonu BIH može.

[largo25]

Ima li šta da ima dobru dividenu i moguću kapitalnu dobit?
Da se i mi obogatimo.

Telekom srpske 12% ,ali je i inflcija 15% , na hranu 40% i moraš bit u minusu svakako.
Samo ti inflacija manje novca pojede.

[drug_profi]

Mozes na ulici od preprodavaca, ali i onda moras u RVP da zakljucis posao.

Dionica je elektronski zapis u računaru.
Samo preko brokera osim ako po zakonu BIH može.

ne mijenja stvar da se i tako preprodaje na ulici, i bas zbog toga se mora posao zakljuciti u RVP.

[Diverse]

Interpreting an interesting 2019 Seeking Alpha article that still holds up in retrospect. Valuing Kraft Heinz (KHC) and its debt followed by my noob commentary/questions regarding the author's analysis.
Basics / Getting Started
Background:

This is an article written by Ian Croci, a Seeking Alpha account that has been inactive since 2019... Since the account user hasn't posted or commented on any of their posts in 3 years, I figured my questions would go unanswered, hence why I'm asking here.

Part of what has really helped me get better at thinking about valuation is reading other people's analysis. However, I often struggle with understanding the *why's* and *how's* of valuating a company and how a person actually gets to their conclusion. In a sense, learning to understand another person's line of thinking helps me form my own.

Keep in mind this article is a follow up to a previous piece the author had written, shortly after KHC had dropped 35%. The author, Ian concludes by saying, "...if you are a really big believer in the company, it offers reasonable, but not exceptional, returns moving forward."

Background TLDR: I'm not asking to be spoonfed here. This is an article I came across, and, in doing my own research, struggled to understand how the author came to their conclusion. Throughout the article, I ask questions in hopes that someone could help me interpret the author's reasoning, numbers, and language being used...

That said, I sincerely appreciate any help.

=============

Summary
KHC is currently sitting atop a mountain of debt and has recently cut the dividend, signaling intent to work on this issue.

Debt is cheaper than equity, but poses risks. Paying it down is expensive, but perhaps necessary.

By understanding how the company intends to combat its debt moving forward, it's possible to refine my original fair value estimate.

A few weeks ago, I wrote an article as a direct rebuttal to an argument Warren Buffett made, essentially contesting the idea that Kraft Heinz (NASDAQ: KHC) is a wonderful business. Towards the end of the article, I issued a fair value estimate for the enterprise of $54.6 billion, even under what I considered to be a very optimistic assessment of future business performance. When reflecting on this price target, I realized that I had over-simplified the differences between debt and equity, and I would like take a deeper dive into the capital structure of the company, and refine my fair value estimate further.

Debt Is Cheap, But Risky
As of the end of 2018, Kraft Heinz carried almost $31 billion in long term debt, an increase of $2.5 billion from the prior year, and paid about $1.3 billion in interest on it, a rate of about 4%. As of writing, the company has a market cap of about $40 billion, meaning debt is now making up almost as large a piece of the pie as equity. In my article explaining my valuation methodology, I require a minimum return of 10% on any equity I'm interested in purchasing, which makes debt at 4% quite a lot cheaper. However, this also means that repaying the debt is an expensive affair, as any cash spent in this way carries only a 4% return on investment. In contrast with retained earnings being reinvested into the core business at 71%, or even in contrast with shareholder returns, at an earnings yield of 8.6%, paying down debt offers poor returns.

Question 1: Could someone ELI5 where it says, "I require a minimum return of 10% on any equity I'm interested in purchasing, which makes debt at 4% quite a lot cheaper."? How does a required rate of return determine if an equity's debt is considered cheap or not?

Question 2: How is the 8.60% earnings yield calculated here? Earnings yield = 1 / PE Ratio

KHC's PE Ratio at this time was between 4 and 5 --> Price at this time = $33.00; EPS = $8.36 --> PE Ratio = ~4

Therefore, wouldn't the earnings yield be closer to 25% (this doesn't make sense and I'm not sure how he is getting 8.60%)?

Of course, even though debt is currently very cheap, and thus offers poor returns, there's the aspect of risk that must be considered. Shareholder returns at 8.6% won't do the shareholder a dime of good if the business goes bankrupt, or earnings otherwise degrade, such that that 8.6% shrivels up over time, before the business has paid out enough to have made a worthwhile investment. With $1.3 billion in interest against about $6 billion in operating income, interest is eating a big chunk of the pie. Of course, 42% of the capital structure is tied up in debt, and it only consumes 22% of the pie, which is a win. The risk, however, is that a small decline in operating income will have a larger impact on shareholders' bottom line, due to the fixed interest expense.



Operating Income $6,000M $5,400M $4,800M $4,200M $3,600M
Change 0% -10% -20% -30% -40%
Interest Expense $1,300M $1,300M $1,300M $1,300M $1,300M
Interest As % 22% 24% 27% 31% 36%
Pretax Income $4,700M $4,100M $3,500M $2,900M $2,300M
Change in Pretax 0% -13% -26% -38% -51%
As this example shows, should operating income continue to dwindle, interest expenses will make up a larger portion of the whole. Of course, on the flip side, should operating income reverse the recent trend, and move upwards, the leverage will be to shareholders' benefit, as interest will make up a smaller portion of the whole, and pretax income will rise more quickly than operating income.

The premise is pretty simple: If earnings are rising, debt, even growing debt, isn't a problem, and can be used to the benefit of shareholders. However, if earnings are falling, debt can very quickly lead to a downward spiral, as paying off low-interest debt adds very little to the bottom line. In a perfect world, companies would have the ability to both pay down debt over time while continuing to offer their shareholders compelling returns. Then, in even the bad times, "bad" becomes a relative term, and an expedient recovery would be possible. In reality, companies tend to overestimate themselves, and put themselves into risk of a death spiral, in order to appease shareholders by at least appearing to offer compelling shareholder returns in the short term.

The Dividend Cut - What It Means
In the most recent quarter, Kraft Heinz cut the annual dividend from $2.50 to $1.60 per share, in an attempt to reduce commitments for the purpose of paying down debt. This boils down to meaning two things - equity holders will receive less, and debt holders will receive more. Over time, this will reduce risk, but also cause some pain to shareholders in the process.

With 1.22 billion shares klix, this $0.90 per share change will result in opening up $1.1 billion per year for debt coverage. At a 4% interest rate, this will add about $44 million to the pretax income on an annual basis, adding almost 1% growth to the bottom line. This growth can be allocated in whatever manner seems best to management. Later, I'll be tallying it up into the bottom line, and directly crediting it to the dividend growth rate, but there will also be a small impact on the rate of forward debt coverage, though too small to be very meaningful.

Question 3: What is meant by, "...result in opening up $1.1 billion per year for debt coverage. At a 4% interest rate, this will add about $44 million to the pretax income on an annual basis, adding almost 1% growth to the bottom line..." Could someone explain how $44M is generated and ADDED to the net income to fuel +1% of growth?

Is this $44M saved in interest expense when KHC decided to free up $1.1 billion for debt coverage, and therefore, considered interest income added back to net income?

However, if this same $0.90 had been kept in the dividend, it would be carrying a yield of about 7.6%, or 2.7% higher than currently, at current market price. While the whole company's earnings can be grown at 1% per year by using this extra $1.1 billion to pay down debt, an individual shareholder could have grown their own portion of otherwise-stable earnings at a rate 2.7% higher, if they had received this cash themselves, and reinvested into the stock at current price. Effectively, a 2.7% dividend yield was traded for a 1% dividend growth rate. With dividends reinvested, this is a 1.7% annual impairment to shareholders' total returns.

Question 4: Is what the author suggesting here is that 1.7% of shareholder value was needlessly destroyed? Could someone explain the tradeoff between the dividend yield and KHC's growth?

The reasons for the dividend cut have been made fairly clear - the debt is seen to be an issue. In recent history, the company's free cash flow has been impaired, and so the debt has been growing simply through paying dividends, a clearly-unsustainable pursuit. However, as I assumed in my optimistic view in my prior article, with working capital returning to balance, and earnings recovering, the company would to generate about $3.6 billion per year in free cash flow. Even in this optimistic scenario, it would have left only $550 million per year to pay down debt. For $31 billion in debt, this would take the better part of a lifetime to erase entirely. So, if the debt is considered to be a problem, it makes sense to attack it more aggressively. However, the fact that it's seen as a problem at all betrays the idea that the optimistic case is the most likely.

An Alternative - If Things Didn't Look So Bad
If paying down debt at a rate of $550 million per year was considered too slow, but the debt itself was not considered a major issue, I believe there would have been a better way of handling it. The write-down of brands was inevitable, and likely would have impaired the stock pretty significantly. Had the stock traded lower, to about $36, without the dividend cut, the stock would have still yielded 7%. This is markedly lower than the 4% the company pays on interest. If management believed earnings were to grow, or in fact, even to remain stable, this discrepancy would have offered them an opportunity.

With a 3% difference between the dividend yield, and the interest rate paid on debt, it would offer management an opportunity to reduce their total commitments by issuing debt to buy back stock. If $550 million per year was deemed too slow a rate of debt repayment, an additional $20 billion in debt used to buy back stock could reduce total commitments by $600 million per year, reaching $1,150 million available for debt repayment per year. Against the new total of $51 billion, this would actually lead to a reduced (but still very long) repayment duration, while reducing the dividend payout ratio. Shareholders would be able to continue either collecting $2.50 per share, or reinvesting at a 7% yield (should market price not change), and the dividend could be grown into the future with the savings from both debt repayment and earnings growth.

As distressed at Kraft Heinz appears to be today, it would probably not be in the company's best interests to be issuing debt. This is perhaps the biggest tell we have that an investment in Kraft Heinz today is a poor decision. If management was confident in not only stable earnings, but earnings growth, moving forward, an additional $20 billion in debt would be a manageable thing to pull off, even if quite questionable in the short term. The business has inherently stable earnings, so if management believed that the future looked like my optimistic case, it would offer a legitimate method to sustain long-term returns for shareholders, as well as ultimately accelerating debt repayment and reducing the dividend payout ratio.

Valuation
With the dividend cut, and the indications of putting more cash towards debt than in the past, my equity-only valuation method is imperfect, because not all free cash flow goes to shareholders. In this, it pays to follow where exactly the money goes. Assuming my optimistic case scenario, with $3.6 billion in free cash flow, about $1.95 billion is currently being allocated to shareholders through dividends, and the rest can be used to pay down debt. With 4% organic earnings growth per year moving forward, and almost 2% earnings growth per year through interest rate reductions, it would require at least a 4% dividend yield to reach my minimum 10% target returns. This actually has an optimistic fair value for the stock with some upside at $40 per share, with a little further upside in the extreme long term as more cash can be reallocated from debt coverage towards shareholder returns or even reinvested into the core business at higher rates.

Question 5: How is the fair value of $40 calculated here?

I'm not sure how the 4% organic growth is calculated, or what is meant by "2% earnings growth per year through interest rate reductions..." By 2%, is the author referring to KHC's terminal growth? Is terminal growth in this case based on the growth of the money supply (2-3%)?

10% required rate of return = ( 4% dividend yield / X ) + (4% earnings growth + 2% terminal) -->

10% = ( 4% div yield / X ) + 6% --> 4% = ( 4% div yield / X ) -->

To achieve a 10% return, KHC would have to trade at $40 with a dividend yield of 4% ... However, as mentioned in the author's conclusion below, he believes earnings will NOT grow at 6% and instead will grow at a minimal 2%, suggesting that in order to achieve a 10% return would require a higher div yield and a drop in the stock price.

However, it's important to understand how optimistic this case is. Because management had the potential tool, if they considered earnings to be at least stable, of issuing debt in order to buy back stock and reduce total commitments, but rather chose the less-risky act of cutting the dividend, I would hypothesize that management is concerned about a further long-term decline in the business, and for earnings to decay even further. With earnings stabilizing around average post-merger levels, and with the (still-optimistic, if the cash flow statement can't be cleaned up) $1.6 billion in interest repayments per year, I think it's a more-likely, and potentially even still too-optimistic, scenario to believe in 2% long-term earnings growth, which could be put into a dividend growth rate. For this scenario to reach a 10% total return, the stock would need to trade with a dividend yield of 8%, at $20.

In this article, I've more closely examined the capital structure of Kraft Heinz. In doing so, I refined and significantly upgraded my optimistic fair value estimate to $40 from $20. On the other hand, I've also identified a clear reason to believe that $20 still may not be cheap enough. I think that it's fair to say, at this point, that if you are a really big believer in the company, it offers reasonable, but not exceptional, returns moving forward. However, without any incredible faith in management and the business returning to strength, KHC isn't worth a second look until and unless it drops below $20.

=============

Question 6: To achieve a 10% return in the best case scenario, KHC would have to trade at $40 with a dividend yield of 4% ... However, he believes, based on the signal from management, earnings will NOT grow at 6% and instead will grow at the minimal perpetuity rate of 2%, suggesting that in order to achieve a 10% return would require a higher dividend yield and a significant drop in the stock price.

Is this a correct assessment of the author's conclusion?

[zigzag]

BH Telecom Sarajevo isplait će dividende dioničarima iz dobiti ostvarene u prošloj godini u iznosu od 0,5515514844 KM po dionici.

Odlukom o raspodjeli prošlogodišnje dobiti koju je usvojila Skupštine dioničara održana 17. juna, za dividende se isplaćuje ukupno 35 miliona KM, 7.317.332 KM ide u neraspoređenu dobit, a milion KM za donacije.

Pravo na dividendu imaju dioničari koji su na dan donošenja odluke evidentirani na listi dioničara kod Registra vrijednosnih papira u Federaciji BiH, proporcionalno njihovom učešću u kapitalu.

Isplata dividende za 2021. godinu izvršiće se putem Registra vrijednosnih papira u Federaciji BiH.

Sve je bolje nego u banci.