Apple (AAPL) is splitting its stock, 7 for 1

AAPL’s 2Q14 earnings report last night was full of mostly positive surprises:

–earnings per share came in at $11.62.  That’s about 15% more than the Wall Street analyst consensus had expected, and higher, by about the same amount, than results in the same quarter a year ago.  It’s the largest margin AAPL has beaten the consensus by in years.

–the company is raising its dividend and increased its proposed share buyback amount by $30 billion

–AAPL is going to split its stock by 7 to 1.

Of these developments, I think the most important is the stock split.

stock splits

Academics will tell you two things about stock splits:

1.  Stock splits have no direct economic significance.  Its’ simply paper shuffling.  Instead of having one share that trades at, say, $560 you’ll soon have seven shares, each trading at $80.

2.  The stocks of companies that have stock splits tend to underperform for a period after the split occurs.

 

The second comment, while true, is, well, silly.  All the outperformance comes between the period when the stock split is anticipated by the stock market or actually announced and the date when the split takes place.

The first is also true–particularly in the United States (but not in many foreign markets).  But this doesn’t mean that the AAPL split has no relevance.

(See my post on stock splits for more details.)

Two reasons:

–stocks with very high per share prices tend to underperform.  Why?  I don’t know.  I think it’s because retail investors prefer to buy stock in round” lots (usually 100 shares).  This may be an echo from the days a half-century ago when trading costs were very high and when the commission for an “odd” lot (anything that isn’t a round lot) was particularly expensive.  For AAPL, this would be a commitment of over $50,000–too rich for a single position for most people.

Yes, it makes no sense.  But, whatever the reason, retail investors like stock splits and respond positively to them.

–more important, studied management contempt for shareholders, who after all are the owners of the company, has long been a key feature of the AAPL persona.  It’s part of the Steve Jobs legacy.  But it’s not a good one.  To me the stock split is a sign that the current management finally realizes how poisonous the Just-Like-Steve mentality has been and is beginning to shake off its shackles.

I don’t think this means AAPL returns to the super growth of its past.  On the other hand, I do think that, if I’m right about the attitude change, that the JLS discount multiple Wall Street now applies to AAPL stock will gradually disappear.  Just achieving a market multiple would imply a 30% gain in the stock.

 

Las Vegas Sands (LVS): a revealing 4Q13 earnings report

the results

Last week LVS reported 4Q and full-year 2013 results.

The quarter was another very good one.  Revenue (remember, this basically means the amount won from gambling customers) was up 18.8%.  EBITDA (earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation and amortization), smoothed to eliminate the effects of good/bad luck, were up by 25.8%.   Macau was up 55.8%–meaning it was the whole growth story.  EPS, on the same adjusted basis, were up by 35.9% at $.87.

For the full year, the company made $2.90 a share in earnings, and paid out $2.00 a share in dividends.

a tale of three countries

I think for an investor it’s more imformative to look at full-year results than just 4Q13.  It’s easier to see the overall economic underpinnings of LVS this way.

LVS had adjusted EBITDA of $4.767 billion last year.  That breaks out as follows:

1.  the US = flattish, at less than 10% of the total

The US had EBITDA of $475 million in 2013.  That’s up by $30 million, or 6.7% the year prior.  Of the total, about 30% comes from royalties paid to the parent by Asian gaming operations ( to be honest, I’ve never followed up on this detail like I would if I were still working).  The rest is split about 3/4 for Las Vegas and 1/4 for Pennsylvania.

Las Vegas is still suffering from the massive overcapacity created by the major casino operators MGM, LVS and WYNN just as the economy was cresting in 2007.  In addition, revenue-hungry states are continuing to create new gambling capacity within their own borders, the latest being Massachusetts.

So flattish is my best guess for the next few years.

2.  Singapore = flattish at just about 30% of the total

The Marina Bay Sands had hold-adjusted EBITDA of $1.385 billion in 2013, up from $1,366 billion in 2012.

For the first time–or maybe the first time I’m aware of–LVS has stated (more or less) clearly its assessment of its Singapore operations.  The evaluation?  …the operation is mature.  It has been government policy in Singapore from the beginning to discourage local citizens from frequenting either of the casino operations in the island state.  So growth there is out.  Its high background check standards–again, no surprise–mean many VIP junket operators are barred from doing business there.  So any high roller growth will come slowly and be the result of hard work.

So Marina Bay has turned into a $1.5 billion yearly annuity.  Not the outcome one might have hoped for a few years ago from LVS’s huge investment, but not a bad result either.

Note:  Marina Bay has also had an unusually long streak of bad luck, during which the amount actually lost by high rollers has consistently fallen shy of what historical experience would lead one to expect.  (translation:  the actual results have been below the hold-adjusted amount).

3.  Macau = 60%+ of the total–and rising

Macau’s EBITDA in 2013 was $2.907 billion, up 45.6% from the prior year.

Yes, the year-on-year comparison is flattered by relative weakness in Macau during the leadership transition in Beijing two years ago.  So Sands China won’t be up by 50% again in 2014.

More important, mass market gambling–which is the sweet spot for LVS–is just beginning to emerge in Macau (more about this tomorrow).  LVS has the experience and the hotel/casino capacity to take advantage of this new trend.  In what will likely be a 15% growth year in revenue for the Macau market in the aggregate, I think Sands China has a reasonable shot at being up by 20% in–and by a considerably higher percentage in EBITDA.

the stock?

First, I should mention that until recently I’ve been selling bits and pieces of my casino stock holdings (WYNN, LVS, Galaxy) because of position size.  Because of this, I don’t feel any urgent desire to add more.

If I owned none?  I’d be torn between Galaxy and LVS (assuming, as I do, that LVS has created conditions where US citizens can’t buy Sands China–company representatives I’ve spoken with appear to be clueless).  

At 20x forward earnings and a dividend yield of 2.7%, LVS strikes me as appropriately valued today–not cheap, but not that expensive if my view on Macau proves correct.  Personally, I’d be waiting to see how the correction we’re in develops, for the chance of buying the stock, say, 10% cheaper than now.  

3Q13 earnings for Wynn Resorts (WYNN)

3Q13

After the close yesterday, WYNN reported its 3Q13 earnings results.  Revenue came in at $1.39 billion, up 7% year on year.  Macau was up by 9.6% and Las Vegas by 1.1%.  The company posted EPS of $1.84, much higher than the Wall Street consensus of $1.65, and considerably ahead of the $1.48 WYNN tallied in the comparable period of 2012.

details

In my view, the basic WYNN story remains unchanged for now:

–The company is capacity constrained in the booming Macau market and will remain so until its new casino in the Chinese SAR, the Wynn Palace, opens in early 2016.  In the meantime, it is refurbishing and fine-tuning its existing capacity to boost profits and maintain competitiveness with new casinos currently being opened in Macau.  But it probably won’t keep pace with overall growth in that market.

–Las Vegas is flattish, which is good performance in a city suffering from the combined effects of slow economic recovery in the US, massive overcapacity created at the market peak and the continuing expansion of regional casinos in hard-strapped states looking for new sources of revenue.

The current situation is probably best summarized by the stock’s market capitalization, almost 95% of which represents the value of WYNN’s Asian subsidiary, Wynn Macau.  Some anticipation of the Wynn Palace’s opening must already be included in the latter’s price, since Las Vegas still accounts for a quarter of WYNN’s total EBITDA.

Massachusetts

Perhaps the most interesting thing about the company’s earnings conference call was Steve Wynn’s apparent distress at the shabby way in which he feels his company is being treated by Massachusetts as it applies for a casino operating license there.  The bone of contention seems to be the state regulator’s suspicion of anyone doing business in Macau.

My quick reading of the situation suggests the vetting process is a little weird.  On the one hand, Massachusetts wants to outdo New Jersey as the strictest venue for casino operation in the US.  On the other, it is still considering MGM, which is barred from doing business in NJ.  And it seems to be intimating that applicants will get more favorable consideration if they give financial support to local tourist boards.   It will be interesting, though not crucial for WYNN, to see how the process turns out.  My sense is it will be a much bigger black eye for Mass than for WYNN if its application ends up being rejected.

my take

I’ve been holding both WYNN and HK: 1128 (Wynn Macau) for a long time.  I’ve recently sold my position in the latter, both on the idea that I can buy it back next year, when the new Palace is nearer to opening and because my overall casino holdings (I also own LVS and HK:0027 (Galaxy Entertainment)) had become too large).

WYNN and 1128 are the best casino operators in their markets, in my opinion.  Las Vegas may be boosted by a better climate for the convention/meeting business in Las Vegas next year.  But I don’t see market-beating earnings acceleration for 1128 for at least seven quarters.  Yes, the stock has been a blockbuster performer in Hong Kong recently, up by over a third during the past three months.  But that’s a short-term negative, in my opinion, not a positive.

Las Vegas Sands (LVS) and Sands China (HK: 1928): 3Q13 earnings

the results

After the New York close yesterday, LVS announced 3Q13 results for itself and for its subsidiaries, Macau-based 1928 and wholly owned Marina Sands of Singapore.

Revenues for LVS came in at $3.57 billion, up 31.7% year on year.  EBITDA (earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation and amortization)  advanced by 45.5% yoy to $1.28 billion.  EPS was $.82, a 78.3% yoy increase.  That figure exceeded the Wall Street consensus by $.05.

During the quarter, LVS repurchased 4.6 million shares of its stock, at an average price of $65.18.  It says it will buy back a minimum of $75 million in stock a month from now on.

LVS also raised its quarterly dividend from $.35/share to $.50, giving a forward yield of 2.8%.

 

1928 rose by almost 10% in overnight trading in Hong Kong (in a market where other Macau casino stocks were up by 4%-5% or so).  LVS has barely budged in this morning’s pre-market trading.

 

the highlights

Macau

LVS is a convention hotel operator.  Its strength is catering to customers who have, say, $10,000 to gamble during a stay rather than VIPs with $1 million or more.  Its huge investment in hotel/casino capacity in the Cotai section of Macau on the conviction that if Sands built it, customers would come, is beginning to pay off royally now.

EBITDA for 1928 came in at $785.3 million for the quarter, up 61.7% yoy.

Singapore

Marina Bay’s EBITDA was $373.6 million, up 43.3% yoy.  However, the amount bet by VIP gamblers was only up by 16.9%.  The largest portion of the EBITDA increase comes from the casino “win” (the amount gamblers lose, which is what casinos count as revenue) bouncing back from an abnormally low 1.79% of the amount bet during 3Q12 to a more normal 2.85%.

US

Down a bit, yoy.  EBITDA in Las Vegas was $87.1 million (vs. $98.2 million during 3Q12).  Bethlehem, Pa brought in $29.6 million (vs. $32.1 million).

my take

At this point, over 90% of LVS’s EBITDA comes from Asia.  That percentage will continue to climb.

Marina Bay is an enigma to me.  …a good enigma, but a puzzle nonetheless.  It isn’t that long ago that Marina Bay and Macau were neck-and-neck in generation of cash for LVS.  But while Singapore has been relatively stagnant, LVS’s Macau EBITDA have doubled.  Has Marina Bay already topped out at $1.5 billion in annual EBITDA?  I find it hard to think this is the case, but I can’t see any evidence to the contrary from the financials.

Macau is booming   …and the market is rapidly developing a large resort/convention segment, which is LVS’s management specialty.

valuation

At today’s Hong Kong closing quote, LVS’s interest in Sands China is worth $49 billion.

If we make the (conservative, in my view) assumption that Marina Bay will generate about $1.5 billion in annual cash flow and that we’re willing to pay 10x for that, then the Singapore subsidiary is worth $15 billion.

The same calculation for the US operations (let’s put a cash flow multiple of 8 on it) would value it at about $4 billion.

Total value = $68 billion.  That compares with a total market cap for LVS at yesterday’s close of $58.5 billion.

If these back of the envelope figures are close to correct, LVS is trading at about a 15% discount to the sum of its parts.  Further upside could come from continuing flowering of the Macau operations, which I think is highly likely, and/or a return to growth for Marina Bay.  (I own the stock and am happy to remain a holder.  At some point, I’ll have to trim the position simply because of size, but see no present reason to do any other selling.)

 

 

3Q13 earnings for Intel (INTC): the wait continues

I’m on the road today, so this will be brief.

Yesterday after the market close, INTC reported earnings for 3Q13.  EPS were $.58/share, considerably above the Wall Street consensus of $.53.  Initially, the stock was up by around 2% in the aftermarket on this news.  Then it reversed course and lost about 2%.  Symmetrical, but not wonderful.

As I see it, the news can be divided into two halves–current market conditions and INTC’s future viability as a chip firm.

The near-term bucket is looking good.

–The high speed and cloud server businesses continue to boom, and now make up at least half of INTC’s total server revenues.

–Regular old corporate servers are even starting to pick up.

–The middlemen and OEMs that INTC sells its PC chips to are slowly starting to build their inventories in response to a bottoming of the PC market in the US and the EU.  Stocks, however, still remain smaller than normal, so there’s more improvement to come.

–More tablets will be appearing over the coming weeks with INTC chips inside.

4Q13 eps, traditionally a big quarter for INTC on holiday sales, will be flattish with 3Q13, on revenues up only slightly, quarter-on-quarter.

The future. on the other hand, has once again been pushed out–this time for another year, until 2015.

INTC’s industry-leading 14 nanometer chips have been delayed by a manufacturing glitch for three months until January.  So their higher speed and lower power use won’t be available during this holiday season.  To my mind, this is not a big deal.  On the other hand, during the conference call that accompanied the earnings announcement, CEO Brian Krzanich said he doesn’t think INTC can make its manufacturing operations as flexible as they need to be to respond to customer needs for another year to eighteen months.

This contrasts with the comments of former CEO Paul Otellini, for whom full competitiveness with rival chipmaker ARM Holdings was always just a quarter or two around the corner.

In hindsight, Otellini had a habit of being too optimistic.  In contrast, Krzanich, as a new CEO, has no incentive to make promises he can’t keep.  His best course of action is to underpromise and overdeliver.

The bottom line, however, is that the turnaround holders like me are hoping for has once again been pushed out.  That’s why the stock is down in the pre-market this morning, though not by as much as it was last night.

I’m content to hold and collect the dividend.