Short cuts: Installux, Gronlandsbanken, Admiral
Compared to Poujoulat and other French company, Installux released almost sensationally good 6M results. Sales went up +3% which is quite impressive for a domestic, France focused company and net result went up almost +14%.
According to the half year report, cash is now around ~86 EUR per share. Only with the 15,80 EUR 6M Earnings per share, Installux would trade at a single digit p/E ex cash even if they make no profit at all in the second 6 months. With a realistic 25-30 EUR per share for the whole year, we are at an cash adjusted P/E of somewhere between 5-6. In my opinion, despite the illiquidity, Installux still offers a great return/risk profile.
Grondlandsbanken delivered very strong 6 month numbers. 6 month profits of 30 DKK per share were almost 20% higher than in 2013, althhough there were significant positive one time effects included (valuation and disposal gains). Nevertheless, operating results also increased yoy despite overall still muted economic activity. What I found most interesting in the report was this statement from the outlook:
After a weak socio-economic growth and negative GDP in 2012 and 2013, no or a weak growth in the Greenland economy is expected in 2014, however, still with much uncertainty. In the expectation that the prices and
quantities of fish hold steady, that no raw material projects are initiated, but that large construction activities will start in the second half of 2014, the bank expects an increase in activity in 2014. It is, however, si gnificant that the activity in Nuuk remains low, while there is in creased activity in a number of coastal towns. A noticeable activity increase is thus essentially not expected until 2015.
So it seems to be that finally the big projects will be realized with a delay. As Gronlandsbanken has shown that they can increase earnings even without economic growth, I think the stock is “worth” to be upgraded to a “half position”. I will therefore increase the position from 1,9% to around 2,5% at current prices.
Already a few days ago, Admiral released H1 2014 numbers. Looking at the stock price, many investors seem to have been dissapointed:
Analysts have mostly lowered their ratings and/or price targets:
|Firm||Analyst||Recommendation||Tgt Px||Date↑||1 Yr Rtn||BARR||Rank|
|Credit Suisse||Chris Esson||neutral||1350||08/18/14|
|Canaccord Genuity Corp||Ben Cohen||sell||1220||08/15/14||4th|
|Exane BNP Paribas||Andy Hughes||underperform||1070||08/14/14|
|Deutsche Bank||Oliver Steel||hold||1260||08/13/14||2nd|
|Keefe, Bruyette & Woods||Greig N Paterson||market perform||1227||08/13/14|
|Oriel Securities Ltd||Marcus Barnard||sell||900||08/13/14||6th|
|Numis Securities Ltd||Nicholas Johnson||add||1720||08/12/14||10.97%||3rd|
Tha analyst “consensus” rating in Blommberg is 2,57 which is pretty bad and one of the worst for all European insurers.
Actually, Admiral posted higher profits than the comparable 6 months in 2013, however the released above average reserves. On the other hand, they still invest a lot, especially in US price comparison and the international business. For me, the results were pretty inline with what management has been saying all along. UK car insurance is in a tough spot and will remain so for some time. Interestingly, the all important “auxiliary” income remained constant despite lower premiums which in my opinion is a very good sign.
International premium has increased by 10%, however the loss has increased as well. Allthough I usually don’t like investor presentations that much, but the Admiral presentation is extremely good. There is also a lot to learn about insurance in general, such as the claim inflation example on page 20 or the detailed reinsurance terms on page 48. Also their view on the US market is quite interesting, especially slide 35 with the acquisition cost per insurance contract. For me, this is showing that the Admiral guys know what they are doing which is unfortunately not the general rule in insurance.
The only disappointing part in my opinion is the Italian subsidiary. Admiral says that they didn’t undwrite more as prices were un attractive. Other than that the international business seems to expand nicely.
Reader Musti forwarded me a link why Morgan Stanley sold out Admiral in one of their funds.
The team became more wary of Admiral (LSE:ADM) after the 2011 turbulence in the stock price, after a scare about the potential for large personal injury claims. While the 2011 claims ratio eventually turned out to be fine, it caused a revision in our view of the quality of the name. The combination of the stock’s recovery, and long-term concerns about the effect of autonomous driving on the motor insurance industry, caused us to reduce and then exit the position.
I think this is quite interesting and revealing. They became nervous because the stock price was volatile and that caused a revision of the “qualitiy of the name”. Self driving cars is definitely something to look at but I think no one can say now how quickly this will come and what impact this will have. A self driving car will still need insurance, so much should be clear.
Overall, for me nothing has changed with regard to Admiral. If you want to see smoothly increasing earnings then you have to go somewhere else. If you want a truly great business at a fair price then you should hold or buy more which I might do if the price falls further. I plan to make this a “full” position until the end of the year.
wenn ich fragen darf: an welcher börse und zu welchem Preis hast du Gronlandsbank gekauft. Ein Handel ist ja praktisch gar nicht vorhanden
Kopenhagen, 645 DKK
I would question that self-driving cars will need (independent) insurance. Two reasons: firstly, they’ll get accepted only if they have lower accident rates than human drivers, which implies a lower accident rate (some human risk disappears) and thus smaller gross premiums. Secondly, they make owning cars less interesting by making the “taxi” model cheaper than the legacy model where the driver often owns their vehicle with abysmal asset utilisation rates and high standby costs (parking). On-demand automated cars are likely to come from large-ish companies that can, as large old school car rental companies do today, self-insure because they have a large enough pool to mutualise risk internally. So no need for dedicated car insurance outside of residual niche markets. That said it’s going to take ages (decades I’d say) to get there.
I am still waiting to see a self driving car in Rome, Paris or another European city. That should be funny to watch how they manage “Italian rules” for driving.
How did you deal with the withholding tax on the Gronlandsbanken dividend in Greenland?
I paid it.
I mean have you tried to get it refunded and if so how smooth was the process?
From Germany you cannot refound the tax. I contacted the tay authority in Greenland, but there is no agreement between the two countries. But don’t forget that Gronlandsbanken pays out the the dividend + the tax on company level. From this the withholding tax is deducted. If you are from another country, please look at the homepage of the bank. There is a comment concerning the tax.
“The only disappointing part in my opinion is the Italian subsidiary. Admiral says that they didn’t undwrite more as prices were un attractive.”
If that’s indeed the reason, that sounds pretty positive to me!