Categories
Articles

My Interview with AutoNation’s CEO Mike Jackson: Pt.1

Here is part one of my interview with AutoNation (AN) CEO mike Jackson

Todd Sullivan: Wilbur Ross said recently he didn’t see current pressures on the US consumer ebbing until the end of next year, how do you feel about that?

Mike Jackson: You know it’s hard to say when exactly pressures are going to ease but sometime into 09, certainly no time into 08. The key thing we are watching for is stabilization in housing and we need the price of housing to stop going to down, that would be the first sign of stabilization and that will begin to give the consumer some sense of confidence about their situation. We see some of that in California already because California was the first state that went into the downward spiral and other states came much later. So yes, it’s probably sometime in 09.

Todd Sullivan: The Kiplinger Report estimates that about 1,200 dealerships across the US are going to close this year, mostly domestic brands, do you see that as an accurate assessment or do you see more than the 1,200?

Mike Jackson: I think it could well be more as we’ve hit a tipping point on sustainability. It’s not just going to be small ones, its going to be big ones also. The retail distribution system was never rationalized and the domestic share moved from 70% to 50%, if you look at the number of dealerships that came out that period of time was very minor vs what was done in the manufacturing side and the white collar side. With any decline in industry value with that overcapacity situation, you’ve hit an inflection point that is going to lead to a rapid decline in the number of dealerships out there, particularly domestic.

The situation was sustained with a bond of loyalty that went just beyond just economics with a resilient business model. But that bond has been broken and the business model cannot handle these types of declines with that type of overcapacity. I think its hit an inflection point and you’re going to see massive amounts of automotive real estate be converted over to other business uses. Families that have been in the business 40, 50, 60, and 70 years are going to say “this is it and I’ve had enough, I’m getting out”.

Todd Sullivan: So by default you will be increasing your market share as these close, and it also means there will be properties perhaps on the market at extremely attractive prices. Is the thought process to perhaps grow market share through the acquisition of some of these cheaper properties or to let them go and just let your market share grow through attrition?

Mike Jackson: Yes, we are going to let it grow through attrition. We’ve tried to pre-position our locations to be the best in the market, to be the ones that have great locations and should survive the shakeout, as you say, stronger than when we went into it. But in the mist of it, it’s a very disruptive and difficult environment to do business in, I won’t mislead you on that. We feel we are well positioned and this is something that had to happen, needs to happen, and we should be in a better position when it’s all set and done.

Todd Sullivan: You said recently that you’re going to decrease your exposure to domestic brands (GM (GM), Ford (F)), I think it’s a 29% now to about 20%. Is that mostly going to be done simply because people aren’t buying domestic brands or are you going to divest some of those domestic brands or change them over?

Mike Jackson: It’s definitely a combination Todd. Us divesting a few more marginal stores we have in domestic, and an acceleration in the share shift that is happening for the entire industry from the domestics over to the imports. It’s a combination of our divestiture / acquisition strategy with what’s happening already in the market place.

Todd Sullivan: So in which direction, clearly you won’t be adding domestic dealerships, so which direction do you see yourself going? Would it be more of a Honda / Toyota or a BMW / Mercedes direction? I think BMW (BMW) just actually reported a sales increase earlier this morning (Friday).

Mike Jackson: We really like premium luxury, we’ve bought a lot of BMW/Mercedes stores over the past five years and are definitely on the lookout to acquire more. Whether we will find one at attractive pricing is another story entirely. We like Nissan (NSANY), Toyota (TM) and Honda (HMC). We basically like the thru-put brands in the metro-urban market, we run a high thru-put model to the greatest extent possible. So that’s what we would be looking for. Again, whether we acquire them or not, depends on the pricing. But we have a pretty good position already, we have 10% of the Mercedes market, so that’s a significant position.

Todd Sullivan: You recently announced a cost reduction plan of a $100 million dollars a year and I believe you are halfway there. How confident are you in delivering the extra $50 million throughout the rest of the year?

Mike Jackson: If I wasn’t more that 100% confident I wouldn’t have announced it

Todd Sullivan: Very nice.

Mike Jackson: Well, that’s why it took me six months to announce it. I mean we basically had an internal goal going into ’08. Doing it though, you know to where it didn’t damage the company long term required a lot of effort and a lot of skill. You have to be extremely thoughtful and you may run into some situations you hadn’t anticipated, that means you can’t hit the target. So we are past that point. We got the hard part done.

Todd Sullivan: When you look at the environment right now, there are some real dichotomies out there. You have automakers saying that they are seeing signs of a bottom and that the worst might be over, but you have analysts out there who are lowering some price targets and say from the next 6-8 months things are going to be bad for the auto dealers, like you. There seems to like this contradiction of thought in regards to outlook. What do you say to someone who is an investor with a 2-3 year time frame, who is looking at these 2 areas and is saying I don’t know what I should do? My personal thought is now is when you buy, but there are a lot of people who are unsure.

Mike Jackson: Well, if you look at our performance year to date, we really hit the trifecta as far as cross currents. The housing crisis which we called out years ago as soon as it started and that it would have implications for our industry. We called that out in ’05 and that then rolled into a credit crisis which started again in housing but now has definitely spread to other businesses and to having effects on the marginal buyer not being able to buy an automobile, so that’s affecting volume. We had a spike in May up to $4.00 a gallon for gasoline and we are dealing with a geographic development in Florida and California, being the two worst states.

So just about everything that can go wrong has gone wrong as far as headwinds and yet we are solidly in the black. We are extremely profitable, not what it was before but you have to consider the headwind. At the same time, we’ve clearly continued to invest in the business as far as profit, technology and cost point of view. We clearly stated with these cost savings that there will be a permanent benefit to a certain percentage of it. So ultimately when the mark occurred, we will have achieved our goal which was to come out of the downturn stronger than we went into it both from a market-share point of view and from a capability point of view. I think the records pretty clear that we are achieving that.

Now, what I can’t tell you, I can’t call the exact moment that the market will turn, and I think I have a different definition than what you described Todd. To me when the business stops going down, not necessarily that it’s going back up, but just stops going down, it’s a much better operating environment for us. Where the market is declining, like the types of declines we saw from May into the 3rd quarter, that is really difficult to manage because all kinds of issue come after you. For example, what your doing with your inventory to the standing levels in the store and you really are operating the business with tremendous intensity everyday. As soon as the business stops going down, your in a very different operating mode and your positioning yourself for recovery and how long we will be in that period where we stop going down and what I can predict. But if it stops going down that’s already quite something.

Pt 2 Tomorrow.


Disclosure (“none” means no position):Long AN, None
Visit the ValuePlays Bookstore for Great Investing Books

Categories
Articles

Monday’s Links

Mobile, Gumshoe, Lehman, Chrome

– Now this is research

– More scams uncovered

– I think they may just go under

– Until they get ad-ons, I can’t really use it very well

Disclosure (“none” means no position):
Visit the ValuePlays Bookstore for Great Investing Books

Categories
Articles

Sunday Reading

CNN,

– Leave it to CNN to try to make a criminal look sympathetic in their quest to make Palin look bad….


Disclosure (“none” means no position):
Visit the ValuePlays Bookstore for Great Investing Books

Categories
Articles

Paulson Spares Fannie and Freddie Shareholders

It looks like common and preferred shareholders of Fannie (FNM) and Freddie Mac (FRE) will not be wiped out…

September 7, 2008
hp-1129

Statement by Secretary Henry M. Paulson, Jr. on Treasury and Federal Housing Finance Agency Action to Protect Financial Markets and Taxpayers

Washington, DC– Good morning. I’m joined here by Jim Lockhart, Director of the new independent regulator, the Federal Housing Finance Agency, FHFA.

In July, Congress granted the Treasury, the Federal Reserve and FHFA new authorities with respect to the GSEs, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. Since that time, we have closely monitored financial market and business conditions and have analyzed in great detail the current financial condition of the GSEs – including the ability of the GSEs to weather a variety of market conditions going forward. As a result of this work, we have determined that it is necessary to take action.

Since this difficult period for the GSEs began, I have clearly stated three critical objectives: providing stability to financial markets, supporting the availability of mortgage finance, and protecting taxpayers – both by minimizing the near term costs to the taxpayer and by setting policymakers on a course to resolve the systemic risk created by the inherent conflict in the GSE structure.

Based on what we have learned about these institutions over the last four weeks – including what we learned about their capital requirements – and given the condition of financial markets today, I concluded that it would not have been in the best interest of the taxpayers for Treasury to simply make an equity investment in these enterprises in their current form.

The four steps we are announcing today are the result of detailed and thorough collaboration between FHFA, the U.S. Treasury, and the Federal Reserve.

We examined all options available, and determined that this comprehensive and complementary set of actions best meets our three objectives of market stability, mortgage availability and taxpayer protection.

Throughout this process we have been in close communication with the GSEs themselves. I have also consulted with Members of Congress from both parties and I appreciate their support as FHFA, the Federal Reserve and the Treasury have moved to address this difficult issue.

Before I turn to Jim to discuss the action he is taking today, let me make clear that these two institutions are unique. They operate solely in the mortgage market and are therefore more exposed than other financial institutions to the housing correction. Their statutory capital requirements are thin and poorly defined as compared to other institutions. Nothing about our actions today in any way reflects a changed view of the housing correction or of the strength of other U.S. financial institutions.

I support the Director’s decision as necessary and appropriate and had advised him that conservatorship was the only form in which I would commit taxpayer money to the GSEs.

I appreciate the productive cooperation we have received from the boards and the management of both GSEs. I attribute the need for today’s action primarily to the inherent conflict and flawed business model embedded in the GSE structure, and to the ongoing housing correction. GSE managements and their Boards are responsible for neither. New CEOs supported by new non-executive Chairmen have taken over management of the enterprises, and we hope and expect that the vast majority of key professionals will remain in their jobs. I am particularly pleased that the departing CEOs, Dan Mudd and Dick Syron, have agreed to stay on for a period to help with the transition.

I have long said that the housing correction poses the biggest risk to our economy. It is a drag on our economic growth, and at the heart of the turmoil and stress for our financial markets and financial institutions. Our economy and our markets will not recover until the bulk of this housing correction is behind us. Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac are critical to turning the corner on housing. Therefore, the primary mission of these enterprises now will be to proactively work to increase the availability of mortgage finance, including by examining the guaranty fee structure with an eye toward mortgage affordability.

To promote stability in the secondary mortgage market and lower the cost of funding, the GSEs will modestly increase their MBS portfolios through the end of 2009. Then, to address systemic risk, in 2010 their portfolios will begin to be gradually reduced at the rate of 10 percent per year, largely through natural run off, eventually stabilizing at a lower, less risky size.

Treasury has taken three additional steps to complement FHFA’s decision to place both enterprises in conservatorship. First, Treasury and FHFA have established Preferred Stock Purchase Agreements, contractual agreements between the Treasury and the conserved entities. Under these agreements, Treasury will ensure that each company maintains a positive net worth. These agreements support market stability by providing additional security and clarity to GSE debt holders – senior and subordinated – and support mortgage availability by providing additional confidence to investors in GSE mortgage backed securities. This commitment will eliminate any mandatory triggering of receivership and will ensure that the conserved entities have the ability to fulfill their financial obligations. It is more efficient than a one-time equity injection, because it will be used only as needed and on terms that Treasury has set. With this agreement, Treasury receives senior preferred equity shares and warrants that protect taxpayers. Additionally, under the terms of the agreement, common and preferred shareholders bear losses ahead of the new government senior preferred shares.

These Preferred Stock Purchase Agreements were made necessary by the ambiguities in the GSE Congressional charters, which have been perceived to indicate government support for agency debt and guaranteed MBS. Our nation has tolerated these ambiguities for too long, and as a result GSE debt and MBS are held by central banks and investors throughout the United States and around the world who believe them to be virtually risk-free. Because the U.S. Government created these ambiguities, we have a responsibility to both avert and ultimately address the systemic risk now posed by the scale and breadth of the holdings of GSE debt and MBS.

Market discipline is best served when shareholders bear both the risk and the reward of their investment. While conservatorship does not eliminate the common stock, it does place common shareholders last in terms of claims on the assets of the enterprise.

Similarly, conservatorship does not eliminate the outstanding preferred stock, but does place preferred shareholders second, after the common shareholders, in absorbing losses. The federal banking agencies are assessing the exposures of banks and thrifts to Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. The agencies believe that, while many institutions hold common or preferred shares of these two GSEs, only a limited number of smaller institutions have holdings that are significant compared to their capital.

The agencies encourage depository institutions to contact their primary federal regulator if they believe that losses on their holdings of Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac common or preferred shares, whether realized or unrealized, are likely to reduce their regulatory capital below “well capitalized.” The banking agencies are prepared to work with the affected institutions to develop capital restoration plans consistent with the capital regulations.

Preferred stock investors should recognize that the GSEs are unlike any other financial institutions and consequently GSE preferred stocks are not a good proxy for financial institution preferred stock more broadly. By stabilizing the GSEs so they can better perform their mission, today’s action should accelerate stabilization in the housing market, ultimately benefiting financial institutions. The broader market for preferred stock issuance should continue to remain available for well-capitalized institutions.

The second step Treasury is taking today is the establishment of a new secured lending credit facility which will be available to Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, and the Federal Home Loan Banks. Given the combination of actions we are taking, including the Preferred Share Purchase Agreements, we expect the GSEs to be in a stronger position to fund their regular business activities in the capital markets. This facility is intended to serve as an ultimate liquidity backstop, in essence, implementing the temporary liquidity backstop authority granted by Congress in July, and will be available until those authorities expire in December 2009.

Finally, to further support the availability of mortgage financing for millions of Americans, Treasury is initiating a temporary program to purchase GSE MBS. During this ongoing housing correction, the GSE portfolios have been constrained, both by their own capital situation and by regulatory efforts to address systemic risk. As the GSEs have grappled with their difficulties, we’ve seen mortgage rate spreads to Treasuries widen, making mortgages less affordable for homebuyers. While the GSEs are expected to moderately increase the size of their portfolios over the next 15 months through prudent mortgage purchases, complementary government efforts can aid mortgage affordability. Treasury will begin this new program later this month, investing in new GSE MBS. Additional purchases will be made as deemed appropriate. Given that Treasury can hold these securities to maturity, the spreads between Treasury issuances and GSE MBS indicate that there is no reason to expect taxpayer losses from this program, and, in fact, it could produce gains. This program will also expire with the Treasury’s temporary authorities in December 2009.

Together, this four part program is the best means of protecting our markets and the taxpayers from the systemic risk posed by the current financial condition of the GSEs. Because the GSEs are in conservatorship, they will no longer be managed with a strategy to maximize common shareholder returns, a strategy which historically encouraged risk-taking. The Preferred Stock Purchase Agreements minimize current cash outlays, and give taxpayers a large stake in the future value of these entities. In the end, the ultimate cost to the taxpayer will depend on the business results of the GSEs going forward. To that end, the steps we have taken to support the GSE debt and to support the mortgage market will together improve the housing market, the US economy and the GSEs’ business outlook.

Through the four actions we have taken today, FHFA and Treasury have acted on the responsibilities we have to protect the stability of the financial markets, including the mortgage market, and to protect the taxpayer to the maximum extent possible.

And let me make clear what today’s actions mean for Americans and their families. Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac are so large and so interwoven in our financial system that a failure of either of them would cause great turmoil in our financial markets here at home and around the globe. This turmoil would directly and negatively impact household wealth: from family budgets, to home values, to savings for college and retirement. A failure would affect the ability of Americans to get home loans, auto loans and other consumer credit and business finance. And a failure would be harmful to economic growth and job creation. That is why we have taken these actions today.

While we expect these four steps to provide greater stability and certainty to market participants and provide long-term clarity to investors in GSE debt and MBS securities, our collective work is not complete. At the end of next year, the Treasury temporary authorities will expire, the GSE portfolios will begin to gradually run off, and the GSEs will begin to pay the government a fee to compensate taxpayers for the on-going support provided by the Preferred Stock Purchase Agreements. Together, these factors should give momentum and urgency to the reform cause. Policymakers must view this next period as a “time out” where we have stabilized the GSEs while we decide their future role and structure.

Because the GSEs are Congressionally-chartered, only Congress can address the inherent conflict of attempting to serve both shareholders and a public mission. The new Congress and the next Administration must decide what role government in general, and these entities in particular, should play in the housing market. There is a consensus today that these enterprises pose a systemic risk and they cannot continue in their current form. Government support needs to be either explicit or non-existent, and structured to resolve the conflict between public and private purposes. And policymakers must address the issue of systemic risk. I recognize that there are strong differences of opinion over the role of government in supporting housing, but under any course policymakers choose, there are ways to structure these entities in order to address market stability in the transition and limit systemic risk and conflict of purposes for the long-term. We will make a grave error if we don’t use this time out to permanently address the structural issues presented by the GSEs

I think at this point, anything that stem the housing slide is a good thing. Even is it just causes it to stagnant, anything that stops the slide has to be viewed as a positive.

Monday sure is going to be a wild ride…


Disclosure (“none” means no position):None
Visit the ValuePlays Bookstore for Great Investing Books

Categories
Articles

Ackman’s Letter tp Paulson on Fannie and Freddie

Here is the letter send from Bill Ackman to Hank Paulson Friday regarding the rumored bailout of Fannie (FNM) and Freddie (FRE) by the governement.

September 5, 2008 The Honorable Henry M. Paulson, Jr. Secretary United
States Department of the Treasury 1500 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20220

Re: Fannie Mae/Freddie Mac Restructuring

Dear Secretary Paulson:

We understand that a Treasury plan for Fannie/Freddie (“the GSEs”) may
be announced this weekend. We thought you might find useful some further
thoughts on potential GSE solutions.

As you are likely aware, we had previously distributed a proposed
restructuring plan for the GSEs. In that plan, under a prepackaged
conservatorship, equity interests would be extinguished, subordinated
debt would be exchanged for warrants, and senior debt would be exchanged
for new senior debt and common equity in the newly recapitalized
entities. The government would write a put to the new common equity
holders which would expire in three years.

It appears, however, that the GSEs may need help more quickly, and
conservatorship may not be triggered until the GSEs are formally
determined to be undercapitalized. As such, in the event the government
needs to inject capital immediately, we suggest you consider the
following transaction (“the Transaction”).

In order to minimize risk to taxpayers while being equitable to other
constituents, we suggest that the Treasury consider purchasing senior
subordinate debt in the two companies in an amount sufficient to address
their capital needs in the short to intermediate term. This senior sub
debt would be junior in right of payment to the outstanding senior
unsecured debt and senior to the outstanding sub debt, preferred stock,
and common equity. We refer to the outstanding sub debt, preferred and
common stock as “the Subordinate Securities.”

The issuance of senior sub debt is permitted under the GSE legislation
and under the existing terms of the outstanding debt and equity
securities of the two entities (please see the attached memo for further
details). As a condition of Treasury’s purchase of senior sub debt, the
GSEs would defer the interest payments on the outstanding sub debt
(which can be deferred for as much as five years), and the dividend
payments on preferred and common stock. All of the Subordinate
Securities would continue to remain outstanding according to their
existing terms.

The new senior sub debt should have a market-based coupon and Treasury
should receive low-strike price warrants (penny warrants) for a
substantial portion, i.e., 49% of the two companies. The coupon and
warrant structure should be as close to fair-market-value terms as
possible. The ultimate determination of fairness would be the
willingness of non-government investors to purchase the Transaction
securities on the same basis as Treasury. As part of the Transaction,
the GSEs would deleverage their capital structures by paying down senior
debt from the free cash flow generated by their core businesses further
improving the position of the new senior sub debt.

The benefits of the Transaction are as follows:

• The Transaction can be accomplished under the existing terms of the outstanding GSE securities without any required consent other than from the GSEs.

• The new security would be senior in right of payment to the existing sub debt and preferred stock minimizing the risk to tax payers while providing substantial support to the outstanding senior debt that has been deemed implicitly guaranteed by the government.

• The new debt interest payments would be tax deductible, reducing the after-tax cost of capital to the GSEs, particularly when compared with preferred stock.

• In the event the outlook and performance of the GSEs and their assets were to improve dramatically, the senior sub debt could be redeemed, distributions to the Subordinate Securities could resume, and their values would increase accordingly.

• In the event that the GSEs’ fundamentals continued to deteriorate and they became undercapitalized, the GSEs could be placed in conservatorship. In
conservatorship, their balance sheets could be restructured along the
lines of our original plan or another plan with the Treasury’s senior sub debt treated preferentially to the Subordinate Securities, again minimizing risk to the tax payer.

• The Transaction would be fundamentally fair to all constituents and would respect the existing terms and corporate hierarchy of all outstanding GSE securities.

• The Transaction would minimize moral hazard issues for sub debt, preferred, and common stock investors.

Most importantly, we believe there are serious negative implications for
other large financial institutions in the event the Treasury were to
bail out Subordinate Security holders. The Treasury and OFHEO have done
substantial research on the benefits to capital market discipline from
large financial institutions’ issuance of subordinate debt, and the
destructiveness of the government implicitly or explicitly guaranteeing
such obligations.

See: Report to Congress “The Feasibility and Desirability of Mandatory
Subordinated Debt”, Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System and
United States Department of the Treasury (December 2000), available at:
www.federalreserve.gov/boarddocs/rptcongress/debt/subord_debt_2000.pdf

“Subordinated Debt Issuance by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac”, Valerie L.
Smith, Office of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight, OFHEO WORKING
PAPERS, Working Paper 07 – 3 (June 2007), available at
http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm” abstract_id=1000264;

“Signals from the Markets for Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac Subordinated
Debt”, Robert N. Collender, Samantha Roberts, Valerie L. Smith, Office
of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight, OFHEO WORKING PAPERS, Working
Paper 07 – 4 (June 2007), available at:
http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm”abstract_id=1000240 &rec=1&src
abs=1000264;

“Subordinated Debt and Bank Capital Reform”, Douglas D. Evanoff, Federal
Reserve Bank of Chicago, Larry D. Wall, Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta,
FRB Atlanta Working Paper No. 2000-24 (November 2000), available at
http:// papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm”abstract_id=252754.

To the extent the Treasury were to bail out the GSEs’ subordinate debt –
which was: (1) never implicitly guaranteed by the government, (2) always
rated below Triple A by the rating agencies, and (3) held by investors
who knowingly took on the risk of loss in exchange for a substantial
credit spread above the GSEs’ senior debt – it would endanger the
systemic benefits from subordinate debt issuance for every highly
leveraged banking institution in the world and the capital markets at
large.

Furthermore, we do not believe that the Treasury can purchase GSE sub
debt, preferred stock or common stock without incurring an immediate
loss to tax payers because of the enormous amount of existing debt
senior to these instruments. At a market coupon or dividend yield (to
the extent that one were to exist), any debt issued pari passu to the
existing sub debt, or preferred stock issued pari passu or even senior
to the existing preferred stock would require a yield that would be
uneconomic for the GSEs. No third-party investor would purchase these
securities regardless of their terms in light of their junior position
in the GSEs’ capital structure.

Please note that Pershing Square and affiliates own CDS on the
subordinate debt of the GSEs. We also note that nearly all participants
in the capital market debate on the GSEs are either long or short the
outstanding GSE securities.

We are contemporaneously releasing this letter to the public in the
interest of market transparency.

Respectfully,

William A. Ackman


Disclosure (“none” means no position):
Visit the ValuePlays Bookstore for Great Investing Books

Categories
Articles

ADM (video)

The video is more than a little goofy but the point it makes is well taken.


Disclosure (“none” means no position):Long ADM
Visit the ValuePlays Bookstore for Great Investing Books

Categories
Articles

Wally Weitz on Wealthtrack (video)

Weitz make a very rare TV appearance to talk about value investing. He covers Fannie (FNM), Freddie (FRE), AIG (AIG)


Visit the ValuePlays Bookstore for Great Investing Books

Categories
Articles

Weekend Reading

Goldman (GS) buying Morgan (MS)?, Obama

– Option traders can usually tell us something and Adam just may be onto something…

– Figures it takes Fox News to finally get him to admit it..

Visit the ValuePlays Bookstore for Great Investing Books

Categories
Articles

Wells Fargo CFO Clarifies Bill Gross Comments

Wells Fargo shares sold off yesterday after Bill Gross said he did not participate in the debt auction. Today, Wells CFO Howard Atkins clarified what the auction was and why the market reacted wrong to the news.


Disclosure (“none” means no position):Long WFC
Visit the ValuePlays Bookstore for Great Investing Books

Categories
Articles

Interview with AutoNation CEO Mike Jackson

Just finished a lengthy interview with Mike Jackson, AutoNation CEO. I hope to have it transcribed and posted on Monday. One thing that struck me, the comparisons between Jackson and Dow chemical (DOW) Andrew Liveris are inescapable. Both are brutally honest about the business environment they are operating in and both have a clear vision on how to manage through it.

Visit the ValuePlays Bookstore for Great Investing Books

Categories
Articles

Altria / UST……..hmmmmm

The deal between Altria (MO) and UST (UST) will make Altria the clear leader in both smokeless and traditional tobacco. It also must be an admission that their offering will enter the “non premium” space below the Copnehagen and Skole offerings from UST.

The deal, rumored to be worth more than $10 billion could be announced as early as Monday, though the timing could be sooner given media reports of the negotiations. UST shares are up 24 percent in trading from a close of $54 on Thursday. As expected, Altria spokesman David Sylvia declined to comment on speculation about a deal. A UST spokesman could not be reached for comment.

Given the long term future of smoking, Altria moving into this market is a must. Even if Altria is forced to raise their price to $70 a share, that would only represent a 16% premium to UST’s January high, not expensive by any means given the brands in UST control.

It would also ad about $1 billion a year in earnings (rough number not accounting for synergies) to the $4 billion Altria already produces.

The larger point here would be gaining access to UST sales and distribution channels for its own smokeless offering. Rather than develop these, a UST purchase simply allows those folks to begin offering and pushing Altria’s smokeless products through their channels. That, is a very valuable asset for Altria.

It also means Altria, in one swoop now becomes the player in the smokeless market, whereas now they are sitting on the sidelines.

If you are going to buy into a markets, go for the top of it.


Disclosure (“none” means no position):Long MO, none
Visit the ValuePlays Bookstore for Great Investing Books

Categories
Articles

Wells Fargo Expanding Insurance Business

I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again, is this 2008 or 1990? Wells Fargo (WFC) is doing the little things like it did in 1990 that made shareholders very happy for the next almost two decades.

America’s largest bank-owned insurance brokerage and a subsidiary of Wells Fargo & Company (WFC) – announced that it has acquired the assets of Spokane, Washington’s Char Clark Associates, Inc. The acquisition adds to Wells Fargo’s diversified presence in Washington State – now a total of 4,300 team members across the region, serving customers from 147 banking stores and 5 insurance brokerage offices.

Founded 24 years ago, Char Clark Associates provides group and individual health, life, disability, dental and vision coverages – focusing on the employee and executive benefit needs of customers ranging in size from one to several hundred employees.

Company shareholder Charlaine “Char” Clark and her team will transition operations into the Wells Fargo Insurance Services office in Spokane, WA. Terms of the transaction were not disclosed.

“We are excited to offer expanded resources, services and support to Char Clark & Associates’ customers,” said Mark Neupert, managing director of Wells Fargo Insurance Services’ Spokane office. “Char is well known and highly respected in the local business community and in our broader marketplace and she and her team will be a tremendous addition to our growing operations here in Eastern Washington and across the entire Pacific Northwest.”

“We’re delighted to join such a well respected organization that lets us broaden and enhance the products, services and solutions we deliver to our customers,” said Char Clark. “Our customers will receive the same great service from the same committed professionals, and they’ll now have access to a wider range of resources and services to help them succeed financially.”

“We’ve grown to become one of America’s largest insurance brokerage companies by combining our national resources with great local agencies like Char Clark Associates, Inc.,” said Dave Zuercher, president, chairman and CEO of Wells Fargo Insurance Services. “We’ll continue to look for agency acquisitions that advance and strengthen our vision, values and geographic interests across the country.”

CEO John Stumpf said recently that he wanted to expend the company’s insurance operations and its footprint in the Northwest. This deal does both.

At a time where other banks like Citi (C), Wachovia (WB) and others are shedding (or trying to) assets at a breakneck pace, Wells Fargo is quietly expanding its business and growing stronger.

It worked before, no reason to expect it won’t again…


Disclosure (“none” means no position):Long WFC, C, WB
Visit the ValuePlays Bookstore for Great Investing Books

Categories
Articles

Friday’s Links

Lead, Thank you, Annello, “moral hazard”

– Jane Genova “moving on up” at Point of Law

– Thank you for the mention and your additional work.

– Annello take on the MSM and points out what they do not see

“The Job of Federal Reserve of the is to create Moral Hazard”


Visit the ValuePlays Bookstore for Great Investing Books

Categories
Articles

Palin Speech (video)

For those who missed it… best line (there were many)? “Do you know the difference between a hockey mom and a pitbull? Lipstick”. The speech drew 37 plus million people, only 1 million less than Obama’s. Wanna bet that had million of people in Louisiana, Mississippi and East Texas not be displaced due to the hurricane , she would have easily beat him? I think so too.

Part 1:

Part 2

Part 3

Part 4


Visit the ValuePlays Bookstore for Great Investing Books

Categories
Articles

Wal-Mart’s "Guidance" Changes Reaction to Results

This is a classic. So just last month when Wal-Mart came in at 3% comps and people were inexplicably disappointed and then guided for 1% to 2% for August, I said “Anyone want to bet Wal-Mart is lowering projections to avoid the current scenario next month? Now Wall St. will lower “estimates”, Wal-Mart will beat them and everyone will be happy…..strange stuff.” Guess what happened today?

Wal-Mart (WMT) said Thursday sales of groceries and back-to-school products helped its August same-store sales rise 3 percent, beating expectations.

Sales in stores open at least one year, a measure known as same-store sales, rose 2.8 percent at Wal-Mart Stores and 4.2 percent at Sam’s Club for the four weeks ended Aug. 29. Analysts polled by Thomson Reuters predicted a 1.6 percent rise.

Including fuel, the world’s largest retailer’s total same-store sales rose 3.5 percent. Total company sales rose 9 percent to $30.67 billion in the four-week period.

“The underlying business performance for Walmart U.S. continued to show strength and the improved relative performance has resulted in market share gains,” said Eduardo Castro-Wright, Walmart U.S. president and chief executive, in a statement.

Isn’t this just great? Same number but because they issue different guidance, people were upset before and are thrilled today. Maybe Sears’ (SHLD) Eddie Lampert and Berkshire’s (BRK.a) Warren Buffett are onto something by not issuing guidance.

It also goes to show the most of Wall St. simply bases their expectations on those set by the company.

Oh yea…the company said it expects September same-store sales to rise 2 percent to 3 percent. Now if we come in a 3% again, we’ll “meet the high end of expectations” and that will be good news. 4% and people will be dancing.

Such nonsense…


Disclosure (“none” means no position):Long WMT, SHLD, none
Visit the ValuePlays Bookstore for Great Investing Books