Posted by yfchong > 2013-08-01 15:29 | Report Abuse

Bro KC reasoning is much detail than the investment analysis......if you are in the finance line, probably you are one of the top gun.

Posted by tonywong > 2013-08-01 15:53 | Report Abuse

thanks for your generous sharing.

Posted by houseofordos > 2013-08-02 07:41 | Report Abuse

KC, mind to share what is your intrinsic value calculation for MFCB ?

Posted by kcchongnz > 2013-08-02 08:11 | Report Abuse

What is the intrinsic value of MFCB?

Financial theory postulated by John Burr Williams in his “The theory of investment value” says that the value of a stock is worth all of the future cash flows expected to be generated by the firm, discounted by an appropriate risk-adjusted rate. This theory has since been extensively used in contemporary finance.

There are two major assumptions used in the computation for the intrinsic value, or the present value, of the expected future cash flows of a company; earnings growth rate and the discount rate. Slight deviations of the assumptions can yield a vast difference in the intrinsic value.

The discount rate is related to what is the required return by the equity and debt holders respectively; i.e. how much risk premium above the risk-free rate would be required. For most practical purpose, in contrast with the academic approach in capital asset pricing model, a risk premium applied is related to how stable the earnings and cash flow of the company and its financial health. The 10-year MGS rate at the moment is about 4%. MFCB earnings and cash flows have been steady for the last 7 years. It has a squeaky clean balance sheet. So it would be conservative to apply a risk premium of 6% above the MGS rate, or a required return of 10% (4%+6%). Using a before-tax borrowing rate of 7%, it weighted average cost of capital is about 9.3%. This WACC will be used as the discount rate for the valuation of the firm.

The more difficult part is the assumption of future cash flows of the company which is related to its expected growth rate. A difference in assumption of growth of 10% will yield a completely different intrinsic value of the company. For example if one assumes MFCB’s earnings will grow by 5% for the next 5 years, and 3% subsequently, its intrinsic value is RM3.67. If his assumption is 15% growth for the next 5 years, the IV is RM4.485. So which growth rate is the right one?

When I carry out the computation of IV to decide whether to invest in a company, I would prefer to use conservative assumptions in its growth rate. In MFCB’s case, how about the assumption that its business will be stagnant, and there is no further growth, not even grow with the rate of inflation? In this case I would use the Earnings Power Valuation popularized by Columbia University Professor Bruce Greenwald. For those who are interested, please refer to the following link:

http://www.scribd.com/doc/15987706/Greenwald-Earnings-Power-Value-EPV-lecture-slides

The intrinsic value of MFCB using the EPV is RM2.27 per share as shown below.

Figures in thousands
Revenue 635304
Ebit 119885
less income tax -30922
EBIT after tax 88963
Add average D&A 17093
Less average capex -22791
Normalized Ebit 83265
Cost of capital, R 9.3%
Capitalized earnings=Ad Ebit/R 892009
Add cash 126108
Other investments 117313
Less debts -68712
EPV 1066718
Less minority interest -406987
EPV to common shareholders 659732
Number of shares 242395
EPV/share 2.72

So at the close of MFCB’s share price at RM1.74 on 1/8/13, it is trading at a margin of safety of 36%.

Posted by Jaack1 > 2013-08-02 09:54 | Report Abuse

02.08.13

Dear Mr KC Chong,

The intrinsic value of MFCB using the EPV is RM2.27 per share as shown below .....

Is there a typo? The EPV should be RM2.72


Tks/Rgds
Jaack

Posted by kcchongnz > 2013-08-02 09:57 | Report Abuse

Jaack1, yes, it is clearly a typo mistake. The intrinsic value is 2.72, a margin of safety of 36% if you buy MFCB now at 2.74.

Posted by Henry HO > 2013-08-02 10:04 | Report Abuse

to Mr KC Chong,

Thank you for the write-up on MFCB...

Would you be considering Magnum & Keck Seng???

Posted by kcchongnz > 2013-08-02 10:23 | Report Abuse

Henry, have not looked at Magnum. Keck Seng yes, hell of undervalued. But I think the management won't pass any "value" to the minority shareholders. I bought at about 4.00 and sold at about 5.00. Not interested anymore.

Posted by newbiestock > 2013-08-02 10:31 | Report Abuse

magnum and keckseng undervalued LOLZ u are funny as wel as stewpead ler

Posted by Henry HO > 2013-08-02 10:50 | Report Abuse

to Mr KC Chong,

Thank you for your comments on Magnum & Keck Seng..

Posted by miketyu > 2013-08-02 14:18 | Report Abuse

kcchongnz what is your target for return before taking profit on any share? 10% earning or 20% or more?

Posted by kcchongnz > 2013-08-02 14:35 | Report Abuse

miketyu,
Everybody is different. That is the beauty of this world.

For me, I am a fundamental investor. So my reference is the intrinsic value of the company, and the concept of margin of safety in investing in its stock. So if the share price goes beyond its intrinsic value, I definitely will sell. But if there is still 20% margin of safety, I likely will keep the stock.

Posted by Jaack1 > 2013-08-03 11:48 | Report Abuse

Dear Mr KC Chong,

MFCB announced that they have obtained approval for a 90years concession on a 9477 ha land to plant rubber and that the development of this land is expected to enhance the long term net assets and earnings of the group.

Is MFCB a planter? Do they have the expertise in this field?

What is your view on this development?

Tks/Rgds
Jaack1

Posted by kcchongnz > 2013-08-03 12:35 | Report Abuse

Jaack, yeah saw that announcement last night. I don't know if it is a good development for MFCB or not. On one hand, all companies strive to grow their business. It would be best if they can grow in the power and limestone products business which they have the experience. But I guess it is good to go regional too. They do not have the experience in plantation, but I guess they can employ expertise. Skill and unskilled labour there is cheap too. I think rubber plantation which they intend to do would be a good business as this natural rubber has been getting less and less in supply but there is always demand for it.

I remember 4-5 years ago this company Kfima ventured into palm oil plantation which they totally did not have any expertise at all. But now the plantation division has been providing them with steady 30% of their revenue and profit. So many critics "dropped their spectacles".

I think there is a good way of capital allocation for growth.

Posted by yfchong > 2013-08-03 12:38 | Report Abuse

Ha ha I think they was to be glove producer, it's good.

Posted by tuniamasingh > 2013-08-03 12:40 | Report Abuse

Agreed with you KC Chong NZ

Posted by Jaack1 > 2013-08-03 13:20 | Report Abuse

Dear Mr KC Chong,

Thank you for your input.

Announcement has addressed ‘the RM6,972,000 Advances for plantation project & long term lease land in Cambodia’ in MFCB 2102 report, page 83.

Outstanding is the MFCB’s clarification on ‘RM 27,824,000 advance on the Don Sahong Hydro Project’ indicated MFCB 2012 report page 83.

MFCB proposed to built a power plant in Republic of Laos - if comes to fruition, it could be interesting.

Tks/Rgds
Jaack1

Posted by tonywong > 2013-08-03 13:44 | Report Abuse

Dear kcchongnz, i enjoy and have learned alot reading your postings,thanks again! is it advisable to buy those stocks you recomended recently at this juncture as KLSE is at the historical high?
do we have to put a stop loss in case of major correction?
THANKS

Posted by kcchongnz > 2013-08-03 14:05 | Report Abuse

tonywong,
For fundamental investors, unlike technical followers, there is no such thing as stop loss. Both have different approach in buying and selling stock.

Fundamental investors buy a good company at reasonable price. Best is cheap price with big margin of safety. They only sell if the stock price has gone up closed to or above the intrinsic value. They do sell even they are at a loss if the fundamentals of a company deteriorates.

Many great fundamental investors do not bother much about macro economy or historical stock prices. They think it is extremely hard to predict macro-economic stuff.

It is the value of a stock the fundamental investors are concerned of, not the broad stock market. Again, it is hard to predict if the broad market will go up more or retreat.

Posted by tonywong > 2013-08-03 14:23 | Report Abuse

Dear kcchongnz, a very good piece of advice. As this is my first investment in KLSE, i feel more confident now . THANKS KCCHONGNZ !!!

Posted by kcchongnz > 2013-08-04 14:42 | Report Abuse

Posted by tonywong > Aug 3, 2013 02:23 PM | Report Abuse
Dear kcchongnz, a very good piece of advice. As this is my first investment in KLSE, i feel more confident now . THANKS KCCHONGNZ !!!

tonywong, if you know mandarin, you must listen to the video appended below.

http://klse.i3investor.com/blogs/kianweiaritcles/34315.jsp

Posted by tonywong > 2013-08-04 16:03 | Report Abuse

dear kcchongnz,
THANK YOU VERY MUCH for your guidance

Posted by Jaack1 > 2013-08-07 10:29 | Report Abuse

Wow ... good call Mr KC Chong

Posted by nokenzo > 2013-08-11 12:04 | Report Abuse

Dear KC,
Thank you very much for your excellent analysis of MFCB intrinsic value. However, I failed to arrive at certain entries of your data. I would be much obliged if you could kindly enlighten me on how to get these figures, viz: Ebit, Income tax, D&A, cost of capital, capitalized earnings and minority interest. I have tried to look at the 2012 financial statement of MFCB, but somehow I cannot find or add up to the above mentioned data like yours. Thank you again.

Posted by kcchongnz > 2013-08-11 12:54 | Report Abuse

nokenzo, definitely you won't get the same figure as mine. There is no way another person doing the EPV will get the same numbers as another. No way. This is because valuation is an art more than a science (don't remember how many times I have mentioned this).

For example, what ebit do you use? I use an average ebit margin of 16%, which is the average ebit margin of last 5 years to last year's revenue to get the constant ebit for the rest of the life of MFCB. Some may use average of 3 years, some last year's.

Income tax, I based on the percent of last year's ebit. What other use?

Capex? I used lat year's capex which is the lowest. This is for EPV, you assume there will be no more growth and hence no capex for growth, just maintenance capex which will be low. D&A? I can't use the pass years D&A because the non cash added back will be more than the maintenance capex. It is not possible for write back of D&A higher than capex for the rest of its life, can it? Can you get back more money (in D&A write back) than the expenses on the plant and machinery you spend on for the long term? So I used an arbitrary D&A of 75% of capex.

Cost of capital is the weighted average cost of capital (WACC) of equity and debt holders. It is worked out based on followings:

WACC Wt R WACC
Market cap 421767 86.0% 10.0% 8.6%

Total debt 68712 14.0% 5.3% 0.7%
490479 9.3%

Tax rate 25.00%

Capitalized earnings is just normalized ebit/WACC.

Minority interest I just based on the last year income statement that worked out to be 38.2% of the net profit belongs to the minority interest. Hence 38.2% of the EPV goes to MI. Frankly speaking I am not 100% sure if this is correct. But I think so.

So you see EPV is more an art. For that matter, all valuation methods are more art than science. There is no right or wrong.Important thing is whether your assumptions are realistic and logical. Also use various valuation methods and if the results are all close, then the valuation may make sense. I guess if you do the EPV using sensible inputs, you will arrive at a figure close to mine too.

Posted by nokenzo > 2013-08-11 13:03 | Report Abuse

Hi KC,
Thanks alot for your prompt reply, I really appreciate it. Shall try again base on your assumption. I am a novice and try to understand what you mean. You are really kind to enlighten me. Thanks again.

Posted by mlg123 > 2013-08-11 14:07 | Report Abuse

Hi KC,

it is interesting to see how you calculate the intrinsic value of MFCB but I still do not really get it.
As I had invested in GUH, it will be useful if you can show me how to calculate the intrinsic value of GUH.
thanks a lot

Posted by kcchongnz > 2013-08-11 18:57 | Report Abuse

What is the intrinsic value of GUH?

Posted by mlg123 > Aug 11, 2013 02:07 PM | Report Abuse
Hi KC,
it is interesting to see how you calculate the intrinsic value of MFCB but I still do not really get it.
As I had invested in GUH, it will be useful if you can show me how to calculate the intrinsic value of GUH.
thanks a lot

I remember I have commented before that GUH is a value stock if you are looking for a cheap property stock but with reasonable financial performance to invest in. Below is my EPV for GUH based on the last two years financials. The assumptions are ebit margin averaging 13%, tax rate 23%, net capex about 4.5m as shown, cost of capital 10%. Please note these limitations.

Revenue 280386
EBIT 35721 13%
NOPAT=EBIT*(1-tax rate) 27581 23%
Average maintenance capex -16741
Add average D&A 12282
Normalised EBIT 23122
Cost of capital, R 10%
Capitalized earnings=Nor Ebit/R 231287
Add cash 160286
Add others 0
Less debts -117
EPV 391456
Less minority interest 0
EPV to common shareholders 391456
Number of shares 185414
EPV/share 2.11 >
Margin of safety 36%

The intrinsic value is RM2.11.

Posted by tonylim > 2013-08-11 22:38 | Report Abuse

Thanks kcchong
Short and sweet.

Posted by Trillion > 1 month ago | Report Abuse

Hahahaha taking again.......

Posted by Trillion > 2013-08-11 22:41 | Report Abuse

KCchong.......you r indeed too good.......someone is eating your food now.....for free.

Posted by Trillion > 2013-08-11 22:58 | Report Abuse

When I don't comment I don't ask for things, when I do comment I ensure I share freely. This is true for any capable person but for those who say they are capable and good but continue to take, pls be aware of them.

Posted by nokenzo > 2013-08-12 20:15 | Report Abuse

Hi KC, I tried for whole day to get the figure you gave in market cap like wt? 86% and 10.0%, and in total debt 14.0% and 5.3% ???. How you get these figure? Sorry I am still in MFCB trying to understand your intrinsic value. Hope you don't mind parting your knowledge. Thank you in advance. The following was what you wrote.

Cost of capital is the weighted average cost of capital (WACC) of equity and debt holders. It is worked out based on followings:

WACC Wt R WACC
Market cap 421767 86.0% 10.0% 8.6%

Total debt 68712 14.0% 5.3% 0.7%
490479 9.3%

Posted by kcchongnz > 2013-08-12 20:56 | Report Abuse

Market capitalization=421.8m, Total debts=68.7m
Total equity + debts=490.5m
Weight of equity=421.8/490.5=86%
Weight of debts=68.7/490.5=14%
Cost of equity=10%
after-tax cost of debts=(1-25%)*7%=5.3%

WACC=86%*10%+14%*5.3%=8.6%+0.7%=9.3%

Posted by nokenzo > 2013-08-12 22:04 | Report Abuse

Hi KC, Thank you so much. You have made my life so much easier. One last question, why use 1-25%? and what is 7%?

Posted by kcchongnz > 2013-10-17 08:42 | Report Abuse

7% is the before-tax cost of debt, interest rate from bank borrowing, loan stock interest etc. It is an assumption as I don't really know exactly that cost.

25% is the tax rate, also an assumption but I think should be pretty close. So (1-25%)*7% is after tax cost of debt.

Actually don't worry too much about the calculation of WACC. One could just use say 10%, and that would be fine.

Posted by nokenzo > 2013-08-13 10:18 | Report Abuse

Dear KC,
Thank you so much for your clarification. I am marveled by how you can readily arrive at the intrinsic value of so many stocks. You are great and unselfish. Salute to you. I am from Northern Malaysia. If you happen to come to this part of the world, please let me know. My email: nokenzo@hotmail.com.
I am a science graduate trying to understand finance, just like a fishmonger trying on masonry work. lol.

Posted by nokenzo > 2013-08-14 08:29 | Report Abuse

Hi KC,
What do you think of MSC? Lately alot of talk about the failed COW in Koba Tin and price has dropped. I understand this was last year's news and 2Q has passed.

Posted by kcchongnz > 2013-08-14 10:20 | Report Abuse

nokenzo, again, i don't know much about this company. all I know is it is a well established and professionally run company.

I don't look at it in detail because its earnings is very volatile and hence hard for me to judge what is the intrinsic value of the company. One year it can earn 56m but the following year lost 93m.

It is beyond my level of competence to understand this type of business.

Posted by nokenzo > 2013-08-14 11:34 | Report Abuse

Hi KC, thank you very much. After I have gone through what you have contributed in this forum, I respect you, that is why I seek your opinion.

Posted by kcchongnz > 2013-09-13 19:25 | Report Abuse

Katsenelson’s absolute PE for MFCB

Basic PE for MFCB with a growth of 4.8% and a dividend yield for last year of 4.4%,

Basic PE = 8 + 0.65*4.8 + 4.4 = 15.5

Business risk: MFCB’s business has high efficiencies with average return of assets of 6.5% and high return of capital of 18.5%. Cash return (FCF/IC) is great at 20%. Hence there may a good moat in its business. An arbitrary 5% premium is applied to its business risk.

Financial risk: MFCB has a very healthy balance sheet with net cash of 130m. Hence a premium of 5% is applied.

Earnings visibility: MFCB has quite stable and reasonable operating profit margins of 20%. Its cash flow from operations is also stable, about the same as its net income. It has stable and high free cash flow every year, averaging more than 10% of revenue. A premium of 5% is applied.

Hence the absolute PE for MFCB is:

Abs PE = 15.5* [1+(1-95%)] *[1+(1-95%)] * [1+(1-95%)] = 17.1

Fair value of MFCB= 17.1*0.239 = RM4.09

Ooop, it is way above its present share price of RM1.82.

Posted by mhchai > 2013-09-13 17:12 | Report Abuse

kcchongnz, can you help me to calculate the fair value of PRKCORP ? TQ

Posted by kcchongnz > 2013-10-21 12:07 | Report Abuse

Oooop mistake again. The absolute PE ratio should be 18 and the price should be RM4.29. I Must be crazy, 135% above its present price of RM1.83!

Posted by kcchongnz > 2013-09-21 19:40 | Report Abuse

Posted by mhchai > Sep 13, 2013 07:35 PM | Report Abuse
kcchongnz, can you help me to calculate the fair value of PRKCORP ? TQ

The earnings of Prkcorp is volatile and hence hard to estimate its intrinsic value. Sometimes it sell land and boast up its earnings which may not be sustainable. I would recommend you to the following blog for hsi writeup on Prkcorp. He knows much more than me about Prkcorp.

http://blisswise.blogspot.co.nz/search?q=prkcorp

However, if you are interested, here is a rough estimate of the intrinsic value of Prkcorp based on absolute PE.

Katsenelson’s absolute PE for Prkcorp

Basic PE for Prkcorp with a growth of 2% and a dividend yield for last year of 2.6%,

Basic PE = 8 + 0.65*2 + 2.6 = 11.9

Business risk: Prkcorp’s business has low efficiencies with slightly below average return of assets of 7.8% and return of equity of 10.1%. Cash flow is good. A discount of 5% is applied to its business risk.

Financial risk: Prkcorp has a very healthy balance sheet with a reasonable debt-to-equity ratio of 0.2. Hence no premium nor discount is applied.

Earnings visibility: Prkcorphas earnings is not stable. a discount of 20% is applied.

Hence the absolute PE for Prkcorp is:
Abs PE = 11.9* [1+(1-105%)] *[1+(1-100%)] * [1+(1-120%)] = 9.0

Fair value of Prkcorp= 9.0*0.381 = RM3.45

Posted by houseofordos > 2013-09-16 17:50 | Report Abuse

PRKcorp is an asset rich company, applying a graham net net valuation method as a most conservative way of valuation as described by KC still presents a decent margin of safety

Graham net-net valuation of Prkcorp

Graham net-net BS value Wt Liq value Per share
Cash and cash equivalent 208122 100% 208122 2.08
Property development costs 132434 100% 132434 1.32
Land held for development 14658 100% 14658 0.15
Investment Properties 5107 100% 5107 0.05
*Other investments 76231 80% 60984.8 0.61
Inventories 6410 50% 3205 0.03
Trade Account Receivables 129945 75% 97458.75 0.97
Property, plant and equipment 85483 0% 0 0.00
Port facilities 86320 0% 0 0.00
Intangible assets/tax recoverable 25267 0% 0 0.00
Total assets 769977
Total liabilities 189876 100% 189876 1.90
Total equity 580101 0
Number of shares 100000 100000
Net tangible asset per share 5.80 3.32

*These are available for sale financial assets (quoted shares in Malaysia)

Closing price 2.87
MOS 13.58%

Posted by kcchongnz > 2013-09-25 18:33 | Report Abuse

house, good one.

You are already conservative doing that. If quoted share, use 100% market value. Port facilities should worth something.

And have you deducted minority interest? Anyway, my estimate is higher because of the above. But conservative is good especially when contemplating whether want to invest or not.

Posted by kcchongnz > 2013-09-16 18:46 | Report Abuse

Hey house, why didn't you put a "disclaimer" in your valuation?

Posted by houseofordos > 2013-09-16 20:39 | Report Abuse

kc, good point, should i just deduct minority interest from equity section ?
disclaimer? aiya who am I ? its not like I have so much influence... hahaha...

Posted by kcchongnz > 2013-09-16 20:44 | Report Abuse

Yes. A substantial amount of the asset belong to MI as the financials of the subsidiaries are consolidated into MFCB statements.

Posted by mhchai > 2013-09-16 21:48 | Report Abuse

Thx you kccchongnz