GAP Inc. (GPS): A Market Leader in Apparel Retail Is Spinning Off Underperforming Assets Which Should Drive Shareholder Value, But Income Derived From a Third-Party Credit Card Agreement Overstates The Company’s Earning Power And Makes the Stock Too Risky

Write-Up by Jonathan Danielson

Gap Inc. (GPS) is a company everyone should be familiar with: they’re an apparel retailer that specializes in ‘casual classics’. Meaning, jeans, khakis, polos, button downs, etc. The Company is headquartered in San Francisco and was founded in 1969. Gap Inc. has acquired and launched several brands over the years, but its main ones currently are: Old Navy, Gap Brand, Banana Republic, Intermix, and Athleta. GPS has increasingly become an Old Navy company over the years as consumers have flocked towards value brands and have deserted higher end specialty brands so it wasn’t too terribly surprising when they announced at the end of last quarter their intentions of separating into two companies. Interestingly enough, Old Navy will be the RemainingCo operating as a stand-alone business while Gap Brand, Banana Republic, Athleta, and Intermix will be spun off.

Based on consolidated metrics, GPS appears to be an interesting situation. When I pull the company up on QuickFS.net I see a company that has 10 year averages of:

• Gross margins: 38%
• EBIT margins: 11%
• ROE: 29%
• ROIC: 34%

All for a P/E of 10 and an EV/EBITDA of 6-ish. Not bad for a retailer. In fact, I was expecting much, much worse. If you pull almost any of their peers up and measure them on the same metrics you get an entirely different picture. More specifically, I looked at Guess, American Eagle, and Abercrombie and Fitch. Let’s just say when you pull those company’s financials up it looks like they have been existing in an era where questions are being raised about the viability of the brick and mortar retail business models. So, perhaps there’s an interesting situation here after all. Gap Inc. only grew revenue at a 1.8% CAGR over the past 10 years. However these are consolidated numbers and Old Navy is being spun off, remember? And Old Navy has been growing faster than the rest of Gap. Inc’s brands. Additionally, the “peers” I listed above most likely aren’t peers – not for Old Navy at least. The companies I previously listed are closer to Gap Brand and Banana Republic. The closest peer for Old Navy is probably somewhere in between Ross and H&M. Ross has been able to maintain healthy margins and growth while it appears H&M has struggled of late. Nonetheless, both companies look much healthier than any of the specialty-type brands previously listed.

We might have a compelling thesis on our hands if Old Navy is all that management cracks it up to be. The answer, as typically the case, isn’t so clear as one would hope. After all, GPS is operating in an environment that’s been dubbed the retail apocalypse. We’re living in the age of Amazon, how is your classical brick and mortar retailer churning out 34% returns on capital? Is Old Navy really that good? Well, I have my suspicions that it might not be the case. I’ll walk you through the numbers, show you how …

VieMed Healthcare (VMD): A Founder Led Canadian Listed U.S. Ventilator Company Faces the Risk of Competitive Bidding for its Medicare Patients Starting in 2021

Write-up by REID HUDSON

(Geoff’s note: VieMed trades under the symbol “VMD” in Canada and over-the-counter in the U.S. under the symbol “VIEMF”. The stock is a lot more liquid in Canada than in the U.S. However, the price difference between the shares in Canada and the U.S. doesn’t always perfectly reflect the U.S. Dollar to Canadian Dollar exchange rate.)

VieMed Healthcare Inc. operates in the home health space and provides services and equipment to a variety of respiratory patients.  Its main market consists of stage 4 COPD patients who are in need of non-invasive ventilation (NIV) therapy to continue living without excessive time spent in a hospital.  VieMed also offers a range of sleep apnea, oxygen, and other respiratory solutions to patients.  VieMed employs Respiratory Therapists (RTs) to assist patients with the set-up of machines, education, continued monitoring, and other services included in respiratory treatment.  The company states that NIV treatment makes up roughly 90% of its business.  VieMed is a Canadian listed company that operates in the United States.  Its corporate structure consists of a Canadian parent company listed on the TSX called VieMed Healthcare Inc.  This parent company is the sole owner of a Delaware incorporated U.S. subsidiary called VieMed Inc. that owns two subsidiaries of its own.  The company operates through these two Louisiana based subsidiaries: one called Sleep Management, LLC and the other called Home Sleep Delivered, LLC.

As the graphic above shows, Sleep Management was founded in 2006 by its current CEO Casey Hoyt.  It got into the Non-Invasive Ventilator (NIV) market in 2012 and began to focus on COPD, changing its name to VieMed shortly thereafter.  After being acquired by PHM, VieMed completed a spin-out in 2017.  It was listed on the TSX Venture Exchange mainly because the company that it spun-off from was listed there.

VieMed claims that it cares for more patients with non-invasive ventilators than any other company in the United States.  NIVs are non-invasive machines that are used to lessen the effort required to breath.  They are primarily used by patients with late-stage COPD and neuromuscular diseases that both make it very difficult to breathe without assistance.  These machines are non-invasive as opposed to invasive ventilators that require insertion through the mouth, nose, or directly to the trachea by way of a tracheostomy tube.

Since entering the NIV market, VieMed has grown revenue and active vent patients at a fantastic rate.  Its revenue has grown at a CAGR 44% since 2010 and around 29% since its name change in 2014.  However, this number is weighed down by a negative year in 2016, when Medicare slashed reimbursement rates for NIVs.  Most recently, VieMed grew its top line number 39% in 2018 and around 50% in 2017.  The number of active ventilation patients that it serves grew to about 5,905 in 2018, representing a growth rate of about 35% for the year.  Active vent patients grew at almost 43% in 2017.   While this growth has been impressive, what …

Sandridge Energy (SD): A Carl Icahn Controlled Post-Bankruptcy Oil Producer With 10-35 Years of Proved Reserves in Colorado, Oklahoma, and Kansas Trading at a Fraction of Net Asset Value

Write-up by JONATHAN DANIELSON

Sandridge Energy (SD) is an upstream oil and nat gas exploration and production company with operations primarily in the Mid-Continent and North Park Basin in Colorado. The Company is an onshore driller and owns three principle assets: Mississippi Lime, NW STACK, and the North Park Basin. The Miss Lime is a mature asset that will continue to decline in production, while the STACK and N Park assets are newer, higher growth, and more economically attractive.

I believe SD to be one of the most demonstrably mispriced and most compelling E&P play around for a multitude of reasons. SD is not a stock for a concentrated investor and extreme caution in trading the name is urged by your author.

Despite being in a tough industry, there is no reason for this valuation discrepancy and it is very unlikely to persist. SD has cleaned house with a new management team in place which has shed unproductive assets, implemented tighter cost controls and will invest future cash flows into their more productive assets.

Recent Events:

There are several factors at play as to why SD is currently trading so cheaply. For one, it’s a post-bankruptcy stock. With headquarters in Oklahoma City, Sandridge was founded by Tom Ward in 2006. Ward went on to accumulate over $10 billion from Wall Street investors and pursued strategies that entailed growing without regard to the underlying economics of the transaction in question (Empire building), leveraging the balance sheet with billions in debt, and subsequently entering Chapter 11.

SD emerged from bankruptcy in late 2016 and has seen its share price slide ever since. The reasoning reorg stocks face selling pressure is well documented in Greenblatt’s Stock Market Genius book, so i’ll be brief – as former bondholders now become equity holders there’s a mismatch in owners of the capital structure. Entities who specialize in distressed debt now find themselves owning equity, which they likely have very little interest in. Thus, selling pressure ensues.

Second, the past 5 years have been brutal for all E&P companies with the collapse in oil prices. Many of whom have subsequently filed for Chapter 11. That’s what happens when you take a commodity business notorious for cyclicality and add leverage. Upstream producer’s woes were exacerbated in the second half of last year as oil was again hammered.

Third – and most importantly – SD was on the bidding block last year as part of their “strategic review” and bids came significantly lower than what was expected. I believe many special situation-type investors owned SD last year in hopes of participating in a quick asset sale. As these hopes failed to materialize these investors likely dumped their shares in droves, as they were now stuck with a mediocre oil producer at a time when crude was crashing.

These factors have culminated in a stock that I believe is too cheap to ignore.

Overview:

Upstream Oil & Gas producers represent the epitome of high risk business models – hundreds …

Garrett Motion (GTX): Messy Financials, A Peculiar Indemnification Liability, & Typical Spin-off Dynamics Have Obfuscated Garrett Motion’s Attractive Underlying Economics

WRITE-UP BY JONATHAN DANIELSON

Overview – Recent Events and Thesis

Garrett Motion (GTX) was spun off of Honeywell in September of last year as part of Honeywell’s ongoing series of divestitures (REZI, GTX, & ASIX). GTX primarily is in the business of designing and manufacturing turbochargers for automotive OEMs. They also design and make E-boosters for hybrid vehicles. As part of the spin-off agreement, Honeywell dumped their Asbestos Indemnification Liabilities on the newly formed entity (approximately $1.4 billion in total liabilities) in addition to loading the newly formed company up with debt that was 3x EBITDA. These dynamics have most likely led the market to view Garrett as a “garbage barge” spin, designed to solely benefit the parent by improving its capital structure and allowing the parent to quietly remove toxic assets off their balance sheet.

Investors in the special situation arena must pay close attention to this possibility, as buying into a garbage barge spin can have devastating results on your portfolio. Nevertheless, assets that the market apparently view as being “garbage”, a closer examination reveals a company that’s an entrenched market leader, possesses a formidably wide moat, earns adequate returns on capital employed, has reasonable growth prospects over the coming years, and is trading at a ludicrous 25% Free Cash Flow yield.

In addition, the Company is inherently highly cash flow generative, with a proven management team in place, and a business model that lends to a good degree of top-line visibility as car/engine designs are started years in advance.

The Company – A Brief History

Founded in the 1930s by Clifford Garrett, GTX was originally an aviation company, supplying the industry with turboprop engines and turbochargers. It wasn’t until the post-war 50s that the Company first started supplying the auto industry with turbos. In 1954 Caterpillar selected Garrett’s T15 turbo for its D9 mining vehicle. Then in the 60s came the Oldsmobile Jetfire Turbo Rocket and the T04 turbo for Deere’s farm tractor. Garrett was gobbled up by Honeywell in the late 1990s and went on to play a significant role in the company’s Transportation Systems segment.

Now, if some of you reading this didn’t grow up with a ‘grease-monkey’ older brother, then you’ll be forgiven for being a bit fuzzy on the specifics the role turbochargers play in enhancing the performance of internal combustion engines. Essentially, in order to increase the power of an engine, you have to pump more air into it (not just more gas). There are really only two ways to do this: by increasing displacement of the engine (which has obvious limitations) or by making the engine more efficient. Here’s a fun video to give you an overview: Turbocharger Basics.

It’s important to note the differences between turbochargers and superchargers as they are very much competing products. The differences between the two products has led to a secular tailwind for the turbocharger market. The way turbochargers increase an engine’s efficiency is by using the engine’s unburned fuel (the exhaust) to …