Release of Client Preliminary Analysis for Coaching: Throwback Thursday

This is another post in our ongoing Throwback Thursday’s Series, where we share blog posts from the past to bring you a ton of value and help you learn faster. Today, I’m sharing one of my old posts with you – Release of Client Preliminary Analysis for Coaching Part 1.

Let’s get to it…

***

Preliminary Analysis Case Study #1 Part 2 – Release of Client 1st Preliminary Analysis for Coaching

On Monday, I announced we were going to begin doing a real-world case study on Constellation Brands – Stock Ticker STZ in this post here.

Well after releasing this post, my team reminded me that there was actually a preliminary analysis my client did before this one so before we get to the STZ case study, we’re doing to take a detour to talk about Canopy Growth Corp –  Stock Ticker WEED.

I didn’t want to skip this one because there’s a lot of contexts and talk in this discussion that we don’t necessarily go over in the later training sessions because we’ve already talked about them.

Below is his unedited preliminary analysis – without any of my comments – for you to get a  look at.

Canopy Growth Corp – WEED

***

WEED – Canopy Growth Corp (Canadian Company)

All numbers are in millions of CAD unless noted otherwise.

• FY Ends March 31^st, 2017
• 3,404 market cap (medium)
• N/A dividend yield.
• P/B TTM = 4.92
• TTM Operating Margin is -39.2 and has somewhat increased over last 2 years.
  • 5 year average OM is N/A
• Share count has done increased from 77 to 119 from FY16 to FY17. Current TTM is 149m.  Statement of shareholder’s equity??
• Book value per share has increased from 1.34 to 1.55 from FY16 to FY17. Current TTM is 3.73.
• Morningstar ROIC TTM is -6.58 and a little higher than the last 2 FY’s
  • 5 year average Morningstar ROIC is N/A
• TTM ROE is -6.45 and a little higher than the last 2 FY’s
  • 5 year average ROE is N/A
• TTM FCF/sales is -151 and we can’t tell any pattern. See con note on FCF
  • 5 year average FCF/sales is N/A
• CCC: No info on the payable period (assume the product is cheap to grow) but DIO exploded on FY2017 to 5,494 days (FY2016 and 2015 avg is about 650 days). Research online says cannabis takes up to ½ year to grow so I would need much more investigation on why inventory takes so long to turnover.
• EV=3,312
• EV/EBIT is -73.6
• EV/FCF is -37.6
• EBIT/EV (earnings yield) -1.3%
• FCF/EV (earnings yield) -2.6%

Cons

• Young company – only about 3 years old after the name change (used to be Tweed)
• Note only the balance sheet on Morningstar has FY2015 so we need to look at 10K for data.  We cannot really tell any direction with a 2/3-year-old history
• SG&A & Other are over 163% of Revenue
• SG&A roughly decreasing and “Other” is increasing
• Op Income and Margin are (-) but are generally decreasing over time
• Outstanding shares are significantly increasing over time
• FCF is increasingly negative as both op cash flow and CapEx are also both increasingly negative
• Not much experience with Canadian companies
• Goodwill and intangible assets exploded on FY2017
• Regulation laws in Canada and the USA
• They bought a lot of companies in FY2016

Pros

• Cash exploded in FY2017
• FY2017 Cash & Equiv – Total Liabilities = $39m
• Book value/share is generally increasing but only for the last 3 years
• Low Debt (also reflected by the ROE and ROIC being similar numbers)
• Revenue is increasing over time
• STZ bought about 10% interest in WEED.  The industry took notice and WEED most likely gained some legitimacy with large companies
• COGS is only 23% of Revenue (doesn’t take much cost to grow product?)
• High Working Capital Ratio = 9.8 but this high typically suggests either too much inventory or not investing excess cash…

***

And since I screwed up, I’m going to begin releasing my thoughts on this company today.

The video below is part one of our exclusive discussion from one of our coaching sessions about this company.

For some reason, when I talk, the audio cuts out so below each shorter video, I’ve created a video where I’m rehashing what I told the client during our training session.

And my context with the missing sound in the above video here…

Again, as I say in the video, I’m not sure why my sound cut out and since all of my past videos are like this – we’ve just fixed the sound issue today, hopefully for good – this is how I’ve got to improvise things.

What do you think of the preliminary analysis above? Does it make for a possible good or bad investment? Did he miss anything in his analysis? What are the important points in the analysis above and why? What the hell is CCC?

I’ll begin answering the above questions and more on Friday.

Your thoughts

If you have any comments or questions, please post them in the comments section below and I’ll answer them.

I’d also love to see your preliminary analysis as well, so feel free to post these in the comments below.

And if you’d like to join our Coaching Program or want more info about it click here.

For reference, he’s in the $ 10,000-year-long program, and this is only after 1 month of coaching via nine 1-hour training sessions via Skype.

And here’s what another Masterclass student who UPGRADED to the Coaching Program thinks of this program.

Thank you for the answer Jason… I am learning so much and the coaching program is such a great tool to learn faster and better. I like having someone to talk to so often about investing… It makes the journey in value investing more enjoyable.  Matteo A., Masterclass and Coaching Program student.

P.S. This analysis is based on the preliminary analysis template I developed over a number of years, and after evaluating thousands of companies. If you’d like a copy of this to do your own preliminary analysis, you can get yours for free here.

P.P.S Get my acclaimed value investing education book, How To Value Invest here for free.