Dit worden rechtzaken. Nu al zijn veel beleggers uitgekleed door de Facebook IPO - wat natúúrlijk niet hun eigen schuld is - en dan is er het bericht dat opperbeursgangondersteuner Morgan Stanley vorige week stiekem de verwachtingen voor het bedrijf zou hebben verlaagd. Hier snuiven advocaten zeker geld.
Veel gebakken lucht rond dit aandeel, maar is er al goede fundamentele analyses? Ik laat die van begeleidende banken als Morgan Stanley – dat naar verluid vrijdag 2 miljard dollar aanlapte om de koers boven 38 dollar te houden – JPMorgan Chase, Goldman Sachs en Barclays buiten beschouwing.
Mijn oog valt op Business Insider’s Henry Blodget en Crossing Wall Street’s Eddy Elfenbein, twee dwarse maar in de VS gerespecteerde denkers. Het leuke en goede aan de artikelen van deze twee is dat ze ook waarheden bevatten voor andere beursgangen (Initial Public Offerings – IPO’s).
IPO’s are bad buys
Eerst maar Elfenbein die ook met een schuin oog naar Blodget keek. Zijn eerste alinea is briljant en eigenlijk moet iedere belegger die op een blauw bordje zetten:
So now that Facebook is public, is the stock a good buy?
The short answer is no.
The longer answer is noooooooo.
First we have to consider a fact that no company has ever gone public because they thought their share price was too low. That shouldn’t dismiss every initial public offering, but it’s an important consideration to keep in mind.
As a general rule, IPO’s are bad buys.
23 dollar
Waar de consensus op Wall Street uitgaat van een winst per aandeel van 0,60 dollar voor 2013, komen Elfenbein en Blodget uit op 1,00 dollar. Hoe zijn berekening er precies uit ziet leest u hier, maar Elfenbein concludeert:
And with a $1 per share estimate for next year, that works out to a fair value of $33. So by using numbers very favorable to Facebook we can see that the stock is overpriced. On top of that, as a prudent investor, I wouldn’t be interest in Facebook unless it’s going for 30% below Fair Value. That’s about $23 per share.
Facebook versus Apple
Dan Blodget, die een enorm verhaal heeft geschreven dat zeker ook voor Apple- en Google-beleggers de moeite van het lezen waard is. Ik beperk mij tot de conclusies:
If Facebook achieves 50% revenue growth for the next two years (a modest acceleration), it will post revenue of about $5.5 billion in 2012 and $8.3 billion in 2013. At the same extraordinary operating profit margin that Facebook achieved last year (50%+), this will produce earnings of ~$1.8 billion (~$0.65 EPS) this year and ~$2.5 billion (~$1 per share) next year.
At $38, here's what those multiples look like:
- 2012E EPS ("Aggressive Case"): $0.65 2012 PE: ~60X
- 2013E EPS ("Aggressive Case"): $1.00 2013 PE: ~40X
For comparison, again, here are the multiples for another red-hot tech company, Apple:
- 2012E EPS: $44 2012 PE: 13X
- 2013E EPS: $50 2013 PE: 10X
16-24 dollar
So Apple's trading at a P/E of 10X next year's estimated earnings, and Facebook's trading at a P/E of 40X using the most aggressive estimates I can come up with. A P/E of 40X isn't ridiculous, but it's expensive. And remember that that PE is on next year's estimated earnings, which are still almost two years from possibly becoming reality.
So, what's a "fair" value for Facebook? I think a fair price for Facebook is 20X-30X 2013 estimated earnings. To be (modestly) conservative, I'll assume that those earnings come in between Wall Street's current consensus--$0.60--and my "aggressive case" estimate--$1.00. I'll use $0.80. So, a fair price for Facebook might be between $16-$24.
Will it get there? We'll see. Probably not without a couple of disappointing quarters. But there are about 7,000 other stocks you can buy. So unless it suddenly becomes clear that Facebook is on the way to rolling out amazing new products that we haven't yet seen, I don't see what the rush is to pay much more than that for it. Especially when you can buy Apple for 10X earnings.