Two Plus Two Older Archives  

Go Back   Two Plus Two Older Archives > Other Topics > The Stock Market

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #11  
Old 12-03-2005, 04:45 PM
Sniper Sniper is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 704
Default Re: BUD - Fools Duel

[ QUOTE ]
I wish I could elaborate my thoughts better than this, but because of my job I'm not allowed to comment on these specific companies.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm sure you must have posted it before, but can you remind us where you work? Thx
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 12-03-2005, 05:28 PM
buffett buffett is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Graham-and-Doddsville
Posts: 133
Default Re: BUD - Fools Duel

[ QUOTE ]
where you work?

[/ QUOTE ]
A small Registered Investment Advisor near New York. We're mainly a non-custodial manager of separate accounts for individuals, institutions, pension plans, etc.; but we also have two hedge funds. I'm not allowed to post about securities we invest in or may be interested in investing in.
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 12-04-2005, 05:02 PM
Uglyowl Uglyowl is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 66
Default Re: BUD - Fools Duel

I appreciate everyone's thoughts.

The way I look at (an amateur's view) is the P/E based on next years earnings is:

BUD: 17.1
PEP: 20.4

That being said BUD has marginal revenue growth and shrinking margins with no turn around that I have heard about in sight, while Pepsi should have 10-13% EPS growth.

That is what may seperate me from the "pros", but I have gotten decent growth over the past few years and expect to continue to do so.

I understand your CSCO example, but at a P/E of 80 a few years back, it is comparing apples to dump trucks.
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 12-04-2005, 06:09 PM
AceHigh AceHigh is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Pennsylvania
Posts: 1,173
Default Re: BUD - Fools Duel

[ QUOTE ]
Here is a link to the original post I made that included this phrase. I think it's a big and widespread problem, so I was trying to draw attention to it by saying it in one thread and repeating it in another.

[/ QUOTE ]

But your post was so cryptic it didn't do that, at least I didn't understand it.

Yes I like high growth stocks, among others, but that's not my sole criteria for buying. I also use intrinsic value when picking stocks.

I thought it was understood when we said we like growth that included the phrase "all other things being realitivily equal".

If you look at BUD it's forward p/e is almost identical to it's current p/e. I like stocks that are going to perform in the near future. So I don't like BUD.

FWIW, I have a current intrinsic value of ~33 on BUD with it's price being ~43.
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 12-04-2005, 10:01 PM
buffett buffett is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Graham-and-Doddsville
Posts: 133
Default Re: BUD - Fools Duel

[ QUOTE ]
we like growth ... "all other things being realitivily equal"

[/ QUOTE ]
I'm glad we've found some common ground [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]...I totally agree.

[ QUOTE ]
I have a current intrinsic value of ~33 on BUD

[/ QUOTE ]
Can you show us your math?
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 12-05-2005, 01:11 AM
AceHigh AceHigh is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Pennsylvania
Posts: 1,173
Default Re: BUD - Fools Duel

I used Quicken's calc:

initial earnings of $1.97 billion grow at a rate of 8.42%, and we discount those future earnings at a rate of 15.00%, we arrive at a net present value for the company's next 10 years of earnings of $14.5 billion. To account for potential earnings beyond the 10th year, we estimate a growth rate of 6.00%, a discount rate of 12.00%, and we arrive at a continuing value of $19.3 billion. To complete the calculation we add these two figures together, subtract the long-term debt for BUD ($8.01 billion), and divide by the outstanding shares (776 million) to get a per share intrinsic value of $33.18.
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 12-05-2005, 05:08 AM
Sniper Sniper is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 704
Default Re: BUD - Fools Duel

Here's S&P's thoughts on BUD leading to 3 star (Hold) rating and a 12 month price target of 45...

[ QUOTE ]
Our 12-month target price of $45 blends our DCF and P/E analyses, giving more weight to the latter. Our DCF model calculates a $53 intrinsic value using a 9.0% cost of capital and a 2.4% five-year growth rate. Applying a below historical average P/E ratio of 16X to our 2006 EPS estimate of $2.68, we get a $43 value.

Risks to our recommendation and target price include market share declines, due to aggressive marketing by competitors, particularly in the wine and spirits categories, for first-time drinkers.

[/ QUOTE ]

Also worth noting, Berkshire holds about 45 million shares of BUD!
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 12-05-2005, 10:31 AM
buffett buffett is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Graham-and-Doddsville
Posts: 133
Default Re: BUD - Fools Duel

Thanks for the math breakdown. What led you to choose 15% and 12% for your discount rates? Do you use similar rates for other companies we've discussed (JCOM, GOOG, DNA, etc.)?
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 12-05-2005, 01:03 PM
AceHigh AceHigh is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Pennsylvania
Posts: 1,173
Default Re: BUD - Fools Duel

Discount rate is bond rate + risk. Bond rate is 6% and risk is 9% for BUD (9% is lowest). Newer companies get higher risk rates, so the other companies all have higher discount rates than BUD. Then all companies default to 12% after 10 years. This is the default discount rate for Quicken and I always take the default rates with this tool for discount rate.
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 12-05-2005, 02:14 PM
buffett buffett is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Graham-and-Doddsville
Posts: 133
Default Re: BUD - Fools Duel

I follow (and agree with) the framework but not the details. It seems like you might be double-counting some "risk," since the 10-year treasuries are yielding 4.5% but you're starting from a base of 6.0%.

Also, I don't get where the 9% comes from and why it is the "lowest."

For comparison purposes: the Longleaf folks discount at inflation+10%, Mr. Buffett has been using ~10% post-tax/~13% pre-tax as his floor discount rate in the current low-rate environment, and CAPM would say to use 4.5% plus some multiple of "risk premium" which I guess would work out to around 11% or so. So the 15%/12% thing to me seems excessive; to show others who may be following along how wide the swings of DCF can be...if you bring those down to 10%, the intrinsic value goes to $74 per share.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 05:45 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.