Going forward we have decided to periodically post updates regarding some of our older write-up’s/positions when for whatever reason we feel they are particularly attractive and actionable. Below is a quick update for Premier Exhibitions – as always feel free to comment/email us with any relevant thoughts and/or questions. Our original thesis can be found here
Update August 24, 2010:
We would argue that at today’s price of $1.67 PRXI is more attractive than its ever been and would advise our readers to read the recently released court opinion/letter to shareholders for some further color. Fwiw we think that Sellers and his turnaround team deserve a standing ovation for their efforts here. Anyhow, the quick and dirty “pitch” is below.
“We have to say this is the first time we have ever witnessed the intrinsic value of a company roughly triple overnight, at least where the market greeted the news with nothing more than a yawn. Sure, the stock closed up some 40% on the news and clearly there is some uncertainty regarding the monetization of the Titanic assets, but given the federal court ruling granted the company an award equal to almost three times its EV at the time of the announcement – one would think at least a double would be in order. God knows the market isn’t efficient, but still…this is ridiculous. Regardless, its clear from experience that Mr. Market can be a little slow but typically he comes to his senses given time and for this I am thankful – especially in this case as its providing investors with an absolutely incredible opportunity in our opinion to generate spectacular returns over the next year or so with very little risk.
Let’s do a quick and dirty valuation for PRXI:
Value of the Assets:
Value of original Titanic artifacts = $35m
Value of newly awarded Titanic artifacts = $110m
Value of Digital archives, etc. = $44m
Note the values above where computed on a liquidation basis by a variety of independent, company, and court appointed appraisers.
Total Value of Titanic Assets = $189m
Its important to keep in mind that the NAV above is for the first time in PRXI’s history completely solid. The Federal court has ruled, meaning their will be no appeal. It’s over, case closed. The only issue at the moment is wether the court will pay PRXI cash of $110m by next August or the company will receive the in specie award. Sure, their remains uncertainty regarding what these assets will ultimately garner when sold (or what happens to the rest of the company if they get the cash award) but with the current EV of the whole company standing at roughly $60m that’s a pretty steep haircut, no? I mean we are as skeptical as the rest, but given all of the new information that has come to light since the ruling we just can’t imagine how this company isn’t worth north of $3 (or double the current price) at an absolute minimum.
Value of the operating business (exhibitions/merchandise):
Looking out over the next couple of years, the question is how much is PRXI’s core business worth? Well, if we assume last quarters revenue run rate of roughly $45m and a 20% EBIT Margin (in line with what history would suggest is achievable post turnaround) the core business would generate roughly $8m in EBIT. At a reasonable multiple of 6x, the business is worth roughly $54m (or right around the company’s current EV). Granted it will likely be another year or two before this company’s turnaround is complete but as of today their is still no compelling reason Im aware of that would lead me to think that this business won’t be able to generate similar revenues and/or a similar level of profitability that it had pre-blow up (in fact, a significant amount of progress turnaround wise has already been made but due to various restructuring charges it remains masked). Notably with the significant costs associated with the court battle now finally behind them, our guess is that progress will only accelerate from here.
Anyhow, add the $8m in excess cash on the balance sheet that is not needed to run the business and we have everything that we need….
Value of Titanic Assets = $189m
Value of PRXI’s operating business = $54m
Value of PRXI’s excess cash = $8m
Note that the above valuation does not assign any value to any future potential recoveries (which could be sizable) nor to any improved performance ticket sales wise from the upcoming 100th anniversary of the sinking (which could certainly increase public interest and hence sales as it draws near).
Total Value = $251m or roughly $5/share vs. the current price of roughly $60m or $1.60/share.
In sum, we’re not sure exactly what PRXI is worth at the moment, although we think its pretty safe to say its worth a lot more than its current price (paraphrasing Buffett, you don’t need a scale to tell a man’s fat!). Seems like an easy lay-up that will likely generate an outsized return over the next six months with very little risk (and better yet regardless of what the general market does as a whole). That said, its possible an investment today may require some patience but given Sellers commitment to monetizing his stake in the near-term, the significant and undisputed embedded value in the titanic assets and the progress to-date regarding the company’s turnaround efforts, our guess is that good things will happen sooner rather than later.”
Below is a great question we received earlier today, so we figured we would go ahead and post it along with our answer if anyone else would like to chime in with their own thoughts:
Q – Thanks for the update. Will the company have to pay taxes on the reward from the court ruling? If yes then the NAV should be adjusted. Also, suppose they get the artifacts (not the cash). They may be “worth” $110M, but how do they get monetized or generate any cash flow for shareholders?
A – great point. We don’t know for sure, although for conservatism’s sake we should probably expect that they would (considering that any sale would likely include all of the assets, one could apply a 36% tax rate to the $189m number above, which would in turn reduce the total value by roughly $68m – not chump change, but not enough to materially change our thesis – even with the reduction Premier remains bafflingly cheap). As to how they get monetized, we wouldn’t think it would be two difficult to sell the collection (all things considered) given their archaeological, historical and cultural significance. Granted, we don’t have any unique insights into this but according to the court appointed appraiser there would be multiple bidders for the assets (at 110m) if they were to go to auction today (Fwiw this has been echoed by management and Sellers). This gives us some comfort given his independence and expertise.
Outside of an outright sale (and given they now have full rights to the assets) we could see how the ruling could also result in additional revenue streams through film expeditions, artifact retrieval, TV royalty’s from Discovery or National Geographic, etc., but thats just us thinking out loud here. We would imagine they might be able to pull some sort of sale leaseback transaction as well.
Again, any thoughts on all of the above by our readers would be greatly appreciated.
PRXI Letter to Shareholders
Thanks for the useful analysis.
I thought I was missing something and never had the time to dig much further but still added some shares.
Mentioned PRXI in a post “Value anomalies reporting news for the week ending 08/13/10 Part 1”
http://shadowstock.blogspot.com/2010/08/value-anomalies-reporting-news-for-week.html
Good work.
John
Hi AAO:
isn’t the operating business the Titanic and Bodies exhibitions? So isn’t including the run rate of the business and a sale of the Titanic assets double-counting, or at least nearly so as it’s the most popular exhibition?
thanks!
John
John,
Thanks, love the blog!
Jrallen81,
Not necessarily (it was a quick and dirty write-up), it depends on the outcome. Either way it wouldn’t make a material difference given the margin of safety the current price provides. Keep in mind that Bodies has made up the majority of the company’s revenues for nearly 5 years now and that franchise would remain firmly in tact. Even if you cut the value of the operating business in half (i.e., say its worth roughly $27m instead of $54m because all the titanic earnings go away), the company’s intrinsic business value would still be roughly twice its current EV. Also remember that they could still end up selling the whole collection while at the same time retaining the exhibition rights for Titanic (this would depend on who the buyer was).
hi AAO,
Nice post.
As a rookie, I am having trouble reconciling the number of shares mentioned in the 10-K with the additional 16 million common stock issued when the convertible notes were converted in Oct ’09.
According to the latest 10K, the number of shares used in diluted per share calculation in 2010 was 36.8 million, however in 2009 the corresponding no. was 29.2 million. If 16 million of additional common stock was issued during the year, wouldn’t the 2010 number be around 29 million + 16 million = 45 million ( given that there were no share buybacks) ?
In fact the number shown on page 37 of the 10-K states that the balance of common stock is around 46 million. So why is 36.8 million used in the EV calculation?
Am I missing something? Wouldn’t the 46 million number compared to the 36.8 million number change the EV calculation and valuation of the company significantly?
Thanks
Vani
Vani,
Not sure I understand your question exactly. Your correct that Premiers outstanding share count today is roughly 47m (and that the larger amount of shares effects the company’s overall valuation). That said, the current EV (including the 47m shares) is still only $65m. Let me know if that helps or if you have any other questions.
Thanks for the response. Sorry for the typo. I meant EV/share.
Yes, the per share valuation does change by more than 25% if we consider the larger number of shares. However, I still think it is undervalued right now.
Btw, do you think that an ‘in-specie’ award by the court may not be in the best outcome for Premier, as it may take much longer to monetize, compared to an outright sale/auction (given that part of the revenue will be used in the upkeep of those artifacts).
I also noticed that Premier earned a higher % of revenues (56 %) from their “Bodies…. the exhibition” than from Titanic. Given that they have been losing revenues and attendance per day has been falling, I was wondering if valuation might take a hit if the court is unable to sell the artifacts and Premier is left to earn revenues from exhibition of unsold artifacts.
Would that change the thesis above in terms of downside risk?
Thanks again
Vani
Assuming they got FMV for all of the Titanic assets, then yes, that would probably be one of the more ideal outcomes in my opinion.
As for your second scenario, even then I think our downside protection is considerable. For example, if the company was forced to sell the Titanic assets in some sort of fire sale scenario at roughly a third of their recently appraised value (and that all of their Titanic revenues disappeared in the process), and you then applied a large haircut to a reasonable estimate of what the Bodies exhibition is likely worth as a standalone entity today, and added the two together – one would still get their money back or perhaps still make a little at the current price.
Obviously I would put the probability of such a scenario actually coming to fruition at less than 5%. So even if I try and imagine the secondary effects of an incredibly unlikely scenario like the one you mention, Premiers equity is still worth more than what you can purchase it for today. Of course, the flipside of PRXI’s tremendous margin of safety is that if we assume any “normal” or reasonable future scenario/outcome it should be an absolute homerun.
In other words, heads we win, tails we don’t lose :).
Thanks AAO for the insight…yes, I agree that the odds are better on the upside than down !!
it’s early but, good call so far!
Just so I’m clear, your understand is the award will be given in August 2011, not 2010, correct?
John,
Thanks (don’t want to count my chickens before they hatch though). Yes, either a cash payment facilitated through a government lead auction or the in specie award will be given by August 2011.
thanks AAO – one other question – does the government control the artifacts now? were they confiscated or something pending the resolution of the court case?
John,
No the artifacts are currently under Premiers control and at least as I understand it, have been since their original recovery.
Yes they are under Premiers control
Above Average Odds,
Luv ya, luv ur show . . . . . my question is this: We all know that the value of any business equals the present value of future cash flows. In Premier’s case one of those future cash flows must be the sale of the Titanic artifacts. I am struggling to get a handle on who could possibly buy these assets given the covenants that the court has imposed (i.e. the collection has to be sold in its entirety to a buyer with the wherewithal to care for the artifacts into perpetuity). With that in mind what museum has that kind of jack? Moreover, this would surely entail the building of some huge new hall to house the exhibition adding millions to the proposed purchase. Especially in today’s market, it would seem that any transaction by a publicly owned institution would be suspect. Just playing devils’ advocate here 🙂
I am also struggling to envision another business buying these assets because then they would be struggling with the same problem Premier has been struggling with for the last 22 years, namely, how to make a profit from these artifacts.
If these guys were still sitting on $100mm in gold or oil or another commodity, then clearly this is a no brainer, but in light of what could be a questionable market this still seems like a turnaround story. I think I am comfortable with your normalized FCF value of $10mm. How long do you think it will take them to get there? 3yrs?
If I assume 3 yrs that gives me $10mm in FCF in 2013. Plug that into a simple steady-state DCF:
PV = FCF/(r-g)
Where
r = cost of equity of 15%
g = growth rate of 7%
And we have a 2013 fair value of $125mm.
Discounting that back to time zero (today) using the same cost of equity:
$125mm/(1.15)^3
Yields a present value of $82mm or approximately where the stock trades today.
I would very much appreciate your thoughts on the above.
Thank you.
[…] – I’m jumping on this bandwagon too! After reading Above Average Odds Investing’s recent post on PRXI, then PlanMaestro’s illuminating series of earlier posts, I have decided to open a […]
Hafbak,
Thanks for the great questions. That said, I think you are thinking about a few details regarding this opportunity in the wrong light. Regarding the cost of preserving the collection into perpetuity, that issue has already been dealt with and as you would expect has been a concern of the court from the beginning (notice they discuss the issue in the letter to shareholders above). Notably, PRXI set up a self funding trust earlier this year for the “sole purpose of providing a performance guarantee for the maintanence and preservation of the Titanic collection for the public interest.” As far as housing the collection and any giant building a potential buyer would possibly need to build, I think you have the wrong idea of the nature of these artifacts. Most of the artifacts are small in size (think preserved letters from the passengers) and don’t necessitate anything close to a giant warehouse to safely store (indeed, PRXI has been safely storing them for nearly 20 years now). As far as who would buy the collection in the current environment see the Q&A section below…
Q: Is there anyway to know what the auction value of the artifacts really is today. Its always amusing when “appraisers” come up with great numbers, but sometimes they are way off base. Who would be paying $150M for these artifacts in an auction scenario? Especially in such a terrible economy?
A: “I hear you (and share your skepticism to a certain extent), but that said I do think they are likely worth something “close” to their appraised values given their replacement cost, not to mention their historical, archeological, and cultural significance. Given that the fair market value used in the decision was based on multiple bids from various buyers and was done in early 2009 (obviously not one of the most stable environments to be seeking bids for this type of “art-like” asset) gives me some additional comfort that the awarded value is likely at least roughly right.
If that assumption turns out to be right then Premier is dramatically undervalued. If not (say the awarded value is wildly, wildly off) and the assets are worth a third of the current estimate in some sort of fire sale, then Premier is probably still undervalued all things considered. Notably even under the fire sale outcome an investor would still be getting the operating business essentially for free and hence would still likely double his or her money over the next few years as the operational turnaround is completed. I guess that’s a long way of saying that at this price it doesn’t matter if the assets are really worth $150m as you say, given the market is already clearly discounting that possibility and then some.”
So, unless you willing to make the claim that the assets are worth nothing (which I think would be a tremendous and indefensible stretch) then Premiers intrinsic business value is materially higher than its current price.
Thanks for the great post.
Do you have a view on Sellers Capital looking to sell their stake in the next 12 – 18 month (from the most recent 10q)?
Is there a risk in the turnaround not being completed due to a change in shareholder.
Or do you think Sellers Capital will look to sell the entire business before then. Or perhaps just sell the Titanic assets and distribute cash to shareholders.
BertFresno,
Appreciate the comments. Regarding Seller’s stake, I certainly don’t have any unique insight into how this plays out except to say that it will in all liklihood be done in a shareholder friendly manner and that I am sure he won’t settle for anything materially below his estimate of the company’s intrinsic value. Notably Sellers stated that he will only sell the stake to a private buyer (1) where the sale would not have a material negative effect on the company and (2) where the buyer is fully committed to the companies multi-year plan recently submitted to the court (obviously).
Regarding the sale and its effects on the turnaround, I doubt it given Davino and Co. are in it for the long haul and the recently revamped board will still be in place. Personally I think the company is in good hands going forward with or without Sellers as Chairman.
As far as your last comment, again I hesitate to speculate on the ultimate outcome here but the outcome you mention above seems an entirely plausible one. We will have to wait and see.
Yesterdays call was interesting in that, Sellers not actively looking to sell, Playboy exhibit?, partnership with Michael Cohl,blu-ray dvd,documentary on cable,Bodies exhibit in Mexico City to be semi-permanent.
And yet the stock doesn’t move
Jay: How about those positive owner earnings :). Honestly I’m just as baffled as you are regarding the price action. I thought Thursday’s earnings and CC filled with a lot of great news and were on balance, very positive. Sure, attendance was under pressure but net/net I think things continue to unfold inline with my expectations (if not better).
Also noticed in the 10-Q that the share repurchase program bought over 100k shares at $1.16…I’ll take that
Jay: Yup! Obviously its not a huge amount but its a start (I was certainly glad to see it though, thats for sure).
This is an excellent post, and I appreciate you putting it together. A question for you…
PRXI believes its 1987 artifacts are worth $35M and that it has around $44M in other properties (media, etc.) from various dives.
Why are these not carried on the balance sheet at that value? They carry artifacts from 1987 at cost (roughly $3M).
Any insights into this?
I would assume that, if awarded the ~$100M for the post-1987 artifacts, that value will have to show up either as cash (obviously, if paid in cash) or under Salvor’s Lien on the balance sheet.
Paul
Paul: Thanks, I appreciate it. My understanding – at least if memory serves – is that they are carried at $3m because that was the original cost of to acquire them on the initial dive. As far as if they will get marked up upon the receipt of the Salvors lien, that’s a really great question and the answer is that I’m not sure. Either way I think it would likely be an immaterial event. In other words, ultimately don’t think it matters, at least as it relates to the company’s intrinsic business value. I suppose that the mark up could end up causing a bunch of mindless quant funds to purchase the stock at that point (as the company would then appear on a lot of screens as statistically cheap on a BV basis) but thats just random speculation on my part.
Thanks!
Any insights into the tax situation? If they monetized the titanic assets would that be a taxable event? would their basis be only 3 million?
If they are awarded an in specie award of assets worth $110, million is that taxable? Would they be forced to take out a loan to pay the taxes? Thanks