Errores de Inversión: Zeal Network

May 6, 2019 in Miscelánea, MOI Global en Español

NOTA DEL EDITOR: El siguiente texto escrito por Javier Ruiz, CFA,  es un extracto de una carta trimestral de Horos Asset Management.

* * *

La propuesta de adquisición de Lotto24 y el cambio de estrategia anunciado por la Compañía es probable que beneficie, fundamentalmente, a los grandes accionistas con intereses cruzados en ambas entidades y no a los accionistas minoritarios
— Burren Capital Advisors

Zeal Network [ETR: TIM], compañía operadora de lotería secundaria de la que somos accionistas desde hace más de seis años, anunció el 19 de noviembre del pasado año la adquisición de Lotto24 [ETR: LO24], el bróker online líder de lotería primaria de Alemania. Una operación transformadora y muy defendida por su equipo gestor y que, sin embargo, pensamos que destruye valor para sus accionistas, entre los que nos encontramos nosotros. Para entender por qué creemos que se trata de un movimiento erróneo, tenemos que hacer un repaso de la historia de la compañía y cómo ha llegado hasta aquí.

Hasta el año 2008, Tipp24 (anterior nombre de Zeal Network) operaba como un bróker de lotería por internet, vendiendo billetes de juegos oficiales del Estado y obteniendo una comisión por esa venta. Se trataba de un negocio sencillo y con crecimiento, en el que Tipp24 llegó a convertirse en el líder indiscutible de Alemania, con una cuota de mercado del 60% y cerca de dos millones y medio de usuarios registrados. Sin embargo, su destino cambió de manera radical cuando el regulador alemán, en un movimiento a todas luces paternalista, decidió prohibir los juegos de apuesta online y su publicidad, incluyendo la venta de lotería. La compañía se vio, por tanto, en una situación insostenible, al convertirse su principal actividad en ilegal. Para salir a flote, Tipp24 encontró una solución de negocio innovadora, convirtiéndose en operador de lotería secundaria y escindiendo su negocio tradicional en una nueva compañía (Lotto24). Al no poder realizar su nueva actividad en Alemania, Tipp24 cambió su domicilio y sede social a Reino Unido y cambió su nombre por el de Zeal Network.
Continue reading »

Highlighted Tweet by DelRey

May 4, 2019 in Twitter

How Cambridge Associates Selects Investment Managers

May 4, 2019 in Building a Great Investment Firm, Equities, Featured, Full Video, Interviews, Transcripts, YouTube

It is a pleasure to revisit our conversation with Marcos Veremis, former managing director with Cambridge Associates, one of the world’s leading asset allocation firms. The firm has more than $600 billion in assets under advisement or management.

In this interview, Marcos discusses his views on hedge funds and the firm’s approach to selecting investment managers. We highly recommend the interview to managers interested in attracting institutional capital.

Marcos is a former managing director with Cambridge Associates in London, working with a variety of investors such as universities, charities, international non-profit organizations, sovereign wealth funds, independent private schools and family offices on investment strategy, asset allocation, investment manager selection and financial planning issues. The job involved direct contact with investment committees and a broad range of investment managers (venture capital, private equity, hedge funds, fixed income, real assets, and equity) in order to make portfolio management decisions. After thirteen years at Cambridge Associates, Marcos was at Evanston Capital Management before becoming a partner at Accolade Partners in 2021.

The following transcript is provided for the convenience and enjoyment of MOI Global members. It has been edited for space and clarity.

John Mihaljevic, MOI Global: Such a pleasure to have with us Marcos Veremis, Managing Director at Cambridge Associates. We’re looking forward to this conversation in which we’ll cover a number of topics, including the construction of hedge fund portfolios. We’ll also go into short selling a bit. Before we get started or as we get started, could you tell us a little bit about your own background and the background of Cambridge Associates, please?

Marcos Veremis: Let me start with the background of Cambridge Associates and then you’ll see where I fit into the organization. Cambridge Associates is an investment advisory firm currently advising $400+ billion in assets of which $30+ billion is in discretionary mandate where we manage the assets directly [figures updated as of May 2019]. The firm started in the early ‘70s as a project for Harvard University, the endowment, from our two cofounders, Jim Bailey and Hunter Lewis. Hunter Lewis you might have come across in the press. He writes books and articles and so on on various topics related to finance. After that project was done, the firm started expanding into providing more services and to more universities.

As time went by, it became a full investment advisory firm. The vast majority of our clients are nonprofits at the moment, but we’ve also expanded into areas such as pensions and definitely ultra-high net worth individuals. That’s a big piece of the business and also sovereign wealth funds and all sorts of clients in Asia. We have one in Africa these days, too, in Continental Europe and, of course, the US.

What we is we create fully customized investment portfolios for our clients. No single portfolio is similar to another portfolio, they’re all different. If you look at the Cambridge portfolios and you look at various client portfolios, you’ll see that no one is identical. We offer fully customized solutions to clients and each portfolio is its own entity, which distinguishes, I think, Cambridge from most other investment advisory firms. One more important thing to note about Cambridge is that we’re fully independent and we also offer independent advice, conflict-free and independent advice. The managers we recommend, they don’t pay us. They don’t pay us to get on our databases, they don’t sponsor conferences. They pay us nothing and we don’t even accept gifts from them. We just try to present our best ideas and make returns for our clients. That’s the purpose of the firm.

Now my role in the firm, a little bit of background. I started pretty young at Cambridge Associates when I was 27, 28 years old. First, I was at Columbia Business School where I took a number of investing courses. As you know, John, Columbia Business School is the value investing birthplace, let’s say, with Ben Graham and Warren Buffett and so on. I did go there and I did take a class with Bruce Greenwald, for example, who’s written a number of books on value investing. It was natural for me to try to find a job at a firm like Cambridge Associates, which also has a value orientation in its investment approach, I think, overall.

The firm is broadly split into two areas with respect to consulting. One is the research consultancy arm and the other is the client-facing consulting arm. I’m in the client-facing consulting arm. What I do is I construct portfolios for the clients I work with. I use a lot of the information that the research team generates in terms of manager ideas and capital market ideas and so on, but I also do my own independent research and have my own favorite fund ideas about asset allocation and so on. I work together with my clients to develop portfolios. That’s, broadly speaking, Cambridge’s background and my background. Happy to answer anymore questions if something’s not clear.

MOI: Perhaps we could delve into the broad topics of asset allocation and portfolio construction. How do you think about it from a big picture standpoint?

Veremis: As a firm, Cambridge Associates back in the 1970s is a firm that actually founded the endowment model of investing alongside Yale and you probably know David Swensen and so on. There’s a specific philosophy behind that model that has worked very successfully over time and we believe is going to work very successfully in the future for reasons that I’ll explain. There are a couple of principles behind it. First, for a portfolio, we have a high equity component and whether it’s public equity or private equity, that’s where the growth is going to come from. Another principle is to have as much diversification as possible within a portfolio. As you know, diversification theory – it’s well-known by now – you can create a more efficient portfolio in terms of risk-adjusted returns by putting different asset classes together or differentiate the sources of returns, uncorrelated sources of returns. That’s the second principle.

The third principle is focusing more on value. Value typically will result across asset classes, over time if you implement it in a disciplined way, it’s going to generate higher returns. The underlying, broad reason behind that is that market participants tend to overpay for what’s popular and growing and tend to underpay for what’s out of favor. That said, we’re looking for managers that don’t just buy value passively, but have a very specific methodology in selecting the best value within value, let’s say. Then the fourth piece and very important is that within this equity-oriented portfolio, you need to have some hedges because you never know, especially in short periods of time, but even longer periods of time, you never know for certain that equity returns are going to generate what you need.

Take Japan during its deflationary period. You’ve got to have some deflation protection in a portfolio and you’ve got to also have some inflation protection in the portfolio. These weights can vary depending on valuations and general market conditions, so in a deflationary environment and depending on valuations, you might overweight, for example, the deflation hedges. This is the broad philosophy. That’s how you construct a portfolio. The first thing you do when you interact with a client is you try to understand what their needs are in terms of liabilities, what their liabilities are, what they want in terms of returns, how comfortable are they with volatility. Once you determine these parameters with a client, you can develop a long-term asset allocation based on asset class characteristics.

Around that model, asset allocation, you can create policy ranges, let’s say. Say you want to have, as a long-term portfolio, 70% in equities. You might say, “Give yourself some flexibility to be somewhat tactical,” 50% or 40% to 80% equity or 50% to 70% equity. It depends, it depends. From there, you want to actively rebalance. The rebalancing is very important and counterintuitive sometimes because you often take money away from managers or asset classes that have been performing better, which for many, many people is counterintuitive, but given the cyclicality of asset class returns and manager returns, rebalancing regularly actually increases the likelihood of you diminishing risks over time and even potentially enhancing returns.

MOI: Let’s go into hedge fund portfolios in particular. You have longstanding expertise in that area. How do you go about constructing those types of portfolios as well as how do you think about manager selection?

Members, log in below to access the restricted content.

Not a member?

Thank you for your interest.  Please note that MOI Global is closed to new members at this time. If you would like to join the waiting list, complete the following form:

Solventis sobre LNA Sante

May 3, 2019 in Ideas de inversión, MOI Global en Español

NOTA DEL EDITOR: Esta idea de inversión es obtenida de una carta de Solventis EOS.

* * *

Precio: 47,45€ (28 febrero 2019) Precio adq.: 47,6€

Capitalización: 461mill. €

Deuda Neta ajustada: 57 mill. €

PER ajustado: 12,7x

El escritor Paulo Coelho en su obra El Alquimista relataba: “Una búsqueda comienza siempre con la suerte del principiante y termina con la prueba del conquistador”. Pues bien, siguiendo este proceso descubrimos LNA Santé [EPA: LNA], una pequeña compañía familiar francesa que opera principalmente residencias de ancianos y centros de rehabilitación en Francia y Bélgica.
Continue reading »

“La diversificación sirve como protección de la ignorancia propia”.

May 1, 2019 in Entrevistas exclusivas, MOI Global en Español

Tuvimos el honor de entrevistar a Sebastián Miralles, CFA, CAIA, socio director de Tempest Capital. Sebastián comenzó su carrera en Coca-Cola México. También pasó por Kroll y Morgan Stanley, antes de comenzar su carrera en la industria de PE en CAF para luego dirigir Fondo de Fondos, el mayor inversor de PE en México. Sebastián aplica los principios del value investing al PE. Es uno de los fundadores de la CFA Society en México y es un gran admirador de Seth Klarman.

MOI Global en Español: Cuéntanos acerca de tu formación y tu trayectoria.

Sebastián Miralles: Descubrí mi amor por las inversiones y por el Value Investing relativamente tarde. Me gradué de la Universidad Panamericana en México como licenciado en Negocios Internacionales. En esa época la industria de Private Equity o Asset Management listado en el país era sumamente reducida. Las clases de valuación e inversión eran rudimentarias.

Continue reading »

A Deeply Humbling Business That Involves Extreme Discipline and Trust

April 30, 2019 in Commentary, Equities, Letters

This article by MOI Global instructor John Lewis is excerpted from a letter of Osmium Partners, based in Greenbrae, California.

Investing is a deeply humbling business that involves extreme discipline and trust. To this end we take maximizing shareholder value very seriously. It is our strong belief that to be a successful investment every business needs to have a massively engaged owner both outside and inside the board room. For our portfolio holdings we are the massively engaged owner outside the board room. For those that are successful allocators of capital, have faster than industry growth rates and better than industry profit margins, while we watch carefully, we don’t have much to say except well done.

From studies we have found that about 4% of publicly traded businesses create meaningful shareholder value above the indices. Our core focus is targeting the outstanding 4%, and not looking for fights/problems. For businesses that are off track to deliver meaningful returns to shareholders over a reasonable period of time, we take the NFL policy: Not For Long.

We believe the best action in most cases is to push for a sale of the business. The benefit is typically twofold: 1) a liquidity premium for change of control that is typically 40%+/- and 2) a competitive auction process whereby if a security is substantially mispriced the premium can be substantial. Two cases: ZIPR +130% premium to market and INTX +120% premium to market. Since 2002, well over 20 of our businesses have been acquired by mainly strategic buyers and we have appointed over 13 directors to public company boards.

We remain confident that many of our businesses are in the early phases of public market value creation as many have been investing heavily over the last few years. Most trade at a sharp discount to our estimate of private market value. We are also finding numerous low quality businesses that have unattractive results and exceptionally high valuations to short.

One key point to emphasize: Many of our companies have extraordinarily high incremental EBITDA margins with incremental revenue growth. Specifically, RST has guided to 65% of incremental revenue converting to operating cash flow, FC 45-50% of incremental revenue growth converting to cash flow growth, Spark is targeting margins in the 20-25% range. These companies are poised to drive very significant operating cash flow growth per share. They are all fairly meaningful businesses: Spark will spend $150 million a year in online member acquisition (guidance) with significant profit margins, RST is investing $140 million a year between R&D and Sales and Marketing or $6.00 per share, FC is generating $155 million in gross profit a year. These resources are being reinvested in very intelligent ways to really grow the businesses in high margin digital subscriptions in the coming years.

The old adage is that the stock market is a market of stocks. Some are quite expensive and risky and conversely there are pockets that trade at less than 30-40% of fair value. We do not want to tip our hand, but we are still finding what we consider extremely attractive reinvestments in the market. We are having a strong month in April (although two positions report at the end of April).

I read somewhere that in the U.S. there are always 100 million people looking to 1) lose weight 2) date and 3) find a new job. Essentially these are evergreen markets that frequently have high margins and large long term customer bases seeking solutions which Weight Watchers ($1.2 billion), Match ($17 billion), and LinkedIn ($27 billion acquisition by MSFT) have capitalized upon and become largely the household brands of choice.

We believe other long term journeys with the customer include Franklin Covey, Rosetta Stone (2-3K hours to learn a language and K-12 95% annual renewal rate in literacy), Travelzoo (the average subscriber stays 7.5 years), and Spark which taps into the evergreen market of 100 million people just in the U.S. looking to date (plus 29 other countries). Nearly all of our businesses have long term relationships with the end customer. We seek businesses that deliver a “value surplus” to their customers where they give more value than they get to create end of time customers vs. end of quarter customers.

Members, log in below to access the restricted content.

Not a member?

Thank you for your interest.  Please note that MOI Global is closed to new members at this time. If you would like to join the waiting list, complete the following form:

Certain factual and statistical (both historical and projected) industry and market data and other information contained herein was obtained by Osmium Partners from independent, third-party sources that it deems to be reliable. However, Osmium Partners has not independently verified any of such data or other information, or the reasonableness of the assumptions upon which such data and other information was based, and there can be no assurance as to the accuracy of such data and other information. Further, many of the statements and assertions contained herein reflect the belief of Osmium Partners, which belief may be based in whole or in part on such data and other information. The analyses provided may include certain statements, assumptions, estimates and projections prepared with respect to, among other things, the historical and anticipated operating performance of the companies. Such statements, assumptions, estimates, and projections reflect various assumptions by Osmium Partners concerning anticipated results that are inherently subject to significant economic, competitive, and other uncertainties and contingencies and have included solely for illustrative purposes. No representations, express or implied, are made as to the accuracy or completeness of such statements, assumptions, estimates or projections or with respect to any materials herein. Actual results may vary materially from the estimates and projected results contained herein. Past Osmium performance is not indicative of future results. Osmium takes concentrated positions. Osmium Partners disclaims any obligation to update this letter. A portion of the Partnership’s assets may from time to time be invested in securities that have limited liquidity. The Partnership’s investment strategy is to make concentrated investments in what it views as its best ideas. The Offering Memorandum and Limited Partnership Agreement offers a comprehensive overview of the risk factors involved in investing with Osmium Partners. The information contained herein is provided for informational purposes only. This is not an offer to sell, or a solicitation to buy, limited partnership interests in Osmium. An investment in Osmium is not suitable for all investors. Graphs/charts are provided for illustrative purposes only and should not be relied on to form an investment decision. Stocks mentioned in the newsletter do not constitute a recommendation to buy or sell the individual securities.

MOI Global