The
Latest Bubble - Bitcoin
And
A Portfolio of AIM shares (8) Utilitywise PLC
Simulated black hole Magellanic Cloud,
courtesy Wikipedia
Bitcoin has no taste, no
touch, no mass, no physical presence at all. It is a money transmitter on the
internet like PayPal, but whereas PayPal clears accounts in seconds,
Bitcoin can take up to four days. Thanks to the promise of anonymity, Bitcoin
is favoured by purchasers of drugs and online gambling. China has banned its
use as a medium of exchange. The United States does not allow international bitcoins
to be converted into real money - the US dollar.
How then is Bitcoin
perceived as a store of value and compared, by its enthusiasts, to gold? And
how can something with no intrinsic value see its price multiply by hundreds of
times in the space of a year?
Bitcoin price in US dollars courtesy Mt.
Gox.
Bitcoin was invented in 2009 by a
mysterious group or individual calling itself Satoshi Nakamoto. He or
they invented a series of algorithms that, supposedly, simulate gold. The Bitcoin
model is maintained by a self-appointed organization called the Bitcoin
Foundation. Its chairman styles himself 'a serial entrepreneur' and its vice
chairman was once a hacker going by the nickname of 'Yankee'. Their objectives
are to standardize, protect and promote Bitcoin.
Bitcoin's appeal is based on clever
marketing:
·
John
Authers of the Financial Times writes 13 December, "The genius
of the new currency is that it has built-in scarcity." The number of bitcoins
in circulation is supposed to be limited to 21 million. This appeals to people
worried about the recent expansion in the money supply of major currencies
(quantitative easing). But what can be done by computer scientists can be
undone by computer scientists. And hackers have created their own unauthorised bitcoins.
·
New bitcoins,
up to the supposed maximum 21 million, are 'mined' by computer scientists
called 'miners'. As the number of available bitcoins diminishes the
difficulty of 'mining' them increases. This is an elaborate game with a payoff
in bitcoins for successful 'miners'.
·
Visually,
virtual bitcoins have been designed to look like gold coins and they use a symbol akin to the dollar. Users can hold them in bitcoin
'wallets'. For people hoarding gold via exchange traded funds, a bitcoin
might seem more real than a gold coin.
·
Bitcoins
are held in anonymous 'blocks'. This ensures that
ownership cannot be traced back by the tax authorities or anyone else.
·
The
Bitcoin Foundation's motto is 'Developing a more
open economy', suggesting an altruistic purpose to the venture.
Speculators can buy bitcoins from specialist suppliers, such as Mt. Gox, Coinbase or China's BTCtrade. They issue a unique
code for the purchased units.
While most of the speculative buying seems to have come from China,
Americans are not far behind. The Winkelvoss twins of Facebook fame have bought
some and they have applied for authorisation to launch a bitcoin
exchange traded fund. Coinbase has raised $25 million to invest in the virtual
currency.
As in the case of any bubble, seemingly sound arguments support the
rising price. The main rational argument is that Bitcoin, as an internet
currency, will require so many billions of dollars to support its eventual role
as the preeminent money transmitter. Divide that number of billions by 21
million and, hey presto, a bitcoin could be worth $1,000, $5,000 or
$10,000. Or nothing at all. Bitcoin could be a black hole, sucking in dollars
and renminbis that will disappear forever.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A Portfolio of AIM shares (8); Utilitywise PLC
A smart electricity meter,
courtesy Wikipedia
The Investors
Chronicle has chosen AIM listed Utilitywise PLC as its 'Growth Tip of the
Year' for 2014 at 244p a share. Might this stock
form part of a portfolio of AIM shares? For the selection criteria of AIM
stocks see an earlier article at http://thejoyfulinvestor.blogspot.co.uk/2013/09/aportfolio-of-shares-in-aim-1-andthe.html
Utilitywise was founded by Geoffrey Thompson and his son Adam in 2006 to
offer small and medium enterprises (SMEs) a service to reduce their energy
bills. The company's website claims:
"Our energy consultants have
direct lines to the energy suppliers. Our consultants negotiate with energy
suppliers every day and have ready access to business energy prices unavailable
to the general public."
90% of the
company's revenues is derived from commissions paid by major energy suppliers
for procuring business from these SMEs. The remaining 10% of income comes
directly from SMEs for specific services designed to save energy. These include
the installation of smart meters and IT packages that measure and identify
energy savings. In 2012 Utilitywise entered the water consultancy market
by acquiring Aqua Veritas Consulting Ltd. (Aqua).
With some
16,000 customers, the company has a very small
share of the 1.8 million SMEs in the UK and Ireland. Utilitywise claims
to be the largest supplier in a very fragmented market.
The
company listed on AIM in June 2012 at 60p a share.
Its shares are currently eligible for 100% business relief for Inheritance Tax,
the company has a 'free float' of 74% of its shares and the bid to offer spread
for its shares is 1.5%. It is valued by the stock market at 190 million pounds.
Directors own 26% of the company.
Utilitywise's
revenues and profits have grown at a racing pace,
as has its share price:
Graph courtesy of LSE, click to enlarge
On the
surface, Utilitywise has performed magnificently since its June 2012 flotation
on AIM:
1. Revenue
is up by two-thirds and earnings per share is up by more than a third year
on year.
2. Three
acquisitions, funded by issuing 5 million pounds in new shares and a 5
million pound loan, all contributed to the company's profit.
3. Utilitywise
ended its 2013 fiscal year with net cash of 4 million pounds, and the
company generated 5 1/2 million pounds net operating cash flow in the last two
years.
4. Return
on equity improved from 18% in 2012 to 19% in 2013. Gross margins are
expected to settle around the 45% mark.
5. Its
customer base has increased by 40% in the year, 34% via organic growth.
Looking
ahead, 2014 should be another year of outstanding
growth in both revenue and pre-tax profit. Consider:
·
At the end
of FY 2013, Utilitywise had an order book of over 18 million pounds;
full year revenue in 2013 was 25 million pounds.
·
The annualised
contribution from its three acquisitions would add a further 8 million pounds in revenue and 2 1/2 million pounds to
profit without any growth at all.
·
And its
sales force at the beginning of FY 2014 was 86% higher that the sales force at the
beginning of FY 2013.
At the present share
price of 240p, Utilitywise trades on an
historical PE ratio of 28 (once adjusted for non-recurring costs), and a
dividend yield of 1.1%. The broker forecast for 2014 places Utilitywise shares
on a forward PE ratio of 20 and a yield of 1.5%. The valuation from my
financial model values the shares at about the current price, when based only
on earnings considerations.* There is not enough data to use the equity per
share and return on equity valuation models.
*EPS growth of 20% p.a., average PE ratio of 18.5, discounted
at 11.8% (3.8% SLXX + 3% operational risk + 5% margin of safety) for the five-year period 2014-18.
There is one serious
caveat. Accounts receivable plus accrued revenue
represented 228 days sales in 2013 versus 77 days in 2012. This extraordinary
increase was due to an increase in accrued revenue of 9.5 million pounds in FY
2013. Accrued revenues "relate to commissions earned, not yet invoiced or
paid and are discounted at an appropriate rate." (Annual Report).
Non-current accrued revenues (revenues that will not be billed until after the
end of the following year) accounted for 7 million pounds of the increase in
reported revenues. While this accounting treatment of accrued revenues is
consistent with the guidelines set out by IAS18, it does have consequences for
the company.
If Utilitywise had not included non-current accrued revenues in
sales, FY 2013 revenues would have been 18 million
pounds instead of 25 million and the company would have reported an adjusted
pre-tax profit of 4.8 million pounds instead of 7.8 million pounds. This helps
to explain the sharp decline of cash conversion, year on year, from 172% of
post-tax profits in 2012 to 25% in 2013.
There is also the risk that the contracting party will not pay out
as agreed. Utilitywise claims that its customers are 'blue chip' and the
company discounts future revenues at 3% per annum. While this may well be
reasonable, Utilitywise is not the cash producing company it seems to be
on the surface. Its debtors require financing.
And the prudent investor will note:
1. Utilitywise is an intermediary between energy and water
suppliers and users. Intermediaries can sometimes be squeezed.
2. The company's share
price peaked at 288p at the beginning of 2014 and was trading at only 89p
in April 2013.
3. Managers can lose control over fast growing companies -
and Utilitywise's staffing levels have more than trebled in the last
three years, with three acquisitions in the last 15 months.
4. Recently, two directors are buying the shares at between
204p and 230p a share.
Your bitcoin article is quite good, but there are a couple of inaccuracies:
ReplyDelete- The Bitcoin Foundation has no special role in Bitcoin, it's more like a fan club.
The way the protocol is controlled is by voting (consensus) of people running Bitcoin nodes: if you want to change the protocol you can if you convince a majority of people running nodes to adopt your change. Each node verifies that every other node respects the protocols, so non-consensus variants are ostracised away (their transactions ignored). If you run a full bitcoin PC client you run a node. If there was a protocol fork where 2 (or more) parties propose a change, you would vote by choosing which code to update to, and the most popular would win.
- The blockchain is not really anonymous in a common sense way.
Imagine that all banks put the PDFs of all their customers' bank statements on their website, for everyone to see, but with the name and address blanked out, and everything else -- the full transactions, account numbers, etc -- visible. It's a low level of anonymity because, while the address is blanked, you can identify people from the transactions they did. If BTC became the primary transaction medium of payments it would probably be of great help for tax inspectors compared to current practice.
Thanks cig for your comments. Do you know who runs Bitcoin nodes? And, how can you get behind the block codes to see who owns bitcoins?
ReplyDeleteBitcoins nodes are run by people who have to:
Delete- operators of online wallets
- miners who mine directly
- hubs of mining syndicates (used by small miners)
- individual users who want to transact without using an online wallet (a wallet operator can steal your coins if they like to)
and then there's amateurs who just like the idea of being part of the network and let a node run even when they don't need to (e.g. even when they don't transact themselves). Some people who transact using the desktop software may not even realise they run a node (while the software is running).
Every node has a full copy of the blockchain since inception (it is needed to process incoming new transactions) and you can also browse it on websites like blockchain.info (who just provide a convenient interface to the same info every node has a copy of locally on disk).
Finding out who owns bitcoin is then detective work, given the "blank identity" issue. There's a whole scene of people trying to find interesting facts from the blockchain. All that is in the blockchain to identify people is bitcoin addresses (aka "account numbers"), but for example if you put a "donate to address 123 if you like this blog" button on here, then people will know that address 123 belongs to you, then we can look at all the transactions you ever did, and if you sent money to the well known address 456 of say a poker site (the poker site address is know because they have to publish it to receive payments from customers) we know you've spent the donations on poker, etc.
It makes it difficult to spend stolen money for example, as vigilantes will try and track addresses that have received the proceeds of crime, and if you ever spend the loot on some actual thing or at an exchange, then the seller of the thing (or exchange) can be asked to reveal who you are, as they have to deliver to the real world (or an identified fiat bank account). People who want privacy can try to take counter-measures by making transactions for the sole purpose of making the trail harder to follow, but it's hard of course as privacy is not a feature of Bitcoin (intentionally, as Satoshi wanted a more transparent system than old school banking where you can't look up everyone's bank statements).
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
ReplyDelete