- •Investment Case 11
- •Valuation summary 37
- •Investment case 53
- •Investment Case
- •Companies Compared Stock data
- •Key metrics
- •Per ha comparison
- •Management credibility
- •Market Overview Summary
- •Ukraine in global context Ukraine produces 2-3% of world soft commodities
- •Sunflower oil, corn, wheat, barley and rapeseed are Ukraine’s key soft commodities to export
- •Ukraine is 8th in arable land globally
- •Key inputs used in crop farming Ukraine`s climate favorable for low-cost agriculture
- •Soil fertility map
- •Machinery use far below developed countries
- •Land trade moratorium makes more benefits
- •Fertilizer use
- •Inputs prices: lease cost is Ukraine’s key cost advantage
- •Case study: Production costs in Ukraine vs. Brazil for corn and soybean
- •Farming Efficiency Ukrainian crop yields lag the eu and us, on par with Argentina and Brazil, above Russia’s
- •5Y average yields, t/ha and their respective 10y cagRs
- •Yields at a premium in Ukraine on the company level
- •Growth Growth should come from yield improvement, crop structure reshuffle and acreage increase
- •Crop structure is gradually shifting to more profitable cultures
- •Combined crop structure of listed companies
- •Ukraine`s 2012 harvest outlook
- •Valuation
- •Valuation summary
- •Valuation summary
- •Asset-based approach
- •Asset-based valuation
- •Valuation premium/discount summary
- •Location matters: Value of land by region
- •Yields efficiency comparing to benchmark region
- •Cost efficiency
- •Adding supplementary businesses
- •Valuation summary for other assets
- •Cost of equity assumptions
- •Model assumptions
- •Landbank growth capped at 30%
- •Crop structure
- •Biological revaluation (ias 41) excluded
- •Land ownership
- •Company Profiles Agroton a high cost producer
- •Investment case
- •Valuation
- •Operating assumptions
- •Financials
- •Income statement*, usd mln
- •Agroton in six charts
- •Operati
- •Industrial Milk Company Corn story
- •Investment case
- •A focus on the corn explains high margins
- •Location favourable for corn
- •Well on track with ipo proceeds
- •Weak ebitda margin in 2012 explained by non-cash items
- •Valuation
- •Valuation
- •Operating assumptions
- •Financials
- •Income statement*, usd mln
- •Ksg Agro On the road to space/Not ready to be public
- •Investment Case
- •A 5x yoy boost in total assets looks strange to us
- •Valuation
- •Operating assumptions
- •Financials
- •Income statement*, usd mln
- •Ksg Agro in six charts
- •Mcb Agricole Acquisition target with lack of positives for minorities
- •Investment Case
- •Inventories balance, usd mln
- •Overview of acquisitions of public farming companies in Ukraine
- •Valuation
- •Operating assumptions
- •Financials
- •Income statement, usd mln
- •Mcb Agricole in six charts
- •Mriya Too sweet to be true
- •Investment Case
- •Valuation
- •Operating assumptions
- •Financials
- •Income statement*, usd mln
- •Mriya in six charts
- •Sintal Agriculture
- •Investment Case
- •25% Yoy cost reduction in 2011 should improve margins
- •Irrigation is a growth option
- •Inventory balance, usd mln
- •Valuation
- •Valuation
- •Operating assumptions
- •Financials
- •Income statement*, usd mln
- •Sintal Agriculture in six charts
- •Astarta Sugar maker
- •Kernel Grain trader actively integrating upstream
- •Poultry producer
- •Appendices Land value
- •Current landowner income capitalization model
- •Farmer income capitalization model
- •Normative value
- •Biological asset revaluation
- •How do we adjust the income statement to be on a cost basis?
- •Ias 41 application summary
- •Appendix: Crop production schedule Crop schedule, based on 2012 harvesting year
- •Investment ratings
- •Contacts
Ksg Agro in six charts
Landbank dynamics, ths ha |
|
Crop structure, by ha |
|
|
|
Source: Company data, Concorde Capital |
|
Source: Company data, Concorde Capital |
Crop yields, 2010 |
|
Crop yields, 2011 |
|
|
|
Source: Company data, State Statistics Committee of Ukraine |
|
Source: Company data, State Statistics Committee of Ukraine |
Production costs, USD/ha, 2010 Sunflower |
|
Wheat |
|
Barley |
|
|
|
|
|
Source: Company data, State Statistics Committee of Ukraine |
|
Source: Company data, State Statistics Committee of Ukraine |
|
Source: Company data
|
Mcb Agricole Acquisition target with lack of positives for minorities
With 90 ths ha spread across 13 regions of Ukraine, MCB Agricole is a close approximate to the average Ukrainian agricultural company in terms of operating efficiency
While posting a 9% average yield premium to the average in comparable regions at a slightly higher costs, the company`s gross profit is harmed by one of the lowest realized crop selling prices
High SG&A costs, at 18-20% of sales erase gross profit further, resulting in a 9% EBITDA margin in 2008, -6% in 2009 and 16% in 2010 – one of the lowest figures among listed agricultural companies
Low profitability, failure to list on WSE last year and low majority shareholder commitment to the business makes MCB Agricole a clear acquisition target, in our view. With one of the least inspiring acquisition track records among Ukrainian listed agricultural companies, we see a possible unfair treatment of minority shareholders as a major risk
We rate the stock HOLD due to high risks, even though it is trading at the lowest EV/ha multiple in the sector and our asset-based valuation points to a significant upside
Watch:
Management decision on whether to delist from the Frankfurt Stock Exchange or to move to another listing level: May-June 2012
Spring sowing campaign results: May 2012
2012 harvest results: June-November 2012
2011 annual financials: December 2012
Company description:
Operates 90 ths ha dispersed in 13 regions across Ukraine. Does not own storage assets. Unsuccessfully attempted to place 25% stake at IPO in December 2011 to finance construction of rapeseed processing plant. DRs listed in Frankfurt.
Selected financials, USD mln and ratios |
|||||
|
2010 |
2011E |
yoy |
2012E |
yoy |
Net revenue |
34.4 |
50.8 |
48% |
52.4 |
3% |
Gross margin, % |
34% |
21% |
-12pp |
19% |
-2pp |
EBITDA |
5.3 |
5.8 |
9% |
4.7 |
-19% |
EBITDA margin, % |
15% |
11% |
-4pp |
9% |
-2pp |
Net income |
3.8 |
2.7 |
-30% |
0.9 |
-65% |
Net margin, % |
11% |
5% |
-6pp |
2% |
-3pp |
|
|
|
|
|
|
PP&E, net |
10.6 |
11.7 |
10% |
12.7 |
8% |
Shareholder equity |
50.0 |
52.6 |
5% |
53.5 |
2% |
LT debt |
0.1 |
0.0 |
-100% |
0.0 |
n/m |
ST debt |
5.8 |
11.6 |
99% |
12.6 |
8% |
Total liabilities & equity |
9.7 |
17.8 |
84% |
19.0 |
7% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating Cash Flow |
-4.5 |
-0.6 |
n/m |
1.9 |
-423% |
CapEx |
0.2 |
2.8 |
14x |
2.8 |
2% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Working Capital |
41.4 |
44.6 |
8% |
45.3 |
1% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Harvest value, USD/ha |
510 |
606 |
19% |
634 |
5% |
Gross profit, USD/ha |
165 |
103 |
-37% |
98 |
-5% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
ROA |
6% |
4% |
-2pp |
1% |
-3pp |
ROE |
8% |
5% |
-3pp |
2% |
-3pp |
ROIC |
8% |
5% |
-3pp |
3% |
-2pp |
Source: Company data, Concorde Capital estimates |
|
|
||||||
Bloomberg |
|
||||||
Reuters |
|
||||||
Recommendation |
|
||||||
Price, USD |
|
||||||
12M target, USD |
|
||||||
Upside |
|
||||||
No of shares, mln |
|
||||||
Market Cap, USD mln |
|
||||||
52-week performance |
|
||||||
52-week range, USD |
|
||||||
ADT, 12M, USD mln |
|
||||||
Free float, % |
|
||||||
Free float, USD mln |
|
||||||
Source: Bloomberg |
|
Ownership structure |
|
Xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx |
xx.x% |
Xxxxxxxxxxxx |
xx.x% |
Xxxxxxxxxxxxx |
xx.x% |
Source: Company data, Concorde Capital estimates |
Share price performance (1) |
|
(1) Hereafter, share prices as of XXX XX, XXXX Source: Bloomberg |
Multiples and per-share data |
|||
|
2008 |
2009E |
2010E |
EV/Capacity |
xx |
xx |
xx |
EV/Output |
xx |
xx |
xx |
|
|
|
|
EV/Sales |
xx |
xx |
xx |
EV/EBITDA |
xx |
xx |
xx |
P/E |
xx |
xx |
xx |
|
|
|
|
P/B |
xx |
xx |
xx |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Source: Bloomberg, Company data, Concorde Capital
Company`s landbank, ths ha
Source: Company data |