I wrote earlier about the privatisation of KFC, after receiving an anonymous comment. On the website from The Malaysian Insider an article from Reuters indicating that there is a lot of discontent, both about the slow progress of the corporate exercise and the quality of the prospectus (for instance using data from last year in comparisons).
It is good to see that there is some shareholder activism going on, it has been much too rare in Malaysia. However, in privatisations and related party transactions, minority shareholders rarely win, they hardly stand a chance.
One reason was highlighted here in the CG Watch 2012 report:
12. Are institutional investors actively voting against resolutions with which they disagree?
Malaysia's score on this item: “marginally” (0.25).
In the long run, this attitude is doing serious damage to minority investors and to Malaysia's reputation.
Investors cry foul over privatising KFC franchisees in Malaysia
A US$1.7 billion (RM5.19 billion) bid for Malaysia’s two main KFC fast food franchisees faces a growing chorus of opposition from investors challenging the terms of the offer that is nearly a year old and now looks to them badly undervalued.
A showdown is looming on November 5 and 6, when shareholders vote on the deal. Some investors contacted by Reuters said they planned to vote against the bid but it was not clear if they had enough firepower to do so.
The bid for KFC Holdings (Malaysia) Bhd and QSR Brands Bhd was made last December by the investment arm of Malaysia’s Johor state and CVC Capital Partners. The Employee Provident Fund joined the consortium in May.
But it was only in October that the companies called extraordinary general meetings. They have not explained the delay.
It is a long enough period, opposing shareholders argue, to mean that the bid price no longer represents the true value of the companies after what has been a prolonged retail sector boom, with prospects for it to continue.
What is not clear is whether those minority shareholders can muster enough support to prevent its backers winning the 75 per cent of the votes they need to pass the acquisition.
But they may be helped by the fact that Johor Corp, top shareholder of both KFC and QSR, is not eligible to vote on the deal because it made the offer. Johor Corp and related parties own nearly half of KFC and about 60 per cent of QSR.
Share prices in the two firms have hovered around last December’s bid price.
In the same period, shares in other Malaysian consumer companies have soared as much as 70 per cent as household spending has jumped, helped by generous government handouts ahead of a hotly contested national election.
“Comparing the companies with their peers based on last year’s multiples is not relevant,” said Jonathan Foster, Singapore-based director of global special situations at Religare Capital Markets. Religare does not own shares in either of the companies.
“If it is based on current multiples, KFC and QSR are quite undervalued.”
Independent advisers for both KFC and QSR have recommended shareholders accept the offer.
Also, shares of the two companies trade at a discount of just about 3 per cent to the offer prices. That suggests the market expects the deal to go through. A discount of 15 per cent or more, known as a merger arbitrage spread, signals investors expect a deal to fail.
Unhappy shareholders
Reuters contacted eight shareholders representing around 38 per cent of the total shares outstanding of KFC and 16 per cent in QSR.
Two said they intended to vote against the proposal and one planned to vote in favour for the lack of a better alternative. The rest declined to comment.
The two holders intending to vote against the deal are based outside Malaysia and represent about 5 per cent of KFC shares and 3 per cent of QSR.
They said both companies had stopped paying dividends since receiving the offer last December, the negotiations had dragged on too long and too little information was shared with minority shareholders.
QSR and Johor did not respond to requests for comment. CVC declined to comment. A KFC official said shareholders will have the opportunity to voice their concerns at the meetings, scheduled for November 5 and 6.
Malaysian consumer stocks have enjoyed a strong run this year as pre-election government giveaways boosted domestic spending.
Nestle (Malaysia) Bhd has risen about 23 per cent to date, while Berjaya Food Bhd and Oldtown Bhd , have risen between 60 per cent and 70 per cent this year, benefitting from strong domestic consumption and solid economic growth.
Shares of KFC and QSR’s sector peers are up an average of 28 per cent this year, compared with a 9 per cent rise in the broader index, according to Thomson Reuters data. By contrast, KFC’s shares are up 2 per cent and QSR’s 1 per cent.
Both companies lag on a current price-to-earnings ratio basis. Berjaya Food and Oldtown trade at 23.50 times and 14.68 times, respectively, more than double where they were last December when the KFC franchisees received their takeover bids.
A Blog about [1] Corporate Governance issues in Malaysia and [2] Global Investment Ideas
Showing posts with label KFC. Show all posts
Showing posts with label KFC. Show all posts
Friday, 2 November 2012
Wednesday, 24 October 2012
KFC: disposal and capital repayment
KFC has published the circular regarding the disposal of its business and the subsequent capital repayment, which effectively implies a General Offer of RM 4.00 per share and RM 1.00 per warrant.
I received the following comment in another posting:
"What are your views on the KFC Holdings (Malaysia) BHD situation? This deal has been dragged out for almost a year, in which time Malaysian peers’ share prices have rallied between 70% to 80%, dividends at KFC have been halted, and in Affin Investment Bank’s Independent advice they use comparable multiples based on last prices from 13th December 2011, highly illogical and against conventional market practice. Surely minority shareholders are getting a raw deal here and would be better off voting the deal down? I am surprised that this has not received much attention in Malaysia, this is another example of poor corporate governance."
I have sympathy for the above, although I find the independent advice in it self not bad (I have seen much worse). Affin did use many comparison methods and quite detailed so, they put a decent effort in writing their independent report in my opinion.
I do agree though that many times (not only in the independent advice but anywhere in the prospectus) comparisons have been made with the situation in 2011, when in reality an updated comparison for 2012 also could or should be given. There is almost a full calendar year difference.
Also, the company has indeed stopped paying dividends, the last dividend was only 3 sen on Oct 7, 2011. This in itself deserves a discussion regarding the reasons for this.
My opinion is that given the cash generating nature of the business and the established brand name, the offer price per share appears somewhat undervalued. However, KFC was never a company with the best CG practices in Malaysia, given that I find the offer price about fair.
And lastly, the offer per share is RM 4.00 and the offer per warrant is RM 1.00. Assuming that the price per share is fair, then the price per warrant is highly unfair. The exercise price is RM 3, and the ex-date is on September 14, 2015, almost 3 full years away. In other words, warrant holders do not receive any money at all for the time value of the warrant.
I have noticed this before (warrant holders being hugely disadvantaged), for instance here, and find it worrisome. Are warrant holders sufficiently warned that they could expect a lousy deal in case the company is privatised?
I received the following comment in another posting:
"What are your views on the KFC Holdings (Malaysia) BHD situation? This deal has been dragged out for almost a year, in which time Malaysian peers’ share prices have rallied between 70% to 80%, dividends at KFC have been halted, and in Affin Investment Bank’s Independent advice they use comparable multiples based on last prices from 13th December 2011, highly illogical and against conventional market practice. Surely minority shareholders are getting a raw deal here and would be better off voting the deal down? I am surprised that this has not received much attention in Malaysia, this is another example of poor corporate governance."
I have sympathy for the above, although I find the independent advice in it self not bad (I have seen much worse). Affin did use many comparison methods and quite detailed so, they put a decent effort in writing their independent report in my opinion.
I do agree though that many times (not only in the independent advice but anywhere in the prospectus) comparisons have been made with the situation in 2011, when in reality an updated comparison for 2012 also could or should be given. There is almost a full calendar year difference.
Also, the company has indeed stopped paying dividends, the last dividend was only 3 sen on Oct 7, 2011. This in itself deserves a discussion regarding the reasons for this.
My opinion is that given the cash generating nature of the business and the established brand name, the offer price per share appears somewhat undervalued. However, KFC was never a company with the best CG practices in Malaysia, given that I find the offer price about fair.
And lastly, the offer per share is RM 4.00 and the offer per warrant is RM 1.00. Assuming that the price per share is fair, then the price per warrant is highly unfair. The exercise price is RM 3, and the ex-date is on September 14, 2015, almost 3 full years away. In other words, warrant holders do not receive any money at all for the time value of the warrant.
I have noticed this before (warrant holders being hugely disadvantaged), for instance here, and find it worrisome. Are warrant holders sufficiently warned that they could expect a lousy deal in case the company is privatised?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
