HAL Trust has been expensive since it made a killing with selling GrandVision to Luxotica. Now it is cheap due to great operating performance of a transformative acquisition.
In general, I agree with your analysis and consider the company to be (very) undervalued. The problem is that this stock has had weak profitability over the years and I don't see any catalyst in the short term that will change this poor performance.
Very interesting! You are not the first one with this point of view. I'm not usually a catalyst investor but in this case I clearly see one. Most of HAL investments are related to maritime activity, which is known to be cyclical. A new bull market in this industry will benefit HAL tremendously. I see HAL in that regard as a "better" low risk version of Valaris or Halliburton (HAL).
I think they could be more proactive in providing gains for shareholders: repurchasing shares or, for example, launching a tender offer at a fair price.
In the last 10 years the stock total return (inc dividends) is 2,7%/year.
In other words, below inflation.
I think there are better opportunities on the market.
The more people know the company, the greater the probability of transacting at a fair price.
Unfortunately, holding companies are out of fashion at the moment, with some fault of their own as they do not treat well small shareholders.
Interesting write-up! The payout policy that creates a 2.5% dividend yield seems a bit odd to me. Do you think this could create a group of investors who buy and sell based on the attractiveness of 2.5% compared to the general interest rate levels at that moment? I.e. buying when interest levels are very low and selling when interest levels are high. That could create share price movements unrelated to the business performance of HAL.
The policy is definitely odd. Don't think that's a big risk. Most of the returns still have to come from capital appreciation. You are also not guaranteed a 2.5% yield. If the stock declines the yield declines with it. In that regard dividend kings have a bigger risk of becoming yield plays.
Not a tax expert. HAL does everything to pay low taxes. Confident that they do not break the law though. In addition taxes are different for every country which means it has different implications for readers.
I do like and own Bollore as well. Did some research on Aker as well. What do you like more about Aker?
Diversion between underlying performance and share price is what allowed me to buy in.
Have you checked up how global minimum income tax (Pillar II) will affect them? It seems their effective tax rate is way above 15% so why they keep such complicated, opaque structure? They don't seem really investor friendly, fullfil only minimum what's required from them. Also I am afraid about minor shareholder protection, I don't know how Bermuda's law prevent them to take company private against minor shareholder's interest.
They not disclose much on why they keep the structure as it is. Given their investments in mostly Dutch (European) companies I do not think that the 15% minimum tax is a big risk. They are quite similar to other European holdings in my opinion.
Personally, I think there disclosure is actually pretty reasonable. They do not have fancy PowerPoints but I think such disclosure by other holdings is quite often too promotional. Boskalis still has its own disclosure which is good. The other main parts are all listed and have good disclosure as well.
I understand that people are worried about being mistreated as a minority shareholder. I always thought the best protection is that the majority shareholder is treating you fairly. In the case of HAL this has been the case for over 25 years. A pretty long track record, I think.
In addition, the controlling family has a stellar reputation in the Netherlands. They contributed 80M euro to a museum and paid of the debts of a 1,000 families in their home town of Rotterdam.
This combination makes me think that taking out minority shareholders for a steal is not a very high risk at HAL.
the main problem remains the low profitability in the last ancillary investments made, also I don't think the estate cares much about the share price, with the dividend change the heirs can enjoy in eternity
In general, I agree with your analysis and consider the company to be (very) undervalued. The problem is that this stock has had weak profitability over the years and I don't see any catalyst in the short term that will change this poor performance.
Very interesting! You are not the first one with this point of view. I'm not usually a catalyst investor but in this case I clearly see one. Most of HAL investments are related to maritime activity, which is known to be cyclical. A new bull market in this industry will benefit HAL tremendously. I see HAL in that regard as a "better" low risk version of Valaris or Halliburton (HAL).
I think they could be more proactive in providing gains for shareholders: repurchasing shares or, for example, launching a tender offer at a fair price.
In the last 10 years the stock total return (inc dividends) is 2,7%/year.
In other words, below inflation.
I think there are better opportunities on the market.
The more people know the company, the greater the probability of transacting at a fair price.
Unfortunately, holding companies are out of fashion at the moment, with some fault of their own as they do not treat well small shareholders.
Interesting write-up! The payout policy that creates a 2.5% dividend yield seems a bit odd to me. Do you think this could create a group of investors who buy and sell based on the attractiveness of 2.5% compared to the general interest rate levels at that moment? I.e. buying when interest levels are very low and selling when interest levels are high. That could create share price movements unrelated to the business performance of HAL.
The policy is definitely odd. Don't think that's a big risk. Most of the returns still have to come from capital appreciation. You are also not guaranteed a 2.5% yield. If the stock declines the yield declines with it. In that regard dividend kings have a bigger risk of becoming yield plays.
Thanks for the write-up Wubbe. Any idea why they paid dividends in shares? Like you said, odd and not a value accretive choice.
Recent investments in Siltronic (>5% ≈ 120m€) and Koppert (140m€)
Great addition! Saw them, but couldn't form a strong opinion and they are both not material to the thesis.
Good analysis but would have appreciated discussion about the tax and legal structure bermuda trust curacao holding future taxes etc.
Results of the shares last years not very good.
Minority shareholder protection?
I believe there are more attractive holding in europe like bollore or aker
Not a tax expert. HAL does everything to pay low taxes. Confident that they do not break the law though. In addition taxes are different for every country which means it has different implications for readers.
I do like and own Bollore as well. Did some research on Aker as well. What do you like more about Aker?
Diversion between underlying performance and share price is what allowed me to buy in.
Have you checked up how global minimum income tax (Pillar II) will affect them? It seems their effective tax rate is way above 15% so why they keep such complicated, opaque structure? They don't seem really investor friendly, fullfil only minimum what's required from them. Also I am afraid about minor shareholder protection, I don't know how Bermuda's law prevent them to take company private against minor shareholder's interest.
They not disclose much on why they keep the structure as it is. Given their investments in mostly Dutch (European) companies I do not think that the 15% minimum tax is a big risk. They are quite similar to other European holdings in my opinion.
Personally, I think there disclosure is actually pretty reasonable. They do not have fancy PowerPoints but I think such disclosure by other holdings is quite often too promotional. Boskalis still has its own disclosure which is good. The other main parts are all listed and have good disclosure as well.
I understand that people are worried about being mistreated as a minority shareholder. I always thought the best protection is that the majority shareholder is treating you fairly. In the case of HAL this has been the case for over 25 years. A pretty long track record, I think.
In addition, the controlling family has a stellar reputation in the Netherlands. They contributed 80M euro to a museum and paid of the debts of a 1,000 families in their home town of Rotterdam.
This combination makes me think that taking out minority shareholders for a steal is not a very high risk at HAL.
Thanks for the write-up. Great food for thought !!!
Good write up man
the main problem remains the low profitability in the last ancillary investments made, also I don't think the estate cares much about the share price, with the dividend change the heirs can enjoy in eternity
Interesting, I'm thinking about investing in HAL