Street Capitalist: Event Driven Value Investments

Avatar

Wisdom on such diverse topics as: spin-offs, merger arbitrage, post-bankruptcy equities, global macro commentary and short ideas.

Street Capitalist: Event Driven Value Investments

Bruce Greenwald: Buffett has lost his mind

This is an interesting, pretty contrarian perspective to the Berkshire Hathaway (NYSE:BRK.A) and Burlington Northern Santa Fe (NYSE:BNI) deal:

Bruce Greenwald’s comments on the BNI deal (Advisor Perspectives):

I know you own Berkshire Hathaway, so I have to ask you what you think about Buffett’s purchase of Burlington Northern.

It’s a crazy deal. It’s an insane deal. We looked at Burlington Northern at $75 and I’ll give you the exact calculation we did. You don’t have a high earnings return. They are paying 18 times earnings, but it’s really much worse than that. They report maintenance cap-ex very carefully. They report depreciation and amortization, and they report only about 70% of the maintenance cap-ex. So they are under-depreciating, and their profit numbers are lower than the true profit numbers – and in a bad way, because the tax shield for the depreciation is undergone too. Their profitability is much lower than it looks.

Buffett’s paying 18-times [at $100/share] and at $75 he was paying 16-times. Our calculation is he was paying 21-times.

Secondly, there are two kinds of assets. There are the rights-of-way, which you can’t get rid of. So there’s no issue about having to earn a return on them because you have to keep it in the business, and because there’s nothing they can do with those rights-of-way. If you look at the asset value of the non-right-of-way equipment, and you write it up because it’s more expensive than it was originally, you get an asset value that’s very close to the earnings power value. We didn’t see a lot franchise value or hidden asset value.

The other thing is that if you try to calculate sustainable earnings, you have to cope with the fact that earnings are up enormously since 2003, when oil went up. There is a simple calculation you can do, which compares the cost-per-ton-mile for freight for a truck versus a railroad. If you build the increase in the price of diesel fuel into the post-2003 experience, when revenues suddenly start to grow, what you see is that the entire growth of the revenue is accounted for by the energy advantage that the railroads have and therefore how much business they can capture from the truckers, and how much pricing they can get because the competition is now more expensive.

There is nothing special about the railroads. It’s entirely an energy play.

If you look at what their margins should have gone up by, given the energy efficiency, the margins go up by only about half of that. So you don’t have a good aggressive management over these five years producing outsized returns.

We looked back at when they did the merger with Santa Fe, because then they did increase margins. But they got bored with it, and margins started to come down. The same thing happened recently. We don’t see a lot of hidden profitability in the culture of the company.

It looked to us like an oil play. He has a history of making bad oil play decisions. And that was at $75/share, we thought there were better oil plays. At $100/share we think he has lost his mind.

  • JeffBarden
    Is there value not only in as an energy play [hedge], but also as a geo-political play, as the world trends toward eco-friendly and alternative energy?

    What may seem intangible and merely socially responsible today, might become prudent business tomorrow.

    disclosure: I used to own B shares; just a little guy.
  • Jeff I think you are right. The hedge like properties and long term business prospects are probably good enough to make BNI generate decent returns for Berkshire that are resistant to inflation.
    I think for Greenwald, this type of deal doesn't compute because they are gunning for 50% discounts on stocks.
  • Travis
    I think the main thing is the Inflation hedge. If you look as the properties of a dream inflation hedge they are all there. Huge moat, steady earnings, asset based, a lot of leverage, and potential for growth. to me the energy part comes as a minor point under the potential for growth. And given Buffett's focus on the slaughtering of the dollar I suspect that's whats on his mind as well.
  • JeffBarden
    That makes sense; Thank you for responding; You guys are much smarter than me, and I enjoy the learning.
blog comments powered by Disqus
Search StreetCapitalist.com