Tag Archives: management

Should You Bet On Casino ETFs After Mixed Earnings?

The overall casino industry is caught in a spiralling slowdown for quite some time now. While Las Vegas was a drag earlier and Macau was an outperformer, the backdrop took a turn in the last few quarters, making Macau a culprit. Notably, Macau – a Chinese territory – is one of the largest casino gaming destinations in the world. Credit crunch issues in mainland China, check on illegal money transfers especially in VIP gaming, constraints on visa and last but not the least, a broad-based slowdown in China were responsible for this drop-off (read: Will Troubles in Macau Spoil Gaming ETF Investments? ). Though the situation has improved, as evident from mixed Q3 earnings from casino bellwethers, there is still room for improvement. Despite the ‘golden week’, gross gaming revenues in Macau plummeted 28.4% year over year to $2.51 billion in October. In China, the golden week is a seven-day long holiday period starting from October 1, when people party and splurge. However, the current decline, which marks the seventeenth successive monthly and fourteenth consecutive double-digit decline, was what analysts had expected. The outright negative mood has weighed on the casino gaming ETF Market Vectors Gaming ETF (NYSEARCA: BJK ), which is down 11.5% so far this year (as of November 4, 2015). However, mixed earnings gave a considerable push to the fund in the last one month, when it added about 5.7%. Given this, investors might be interested in the casino earnings details and the potential impact on the casino ETF ahead. Q3 Earnings in Detail MGM Resorts International (NYSE: MGM ) posted third-quarter 2015 earnings of 15 cents per share on October 27. Earnings surpassed the Zacks Consensus Estimate of 3 cents and reversed the year-ago loss of 2 cents. Revenues were down 8.2% to $2.28 billon and fell short of the Zacks Consensus Estimate by 0.6%. The downside reflects a significant decline in revenues from MGM China. VIP gambling continues to be a drag in China. However, net revenue at wholly owned domestic resorts was up 3.7%. Casino revenues from wholly owned domestic resorts went up 4%. Along with this, MGM Resorts announced a plan to create a controlled real estate investment trust (REIT) that will be named MGM Growth Properties LLC. The transaction is expected to be completed in the first quarter of 2016. Thanks to the earnings beat plus restructuring effort, MGM shares gained about 10.3% in the last five trading sessions (as of November 4, 2015). On October 21, Las Vegas Sands Corp. (NYSE: LVS ) fell shy of the Zacks Consensus Estimate on revenues but surpassed the same on earnings. Cost containment aided earnings. Also, the company declared a 10.8% increase in dividend for 2016. Earnings of 66 cents per share fell 21% year over year hurt by an 18% decline in revenues. Earnings beat our estimate by 4.8% while revenues of $2.89 billion fell short of the Zacks Consensus Estimate of $2.97 billion. Gross gaming revenues in Macau declined in double digits in all three months of the quarter. LVS stock was up about 6.1% since it reported earnings (as of November 4, 2015). On October 15, Wynn Resorts Ltd. (NASDAQ: WYNN ) posted mixed third-quarter 2015 results. Adjusted earnings of 86 cents dropped 56% and missed the Zacks Consensus Estimate by 14.7%. Revenues of $996.3 million missed the consensus mark of $1.03 billion by 3.4% and slipped 27% year over year, owing to a choppy performance both Macau and Las Vegas. WYNN resorts lost 1.2% since reporting earnings (as of November 4, 2015) (see all the Consumer Discretionary ETFs here ). Casino ETF: Buy on the Value? Investors should note that casino stocks are extremely cheap in valuation after undergoing a steep sell-off. The fund is presently trading at $34.04 per share which is 24.6% down from its 52-week high. Moreover, though Macau revenues are still lackluster, in-line data and signs of stability in companies’ earnings point to a revival, albeit slow. Notably, all three companies mentioned above have found a place in the top 10 holdings of this $27.6 million fund with a considerable share. Las Vegas Sands and Sands China together have about 14% exposure in BJK. MGM Resorts International has 4% weight in the fund while Wynn Resorts Ltd accounts for more than 6% of BJK. The product charges 65 bps in fees. The fund lost over 20% in the last one year (as of November 4, 2015). Link to the original post on Zacks.com

Lipper Closed-End Fund Summary: October 2015

By Tom Roseen For the first month in seven equity and fixed income CEFs posted plus-side performance on average on both a NAV basis (+5.97% and +1.07%, respectively for October) and market basis (+7.50% and +3.41%). Year to date equity CEFs remained in the red for the fourth straight month, down 4.41%, while fixed income CEFs moved more solidly into the black, returning 1.54% on average on a NAV basis for the same period. For the month many of the major broad-based indices chalked up their best one-month return since October 2011, with the Dow Jones Industrial Average Price Only Index and the S&P 500 Composite Price Only Index returning 8.47% and 8.30%, respectively. Beleaguered Shanghai Price Only Composite and Xetra DAX posted a couple of the strongest returns in the global markets, returning 11.50% and 11.15%, respectively, for October as investors cheered easy-money news from both the Peoples Bank of China (PBOC) and the European Central Bank (ECB). Despite a weaker-than-expected jobs report at the beginning of the month, mixed economic data throughout the month, and a roller-coaster ride of corporate earnings reports, volatility-as measured by the CBOE Volatility Index (VIX)-fell 38% over the month to 15, remaining below the long-term average of 20. Investors appeared to shrug off a disappointing nonfarm payrolls report that showed the U.S. had added a lower-than-expected 142,000 jobs for September-below the consensus-expected 200,000-as investors perhaps realized the Federal Open Market Committee was probably not going to raise interest rates this year. As commodity prices rallied mid-month, the S&P 500 posted is strongest weekly gain for 2015. And while the Fed minutes’ discussing global risks kept the hawks in check, many felt the downside risk was on the mend. Ignoring a slight decline in industrial production for September, consumer sentiment rose in October for the first month in four. A surprise cut in interest rates by the PBOC, better-than expected earnings reports from a few heavyweight tech firms (Amazon (NASDAQ: AMZN ), Microsoft (NASDAQ: MSFT ), and Alphabet (NASDAQ: GOOG )), and hints from the ECB that further easing might be in the cards pushed stocks to a fourth consecutive week of plus-side performance and sent investors into risker assets for the month and out of some recently popular safe-haven plays. Battered energy stocks got a shot in the arm with the rise in commodity prices and on news the central bank in the second largest economy in the world had cut interest rates, sending Lipper’s domestic equity CEFs macro-group (+6.48%) to the top of the equity CEFs universe for the first month since August 2014. World equity CEFs (+5.46%) and mixed-asset CEFs (+5.03%) also fared well during the month. Treasury yields rose at all maturity levels along the curve after the Fed left the door open for possible rate increases later this year, with the largest increase witnessed in the six-month yield and the five-year yield, 15 bps each to 0.23% and 1.52%, respectively. For the first month in four all three fixed income CEF macro-groups posted plus-side returns, with world bond CEFs (+3.29%) leading the way, followed by domestic taxable bond CEFs (+1.19%) and municipal bond CEFs (+0.68%) as investors put some risk back in their portfolios. For October the median discount of all CEFs narrowed 157 bps to 9.58%-slightly worse than the 12-month moving average discount (9.50%). Equity CEFs’ median discount narrowed 91 bps to 11.29%, while fixed income CEFs’ median discount narrowed 160 bps to 8.41%. For the month 82% of all funds’ discounts or premiums improved, while 16% worsened.

NiSource: Unexciting Prospects, Unless…

NiSource is the third largest natural gas distribution company in the US. Unlike some peers, the spin-off of its MLP assets was structured with no residual income or ownership. Share prices seem fully valued unless a potential acquisitioner were to pony up a nice premium. NiSource (NYSE: NI ) is a 100% regulated natural gas and electric utility. After spinning off its natural gas midstream pipelines, the assets remaining are mainly regulated by state-PUC in seven states in the Mid-Atlantic, Northeast and Midwest. Servicing 4 million customers total categorizes NI as a medium tier utilities by customer count and ranks third largest in natural gas distribution. Of this number 3.5 million are natural gas customers and 500,000 electric customers in Indiana. The company’s rate base assets are $5.0 billion in natural gas and $3.0 billion in electricity. While its natural gas interstate pipelines and the vast majority of its storage business was divested last July, NI retained 58,000 miles of distribution pipelines and about 5% of its previous storage facilities. These are reported as part of the natural gas distribution segment. NI also operates a network of four coal-fired plants with 2,540 MW capacity, along with natural and hydro plants generating an additional 745 MW. Management has previously indicated it would consider the possible sale of this business. The service territory is pictured below, from their most recent presentation . (click to enlarge) Management believes its current configuration and its capital expenditure forecast will drive earnings higher by 4% to 6% annually. Over the next 5 years, management forecasts capital investments of $6.9 billion, about evenly spread out at $1.3 billion a year, substantially increasing its rate base. The company recently received approvals for natural gas rate increases in MA and PA totally $60 million, and annual automatic “trackers”, or inclusions in rate base assets, cover about $1 billion a year of current multi-year investment projects. For example, similar to its peers, NI has an ongoing natural gas distribution infrastructure project to upgrade 7,200 miles of bare steel or cast iron pipes with plastic. Management expects to increase its rate base by 6% to 8% a year. Where is the capital for the cap ex budget going to come from? With the divestiture, cap ex needs are reduced from over $2 billion last year, but the reduced cap ex budget is accompanied by lower operating cash flow. Investors should pour over the next 3 quarters operating cash flow reports to evaluate the balance between cash flow and cap ex, with the understanding any shortfall will be made up by either more debt or dilutive equity raises. In early 2011, the company settled with the EPA concerning compliance of its coal plants. NI agreed to spend $850 million between 2011 and 2018 to bring its plants into compliance, and these improvements are part of its rate base calculations. While there is a risk the fight against coal power plants will continue to result in higher emission standards, translating into higher cap ex requirements for its aging fleet, the company should be in compliance with current standards. As with many of its peers, NI mainly uses pass-through natural gas pricing so the utility has very little commodity risk and offers a bit more stability in earnings. In addition, 45% of revenue is volume based while the balance of revenue is not, reflecting a more constant income model. According to the company, operating earnings are split 65% natural gas and 35% electric. Distractors of the company point to its high use of coal to generate electricity, the exit of top management to its MLP spin-off, and the substantial percentage of commercial and industrial customers. The CEO and CFO went with the MLP and while both replacements have extensive experience in the utility industry, they are fresh to their respective responsibilities. Residential gas deliveries accounted for 28% of volume and 55% of revenue, while industrial and commercial customers completed the balance. Some investors believe the company’s higher exposure to industrial volumes makes NI more susceptible to swings in economic growth. Of interest in the spinoff of its MLP is the lack of continuing ownership by NiSource. Many of the recent separations offer the sponsor a potentially lucrative General Partner contract and the sponsor retains a large percentage ownership of the MLP though its publicly traded unit holdings. The sponsor maintains a positive cash flow interest through MLP distributions, GP incentive distribution rights, and management fees. In the case of NI, however, shareholders received 100% ownership of both in a 1 for 1 stock distribution. The business split instills a bit more risk as the utility finds its own footing. With the recent separation and associated one-time fees, financial comparisons are difficult. Ongoing 2015 EPS are expected at slightly less than $1.00, not including the storage and transportation contribution for the first half. For 2016, the company is expected to earn $1.06, and investors may want to use this consensus number for their own due diligence research. There are few ETFs that offer sector comparisons, and the closest is the Hennessy Natural Gas mutual fund (MUTF: GASFX ) as a sector comparison. Using GASFX as a comparison, NI trades at a PE of 19.0 vs 20.6 for the fund; dividend yield of 3.2% for NI vs sector average of 3.82% and a fund yield of 2.46%. It seems at its current price, NI is fairly valued. It should be noted NI is one of only a few new additions GASFX made last quarter, buying an initial position of 1.5 million shares and NI now represents 1.77% of the funds portfolio. Within the longer term consolidation of the utility business and the current appetite for natural gas utilities, NiSource could become an acquisition target. Mario Gabelli offers an insightful quarterly review of sector events in its utility fund Shareholder Commentary report pdf. Using this report as a benchmark, a recent asset purchase by a merchant power producer pegs a ballpark price for 3,200 MW of coal and gas capacity at between $1.4 and 1.6 billion, plus the value of NI’s electric distribution assets. There have been several acquisitions in the natural gas distribution business which could be used for back-of-the-napkin comparisons. Based on customer count acquisition cost for recently acquired New Mexico Gas, Alabama Gas, and municipal utility Philadelphia Gas Works, NI’s 3.5 million natural gas customers could bring in $8 to $10 billion. With a current market capitalization of $6 billion and long-term debt of $6 billion, it would seem share prices are trading at about its value in an acquisition. While there has been a change in management in the corner office, and the other guys were open to merger discussions a year ago, with the then-CEO not directly rebutting conference call questions concerning a potential acquisition by one of the top-tiered utilities, investors should not bank on a repeat performance anytime soon. NiSource offers a steady income potential at slightly higher yields to its natural gas distribution peers, with earnings and dividend growth at industry averages, and a possible acquisition candidate. However, all these attributes are fully discounted in its current share price…Unless an acquirer decides a premium price is warranted. Author’s Note: Please review disclosure in Author’s profile.