@jtvellum How much credit does the market give Pellerin though? I own because of Haw, not Pellerin. If Haw is implicated then we're in trouble. But the only real bear thesis I see is Pellerin being forced to sell his shares to fund fines or as a consequence. Otherwise the engine is intact?
@AndrewDoPaco1@CJ0pp3l Professional services is an indicator of sticky software (vendor reliance and added customization). With PS declining and organic growth declining previously it's showing cracks in the armor of their biggest business. It's cheap but not cheap enough yet for all these signs imo
@AndrewDoPaco1@CJ0pp3l I don't understand why they can't grow recurring while maintaining non-recurring revenue. They finally show an increase in recurring revenue but total organic revenue still falls.
I'm monitoring because they may get tailwind from NA oil growth but doesn't yet look promising
@Divergent7651 Depends on how frequency and imperfection is defined. Substack subscribers need content to justify cost. A predictable release schedule is usually the best way to address frequency. Poor quality/incorrect work significantly impacts credibility no matter how frequent/infrequent
@DeepValueBagger The cycle of hire and fire will go on for a while at most of these companies. It's unfortunately the best way to force company culture into a specific direction (i.e. AI adoption). They'll be happy to rehire the employee base with the filter of their new culture
@mr_deepvalue I certainly wouldn't call CSU share deep value but valuing them based on their acquisition multiples doesn't make sense. I would love to buy their shares at that price but they operate at better margins than the businesses they buy.
@mr_deepvalue Seems a bit illogical to value a capital deployer based strictly on the multiples it acquires at. It discredits any ability to improve the businesses, their ability to mass acquire businesses, or compound cashflows.
@NestBetter I love organic growth but I'm not sure this take is all that new or impactful. As long as their acquisitions meet the hurdle rate I'm pretty agnostic to whether the businesses are organically growing. If you trust their capital deployment discipline organic growth is a bonus
@tsxman@TSXDivStock I think for https://t.co/1JfmHxCyhX to be taken private, MRT.UN will be taken private first. It will be cleaner for the ultimate buyer of https://t.co/1JfmHxCyhX if there aren't loose publicly traded subsidiary positions floating around.
@PutItToTheTest@JJ_McCullough Land per capita meaning higher costs is extremely important. Think telecom, highways, logistics. You want to build a new mine? You need to connect it with roads or rails or ports. It needs to be supported by workers which with a small pop and large land is hard and expensive
@PutItToTheTest@JJ_McCullough More resources per capita is good for domestic use, if you want to monetize you need someone to sell to. Value of domestic use is capped if your population is so small (low demand) so to make domestic investment worth it you need external offloads (increase demand)
@no_cap_cap It comes down to trust in management and I don't like how their outlook seems to have 180 over the past year. I appreciate their guidance may be conservative but to switch up so fast feels worrying. I do like the recent insider buys though so may give it another quarter
@no_cap_cap It's always been small for me but will likely sell to redeploy elsewhere. Feel like the short-term is execution risk and a wait and see instead of underappreciated catalysts. It's still cheap but I don't mind missing some gains to see how they do