Fresh deep dive out on $SRI. A name that may not screen cheap (~12x FY26 EBITDA) but represents a compelling normalized earnings power + free embedded option story. 12x becomes <4x by 2030 and my base case is ~$15/share (slightly more than a double from today).
$LRN while the market frets over enrollments in the upcoming season, this post does a good job of showing some of the long-term demand drivers which aren't going away
@stockthoughts81 What do you think the right multiple is for each part of the business? From a valaution standpoint seems like power has a wide range of opinions in particular.
$AMR has moved up >30% since publishing my deep dive in late July.
I believe this has been driven by non-US coal indices strengthening across the 26/27 futures curve on supply discipline. This is consistent with my view on mid-cycle/normalized pricing. Non-US price strength validates the mid-cycle thesis and US indices are more likely to follow this path with pricing upside and a narrowing discount.
US met coal indices relevant to $AMR have not changed and my view of intrinsic value/normalized earnings power hasn’t either.
With a thinner margin of safety and less upside (normalized FCF yield now closer to ~mid-teens), I have trimmed my position roughly by half. Though I still see upside, the risk/reward no longer justifies the same position size.
Fresh deep dive out on $SRI. A name that may not screen cheap (~12x FY26 EBITDA) but represents a compelling normalized earnings power + free embedded option story. 12x becomes <4x by 2030 and my base case is ~$15/share (slightly more than a double from today).
Despite some management turnover post the Control Devices sale, execution YTD has been solid. I’m watching for MirrorEye incrementals to show up after some one-time headwinds in FY26, CL8 truck production to normalize, and a refi of the credit facility.
ABG does a pretty good job of valuing $GLNG’s embedded contract commodity upside, something the market is clearly not valuing adequately.
We could even argue that ABG’s assumptions are conservative.
@justfactstruth $FTAI is a super interesting name. As I’ve done work on it seems like there is a wide divergence of opinions on what the right multiple is for the business in totality + for each of the parts..
Hard to say as it depends on what value the market places on the LNG price call option, leverage, and the possibility/value of future FLNGs..
That said, it seems a range of at least $80-90 is reasonable (napkin math) if you assume 10x EBITDA for the tolling portion, reasonable leverage (say 3x net debt/ebitda), and minimal value ascribed to the commodity kicker/future growth.
No kidding! The catalyst path seems quite good from here.. We may well get an announcement with strong economics and diversification geographically very soon.
On the datapoints we have seems easy to make the case FLNG #4 is >$10 NPV/share on top of a name that already had downside protection from it’s prior asset base/agreements at this valuation. Will be interesting to see how the strategic review plays into these dynamics.
In thinking about long-term value, I wonder how the commodity call option gets valued once the dust settles 2028-2030. Can value it as an option or a simple multiple and we know it’s worth something - who knows if this becomes another blind spot even after we get the tolling EBITDA flowing through the P&L.
$GLNG with a strong Q2 update and announcement of a 4th FLNG.
Although a finalized commercial agreement is TBD, we now have ~$1.2B of long-term tolling EBITDA very reachable by 2030 with a one-way call option on LNG prices and near-term strategic review optionality providing additional levers of value.
I think this is a very interesting idea that could be very mis-priced due to complexity, out-year EBITDA ramp, etc.
Any thoughts welcome.