SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : Ask Michael Burke -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: Knighty Tin who wrote (88457)1/13/2001 1:44:20 PM
From: JHP  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 132070
 
Michael,
thanks for TIE. How high will TIE fly?

Fundamentals:

Titanium Metals (NYSE ticker TIE) is the worlds largest supplier and integrated producer of titanium metal products. In 1999 TIE accounted for 24% of worldwide industry shipments, shipping 11,400 metric tons at an average price of $33.00 per kilogram. That equates to approximately 25 million lbs.

The purchase of TIE common stock is an idea based in buying a stock when no one wants it and holding it until they do. TIE will command much higher prices when an upswing in aerospace and titanium demand becomes apparent and the current cyclical downswing in the industry turns up, which may have happened as we speak. This strategy coincides with our objective of realizing long term capital gains at greatly reduced tax rates. In every calamity there exists an opportunity for those with the foresight, patience, and courage to buy out of favor down and out stocks when they are cheap and nobody wants them. In most instances this requires stepping up to the plate while the backdrop of news is bad, and when the stock is at bargain basement levels. Such is the case with TIE.

The Company's sales in 1999 were $480 million versus $707 million in 1998 and $733 million in 1997, a peak year for titanium shipments. I believe that mid year 2000 represented the trough of the titanium cycle. Earnings have steadily declined from $2.64 per share in 1997, to $1.46 in 1998, and a loss of $1.00 per share in 1999. Analysts who cover TIE estimate the Co. will lose $1.20 in 2000, and lose $.30 in 2001. Fortunately as TIE's CEO Martin Landis stated at the last conference call, titanium demand has a way of sneaking up and when it does, demand grows fast, taking everyone by surprise. While on the surface the numbers appear bleak, research into the titanium industry and TIE in particular show that the future is anything but bleak. TIE has alot going for it in the future which can make for substantial long term capital gains.

TIE is a leaner and meaner company today than at any time in the past. They have paired down the workforce from a 1997 peak of 3,025 to a headcount of 2,300 today. This reduction was necessary due to the the general decrease in aerospace and aircraft demand experienced throughout the industry over the last several years. While downsizing the headcount, TIE implemented a major strategic expansion of its facilities and equipment. TIE spent over $100 million to increase capacity at the request of Boeing who wanted to insure adequate supplies of the metal were available to meet forecasted production needs. Boeing blew it, and they forecasted wrong. They also failed to integrate McDonnel Douglas as quickly as they thought causing huge production problems. Boeing looks like they are getting their act together now however. Back in the peak demand years Boeing and TIE entered into a long term supply contract. TIE increased capacity, but orders from Boeing failed to materialize. TIE now has 48,000 metric tons or 26% of the world's melting capacity. They also have 20,000 metric tons of mill product capacity which represents roughly 16% of total world mill product capacity. The Co. is no small player in the titanium game. Unfortunately TIE's expansion was accompanied by a period of decreased aircraft production from 1997 through 2000. TIE now operates at only 50% of its capacity, thus is unprofitable. The cost to TIE of all this unabsorbed overhead, coupled with restructuring charges and layoff demands on severance pay have hurt TIE badly. TIE sued Boeing in 1999 for $640 million related to the breach of contract regarding TIE's expansion and Boeing's failure to take minimum contractually specified amounts of titanium product. After reading both TIE's complaint and Boeing's response, it becomes painfully obvious that TIE has a very good case. My guess is that it will be settled out of court sometime before the February 2002 trial date. BA can not afford a trial they will clearly lose. TIE will get a chunk of money and probably commitments for purchase of product. A $640 million settlement is worth $20 per share to TIE holders, though I doubt it will ever get to court. They are talking now, but an outcome whatever it is will be favorable to TIE. Boeing recently settled smaller breach of contract suits with other suppliers such as RTI , another titanium producer. RTI got pretty much what they asked for in the suit roughly $16 million. In the meantime Boeing's commercial and military aircraft backlog continues to grow. BA can not afford to alienate TIE during a period of increasing aircraft demand. You know what they say, "What goes around comes around."

There are only 2 other fully integrated producers of titanium in the US. Allegheny Teledyne (now Allegheny Technologies, NYSE ticker ATI) and RTI International ( NYSE ticker RTI). Allegheny is clearly the larger of those 2. With its March 1998 takeover of Oregon Metallurgical and its purchase of the assets of Ludlam from Bethlehem Steel last year, it has quite an operation. It's Allvac, TI Industries, and Wah Chang units all produce varying amounts of titanium product. However titanium is only a part of ATI, so it is not a pure play on titanium. RTI was the titanium arm of US Steel ( now USX) and was spun off from USX in 1990. It trades under symbol RTI on the NYSE, but RTI has some very daunting environmental litigation pending. It is too risky and in fact USX spun it off thereby avoiding future liability. What remains is the fact that TIE is the only pure titanium play left. Boeing did navigate some strategic supply agreements with Verkhnaya Salda Metallurgical Production Association (VSMPO) , of Russia. The potential 5 year deal struck was worth only $75 million and has potential to $175 million, hardly enough to build Boeing's back ordered aircraft. Additionally, Russia's unstable economy is riddled with crime, bribery, kickbacks, and all sorts of problems. Doing business with Russia is kinda like shooting craps with a Mafia hit man. So Boeing must have a reliable US supplier base it can depend on.

In year 2000 alone Boeing has received orders for 529 commercial aircraft, well ahead of last years forecasted order rate for year 2000. That number grows as I write this article. In 1999 the school of thought by the forecasting geniuses was that BA would receive orders for 470 aircraft in year 2000. that has been exceeded. What is most promising is the fact that Boeing's 777 model is really picking up steam. British Airways continues to build its fleet of the 777 and now has 40 with 5 more on order. Backlog on the 777 is 115 aircraft with AlItalia, American Airlines, Singapore Airlines, GE Capital, International Finance and leasing Corp., Continental Airlines, Japan Airlines, and Nippon all in the customer mix. Typical demands on titanium supply begin about a year before scheduled deliveries of aircraft. The 777 is the world's largest user of titanium with a flyweight of finished titanium parts equal to about 1/2 million pounds. The purchase requirements are much higher, given the complexity of the structural shapes and finish machined components. While the exact purchase requirements of sheet, billet, ingot, etc. are unknown, the B2 Bomber had a purchase requirement of 7 times the flyweight. Then you have the A300 Airbus coming online about 5 years from now the way it looks. That plane could really deplete titanium supply and resources causing a panic scarcity.

In addition to commercial aircraft, the future looks bright on the military side as well. Stepped up defense spending is being directed primarily to purchase hardware, while DOD is cutting overhead like salaries and facilities. Take for example the the Airborne Laser Program Office down at Kirtland AFB in New Mexico. They have designated titanium the material of choice for the largest aircraft belly skins ever produced. The 25 x 5 1/2 foot skins ( 2 per plane) will provide the armor's reflective capability to repel fire and protect contents. Of course it is DOD who originally designated titanium a strategic commodity vital to the national security.

There are other promising uses for titanium as well in the medical and orthopedic markets, space travel, energy, and automotive uses. This past year TIE struck a deal with Corvette to supply a new titanium muffler system for the legendary sports vehicle.

Titanium goes into virtually every aircraft produced. It's in the pipes, the skins, the hydraulic landing gears, the ducts, the heat exchangers, you name it. It's high strength, corrosion resistance, light weight, and thermal properties make it the ideal material for demanding applications. the US has the lead in only 2 basic manufacturing industries. One is aircraft and the other is technology. Going forward we must maintain that leadership and productive capability or we lose like we lost to Toyota in the 80's. TIE is well positioned to capitalize on increased aircraft production coming on line now. Military use of titanium will grow as well. Lets face it, people want to fly and they will be flying long after the boob tube is an obsolete relic.

Industry experts say the amount of titanium product in the pipeline is is wearing down and inventories of existing product are being depleted. I spoke with one major California supplier of titanium who told me that things are picking up and that order rates are improving a bit now. Their experience says the worst is over and they anticipate a gradual upswing in demand. TIE has recently raised prices on certain aircraft grades, something that could never be done a year back.

Institutional holdings of TIE represent about 11 million shares as of the last reporting period. Several institutions took initial positions recently. Royce Associates took a position of 664,000 shares. TIE also has a strategic agreement with Rolls Royce who uses titanium in engines they produce. First Union bought 162,000 shares and Caxton Associates took an initial position of 200,000 shares. There are a few others as well who either established initial positions or increased previous holdings. While a few institutions did sell or reduce holdings, overall in net terms more than a million shares were bought than sold by institutions in the 3rd quarter of 2000 and the number of institutions holding TIE stock was reduced by 8. This is a positive development as more weak holders are eliminated and more and more shares find their way into fewer and fewer strong hands. TIE has approximately 32 million shares outstanding. Institutions owned 30.5% or 9,706,839 shares representing an increase of 12.35% during Q3, 2000. 24 institutional sales of 739,354 shares was dwarfed by 16 institutional purchases of 1,806,103 shares in the 3rd qtr. of 2000. The net affect is that 1,066,749 more shares are owned by 8 less stockholders. The transition of shares from weak holders to strong hands is telling. Particularly when such a transition takes place against a backdrop af large quarterly losses.

Insiders began purchasing TIE stock again in mid 2000 as well. The CEO and others shelled out for 70,000 shares in May of 2000 coming after Tremont increased its stake in January. Management and insiders now own about 1.2 % of the stock. They bought of course while the news was bad and just as TIE eliminated the dividend. Tremont Corp. (NYSE ticker TRE) owns 12.3 million shares of TIE or 40%. This strange corporate concoction of Wall St. Financier Harold Simmons has accumulated stock in TIE at prices ranging from $27 to $4 1/4 over the past 4 years. The most recent purchase was 2 million shares on Jan. 3rd 2000. One has to wonder about Simmons and his maze of corporate holdings. He is the major shareholder and controlling interest behind NL Industries (NYSE ticker NL) which is a major user of titanium pigments and powder forms. He is an indirect controlling interest in TIE as well through his ownership of Valhi Corp., Tremont Corp., and NL, which all own stock in each other and TIE in one way or another. It's a real mish mash, but the fact remains they are holding 40% of TIE.

Given the possibilities here, from BA's lawsuit to higher aircraft production rates, from increased institutional interest to insider buying, the situation warrants making TIE an all time favorite for large capital gains. My projected target of $30-$40 in 2-3 years represents a 300-400% gain from today's prices. Its worth putting this one away for a while.

members.aol.com



To: Knighty Tin who wrote (88457)1/13/2001 1:47:20 PM
From: mishedlo  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 132070
 
MBNA Selectively Disclosed Fourth-Quarter Data, Analysts Say
thestreet.com

Mike - What does this say to you. If they have cleverly securitized all the bad loans and kept the good ones then maybe they are doing something really smart. OTOH what the hell are they hiding?
Thoughts please.

MBNA (KRB:NYSE - news), the world's largest independent credit card issuer with nearly $90 billion in loans, allegedly shared key financial data with selected brokerage analysts Wednesday without providing the numbers to other analysts or the public.

The company's alleged failure to widely disseminate the data, which is said to give valuable insights into fourth-quarter earnings, could run afoul of a new Securities and Exchange Commission rule designed to clamp down on selective disclosure of material information by public companies.

MBNA's finance chief, Scot Kaufman, denies that his company practiced selective disclosure Wednesday. The SEC didn't immediately comment. MBNA stock rose 50 cents to $37 Thursday, putting it near its 52-week high.

Differing Data
The data in question come from a special type of quarterly income statement, calculated by the company, that analysts say gives a much fuller grasp of MBNA's results. This so-called managed-basis income statement doesn't appear in MBNA's press releases but does appear in releases from other large credit companies, including American Express (AXP:NYSE - news), Capital One (COF:NYSE - news) and Providian (PVN:NYSE - news). Up until the third quarter, MBNA distributed a managed-basis income statement solely to investment professionals.

Climbing
MBNA's fortunes improving



These managed-basis income data show slowing growth in an important revenue line at MBNA, according to Todd Pitsinger, a consumer finance analyst with Arlington, Va.-based Friedman Billings & Ramsey. Pitsinger says he made a number of requests Wednesday to see the data, but got the figures only Thursday, over the phone. "This is a big issue," the analyst says. "I told [MBNA] pretty aggressively [on Wednesday] that this was the wrong thing to do." (Pitsinger rates MBNA an accumulate and FBR hasn't done underwriting for the company.)

Joel Houck, an analyst with St. Louis-based A.G. Edwards, says he made a request Wednesday for the data, but he hadn't received anything at noon Thursday, when he spoke with TheStreet.com. (Houck gives MBNA a reduce rating and A.G. Edwards hasn't done underwriting for the company.)

Extra Info
When reporting quarterly earnings, U.S. credit card companies usually issue two types of income statements. One type, which MBNA did publish in its release Wednesday, conforms with regular U.S. accounting regulations. But this version gives a skewed snapshot of credit card firms' financials, since it excludes the effect of securitized loans. Securitized loans are those that have been bundled up and sold as bonds.

The information MBNA didn't provide in its release is known as the managed income statement. This statement assumes that all loans have been kept on the firm's balance sheet and that no securitization has taken place. It is this information that analysts depend on to get a full picture of a credit card company's finances.

"We did not distribute a managed income statement," says MBNA's Kaufman. Nor did the company give out parts of a fourth-quarter managed income statement, orally or otherwise, he adds. The CFO didn't say why MBNA doesn't include a managed income statement in its earning releases.

Because MBNA securtizes some 80% of its loans, the managed income statement looks a lot different from the regular form. The Wilmington, Del.-based company included a managed statement in its SEC filing for third-quarter 2000 results. This quarterly filing, called a 10-Q, came out on Nov. 14, 2000, over a month after its third-quarter earnings release was published on Oct. 11.

The two accounting treatments can provide drastically different results for the same period. The MBNA 10-Q shows third-quarter net interest income totaled $1.48 billion on a managed basis, vs. $434 million in the standard income statement. Fee income was $774 million in the third quarter, using the managed method, against $1.33 billion.

"It's virtually impossible to work your earnings model [for MBNA] without the managed data," says A.G. Edwards' Houck.

Says Kaufman: "I don't think it'd be material information even if we did distribute" data from a managed fourth-quarter income statement.

The Upshot
FBR's Pitsinger says the managed-basis data show that the fourth quarter may not have been as strong as it first appeared. In particular, he says, managed-basis fee income of $810 million was 19% above the $683 million posted in the year-ago period. He and others expected other income to grow faster than that. A year ago, it was growing at 40%.

Pitsinger says: "There's no way to get a managed fee income without significant additional guidance from the company."

MBNA's earnings release does include some managed-basis figures, but they are for loan totals, credit quality indicators and margin information. Kaufman says that it's possible to work out a managed income statement from these managed numbers in the release.

Up until the fourth-quarter earnings release, MBNA used to give the managed-basis income statement to investment professionals who requested it, according to Kaufman. But in part because of the introduction of the SEC's new fair disclosure rules in October 2000, that practice had to stop, Kaufman says.



To: Knighty Tin who wrote (88457)1/13/2001 8:33:03 PM
From: Knighty Tin  Respond to of 132070
 
To All, Barron's had their Roundtable discussion this week. I like and respect Barton Biggs. But his picks last year were incredibly disastrous. If you followed his advice last year, there is no reason to look at his picks this year. You are broke. This is the first time I remember Barron's actually putting out a table tracking how the gurus performed.

On the other hand, I think Abby JO is a toad, but her picks were pretty darned good. IBM was a turkey, but the other 4 were all up, a couple of them more than 70%, in a pretty tough year.

Meryl Buchanan was the only one to make money on all of her picks, including a short sale.

All of Felix Zulauf's longs were losers, but he did make a pittance on his shorts. If I were him, though, I'd buy up all the copies of this rag in Switzerland and tear out the performance page before his potential clients see it. <g>

ARchie MacAllister had several mega winners and only one small loser.

John Neff and Scott Black both performed very well.

Art Samberg had only 3 picks and the loss on the turkey overwhelmed the gains on the 2 winners.

Mario Gabelli, whom I also like, was mediocre.

To be fair, the people had a static recommendation, which is not real world. Many would have cut their losses. Of course, they also may have cut their gains. So, this sort of thing does not really prove somebody's worth or lessness as a manager. In fact, it is kind of silly. But fun.

I still talk about how in 1995, my closed end picks in Kiplinger's beat the other five gurus, and how Morningstar finished dead last with its picks in that article. So, it is not quite as silly when I win. <VBG>