Part II of the analysis
The main competitors for the company are the other big pharma companies and the generic firms such as Ranbaxy, Sun etc. We can apply Michael porter’s five factor model to evaluate the company
Barrier to entry – All the segments of the company enjoy substantial entry barriers. The pharma and medical devices have formidable barriers in the form of patents and sales and marketing network. In addition any new drug or device requires substantial R&D expenses and infrastructure. The consumer segment has barriers in the form of Brands and distribution network
Supplier power – Moderate to low in this industry. Suppliers are mainly providers of basic chemicals or contract manufacturers. The value is derived from the IPR of the drug and not from the manufacturing.
Buyer power – Low in consumer goods. However in case of Pharma and the devices segments, national programs such as Medicare have a strong leverage and with escalating cost will attempt to drive down prices.
Substitute product – none
Rivalry – There is intense rivalry in the industry from other pharma majors who are attempting to develop a similar drug and especially from the generics where the price and profits drop by as much as 90% over the course of a few years as soon as the drug comes off a patent. In addition, the generic companies are constantly trying to challenge the patents too.
Management quality checklist
- Management compensation: The company has almost 215 Million outstanding options which would result in 2% dilution. The options do not appear to be excessive.
- Capital allocation record: Fairly good. The management has maintained an ROE in excess of 25%, low debt and a dividend payout of almost 40%. In addition, the management has been engaged in acquiring other pharma companies to pull gaps in its drug pipeline and added to it too.
- Shareholder communication: The shareholder disclosure is good with clear explanation of the benefits assumptions and IP R&D (in process R&D) calculations from the acquisitions.
- Accounting practice: The overall accounting seems to be conservative. However there are some areas of concern. For example – the company has assumed long term returns on plan assets of 9%. I think that is aggressive and could result in additional charges over the years. The IP R&D (in process R&D) charges do not appear to be excessive.
The company has approximately 12 Bn of cash flow and is selling at around 13 times earnings. The company has shown a profit growth of almost 15% per annum with high degree of consistency. At the same time the company has maintained a high level of ROE during this period too. One cannot assume such a high level of profit growth in the future as some part of this has come from the increase in net margins. However with a conservative assumption of 6-7% growth, discount rate of 8% and CAP period of 10 yrs, intrinsic value can be estimated to be between 80-85 (PE of around 20).
The current valuation assumes a growth of 0 or worse and gives no value to the competitive advantage of the company. The company is currently selling at a 5 year low and appears to undervalued by comparative and absolute standards.
The company has performed well in the past in terms of fundamental performance. The sales and profits have grown at a double digit rate. In addition the company has a healthy drug pipeline at various stages of approval which could help in replacing the blockbuster drugs going off patent. The medical devices and consumer division provide stability to the earnings and help in reducing the risks of the pharma division.
The management has been a rational allocator of capital which is visible via the high dividend payout, above average ROE and sensible acquisitions. The company appears 20-30% undervalued compared to the intrinsic value which in turn can be expected to grow at 7-10% in the future.
A new addition: I have created a pdf version of the analysis. Please feel free to download and share with others