FundInvestor PMS 185 U
Transcription
FundInvestor PMS 185 U
Cover_0807.qxp 8/2/07 8:36 PM Page 1 StockInvestor August 15, 2007 Volume Number 7 2 Buying core holdings at a discount Options for Long-Term Investors Although stock options are viewed by many as the realm of traders and speculators, there are ways they can be used by rational investors with a long-term view. We are expanding our options coverage here at Morningstar, and I plan on periodically sharing ideas from the options realm for companies in the Tortoise and Hare. This month, I thought I would introduce stock options for those who are unfamiliar, as well as explain some of the basic strategies available. Our focus on businesses and intrinsic value gives us an edge in this space. As I will explain in a moment, the vast majority of options traders are focused on two things we should not care about—short-term stock prices and volatility. By focusing on intrinsic business value and using options to exploit this perspective-based advantage we have, we should be able to increase our returns. An Introduction There are two types of stock options that can be bought and sold—the call and the put. A call option gives its owner the option (but not the obligation) to buy a stock at a specific price, known as the strike price, up to a given point in time, called the expiration date. A put provides the owner of the option the right to sell a stock at a specific price up to a given point in time. Options are contracts, and one can either buy a contract or sell to create a contract. Options are traded in units called contracts. Each contract covers 100 shares, though option prices are quoted in per-share terms. An example should make things clearer. If I were to buy five contracts priced at $10 to buy eBay EBAY with a $30 strike price and a January 2010 expiration, I would hand over $5,000 (5 contracts x $10 x 100 shares per contract) plus commission. I’d then have the right to buy 500 shares of eBay at $30 between now and January 2010. If a call option has a strike price below the market price, it is “in the money,” as is a put option that has a strike price above the market price. In the money options have intrinsic value if exercised today, which is the case in our eBay example above. Options “out of the money” would not have value if exercised, but still have some value because of the potential to become in the money in the future. There are several key factors that influence option values. First, the level of volatility in the underlying stock plays a key role in an option’s price. The higher the volatility of the underlying security, the greater the value of the option. If the underlying stock is more volatile, it means the option has a greater chance of trading in the money before the option expires. Second, the amount of time left until the option expires influences the option’s value. The more time left until expiration, the greater the value of the option. Again, the longer until expiration, the more time for an option to trade or finish in the money. Finally, the direction in which the underlying stock is trading will affect the value of the option. If a stock appreciates, it will positively affect call options and negatively affect put options. If a stock falls, it will have the opposite effects. Pros and Cons Options certainly can have their place in a long-term investor’s portfolio, but some very important caveats Continued on Page 30 Paul Larson Equities Strategist and Editor The Tortoise Portfolio 2 Our favorite conservative picks, including Bank of America and Novartis The Hare Portfolio Our favorite aggressive picks, including eBay and CarMax 4 Tortoise and Hare Focus 6 Washington Mutual and Expedia Bellwether Watchlist 8 Ratings and comments on more than 150 wide-moat companies InternationalInvestor Russia: The Bear Roars 17 Company Spotlights Q&A with our Corporate Executive Board and Amgen analysts 22 Company Focus Nike, Discover Financial Services, Hershey, and Lowe’s 26 Ports_0807.qxp 8/2/07 8:24 PM Page 2 2 The Tortoise Portfolio blend funds since inception, but it has outperformed only 10.5% of these funds over the past 12 months. Morningstar Stock Portfolios | Paul Larson From its inception on June 18, 2001, through July 31, 2007, the Tortoise Portfolio has returned 90.6% compared with a total return of 33.2% for the S&P 500 Index and 37.3% for the average large-cap blend mutual fund. Year to date, this portfolio has risen 1.4% versus a 3.6% total return for the S&P 500. The Tortoise has outperformed 97.9% of U.S. large-cap The Tortoise Portfolio Portfolio Holdings Performance and Transaction Summary Stock Name Å 5 Shares added Í 5 Shares sold Bank of America BAC C 5 New holding UR 5 Under Review Berkshire Hathaway BRK.B Star Rating Business Risk QQQQQ QQQQQ QQQQQ QQQQ QQQ -Avg Fair Value ($) Current Price ($) Consider Buying Consider Selling 4700.00 3604.00 4004.90 6170.60 Size of Moat Dividend Yield (%) Wide 0.0 œ Stewardship 61.00 46.29 47.00 76.40 Narrow 1.7 ∑ 70.00 47.42 54.00 87.70 Wide 4.7 ∑ -Avg 60.00 52.11 51.10 78.80 Wide 2.5 ¥ -Avg 71.00 66.00 60.50 93.20 Wide 2.1 ∑ QQQQQ QQQ QQQQ QQQQQ QQQQQ -Avg 73.00 53.95 62.20 95.80 Wide 2.0 — -Avg 61.00 57.68 52.00 80.10 Wide 1.9 ¥ -Avg 53.00 46.42 45.20 69.60 Wide 1.9 ∑ -Avg 80.00 60.50 68.20 105.00 Wide 1.9 ∑ -Avg 70.00 58.54 59.60 91.90 Wide 1.0 œ QQQQ QQQQQ QQQQQ QQQQQ QQQ -Avg 57.00 48.77 48.60 74.80 Wide 2.4 œ -Avg 47.00 36.56 40.00 61.70 Wide 1.1 œ -Avg 60.00 45.95 51.10 78.80 Wide 1.7 ∑ -Avg 63.00 44.01 48.60 78.90 Wide 3.2 œ -Avg 79.00 78.56 60.90 99.00 Wide 1.3 œ QQQQQ QQQQ QQQ QQQ QQQQ -Avg 44.00 37.17 37.50 57.80 Wide 2.2 ¥ -Avg 700.00 549.50 539.80 877.00 None 1.5 œ -Avg 35.00 36.20 29.80 46.00 Narrow 3.2 œ -Avg 55.00 49.90 46.90 72.20 Wide 6.7 œ -Avg 76.00 65.62 64.80 99.80 Wide 1.9 ∑ 58.00 37.53 44.70 72.70 Narrow 5.8 ∑ 31.00 23.51 23.90 38.80 Wide 4.5 ¥ Moody’s MCO QQQQQ -Avg QQQQQ -Avg QQQQQ -Avg 65.00 53.80 55.40 85.30 Wide 0.6 ∑ Broadridge Fin Solutions BR Not Rated NA NA 17.59 NA NA NA 0.3 — Coca-Cola KO Colgate-Palmolive CL Novartis AG NVS Wrigley Wm Jr WWY Automatic Data Prcsng ADP Johnson & Johnson JNJ American Express AXP Anheuser-Busch Co BUD What is the goal of the Tortoise Portfolio? The Tortoise Portfolio has two goals: to outperform the S&P 500 Index and to generate positive returns regardless of the broad market environment. Companies in this portfolio tend to be large, moderate to low risk, and slow growing. We aim for all the companies here to have an economic moat. Morningstar Ratings & Fundamentals -Avg Spec 5 Speculative Avg 5 Average The Tortoise had yet another bad month in terms of performance. Not only did it lose more value, but it also lost ground to the S&P 500. Leading the way on the downside again was Moody’s MCO, falling 13.5% in July. Look no further than the tumult in the -Avg First American FAF 1Avg 5 Above Average 2Avg 5 Below Average There were no trades in the Tortoise in July. But with the recent market volatility creating numerous buying opportunities (the “Consider Buying” list on page 14 is at record length), I would not be surprised to find myself making some trades shortly. Cintas CTAS Wal-Mart Stores WMT J.P. Morgan Chase & Co. JPM General Dynamics GD Home Depot HD White Mountains Ins WTM TransCanada TRP Kinder Morgan Mngmt KMR PepsiCo PEP Washington Mutual WM Pfizer PFE Cash Holdings Tortoise Portfolio Total 2.5 Ports_0807.qxp 8/2/07 8:24 PM Page 3 Morningstar StockInvestor Median Price/Fair-Value Ratio Subgroup Med. P/FV Ratio All Stocks Wide Moat Narrow Moat No Moat Below Avg. Risk Average Risk Above Avg. Risk NYSE NASDAQ 0.96 0.91 0.94 1.00 0.91 0.96 0.99 0.96 0.96 Data through July 31, 2007. credit markets for a reason for Moody’s decline. I am kicking myself for not selling all of the portfolio’s stake in Moody’s when I trimmed the position in February. Only two fair value changes to note—a $2 per share decrease at Pfizer PFE reflecting higher Lipitor competition, and a $4 increase at General Dynamics GD mirroring accrued cash flows. Ticker Paul Larson personally owns shares of the following Tortoise stocks: BAC, BRK.B, BUD, CTAS, FAF, GD, HD, JNJ, JPM, KMR, KO, NVS, PFE, TRP, +WM, WMT, and WWY. 1 5 Paul has bought the stock in the past month. 2 5 Paul has sold the stock in the past month. © 2007 Morningstar, Inc. All rights reserved. Any opinions, recommendations, or information contained herein: (i) is for educational purposes only; (ii) is not guaranteed to be accurate, complete, or timely; (iii) has not been tailored to suit any particular person’s portfolio or holdings; and (iv) should not be construed as investment advice of any kind. Neither Morningstar nor any of its agents shall have any liability with respect to such opinions, recommendations, or information. Morningstar has not given its consent to be deemed an “expert” under the federal Securities Act of 1933. Past performance is no guarantee of future results. Before making any investment, consult with your financial advisor. Morningstar employees may have holdings in the stocks recommended. Portfolio Performance Breakdown Portfolio Value Date of First # of Shares Purchase +/– Change Total Cost Basis/ 2 Share ($) Total 2 Cost ($) Current Value ($) 8613.00 14416.00 67.4 % Gain / % of Loss This Month 12 Month Since5 Inception — -3.2 12.4 11.1 S&P 500 Index 1455.3 -3.1 16.1 4.8 NASDAQ Composite 2546.3 -2.1 22.7 4.2 Trailing Return (%) Index Level 8.0 Tortoise Portfolio Portfolio BRK.B 06-18-01 0 4 2153.25 FAF 03-17-04 0 300 28.70 8610.99 13887.00 61.3 7.7 BAC 04-25-07 0 270 50.43 13615.67 12803.40 -6.0 7.1 KO 10-01-04 0 200 40.63 8125.72 10422.00 28.3 5.8 CL 06-26-02 0 150 45.54 6831.23 9900.00 44.9 5.5 % Total Return NVS 02-09-07 0 170 57.05 9697.79 9171.50 -5.4 5.1 •Tortoise Portfolio • S&P 500 Index WWY 04-18-06 0 150 45.97 6895.59 8652.00 25.5 4.8 70 ADP 06-14-02 0 175 27.84 4872.72 8123.50 66.7 4.5 JNJ 12-06-05 0 130 59.51 7736.38 7865.00 1.7 4.4 AXP 07-18-01 0 125 29.46 3682.50 7317.50 98.7 4.1 BUD 10-20-03 0 150 48.70 7304.36 7315.50 0.2 4.1 CTAS 05-16-07 0 200 37.61 7522.00 7312.00 -2.8 4.0 WMT 07-19-02 0 150 47.43 7114.28 6892.50 -3.1 3.8 07-23-02 0 150 30.49 4574.16 6601.50 44.3 3.7 JPM 3 Contact Paul Larson at paul_larson@morningstar.com One correction to mention. Last issue, Broadridge Financial BR (the spin-off received from Automatic Data Processing ADP earlier this year) did not appear in the portfolio table. I did not sell it just yet, and Broadridge should have appeared. All the other portfolio data was correct. My apologies for the error. œ Portfolio Transactions August 2007 35 0 06-01 06-02 06-03 06-04 Top Five Sectors (%) a Financial Srvcs s Consumer Goods 37.6 22 33 26 Lrg 11 7 0 Med 0 0 0 Sm 0 80 25.31 2025.06 6284.80 210.4 3.5 09-24-01 0 150 21.85 3277.50 5575.50 70.1 3.1 i Healthcare p Business Srvcs 11.7 HD WTM 11-05-01 0 10 355.30 3553.00 5495.00 54.7 3.0 o Consumer Srvcs 7.1 TRP 01-23-04 0 150 21.21 3181.88 5430.00 70.7 3.0 KMR 03-08-06 0 105 38.33 4024.13 5239.50 30.2 2.9 75 35.92 2694.25 4921.50 82.7 2.7 WM 12-05-01 0 125 31.05 3881.75 4691.25 20.9 2.6 PFE 09-24-01 0 150 35.21 5281.01 3526.50 -33.2 2.0 MCO 12-16-02 0 50 20.80 1039.75 2690.00 158.7 1.5 BR 06-14-02 0 43 11.92 512.56 756.37 47.6 0.4 5554.423 4 180844.24 3.1 100.0 10.3 p50 –100 p25 – 50 p10 – 25 p0 – 10 Morningstar ratings and fundamentals as of 07-31-07. Portfolio inception date: 6-18-01. 1 0 06-07 Value Blend Growth 23.5 03-12-03 07-19-02 06-06 Style Breakdown (%) GD PEP 06-05 Master limited partnership units have different tax characteristics than common stocks and may not be suitable for taxdeferred accounts such as IRAs. Please consult your tax advisor before buying. 2 Cost basis includes commissions. Includes interest and dividends. 4 Includes capital gains. 5 Returns since inception are annualized and include dividends. 3 Ports_0807.qxp 8/2/07 8:24 PM Page 4 4 The Hare Portfolio Though the Hare lost value, July was good for the portfolio on a relative-performance basis versus both the S&P and the Tortoise. The S&P had its worst month since July 2004, yet seven of the Hare’s holdings bucked the trend and rose in value. Morningstar Stock Portfolios | Paul Larson From its inception on June 18, 2001, through July 31, 2007, the Hare Portfolio has returned 62.7% compared with a total return of 33.2% for the S&P 500 Index and 19.7% for the average large-cap growth mutual fund. Year to date, this portfolio has returned 5.2% versus a 3.6% total return for the S&P 500 Index. The Hare has outperformed 97.3% of U.S. largecap growth funds since inception and 98.8% of these funds in the past 12 months. The Hare Portfolio Performance and Transaction Summary Å 5 Shares added Í 5 Shares sold C 5 New holding UR 5 Under Review Spec 5 Speculative 1Avg 5 Above Average 2Avg 5 Below Average Avg 5 Average Portfolio Holdings I made several trades this past month. On July 10, I sold the portfolio’s entire stake in Nokia NOK at $28.88, raising $11,541.83. I’ve never been a fan of companies with very rapid product cycles, and Nokia selling at a premium to our fair value estimate proved a juicy chance to reallocate capital to some of the other opportunities available. I then used the funds to buy one new position— Corporate Executive Board EXBD—and added to existing holdings Enterprise GP Holdings EPE Morningstar Ratings & Fundamentals Star Rating Business Risk -Avg 32.00 23.93 -Avg 167.00 160.80 -Avg 40.00 32.84 30.80 50.10 eBay EBAY QQQQQ QQQ QQQQ QQQ QQQQQ Paychex PAYX QQQQ Stock Name CarMax KMX MasterCard MA Compass Minerals Intl CMP Biogen Idec BIIB Fair Value ($) Current Price ($) Consider Buying Consider Selling Size of Moat Dividend Yield (%) 24.70 40.10 Narrow 0.0 128.80 209.20 Wide 0.3 ¥ Narrow 3.8 ∑ Stewardship ∑ -Avg 58.00 56.54 44.70 72.70 Wide 0.0 ∑ -Avg 49.00 32.40 41.80 64.30 Wide 0.0 ∑ œ -Avg 46.00 41.38 39.20 60.40 Wide 2.3 QQQQQ -Avg Å Fastenal FAST Enterprise GP Holdings LP EPE QQQQQ -Avg Å 63.00 45.07 53.70 82.70 Wide 0.9 œ 54.00 40.45 41.60 67.70 Wide 3.5 ∑ QQQQ -Avg QQQQQ -Avg 34.00 28.99 29.00 44.60 Wide 1.4 œ 38.00 31.88 32.40 49.90 Wide 2.3 ∑ QQQ QQQQQ QQQQQ QQQQQ QQQQ -Avg 65.00 59.11 50.10 81.40 Wide 0.0 ¥ -Avg 32.00 19.95 27.30 42.00 Wide 0.1 ¥ -Avg 63.00 47.89 48.60 78.90 Wide 0.2 ¥ -Avg 47.00 35.32 36.20 58.90 Wide 1.5 ∑ -Avg 34.00 27.97 26.20 42.60 Wide 0.0 † QQQQQ -Avg QQQQ -Avg QQQQ -Avg 93.00 67.42 71.70 116.50 Wide 2.1 ¥ 41.00 32.34 31.60 51.40 Narrow 2.3 — 69.00 53.74 53.20 86.50 Wide 0.0 ¥ Microsoft MSFT Sysco SYY Apollo Group APOL What is the goal of Western Union WU the Hare Portfolio? International Speedway ISCA The Hare Portfolio has two International Game Tech IGT goals: to outperform the S&P Dell DELL 500 Index and to generate positive returns regardless of the C Corporate Executive Brd EXBD broad market environment.ComCemex SAB de CV CX panies in this portfolio tend to Amgen AMGN either be small or fast growing, or have a high risk/return IAC/InterActiveCorp IACI proposition. All companies here Expedia EXPE have an economic moat. Boston Scientific BSX Í Nokia NOK -Avg UR 28.74 UR UR Narrow 0.0 ¥ QQQQQ -Avg 38.00 26.61 29.30 47.60 Narrow 0.0 ¥ QQQQQ -Avg QQQ Avg 21.00 13.15 16.20 26.30 Wide 0.0 ¥ 27.00 28.57 20.80 33.80 Narrow 2.1 œ UR Cash Holdings Hare Portfolio Total 1.7 Ports_0807.qxp 8/2/07 8:24 PM Page 5 Morningstar StockInvestor and Fastenal FAST. There is much more on Corporate Executive on page 22, while Enterprise was spotlighted in the June issue, and the interview with our Fastenal analyst was in the March issue. Contact Paul Larson at paul_larson@morningstar.com AMGN, APOL, BIIB, CMP, CX, DELL, +EBAY, EPE, +EXBD, EXPE, FAST, IACI, IGT, ISCA, KMX, MA, MSFT, PAYX, SYY, and WU. 1 5 Paul has bought the stock in the past month. 2 5 Paul has sold the stock in the past month. © 2007 Morningstar, Inc. All rights reserved. Any opinions, recommendations, or information contained herein: (i) is for educational purposes only; (ii) is not guaranteed to be accurate, complete, or timely; (iii) has not been tailored to suit any particular person’s portfolio or holdings; and (iv) should not be construed as investment advice of any kind. Neither Morningstar nor any of its agents shall have any liability with respect to such opinions, recommendations, or information. Morningstar has not given its consent to be deemed an “expert” under the federal Securities Act of 1933. Past performance is no guarantee of future results. Before making any investment, consult with your financial advisor. Morningstar employees may have holdings in the stocks recommended. Sign up for free Portfolio E-Mail Alerts Want to find out about changes to our portfolios? Sign up for e-mail alerts at http://msi.morningstar.com. We’ll let you know what stock(s) we traded, and why, within 24 hours of any transaction. Portfolio Performance Breakdown Portfolio Value Ticker Date of First # of Shares +/– Change Total Purchase KMX 01-20-04 0 1100 14.71 16181.44 26323.00 62.7 14.8 MA 05-30-06 0 100 44.00 4399.98 16080.00 265.5 9.0 CMP 08-18-05 0 350 24.26 8490.48 11494.00 35.4 6.5 BIIB 12-12-02 0 200 32.58 6516.00 11308.00 73.5 6.4 EBAY 04-20-06 0 330 33.08 10917.98 10692.00 -2.1 6.0 % Total Return PAYX 06-24-02 0 250 28.55 7138.50 10345.00 44.9 5.8 •Hare Portfolio • S&P 500 Index FAST 01-29-07 +95 220 38.56 8482.65 9915.40 16.9 5.6 80 EPE 05-29-07 +65 235 37.74 8867.87 9505.75 7.2 5.3 MSFT 08-22-05 0 300 26.30 7891.26 8697.00 10.2 4.9 10-09-03 0 250 31.98 7996.00 7970.00 -0.3 4.5 APOL 08-02-04 0 125 66.81 8351.73 7388.75 -11.5 4.2 WU 10-02-06 0 365 17.74 6474.63 7281.75 12.5 4.1 ISCA 01-06-06 0 150 48.44 7266.11 7183.50 -1.1 4.0 IGT 06-27-05 0 200 28.35 5669.00 7064.00 24.6 4.0 DELL 09-21-01 0 200 20.39 4078.00 5594.00 37.2 3.1 EXBD 07-10-07 +80 80 67.76 5421.14 5393.60 -0.5 3.0 12-11-06 0 128 31.52 4034.10 4139.52 2.6 2.3 AMGN 06-11-02 0 75 38.80 2910.25 4030.50 38.5 2.3 01-11-05 0 100 28.39 2838.87 2874.00 1.2 1.6 SYY CX IACI Cost Basis/ 2 Share ($) Total 2 Cost ($) Current Value ($) % Gain / % of Loss Portfolio 01-11-05 0 100 BSX NOK 22.73 2273.12 2661.00 17.1 06-18-01 0 06-18-01 -400 160 8.60 1376.00 2104.00 52.9 1.2 0 12.48 4991.00 0.00 0.0 0.0 137.993 1.5 0.1 4 178182.76 100.0 This Month 12 Month Since5 Inception — -2.4 31.8 8.3 S&P 500 Index 1455.3 -3.1 16.1 4.8 NASDAQ Composite 2546.3 -2.1 22.7 4.2 Trailing Return (%) Index Level Hare Portfolio 40 0 06-01 06-02 06-03 06-04 Top Five Sectors (%) o Consumer Srvcs p Business Srvcs 06-05 06-06 06-07 Style Breakdown (%) 36.5 Value Blend Growth 27.5 0 14 39 Lrg i Healthcare d Ind Mtrls. 9.8 0 12 28 Med 6 0 0 Sm g Utilities 5.3 8.8 p50 –100 p25 – 50 p10 – 25 p0 – 10 Morningstar ratings and fundamentals as of 07-31-07. Portfolio inception date: 6-18-01. 1 EXPE 5 Paul Larson personally owns shares of the following Hare stocks: Many portfolio companies have reported second quarter earnings in recent weeks. We had IAC/InterActive IACI “under review” at publication after the firm reported disappointing results, but nearly all the other earnings reports looked solid. We knocked a dollar off our Compass Minerals CMP fair value, and also reduced our Expedia EXPE fair value after the proposed share buyback was reduced in size. On the other side of the coin, we modestly increased our fair values for Paychex PAYX and Biogen Idec BIIB. œ Portfolio Transactions August 2007 Master limited partnership units have different tax characteristics than common stocks and may not be suitable for taxdeferred accounts such as IRAs. Please consult your tax advisor before buying. 2 Cost basis includes commissions. Includes interest and dividends. 4 Includes capital gains. 5 Returns since inception are annualized and include dividends. 3 Focus_0807.qxp 8/2/07 8:22 PM Page 6 6 Washington Mutual WM Paul’s Position Though subprime woes certainly represent a headwind, we have it incorporated into our cashflow models, and banks as a group look cheap. Tortoise Stock Focus | Erin Swanson, CFA Morningstar’s Take Rating 1-Yr High/Low Fair Value Current Price Consider Buy Consider Sell QQQQQ $46.38/37.50 $58.00 $37.53 $44.70 $72.70 Size of Moat Business Risk Market Cap Dividend Yield Revenues Narrow -Avg $33.3 bil 5.8% $14.4 bil Stewardship ∑ • Washington Mutual % Change in Price • S&P 500 Index 100 75 Washington Mutual is a major player in the U.S. mortgage industry, a thorn in the bank’s side of late. Although we don’t believe the challenges facing this market will abate soon, we contend that management is making the best of a challenging situation and that strong retail banking operations and diversification efforts will help WaMu weather the current storm. 50 25 20 -25 97 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 07 Data through July 31, 2007. Profile From its humble beginnings in 1889, Washington Mutual has grown into the largest thrift in the U.S., with nearly $350 billion in assets. The Seattle-based firm operates four primary business segments— retail banking, card services, commercial, and home loans—serving more than 19 million households. WaMu is focused on the mass middle market through approximately 2,225 retail banking stores, 465 lending centers, and 3,925 ATMs. Management and Stewardship For the last 15 years, Kerry Killinger has guided WaMu with a focus on enhancing shareholder value. For example, WaMu is scheduled to sell nearly $18 billion in low-margin loans in 2007, with the intention of using its excess capital to repurchase shares. Other areas of corporate governance that we like include the required level of stock ownership for executives and directors as well as the recent decision to elect directors annually. At 56, Killinger should remain at the helm for the foreseeable future—good news for shareholders. However, we’d feel better if he had more skin in the game. Killinger’s ownership of less than 1% of WaMu’s stock—valued at just below $280 million—could be increased. Valuation We think WaMu is worth $58. We aren’t blind to the view that the mortgage business will drag on results. We believe net chargeoffs to loans will increase to 0.7% in 2007, up from 0.22% in 2006. We expect charge-offs will moderate to 0.43% on average through 2011 as the credit environment normalizes. Because the mortgage market is consolidating, we believe WaMu stands to gain share, driving loan growth. We expect loan balances will grow 5% annually during the next five years. In addition, we believe the firm will realize some leverage, with operating expenses falling to 57% of revenue by 2011 from 61% in 2006. We expect net interest margins will improve to 2.8% by 2011 from 2.6% in 2006. Retail banking is WaMu’s crown jewel. We believe the firm’s hassle-free approach to banking and its open, personal banking environment—a sharp contrast to a traditional bank—have been cheered by customers. In 2006, WaMu opened a record 1.23 million net new checking accounts, even though it opened only 144 new stores. The benefits don’t stop there, in our opinion. WaMu is leveraging its strong retail platform and customer relationships to diversify its revenue stream. In 2005, it acquired Providian, a leading credit card issuer to the middle market. We believe this business is a great fit for WaMu, as it allows the firm to cross-sell its existing customers additional products. We are further encouraged that WaMu focuses on creating new products to meet the changing needs of its customer base, helping it stay at the top of the competitive landscape. For instance, WaMu was the first bank to offer free checking to its customers. In the second quarter of 2006, WaMu launched another industry first: Customers can now open a checking account online, without any paperwork, which has the potential to boost deposit base growth. All is not smooth sailing for WaMu, however. Mortgage banking is softening after years of robust growth. We think WaMu’s management team anticipated this slowdown and began taking steps to position its balance sheet for tougher times. During 2006, WaMu sold nearly all of its subprime mortgage originations, tightened its underwriting standards, and reduced its subprime portfolio by $2.4 billion. œ Focus_0807.qxp 8/2/07 8:22 PM Page 7 Morningstar StockInvestor Expedia EXPE August 2007 7 Paul’s Position The share buyback, even though it was reduced, still adds value. Hare Stock Focus | Sumit Desai, CFA Morningstar’s Take Expedia has set itself apart in the cutthroat online travel market, and we think it will remain on top. Rating 1-Yr High/Low Fair Value Current Price Consider Buy Consider Sell QQQQQ $29.85/12.87 $38.00 $26.61 $29.30 $47.60 Size of Moat Business Risk Market Cap Dividend Yield Revenues Narrow -Avg $8.1 bil NA% $2.3 bil Stewardship ¥ • Expedia % Change in Price • S&P 500 Index 30 15 0 Online travel agents (OTAs) negotiate wholesale rates with travel suppliers (airlines and hotels) and sell at a markup, pocketing the difference. Initially, travel suppliers were eager to use OTAs to help sell inventory. In recent years, however, hotels and airlines— boosted by an improved economy and improving occupancy rates—have begun selling inventory through their own Web sites and reducing allocations to OTAs. -15 -30 -45 97 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 07 Data through July 31, 2007. Profile Expedia is the world’s largest online travel agency, with more than $16.8 billion in gross bookings during 2006. The firm’s brands include Expedia.com, Hotels.com, Hotwire, and TripAdvisor. In 2006, Expedia generated almost 28% of sales from its international operations. Expedia was spun off from IAC/InterActiveCorp in 2005. Management and Stewardship Dara Khosrowshahi was appointed CEO of Expedia after the spin off. Prior to his current role, Khosrowshahi served in various executive positions within IAC. Barry Diller remains chairman of Expedia, in addition to his role as CEO and chairman of IAC. We’re not fans of Expedia’s dual-class ownership structure, as each B-class share gives its owner 10 votes compared with only one vote per common share. Liberty Media LINTA owns 100% of these B shares, however Diller controls the voting power over these shares. This structure gives Diller majority voting power over the company, leaving minority shareholders with little say in the strategy and business proceedings of Expedia. That said, we have no reason to expect any wrongdoings and admire management’s willingness to sacrifice short-term results to create value over the long haul. Valuation We lowered our fair value estimate to $38 from $42 to account for the company’s revised tender offer. We now assume a 25 million share buyback at $30 per share. We project compound annual revenue growth of 11% for the next five years. This revenue-growth forecast assumes that Expedia continues to lose market share over the next five years, and that this loss is offset by an increasing number of travel transactions moving online. As Expedia expands its top line, we think the company can spread its fixed costs over a larger base of transactions and drive significant margin expansion. We’ve forecast operating margins improving to about 25% in five years, compared with 18% in 2006 (excluding charges). Expedia has separated itself from the pack, however, with several competitive advantages. Expedia is almost twice as big as its closest competitor, with a near-35% market share of the U.S. OTA market. The company uses its size to negotiate lower wholesale prices from suppliers, and, because Expedia is the largest OTA, more suppliers are likely to distribute through the firm. The lower costs lead to higher margins than competitors, and the diverse inventory attracts even more customers to Expedia’s sites, leading to favorable network economics and an uphill battle for competing OTAs. Expedia is focusing on differentiating its product offerings. For example, the company is focusing on offering higher-margin vacation packages, which are difficult for suppliers and meta-search firms to duplicate. Expedia also benefits from the vast amount of user reviews on its various Web sites. User reviews are often the last feature viewed on Expedia’s site before a purchase is made, demonstrating the importance consumers often place on this feature. We also have high hopes for Expedia’s international expansion. Online travel penetration has yet to reach the levels seen in the U.S. In Europe and Asia, only 17% of travel was booked online during 2006, compared with almost 47% in the U.S. As Expedia and other OTAs increase their marketing in Europe, we expect online travel bookings to increase rapidly. œ Bell_0807.qxp 8/2/07 8:19 PM Page 8 8 All the companies on this watchlist have wide economic moats. Go to http://msi.morningstar.com to track changes throughout the month. Bellwether Watchlist Company Name Star Rating 3M Company MMM QQQQ -Avg 103.00 88.92 87.80 135.20 X 2.1 15.5 Innovation and manufacturing skills cornerstone of moat. Featured May 2007. Raised fair value in June. Abbott Laboratories ABT QQQQ -Avg 56.00 50.69 47.70 73.50 X 2.5 51.8 Debated in May 2006 “Bulls vs. Bears” feature. Recently purchased Kos Pharmaceuticals. Adobe Systems ADBE QQQ Avg 38.00 40.29 29.30 47.60 C 0.0 42.4 Network effect and switching costs create a superwide moat. Featured July 2006. Aflac AFL QQQ Avg 54.00 52.12 41.60 67.70 X 1.3 17.1 Wide-moat life insurers are very rare. Last featured in the May 2006 issue. Alcon ACL QQ -Avg 112.00 136.50 Allergan AGN QQQ Avg 57.00 58.13 44.00 71.40 C 0.3 43.1 Specialty pharmaceutical company that derives more than one third of its revenue from Botox. Q Avg 63.00 83.92 48.60 78.90 C 5.0 19.2 Robust growth from rising international equity markets already priced into shares of this asset manager. +Avg 78.00 66.47 49.70 94.10 C 4.9 12.1 Litigation environment stabilizing. Kraft spin-off completed in April. [ Alliancebernstein Hldg LP AB Altria Group MO QQQQ Bus. Risk Fair Current Consider Consider Yield Value ($)* Price ($) Buying ($) Selling ($) Stew. (%) P/E 95.40 147.00 C 1.5 31.3 Portfolio Comment Ophthalmic leader currently benefiting from Bausch & Lomb’s problems. Raised fair value estimate in July. [ Amazon.com AMZN Q Avg 40.00 78.54 30.80 50.10 Z 0.0 107.5 Head and shoulders above the competition in online retailing. Featured Jan. 2007. ] American Express AXP QQQQQ -Avg 70.00 58.54 59.60 91.90 Z 1.0 18.4 Potential legal windfall from competitors. One of our favorite business models. Featured May 2006. Amgen AMGN QQQQ Avg 69.00 53.74 53.20 86.50 C 0.0 20.7 Top-shelf biotech firm, but recent clinical trial disappointments prompt fair value decline. Spotlighted this issue. Anheuser-Busch BUD QQQQ -Avg 57.00 48.77 48.60 74.80 Z 2.4 19.1 Controls more than 50% of domestic beer market. New Busch-family CEO in 2006. Debated in March 2006 issue. Apollo Group APOL QQQ Avg 65.00 59.11 50.10 81.40 C 0.0 27.1 Largest for-profit education firm, with over 300,000 students. Featured in Sept. 2006, debated in Feb. 2007. Applied Materials AMAT QQQ Avg 20.00 22.04 15.40 25.10 C 1.0 18.4 Semiconductor equipment standard-bearer. Technological lead and broad product portfolio provide moat. Autodesk ADSK QQQ Avg 45.00 42.37 34.70 56.40 C 0.0 31.9 AutoCAD software has high switching costs. Upped fair value, reduced Stewardship Grade. Featured Oct. 2006. Automatic Data Prcssng ADP QQQQ -Avg 53.00 46.42 45.20 69.60 X 1.9 21.8 Client turnover very low. Spun off Broadridge Financial in April. Featured March 2006. Avon Products AVP QQQQ Avg 44.00 36.01 33.90 55.10 X 2.0 28.2 Brands and direct-sales model lead to high and consistent returns on capital. Debated in Sept. “Bulls vs. Bears.” QQQQQ Avg 70.00 47.42 54.00 87.70 X 4.7 10.1 A retail-banking juggernaut. Bought in Tortoise in April and June. Spotlighted in July. 50.00 42.55 38.60 62.60 X 2.1 21.0 Getting out of retail banking to focus on securities servicing. Mellon acquisition closed in July. ] Bank of America BAC Bank of New York Company BK QQQQ ] Berkshire Hathaway BRK.B Avg QQQQQ -Avg 4700.00 3604.00 4004.90 6170.60 Z 0.0 14.8 Buffett still going strong. Firm continues to create copious amounts of value. Raised fair value in May. Biogen Idec BIIB QQQ Avg 58.00 56.54 44.70 72.70 X 0.0 33.4 Tysabri is back, and growth appears to be reaccelerating. In Hare Portfolio. Raised fair value in July. Biomet BMET QQQ -Avg 46.00 45.52 39.20 60.40 C 0.0 33.2 Growing senior population provides strong secular tailwinds. After recent tender, likely to go private soon. Blackrock BLK QQQ Avg 155.00 159.50 Merged with Merrill Lynch’s asset management business. Featured April 2006. Raised fair value again in July. -Avg 38.00 36.25 32.40 49.90 C 4.5 19.3 Natural-gas pipeline company that is well-positioned for growth. Structured as a master limited partnership. QQQQQ Avg 21.00 13.15 16.20 26.30 C 0.0 Recently hit by recalls and safety concerns. New fair value in May. Featured March 2006. Boardwalk Pipeline Prtnrs BWP QQQ ] Boston Scientific BSX 119.50 194.20 C 1.4 37.2 NA *Fair value based on Morningstar analyst estimates. Data through July 31, 2007. UR 5 Under Review –Avg 5 Below Average +Avg 5 Above Average ] 5 Stocks to consider buying [ 5 Stocks to consider selling Bell_0807.qxp 8/2/07 8:19 PM Page 9 Morningstar StockInvestor 9 Company Name Star Rating Bus. Risk Fair Current Consider Consider Yield Value ($)* Price ($) Buying ($) Selling ($) Stew. (%) P/E Bristol-Myers Squibb BMY QQQ Avg 29.00 28.41 22.40 36.30 C 3.9 35.5 Pharmaceutical firm experienced several management miscues in recent years. Recently reduced risk rating. Brown & Brown BRO QQQQ Avg 30.00 25.70 23.10 37.60 Z 0.9 20.1 Stout returns on capital created by innovative incentive structure and disciplined acquisitions. Buckeye GP Holdings BGH QQQ -Avg 33.00 35.90 28.10 43.30 C 1.9 80.0 Owns general partner of Buckeye Partners LP. General partner’s returns are leveraged. Raised fair value in July. Buckeye Partners LP BPL QQQ -Avg 54.00 53.87 46.00 70.90 C 5.8 18.5 Pipeline firms tend to have moats due to their geographic advantage, and Buckeye is among our favorites. Calamos CLMS QQQ Avg 26.00 24.70 20.00 32.60 V 1.6 17.8 Asset management can be a fantastic business, as evidenced by its 50% operating margins. Campbell Soup CPB QQQQ -Avg 42.00 36.83 35.80 55.10 C 1.6 17.3 Strong brands and market share in excess of 70%. Perfect potential Tortoise stock. QQQQQ Avg 115.00 70.76 88.70 144.10 X 0.2 11.1 Strategy provides an advantage in customer targeting and pricing risk appropriately. QQQ Avg 73.00 78.80 56.30 91.50 X 1.6 15.2 Sensitive to economic cycles, so near-term results may be bumpy. A well-run firm nevertheless. Featured June 2006. CH Robinson Worldwide CHRW QQQ Avg 45.00 48.65 34.70 56.40 X 1.4 30.0 Leading truck brokerage with an interesting business model. Benefits from scale advantages. QQQQQ Avg 53.00 36.84 40.90 66.40 V 0.0 26.9 Leader in electronic bill payment and processing. Strong secular tailwinds. Featured Oct. 2006. Avg 630.00 552.50 ] Capital One Financial COF Caterpillar CAT ] Checkfree CKFR Chicago Mercantile Exchan CME QQQQ Portfolio August 2007 485.80 789.30 X 0.5 43.5 Comment Hall of Fame member of Hare. Enjoys network effect, leading to huge profit growth. In bidding war for CBOT. QQQQQ -Avg 47.00 36.56 40.00 61.70 Z 1.1 17.5 Economies of scale story. Reduced risk rating in Feb. Purchased in Tortoise. Spotlighted in June issue. QQQ Avg 30.00 28.91 23.10 37.60 X 0.0 26.0 Still 800-pound gorilla of networking industry. Retaking significant market share. Featured Dec. 2006. QQQQQ Avg 64.00 46.57 49.40 80.20 X 4.4 11.2 Its businesses collectively have core earnings power of more than $20 billion per year, by our estimate. Coca-Cola KO QQQQ -Avg 60.00 52.11 51.10 78.80 C 2.5 23.2 Perhaps one of the longest-lived moats around thanks to its brands and business model. Featured July 2006. Colgate-Palmolive CL QQQ -Avg 71.00 66.00 60.50 93.20 X 2.1 21.9 Worldwide leading toothpaste brand. In Tortoise Portfolio. Featured April 2006, raised fair value in March. Comcast CMCSA QQQ Avg 27.00 26.27 20.80 33.80 C 0.0 29.5 Unmatched ability to offer multiple services over one connection. Featured Jan. 2006. ] Corporate Executive Board EXBD QQQQQ Avg 93.00 67.42 71.70 116.50 C 2.1 33.3 ] Cintas CTAS Cisco Systems CSCO ] Citigroup C Collects and sells best-practices intelligence. Bought in Hare in July. Spotlighted in July issue. Dell DELL QQQQ Avg 34.00 27.97 26.20 42.60 V 0.0 19.7 Facing competitive pressures and accounting issues, but Michael Dell back in charge. Featured June 2006. DeVry DV QQQ Avg 35.00 32.40 27.00 43.90 C 0.3 31.8 For-profit education companies tend to be very profitable, and DeVry is no different. Featured March 2007. Dow Jones & Company DJ UR Avg UR 57.38 UR UR V 1.7 41.3 Dun & Bradstreet DNB QQ -Avg 87.00 97.76 74.10 114.20 C 0.5 25.6 Eaton Vance EV QQQ Avg 40.00 41.86 30.80 50.10 X 1.2 52.4 Money management firm with below-average customer turnover. Raised fair value in March. Featured Jan. 2006. QQQQQ -Avg 49.00 32.40 41.80 64.30 X 0.0 32.7 In Hare Portfolio. Excellent example of network effect. Featured Aug. 2006 and Feb. 2007. Electronic Arts ERTS QQQQ Avg 61.00 48.64 47.00 76.40 X 0.0 204.1 Profits ebb and flow with video game console cycle, but strong long-term growth expected. Eli Lilly & Company LLY QQQ Avg 61.00 54.09 47.00 76.40 X 3.1 25.2 Leading maker of mental-health drugs. Enjoys fastgrowing portfolio of new branded drugs. ] eBay EBAY Stew. 5 Morningstar Stewardship Grade C 5 New Addition 5 Potential Tortoise Portfolio Holding 5 Potential Hare Portfolio Holding The newspaper business model is under attack on multiple fronts. To be purchased by News Corp. Database model characterized by high barriers to entry and low incremental costs. Bell_0807.qxp 8/2/07 8:19 PM Page 10 10 Company Name Star Rating Bus. Risk Fair Current Consider Consider Yield Value ($)* Price ($) Buying ($) Selling ($) Stew. (%) P/E Portfolio Comment QQQQQ Avg 54.00 40.45 41.60 67.70 X 3.5 34.8 Owns general partners of TEPPCO and Energy Transfer. Purchased in Hare Portfolio. Spotlighted in June issue. Equifax EFX QQQ Avg 42.00 40.46 32.40 52.60 C 0.4 18.6 Credit bureaus operate in an oligopoly. Like other database firms, enjoys high entry barriers. Featured Oct. 2005. Expeditors Intl of WA EXPD UR -Avg UR 44.68 UR UR Z 0.6 41.0 ExxonMobil XOM QQQ -Avg 84.00 85.13 Fannie Mae FNM Not Rated +Avg NA 59.84 NA NA V 2.6 10.0 Firm “not rated” due to lack of reliable financial statements. Justice Dept. investigation recently dropped. ] Fastenal FAST QQQQQ -Avg 63.00 45.07 53.70 82.70 Z 0.9 33.1 Interesting distributor focused on the fastener market. Spotlighted March 2007. In Hare portfolio. ] Federated Investors FII QQQQQ Avg 48.00 36.01 37.00 60.10 C 2.1 19.3 Major player in the money management industry. Featured Dec. 2006. First Data FDC QQQ Avg 33.00 31.79 25.40 41.30 V 0.5 30.6 Raised fair value after $34 cash buyout offer received. Featured Nov. 2006. Fiserv FISV QQQQ Avg 59.00 49.42 45.50 73.90 C 0.0 19.6 Easily the nation’s largest bank processing firm. Enjoys significant customer switching costs. Featured Jan. 2006. Fortress Investment Group FIG QQQ +Avg 17.00 18.97 10.80 20.50 V 1.8 New addition to the watchlist. Runs large hedge fund and private equity shop. Featured July 2007. Forward Air FWRD UR Avg UR 34.07 UR Franklin Resources BEN QQ Avg 110.00 127.37 Freddie Mac FRE Not Rated Gamco Investors GBL ] Enterprise GP Holdings LP EPE 71.60 110.30 X 1.5 12.4 NA UR X 0.8 22.0 Freight consolidation business model benefits from network effect, scale advantages. Featured Jan. 2006. Largest, most efficient oil company on the planet. We discussed oil in June 2006 “Bulls vs. Bears.” Has no rival with the same scale and service quality. 84.80 137.80 Z 0.5 20.2 Owns some of the best-established brand names in the mutual fund industry. Raised fair value in July. Like sister Fannie, we have Freddie “not rated” because of a lack of reliable financial statements. +Avg NA 57.27 NA NA V 3.4 20.2 QQ Avg 44.00 51.94 33.90 55.10 V 0.2 21.3 Genentech DNA QQQQ Avg 89.00 74.38 68.60 111.50 X 0.0 33.2 General Dynamics GD QQQ Avg 79.00 78.56 60.90 99.00 Z 1.3 18.2 Focused on cash generation and allocates capital with admirable discipline. In Tortoise Portfolio. General Electric GE QQQQ Avg 45.00 38.76 34.70 56.40 X 2.8 19.3 Leader in large number of industries. Featured Feb. 2007. Raised fair value estimate significantly in July. Genzyme GENZ QQQ Avg 71.00 63.07 54.70 89.00 X 0.0 454.6 New addition to the watchlist. Upgraded to “wide” moat in Oct. 2006 due to improving operating efficiency. QQQQQ Avg 66.00 44.93 50.90 82.70 C 0.0 21.0 Has dominant market position in images and significant operating leverage. Featured May and Oct. 2006. 188.34 ] Getty Images GYI 151.10 245.60 X 0.7 Mario Gabelli’s name is excellent advertising for Gamco’s products, though he is facing legal issues today. One of our favorite biotech companies with strong research amd development capabilities. Goldman Sachs Group GS QQQ Avg 196.00 Graco GGG QQQQ Avg 50.00 41.04 38.60 62.60 X 1.6 18.5 Standout among industrial firms, dominant in several niche markets. Spotlighted in May issue. QQQQQ Avg 27.00 19.95 20.80 33.80 C 2.7 17.4 Tax prep leader currently playing a game of chicken with N.Y. attorney general over IRA fees. Featured Feb. 2006. QQQ Avg 64.00 57.32 49.40 80.20 X 1.5 15.0 One of the strongest and most profitable brands on the planet. Featured Feb. 2007. ] Hershey Company HSY QQQQQ -Avg 58.00 46.10 49.40 76.10 C 2.3 20.6 Largest candymaker in the U.S., with a 30% share. Wide portfolio of consumer brands. Featured this issue. ] Home Depot HD QQQQQ -Avg 44.00 37.17 37.50 57.80 C 2.2 14.2 One of only a handful of wide-moat retailers. Debated in Aug. 2006 “Bulls vs Bears” feature. -Avg 105.00 110.65 ] H & R Block HRB Harley-Davidson HOG IBM IBM QQQ 8.8 89.50 137.90 X 1.2 17.9 Simply the gold standard among investment banks. Featured June 2006. Bread and butter is servicing rat’s nest of IT infrastructure at core of most firms. Featured Feb. 2006. *Fair value based on Morningstar analyst estimates. Data through July 31, 2007. UR 5 Under Review –Avg 5 Below Average +Avg 5 Above Average ] 5 Stocks to consider buying [ 5 Stocks to consider selling Bell_0807.qxp 8/2/07 8:19 PM Page 11 Morningstar StockInvestor 11 Company Name Star Rating Bus. Risk Fair Current Consider Consider Yield Value ($)* Price ($) Buying ($) Selling ($) Stew. (%) P/E IMS Health RX QQQQ Avg 35.00 28.13 27.00 43.90 C 0.4 20.1 Moat comes from hard-to-replicate database of global pharmaceutical sales. Intel INTC QQQ Avg 25.00 23.62 19.30 31.30 X 1.8 26.0 Facing competitive pressure from AMD, but still wide moat. Featured May 2006. Raised fair value in April. ] International Game Tech IGT QQQQQ Avg 47.00 35.32 36.20 58.90 X 1.5 25.6 Slot machine manufacturer with approximately 70% share. In Hare Portfolio. Featured April 2007. ] International Speedway ISCA QQQQQ Avg 63.00 47.89 48.60 78.90 C 0.2 26.3 Strong relationship with NASCAR sanctioning body. Abandoning NYC and WA efforts. Featured Feb. and May 2006. Intuit INTU QQQQ Avg 33.00 28.64 25.40 41.30 X 0.0 23.3 Dominates small-business accounting, tax prep, and personal finance software. Featured Dec. 2005. Iron Mountain IRM QQQQ -Avg 31.00 26.79 26.40 40.70 Z 0.0 40.0 Document storage provides high switching costs and recurring revenue stream. Featured Sept. 2006. QQQQQ Avg 63.00 44.01 48.60 78.90 Z 3.2 10.2 Banking behemoth led by former winner of Morningstar CEO of the Year award. In Tortoise. Featured April 2007. -Avg 25.00 24.02 21.30 32.80 X 1.0 22.0 Bank processing firm focused on smaller banks. Enjoys high customer switching costs. Featured Sept. 2005. -Avg 47.00 42.29 40.00 61.70 X 1.0 24.8 Book publisher enjoys high returns on capital. Featured Dec. 2005. QQQQQ -Avg 80.00 60.50 68.20 105.00 X 1.9 17.2 ] J.P. Morgan Chase & Co. JPM Jack Henry & Associates JKHY QQQ John Wiley & Sons JW.A ] Johnson & Johnson JNJ QQQQ Portfolio August 2007 Comment Health-care giant recently completed purchase of Pfizer’s consumer business. Featured in June issue. Kinder Morgan Energy Ptnr KMP QQQ -Avg 55.00 52.98 46.90 72.20 Z 6.3 28.8 Largest master limited partnership focused on energy transport and storage. Pipelines tend to have moats. Kinder Morgan Mngmt KMR QQQ -Avg 55.00 49.90 46.90 72.20 Z 6.7 42.7 Different share class of KMP without MLP tax complexity. Pays in shares instead of cash. Featured Feb. 2007. KLA-Tencor KLAC QQ Avg 48.00 56.79 37.00 60.10 C 0.9 22.6 One of several entangled in stock option backdating mess. Still dominates certain niches of semiconductor industry. QQQQQ Avg 119.00 90.00 91.80 149.10 C 1.0 20.1 Now among the largest asset managers on the planet. Featured Dec. 2006. Linear Technology LLTC QQQQ Avg 42.00 35.65 32.40 52.60 X 1.9 25.5 Among semiconductor companies, lower risk. Featured Oct. 2006. Reduced fair value estimate in July. Lockheed Martin LMT QQQ Avg 97.00 98.48 74.80 121.50 X 1.4 15.1 QQQQQ -Avg 39.00 28.01 33.20 51.20 X 0.8 14.4 Not many retailers have wide moats, but Lowe’s does. Featured this issue. ] Legg Mason LM ] Lowe’s Companies LOW Improved efficiency and being sole provider of many key defense items prompt recent moat upgrade. Magellan Midstream Hldgs MGG QQQ -Avg 31.00 30.43 26.40 40.70 C 3.2 47.6 General partner of pipeline firm MMP. Higher growth but slightly higher risk than MMP. Raised fair value in June. Magellan Midstream Part MMP QQQ -Avg 46.00 45.31 39.20 60.40 C 5.3 20.2 Long-haul oil pipelines and energy storage assets. Advantage period several decades. QQQQQ Avg 45.00 27.55 34.70 56.40 X 2.7 18.4 Regulatory woes appear to be mostly in the rearview mirror. Featured March 2007. Avg 167.00 160.80 ] Marsh & McLennan Cos MMC MasterCard MA QQQ 128.80 209.20 C 0.3 161.3 One of three major global card systems. In Hare Portfolio. Raised fair value again in June. Featured Jan. 2007. QQQQQ Avg 46.00 31.70 35.50 57.60 X 2.0 23.2 Analog semiconductor expertise in short supply. Featured Nov. 2006. Reduced fair value in July. McCormick MKC QQQ -Avg 37.00 34.16 31.50 48.60 X 2.3 21.6 More than two times larger than its next competitor in spices and seasonings. Featured Jan. 2007. McDonald’s MCD QQQ -Avg 49.00 47.87 41.80 64.30 Z 2.1 19.4 Recent watchlist addition. Brand and scale make “Golden Arches” unique. Spotlighted in May issue. McGraw-Hill Companies MHP QQQ -Avg 63.00 60.50 53.70 82.70 X 0.9 21.7 Book publisher and parent company of S&P has very wide moat. Featured March 2006. QQQQQ -Avg 64.00 50.67 54.50 84.00 X 0.9 21.0 Largest medical-equipment maker with wide product portfolio and technological lead. Featured July 2007. ] Maxim Integrated Prod MXIM ] Medtronic MDT Stew. 5 Morningstar Stewardship Grade C 5 New Addition 5 Potential Tortoise Portfolio Holding 5 Potential Hare Portfolio Holding Bell_0807.qxp 8/2/07 8:19 PM Page 12 12 Company Name Star Rating Merck MRK UR Merrill Lynch & Company MER Bus. Risk Fair Current Consider Consider Yield Value ($)* Price ($) Buying ($) Selling ($) Stew. (%) P/E UR X 3.1 23.4 Comment +Avg UR 49.65 QQQ Avg 83.00 74.20 64.00 104.00 X 1.6 ] Microsoft MSFT QQQQ -Avg 34.00 28.99 29.00 44.60 Z 1.4 20.9 Gates to step down from day-to-day role to run charity. New Vista software selling now. Featured Dec. 2006. ] Moody’s MCO QQQQQ -Avg 65.00 53.80 55.40 85.30 X 0.6 19.8 Credit markets prefer fewer voices to many. In the Tortoise Portfolio. Featured Jan. 2006. Morgan Stanley MS QQQQ Avg 80.00 63.87 61.70 100.20 C 1.7 News Corporation NWS QQQ -Avg 25.00 22.66 21.30 32.80 V 0.4 21.0 Improved capital allocation and returns prompt moat upgrade for the media titan. Featured in May issue. Nike NKE QQQQ Avg 65.00 56.45 50.10 81.40 X 1.6 19.3 Strong brands translate to high returns. Featured this issue. Northern Trust NTRS QQQ Avg 59.00 62.46 45.50 73.90 X 1.6 20.2 Focused on large institutions and the wealthy. Sold from Tortoise in June. Nuveen Investments JNC QQQ -Avg 65.00 61.14 55.40 85.30 X 1.6 26.0 Leader in closed-end fixed-income funds as well as munibond products. Announced deal to go private in June. ONEOK Partners LP OKS QQQ -Avg 68.00 67.56 57.90 89.30 C 5.8 12.7 Pipeline firm changed name from Northern Border Partners. Like most pipelines, very long advantage duration. Oracle ORCL QQQQ Avg 22.00 19.12 17.00 27.60 X While wide moat is being tested, maintains enviable position in the database market. Paychex PAYX QQQQ -Avg 46.00 41.38 39.20 60.40 Z 2.3 30.7 Payroll processor focused on small businesses that are uneconomical for rivals to steal. Featured Aug. 2006. PepsiCo PEP QQQQ -Avg 76.00 65.62 64.80 99.80 X 1.9 18.4 Dominant salty-snacks company. Boasts 16 brands with over $1 billion in sales. New CEO. Featured March 2006. QQQQQ Avg 31.00 23.51 23.90 38.80 C 4.5 16.2 Lipitor facing significant competition from generics. Featured Feb. 2007. In Tortoise portfolio. QQQ -Avg 46.00 46.10 39.20 60.40 X 2.8 18.0 Long and dominant history in the postage meter industry, but facing challenges from alternatives to direct mail. ] Procter & Gamble PG QQQQQ -Avg 77.00 61.86 65.60 101.10 X 2.1 21.3 ] Progressive PGR QQQQQ Avg 28.00 20.98 21.60 35.10 Z 0.1 10.3 Can apply greater underwriting insight more finely and much faster than competitors. Qualcomm QCOM QQQ Avg 46.00 41.65 35.50 57.60 Z 1.2 25.4 Intellectual property powerhouse in wireless industry. Patents provide very high-margin revenue stream. Renaissance Re Holdings RNR QQQQ +Avg 77.00 57.50 49.10 92.90 X 1.5 Highly technical underwriting skills. Benign hurricane season in 2006 benefitted all insurers. Schering-Plough SGP QQQ +Avg 31.00 28.54 19.80 37.40 C 0.8 28.3 Not nearly as attractive a business as other pharmaceutical companies, but still possesses a wide moat. SEI Investments SEIC QQQ -Avg 25.00 27.26 21.30 32.80 X 0.5 22.6 Strong technology platform to offer investmentprocessing services to private-banking and trust clients SLM SLM QQQ Avg 51.00 49.17 39.30 63.90 Z 1.5 19.3 $60 buyout appears in jeopardy from changes in government policy. Sold from Tortoise in April. ] St. Joe JOE QQQQQ Avg 56.00 40.54 43.20 70.20 X 1.6 52.6 Recent addition to the watchlist. Owns huge amounts of undeveloped land in Flordia. Featured in July issue. ] Starbucks SBUX QQQQQ Avg 36.00 26.68 27.80 45.10 C 0.0 33.8 Strong brand creates large barrier to success in industry. Spotlighted in the July issue. State Street STT QQ Avg 57.00 67.03 44.00 71.40 X 1.3 20.0 Majority of revenue and profits come from the bank’s feebased businesses. Stericycle SRCL UR Avg UR 47.94 UR UR X 0.0 38.9 ] Pfizer PFE Pitney Bowes PBI UR Portfolio 7.9 7.3 UR 23.6 5.4 Vioxx mess explains above-average risk. Sold completely from Tortoise in Oct. Featured Sept. 2006. Has a top-tier advisory and brokerage as well as an investment banking business. Diversified investment bank, recently freed from conservative management. Has 22 brands that generate more than $1 billion in sales annually. Featured in June issue. Medical waste is a noncyclical business, and Stericycle has a dominant share. *Fair value based on Morningstar analyst estimates. Data through July 31, 2007. UR 5 Under Review –Avg 5 Below Average +Avg 5 Above Average ] 5 Stocks to consider buying [ 5 Stocks to consider selling Bell_0807.qxp 8/2/07 8:19 PM Page 13 Morningstar StockInvestor Star Rating Bus. Risk Strayer Education STRA QQ Avg 127.00 Stryker SYK QQ -Avg 55.00 62.43 46.90 72.20 C 0.4 29.4 Demographics are on its side. Government looking into competitive behavior of industry. Raised fair value in Feb. Synovus Financial SNV QQQQ Avg 35.00 27.96 27.00 43.90 X 2.9 14.6 Owns a bank as well as 81% of Bellwether firm Total System Services. QQQQQ -Avg 38.00 31.88 32.40 49.90 X 2.3 21.0 Wide-moat distributors are rare, but this one dominates. In Hare. Featured April 2006. T Rowe Price Group TROW QQ Avg 43.00 52.13 33.20 53.90 Z 1.3 25.1 Asset manager with excellent fund lineup and ethical reputation. Raised fair value in Dec. TEPPCO Partners TPP QQQ -Avg 43.00 43.57 36.60 56.50 X 6.2 16.6 Pipeline company enjoys significant barriers to entry and very stable cash flows. Featured Aug. 2006. QQQQQ -Avg 25.00 19.26 21.30 32.80 C 1.1 15.4 Like Disney and News Corp., improved capital allocation and returns prompt moat upgrade. Featured May 2007. Total System Services TSS QQQ Avg 29.00 28.13 22.40 36.30 C 1.0 21.8 Handles applications, billing, collections, and customer service for credit card issuers. Featured April 2006. United Parcel Service UPS QQQQ -Avg 88.00 75.72 75.00 115.50 X 2.1 20.2 One of the more attractive Bellwethers, with a very strong balance sheet. Featured July 2006. United Technologies UTX QQQ -Avg 78.00 72.97 66.50 102.40 Z 1.5 19.0 Diversified company operating efficiently in several industrial markets. Featured Feb. 2007. QQQQQ -Avg 41.00 29.95 34.90 53.80 Z 5.1 11.5 Strong competitive position in terms of geographic reach and earnings growth prospects. UST UST QQQ Avg 48.00 53.55 37.00 60.10 C 4.4 17.5 Strong brands, owns 90% share of market for premium smokeless tobacco. Featured Sept. 2006. W.P. Stewart & Company WPL QQQQ Avg 13.00 10.85 10.00 16.30 B 7.0 13.2 Reduced fair value in April after more bleeding and dividend cut. Featured July 2006 and in Sept. cover story. QQQQQ -Avg 60.00 45.95 51.10 78.80 X 1.7 15.5 Retailing goliath enjoys enormous cost advantages. Debated in March 2006 and featured in Oct. 2006. QQQQ Avg 56.00 44.18 43.20 70.20 X 0.7 21.7 Impressive and consistent growth. Wal-Mart generic-drug threat caused increased risk rating. Featured Feb. 2007. QQQQQ -Avg 40.00 33.00 34.10 52.50 X 0.9 15.4 Owns outstanding brands and extensive media library. Featured March 2007. ] Time Warner TWX ] US Bancorp USB ] Wal-Mart Stores WMT Walgreen WAG ] Walt Disney DIS 151.53 Portfolio 13 Company Name ] Sysco SYY Fair Current Consider Consider Yield Value ($)* Price ($) Buying ($) Selling ($) Stew. (%) P/E August 2007 97.90 159.10 X 0.8 37.5 Comment Very profitable for-profit education company. Featured Aug. 2006. Washington Post Co WPO UR -Avg UR 790.75 UR UR X 1.0 24.4 Waters WAT QQQ -Avg 58.00 58.26 49.40 76.10 X 0.0 25.9 Large share in analytical instruments important in drug discovery, research, manufacturing. Featured Oct. 2006. Weight Watchers Intl WTW QQQ Avg 54.00 48.52 41.60 67.70 X 1.4 22.3 Worldwide leader of weight-loss services, with a highly recognizable and respected brand. Featured Oct. 2005. Wells Fargo WFC QQQQ Avg 39.00 33.77 30.10 48.90 X 3.3 13.3 Boasts top-three deposit market share in 15 of its 23 states. Attractive lending spreads. QQQQQ -Avg 32.00 19.95 27.30 42.00 C 0.1 17.4 The Hare received shares in spin-off from First Data, then we bought more in Oct. Featured extensively Nov. 2006. Wrigley Wm Jr WWY QQQ -Avg 61.00 57.68 52.00 80.10 C 1.9 28.6 Dominant gum company around the globe, in Tortoise Portfolio. Raised fair value. Featured May and June 2006. Wyeth WYE QQQ Avg 52.00 48.52 40.10 65.20 C 2.1 15.3 Excellent growth-oriented drug portfolio complemented by consumer-products and animal-health businesses. Zimmer Holdings ZMH QQQQ -Avg 89.00 77.76 75.80 116.80 X 0.0 21.8 ] Western Union WU Stew. 5 Morningstar Stewardship Grade C 5 New Addition 5 Potential Tortoise Portfolio Holding 5 Potential Hare Portfolio Holding Talented management guiding namesake newspaper and Kaplan. Featured Oct. 2005. Reduced fair value in Dec. Government looking into competitive behavior of orthopedic industry. Featured July 2006. Raised fair value. Bell_0807.qxp 8/2/07 8:19 PM Page 14 14 Morningstar Bellwether Watchlist Recommendations Stocks to Consider Buying Allied Irish Banks AIB* American Express AXP Bank of America BAC Berkshire Hathaway BRK.B Boston Scientific BSX Cadbury Schweppes CSG* Capital One Financial COF Checkfree CKFR Cintas CTAS Citigroup C Corporate Exec Board EXBD eBay, EBAY Enterprise GP Holdings LP EPE Fastenal FAST Federated Investors FII Getty Images GYI H & R Block HRB Hershey HSY Home Depot HD International Game Tech. IGT International Speedway ISCA J.P. Morgan Chase JPM Johnson & Johnson JNJ Legg Mason LM Lowe's Companies LOW Marsh & McLennan MMC Maxim Integrated MXIM Amazon.com AMZN Comp. Vale Do Rio Doc RIO* Medtronic MDT Microsoft MSFT Moody's MCO Novartis NVS* Pfizer PFE Procter & Gamble PG Progressive PGR St. Joe JOE Starbucks SBUX Sysco SYY Time Warner TWX US Bancorp USB Wal-Mart Stores WMT Walt Disney DIS Western Union WU Stocks to Consider Selling Alliancebernstein Hold. LP AB Above are all the firms trading below their “Consider Buying” price as well as those trading above their “Consider Selling” price.*Stocks from the International Stalwarts list. See Page 18 for more. Cost Advantage: Companies that thrive on being the low-cost provider in a commodity industry can offer lower prices to customers and still make a profit. These companies create difficulty for higher-cost competitors. Types of Economic Moats What separates a bad company from a good one, in large part, is the size of the “economic moat,” or competitive barrier, a firm builds around itself. Here are four main types of economic moats along with explanations of how they work: High Customer-Switching Costs: If a company sells products that customers can’t get elsewhere—at least not easily—it has high customer-switching costs. This creates a situation in which customers are willing to pay higher prices for products because of convenience. Bellwether Watchlist Review American Express AXP American Express continued to produce solid results in the second quarter, with earnings up 12% from last year and return on equity reaching an astounding 38%. All the operating metrics show that the credit card business, which generates the bulk of the earnings, is firing on all cylinders. Card-billed business and cards in force grew in the second quarter by 15% and 10%, respectively, from last year. The average discount rate remained at 2.57%, and average spending per card member rose by 8% from last year. American Express AXP Star Rating QQQQQ Business Risk -Avg 70.00 Fair Value ($) 58.54 Current Price ($) Market Cap ($bil) 69.6 1.0 Dividend Yield (%) Wide Size of Moat Consider Buying ($) 59.60 Consider Selling ($) 91.90 1-Yr Hi/Low ($) 65.89/51.19 Stewardship P/E œ 18.4 The only negative in the quarter was a 36% jump in provisions. Nevertheless, we don’t think credit quality is a concern because last year’s provisions were unusually low and net charge-offs to average loans remained unchanged from the first quarter. In addition, we have modeled normalized provisions for the next five years. At this point, our fair value estimate remains unchanged. Analyst: Michael Kon, CFA Intangible Assets: Some companies have an advantage over competitors because of unique nonphysical assets such as intellectual property rights (patents, trademarks, and copyrights), government approvals, brand names, a unique company culture, or a geographic advantage. The Network Effect: A common trait among companies that exploit the network effect is that they are the first, or one of the first, to create a standard in an emerging industry. These companies can sometimes create monopolies. Bank of America BAC Bank of America reported first-half earnings that largely met our estimates. We are holding our fair value estimate steady. The bank’s spread business as well as several fee-income businesses actually experienced negative growth from the prior-year period. Compressed spreads were behind the declining net interest income, while rising credit costs took their toll on the credit card business. While the bank managed to expand its loan book an impressive 14%, deposit growth was anemic at just over 3%, as the bank let some of the higher-price deposits run off. There were some bright spots. Investment banking income improved 27% in the first half from the prioryear period as the huge impetus from private-equity deals and demand for leveraged loans drove B of A’s syndicated lending business. Client assets in the wealth-management businesses grew 11%, to $808 billion, boosting profits of that division. Increased mortgage originations to existing checking account Bell_0807.qxp 8/2/07 8:19 PM Page 15 Morningstar StockInvestor Bank of America BAC Star Rating QQQQQ Business Risk Avg Fair Value ($) 70.00 Current Price ($) 47.42 Market Cap ($bil) 210.4 Dividend Yield (%) 4.7 Size of Moat Wide Consider Buying ($) 54.00 Consider Selling ($) 87.70 1-Yr Hi/Low ($) 55.08/46.90 Stewardship ∑ P/E 10.1 eBay EBAY Star Rating QQQQQ Business Risk -Avg Fair Value ($) 49.00 Current Price ($) 32.40 Market Cap ($bil) 44.0 Dividend Yield (%) — Size of Moat Wide Consider Buying ($) 41.80 Consider Selling ($) 64.30 1-Yr Hi/Low ($) 35.41/22.83 ∑ Stewardship P/E 32.7 Fastenal FAST Star Rating QQQQQ Business Risk -Avg Fair Value ($) 63.00 Current Price ($) 45.07 Market Cap ($bil) 6.8 Dividend Yield (%) 0.9 Size of Moat Wide Consider Buying ($) 53.70 Consider Selling ($) 82.70 1-Yr Hi/Low ($) 48.93/33.05 Stewardship œ P/E 33.1 customers boosted profits by 60% in that business. Mortgages still represent a large opportunity for B of A, as only 10% of its checking customers have mortgages through the bank. We are thrilled with Bank of America’s proposed purchase of LaSalle bank. We believe LaSalle will be worth a lot more under the B of A umbrella than its $21 billion purchase price. B of A expects to close the acquisition in the fourth quarter, and we estimate it will take as long as a year for the bank to bring LaSalle’s sky-high expense ratio in line with its own. Nonetheless, we are confident that B of A will accomplish that goal, now that it is a veteran integrator of large acquisitions. We believe the market is offering a tremendous discount for the shares of this giant. Analyst: Ganesh Rathnam eBay EBAY After reviewing eBay’s second-quarter results, we are maintaining our fair value estimate. Revenue, operating profits, and free cash flow grew by 30%, 47%, and 45%, respectively. These solid fundamental results, combined with the repurchase of $344 million of outstanding shares, led to impressive 59% growth in diluted earnings per share. The company’s U.S. and international marketplaces generated $1.3 billion in revenue, a 26% increase from the prior-year quarter and an acceleration from the 23% growth rate in the first quarter. Higher average selling prices and stronger conversion rates more than made up for the 6% decline in new listings. Although declining listings isn’t a good sign, eBay has undertaken several initiatives to address the issue. In addition, eBay has proved that it can still generate growth in gross merchandise volume and revenue without growth in listings. PayPal generated $454 million in revenue, an increase of 34% from the prior-year quarter. Total payment volume from the online payment service grew a respectable 18% on the eBay platform and a remarkable 57% off the platform. Skype also performed well, with revenue reaching $90 million, an increase of 103% from a year ago. Despite Skype’s impressive growth and second quarter of profitability, August 2007 15 management said the business has not performed as expected. Overall, eBay had another strong quarter. Therefore, the company yet again raised its forecast for 2007. It now calls for 2007 revenue to increase 22%-25%, to $7.30-$7.45 billion (up from its previous forecast of $7.20-$7.45 billion), and for earnings per share to rise 37%-42%, to $1.08-$1.12 (versus its prior estimate of $1.05 -$1.09). Analyst: Larry Witt, CFA Fastenal FAST Fastenal posted impressive second-quarter results, with sales and earnings up 13.3% and 17%, respectively. While the firm did a fine job of controlling support expenses versus last year, its gains on the gross margin line are even more notable. Excluding a one-time inventory charge uncovered alongside an IT system upgrade, product margins improved by a full percentage point over last year. With encouragement from management, store-level employees have been pushing up prices on less-profitable transactions. At the same time, cost reductions have resulted from increased direct sourcing from Asia and lower freight costs as more products are transported with company assets—which can be leveraged alongside growth—rather than by third-party shipping. Fastenal’s recent strategy shift is also beginning to show up in the financials. While higher sales growth from new salespeople might take a while to develop, lower capital-reinvestment requirements are already on display. Inventory growth has slowed and capital expenditures are running substantially below last year. As a result, the company bumped up its dividend and has been buying back more shares, which we think is a great use of shareholder capital at recent prices. We’re maintaining our fair value estimate. Analyst: Matthew Warren International Game Technology IGT International Game Technology announced fiscal third-quarter results that showed year-over-year and sequential improvement. We are maintaining our fair value estimate and continue to believe the future looks promising for this wide-moat firm. Bell_0807.qxp 8/2/07 8:19 PM 16 Page 16 Bellwether Watchlist Review Continued from Page 15 Intl Game Tech IGT Star Rating QQQQQ Business Risk Avg Fair Value ($) 47.00 Current Price ($) 35.32 Market Cap ($bil) 11.7 Dividend Yield (%) 1.5 Size of Moat Wide Consider Buying ($) 36.20 Consider Selling ($) 58.90 1-Yr Hi/Low ($) 48.79/35.18 Stewardship ∑ P/E 25.6 Intl Speedway ISCA Star Rating QQQQQ Business Risk Avg Fair Value ($) 63.00 Current Price ($) 47.89 Market Cap ($bil) 2.5 Dividend Yield (%) 0.2 Size of Moat Wide Consider Buying ($) 48.60 Consider Selling ($) 78.90 1-Yr Hi/Low ($) 54.78/44.56 Stewardship ¥ P/E 26.3 Johnson & Johnson JNJ Star Rating QQQQQ Business Risk -Avg Fair Value ($) 80.00 Current Price ($) 60.50 Market Cap ($bil) 175.2 Dividend Yield (%) 1.9 Size of Moat Wide Consider Buying ($) 68.20 Consider Selling ($) 105.00 1-Yr Hi/Low ($) 69.41/59.72 Stewardship ∑ P/E 17.2 Sales for the quarter increased 15.4% compared with last year, driven by a 22.5% jump in product sales and 8.6% increase in the gaming operations segment. Product sales were especially strong due to the sale of almost 15,000 units in Japan (proving that weakness in Japan during the second quarter was a temporary issue). Revenue growth in the product sales segment will continue to be lumpy, given the lull in the domestic replacement cycle. The gaming operations segment was boosted by increased placements in Mexico and New York. IGT’s operating margin increased to 30.6% in the quarter as a result of gross margin expansion (due to improved product mix and better pricing) and general operating leverage. During the quarter, IGT bought back 6.4 million shares for a total cost of about $249 million, and the company has bought back about $611 million of shares year to date. We continue to be impressed with the firm’s willingness to return cash to shareholders in this manner, especially given that the shares currently trade at a discount to our fair value estimate. Analyst: Sumit Desai, CFA International Speedway ISCA International Speedway Corporation reported secondquarter results that left much to be desired. However, after sorting through a litany of charges and other short-term challenges, the long-term attractiveness of International Speedway remains. We’re keeping our fair value estimate intact. Starting with the bad news, the first half of the year has been riddled with arguably nonrecurring expenses. Issues to blame for these extra costs include the failed attempts to develop racetracks in Washington and New York; the Kentucky antitrust litigation; and losses at ISC’s joint venture, Motorsports Authentics, due to the departure of Dale Earnhardt Jr. from Dale Earnhardt Inc. In addition, inclement weather weighed on the results of certain races hosted by International Speedway tracks. These adverse developments led to a dismal 19% operating margin, compared with 30% a year ago. Looking past these items, we can still see a great underlying business. Revenue increased 5%—no small feat, given that the new television contract (with its lower annual revenue) is creating tough year-over-year comparisons. The transition of Chicagoland Speedway from an equity investment to a wholly owned track provided some of this boost. Other motorsports-related revenue also contributed, increasing by an impressive 19%. This business is driven by corporate advertising at ISC events, which remains this firm’s fastest-growing revenue stream. The 10-year comprehensive sponsorship deal signed with Coca-Cola is solid evidence of this trend. Analyst: Joel Bloomer Johnson & Johnson JNJ Johnson & Johnson’s second-quarter results were in line with our expectations, and we don’t expect any material changes to our fair value estimate. Sales increased 13.2% in the second quarter, with 2.4% of that growth coming from currency benefits. Overall growth was boosted significantly by the addition of Pfizer’s PFE consumer product business, which J&J acquired late last year. Growth in the pharmaceutical division came from a couple of key products, including J&J’s schizophrenia franchise and Topamax for epilepsy and migraines. Strength in these products was offset by continued challenges for anemia treatment Procrit and generic competition in some markets. Challenges in the medical device segment continued, with sales advancing just 2.8% from the same period last year (excluding currency benefits), as sales declines continued in the Cordis division. Cypher, J&J’s drugcoated stent, continued to suffer from price declines and weakness in demand for drug-coated stents in general, particularly in the U.S. Despite some sales declines for Procrit and Cypher, as well as generic competition with some products, J&J did an admirable job preserving profitability. Earnings before tax increased almost as fast as sales, as the firm controlled growth in research spending. While we expect J&J to continue to spend heavily on research and development, we expect this cost will decline as a percentage of sales as the firm’s sales become more heavily weighted toward less research-intensive businesses. œ Analyst: Heather Brilliant, CFA siii_0807.qxp 8/2/07 8:17 PM Page 17 Special InternationalInvestor Insert Russia: The Bear Roars InternationalInvestor | Allan Nichols, CFA Allan Nichols, CFA International Equities Strategist Rostelecom ROS Star Rating Q Business Risk Spec. Fair Value ($) 31.00 Current Price ($) 57.00 Market Cap ($bil) 7.2 Dividend Yield (%) 0.6 Size of Moat None Consider Buying ($) 16.10 Consider Selling ($) 38.10 1-Yr Hi/Low ($) 60.33/27.42 Stewardship — NA P/E Golden Telecom GLDN Star Rating QQQ Business Risk Spec. Fair Value ($) 56.00 Current Price ($) 64.65 Market Cap ($bil) 2.4 Dividend Yield (%) 0.3 Size of Moat None Consider Buying ($) 29.10 Consider Selling ($) 68.80 1-Yr Hi/Low ($) 70.48/23.19 Stewardship ¥ P/E 29.2 According to the results of an annual survey released in June, Mercer Human Resource Consulting declared Moscow the most expensive city in the world for expatriates. I was in Moscow in June and can vouch for its high-priced services. I’ve stayed at the Waldorf Astoria in New York for less per night than it cost me to stay at a Holiday Inn five miles from the Kremlin. Food was also expensive, as were electronics. I was surprised by the number of cranes I saw and new buildings under construction. It reminded me of when I was in Asia in March 1997; Bangkok, Jakarta, and Kuala Lumpur were all undergoing major construction booms. However, just more than three months later, the Asian crisis began with Thailand devaluing the baht, and goodbye boom. Historically, buildings in Russia have been fairly short because of the abundance of land. It’s a different story today, and tall skyscrapers are actively going up. There are no zoning laws in Russia, and while most of the tall buildings are being built outside the center of Moscow, some are going up near the Kremlin and will block the views from other buildings. I think zoning regulations will likely become a hot political issue. Despite Russia’s similarities to Asia, I don’t think its current boom will end soon. There are significant differences between Russia today and Asia in 1997. The Asian governments were running large current account deficits—similar to the U.S. today—but with their currencies fixed to the U.S. dollar. The two situations were incompatible but were being propped up by hot money from foreign investors wanting access to the Asian Tigers. As more people began to talk of the unstable situation, locals began moving money offshore or converting to hard-currency-based accounts. As investors began to flee, the countries’ reserves fell, creating a vicious cycle that ended in devaluation and spread throughout Asia. (Hot money is once again flowing into emerging markets, but most countries are running current account surpluses.) Whereas, the Asian governments of 1997 were running current account deficits, Russia is running a current account surplus as well as a fiscal surplus. With oil hitting all-time nominal highs, Russia has paid off its debts and is hoarding cash. It now sits on $406 billion in reserves, trailing only China and Japan. This is a far cry from its position in 1998, when the Asian crises caused a global recession that sent oil to $10 per barrel. This in turn led to the Russian crises, with the country devaluing its currency and defaulting on its debt—something that the Soviet Union, through more than 70 years of existence, had never done. With the rise of the price of oil, president Vladimir Putin has been able to once again exhibit Russia’s global power. Twice he has cut off natural-gas flows to Western Europe, reminding the countries there how dependent they have become on Russian natural gas. The Soviet Union was long referred to as “the Bear.” I spent four summers as a river guide and spent a lot of time outdoors. In the wild, there aren’t many situations more dangerous than getting between a large female bear and her cubs. Unfortunately, the West has gotten between Russia and her former satellite states—her cubs—and Russia has become angry, powerful, and dangerous. It’s no wonder that with newfound strength, Russia is once again flexing its muscles. Russia has been reconsolidating its natural-resource assets, which it considers strategic and which Putin thinks were sold at ridiculously cheap prices. We might not agree with his tactics, such as claiming back taxes on Yukos for issues that were standard practice and not enforced elsewhere, or claiming environmental problems with Sakhalin II that disappeared once International Stalwart Shell RDS.A turned control of the project over to state-controlled Gazprom. However, it is understandable why Russia has done what it has. In the telecom industry, the government has used Gazprom’s pension funds to buy back Rostelecom ROS. Continued on Page 20 siii_0807.qxp 8/2/07 8:17 PM Page 18 A watchlist of our 50 favorite international stocks with moats. Go to http://msi.morningstar.com to track changes throughout the month. International Stalwarts Star Rating Fair Current Consider Consider Size of Value ($)* Price ($) Buying ($) Selling ($) Moat Div. Yield (%) P/E QQQQQ Avg 71.00 52.23 54.70 3.7 8.3 Continues to benefit from Ireland’s robust economy. Strength in U.K. and Poland as well. Featured this issue. America Mobile SAB AMX QQQQ +Avg 83.00 59.88 52.90 100.10 Narrow 0.6 26.8 137 million wireless customers, largest in Latin America. Fair value increased 88%. Highlighted Jan. 2007. Arcelor Mittal MT QQQ Avg 56.00 61.02 43.20 11.6 Largest steel producer in the world. Leading industry consolidation and improved economics. ARM Holdings PL ARMHY QQ +Avg 7.50 8.90 4.80 9.00 Wide 0.6 43.5 Sells chip designs to the semiconductor industry that are used in electronics, mobile phones, and autos. AstraZeneca PL AZN QQQ Avg 51.00 51.83 39.30 63.90 Wide 3.3 13.5 Firm is No. 1 in gastrointestinal (ulcer) drugs. Closed MedImmune acquisition. Will further enhance pipeline. Bank of Montreal BMO QQQQ Avg 75.00 62.51 57.80 94.00 Wide 3.6 12.9 Wide-moat Canadian bank. Agreed to acquire two Wisconsin banks. Featured Oct. 2006. Bank of Nova Scotia BNS QQQ Avg 46.00 46.52 35.50 57.60 Wide 3.2 14.0 25% of earnings from international operations, especially Latin America. Highlighted Nov. 2006. Barclays PL BCS QQQQ Avg 64.00 55.99 49.40 80.20 Wide 4.4 10.0 Good first-half results. Increased bid for ABN Amro Bank. Still below RBS offer. Highlighted July 2006. BP PL BP QQQ Avg 72.00 69.40 55.50 90.20 Narrow 3.5 10.5 Despite safety problems, still one of the world’s best oil firms. CEO stepped down early. Featured Feb. 2007. British Amer Tbco PL BTI QQQ +Avg 64.00 65.09 40.80 77.20 Wide 3.3 19.3 Successfully taking cigarettes into emerging markets. Cash cow. British Sky Brdcsting BSY UR — UR 53.81 UR UR UR 1.9 23.8 Dominant pay television provider in the U.K. and Ireland. More than twice as many customers as cable competitor. Avg 32.00 35.14 24.70 40.10 Narrow 1.3 18.5 Owns and manages offices, residential develpments, and hydro plants. Split stock 3 for 2 recently. QQQQQ -Avg 60.00 49.73 51.10 78.80 Wide 2.2 24.6 Announced split between confectioneries and beverages. Highlighted April 2007. Canadian Imp Bk Of Cmrc CM QQQ Avg 82.00 87.02 63.20 102.70 Wide 3.0 12.5 Fair value raised $3. Despite Enron-related woes, it boasts an excellent retail bank. Canon CAJ QQQ Avg 50.00 53.08 38.60 62.60 Narrow 1.6 19.1 Leading consumer electronics firm, with specialties in photography and printing. Cemex SAB de CV CX QQQQ Avg 41.00 32.34 31.60 51.40 Narrow 2.3 10.1 World’s best cement company. Global diversification offsetting weak U.S. In Hare Portfolio. China Mobile CHL QQQ +Avg 52.00 57.39 33.10 62.70 Narrow 1.5 26.6 Wireless phone company with more than 300 million subscribers. Fair value increased $7. Featured April 2007. Companhia de Bebidas ABV QQQ +Avg 75.00 68.50 47.80 90.50 Wide 2.0 30.1 Dominates Brazil beer market; strong in other markets and soft drinks. Highlighted June 2006. Fair value raised 23%. Q +Avg 21.00 49.01 13.40 25.30 Narrow 1.2 18.2 Largest exporter of iron ore—key to steel production. Sizable position in nickel and other metals. Company Name ] Allied Irish Banks AIB Brookfield Asset Mngmnt BAM QQQ ] Cadbury Schweppes PLC CSG [ Companhia Vale Do Rio Doc RIO Bus. Risk 89.00 Wide 70.20 Narrow 1.5 Comment Dassault Systemes SA DASTY QQQ Avg 62.00 60.16 47.80 77.70 Wide 0.7 29.4 French product life management and 3D design software firm. Featured Jan. 2007. Diageo PL DEO QQQQ -Avg 92.00 81.68 78.40 120.80 Wide 3.0 15.1 Largest spirits producer in the world. Exclusive distribution competitors can’t match. . E.ON AG EON QQQ Avg 59.00 52.33 45.50 73.90 Narrow 2.9 15.5 Large electric utility in Germany. Pulled out of bidding war for Endesa. Large cash war chest. Featured June 2007. Enel Spa EN UR Avg UR 51.45 UR UR Narrow 6.3 15.2 Large electric utility in Italy. Appears to have won bidding war for Endesa of Spain. Large cash war chest. Fomento Econ Mex SAB FMX QQQQ Avg 46.00 37.02 35.50 57.60 Narrow 1.1 73.0 Top producer/distributor of beer and Coke in Mexico. Featured May 2007. GlaxoSmithKline PL GSK QQQQ Avg 63.00 51.08 48.60 78.90 Wide 13.5 Strong drug portfolio despite recent negative safety data on Avandia. Featured March 2007. 3.7 *Fair value based on Morningstar analyst estimates. Data through July 31, 2007. UR 5 Under Review –Avg 5 Below Average +Avg 5 Above Average ] 5 Stocks to consider buying [ 5 Stocks to consider selling siii_0807.qxp 8/2/07 8:17 PM Page 19 Special InternationalInvestor Insert Company Name Star Rating Bus. Risk Fair Current Consider Consider Size of Value ($)* Price ($) Buying ($) Selling ($) Moat Grupo Danone GDNNY QQQ Avg 17.00 14.60 13.10 21.30 Narrow 1.8 19.0 Top global producer of yogurt. Selling biscuits. Buying Numico. Fair value lowered $1. Featured Nov. 2006. Grupo Aero del Norte OMAB QQQ +Avg 26.00 26.70 16.60 31.40 Wide 0.7 31.6 Wide-moat firm with airport monopoly in northern Mexico. Grupo Aero Pacifico PAC QQQ Avg 47.00 48.62 36.20 58.90 Wide 2.8 33.0 Airport monopoly in west-central Mexico, including Guadalajara. Fair value raised $4. Highlighted Dec. 2006. Grupo Aero Sureste ASR QQQQ +Avg 61.00 52.57 38.90 73.60 Wide 1.3 32.4 Completed third terminal at Cancun airport. Increased fair value 24%. Highlighted Sept. 2006. HSB HBC QQQ Avg 97.00 93.16 74.80 121.50 Wide 4.5 13.4 2006 results hurt by subprime mortgage lending. Fair value raised $6. Highlighted March 2007. Imperial Tbco Grp PL ITY QQQ +Avg 93.00 87.66 59.30 112.20 Wide 2.8 18.0 Appears to have won bidding for Spanish-French cigarette firm Altadis. Fair value increased 26%. Cash cow. Infosys Technologies INFY QQQ Avg 54.00 49.60 41.60 67.70 Narrow 0.5 33.1 Largest offshore IT outsourcer. Growing rapidly with clients worldwide. Highlighted June 2007. Lloyds TSB Group PL LYG QQQQ Avg 53.00 45.24 40.90 66.40 Wide 5.9 11.4 Shareholder friendly. Increased already large dividend 5%. Featured July 2006. Selling Abbey Life. Luxottica Group LUX QQQ Avg 34.00 36.04 26.20 42.60 Narrow 1.6 28.3 World’s largest manufacturer and retailer of prescription eye glasses. Acquiring sports eyeglass brand Oakley. Nokia NOK QQQ Avg 27.00 28.64 20.80 33.80 Narrow 2.0 20.2 Market leader. Best profits in industry. Recently sold from the Hare Portfolio. Highlighted March 2007. QQQQQ -Avg 73.00 53.95 62.20 95.80 Wide 2.0 18.2 Recent addition to Tortoise Portfolio. Strong 1Q. Robust drug pipeline. Highlighted Jan. 2007. Novo Nordisk NVO QQ Avg 88.00 104.91 67.90 110.30 Wide 1.2 28.9 Leader in diabetes treatments. Rivals also attracted to growing diabetes market. Reed Elsevier PL RUK QQQ Avg 44.00 49.37 33.90 55.10 Narrow 2.5 24.3 Leading publisher & information provider, esp. in science and technology. Selling rest of U.S. education business. Royal Bank of Canada RY QQQ Avg 46.00 51.04 35.50 57.60 Wide 3.0 15.1 Largest bank in Canada by assets. Dominates many product categories. Royal Dutch Shell PLC RDS.A QQQ -Avg 74.00 77.59 63.10 97.20 Narrow 3.4 9.8 One of the three largest integrated oil companies. Largest retail distribution network. Strong chemical results in 1Q. SABMiller PL SBMRY UR — UR 25.70 UR UR Wide 1.8 24.6 Leading wide moat international brewer that is also a top producer of Coke and other soft drinks. Sanofi-Aventis SNY QQQQ Avg 48.00 41.75 37.00 60.10 Wide 2.8 20.9 FDA panel rejected new drug rimonabant. Plavix patent upheld. Still strong pipeline. Featured July 2007. SAP AG SAP QQQ Avg 56.00 53.92 43.20 70.20 Narrow 1.2 26.2 German software firm dominates enterprise resource planning market. Fair value raised $8. Taiwan Semiconductor TSM QQQ +Avg 11.00 10.15 7.00 13.30 Narrow 4.4 13.6 Largest independent semiconductor foundry. Roughly 50% market share. Teva Pharmceuticl Ind TEVA QQQ Avg 43.00 42.02 33.20 53.90 Narrow 0.7 61.0 Fair value raised another $5. World’s largest generic drug firm. Competition from big pharma is a looming threat. Toronto-Dominion Bank TD QQQ Avg 64.00 64.12 49.40 80.20 Wide 2.9 10.8 Wide-moat Canadian bank. High return on equity in Canada, expanding into U.S. Toyota Motor TM QQQ Avg 135.00 120.63 104.10 169.10 Narrow 0.7 14.5 World’s largest automaker in 1Q. Seems above industry’s struggles. FV increased 25%. Highlighted Nov. 2006. TransCanada TRP QQQ -Avg 35.00 36.20 29.80 46.00 Narrow 3.2 18.0 Dominant Canadian natural-gas pipeline firm that is in the Tortoise Portfolio. UBS AG UBS QQQ Avg 60.00 55.07 46.30 75.20 Wide 3.3 0.0 Struggled recently. Ousted CEO Peter Wuffli. World’s largest asset manager. Strong I-bank. Vodafone Group PL VOD QQQ Avg 30.00 30.35 23.10 37.60 Narrow 4.5 0.0 Largest wireless telephone carrier by revenues. Most geographically diversified. Closed Indian acquisition. ] Novartis AG NVS Stew. 5 Morningstar Stewardship Grade C 5 New Addition Div. Yield (%) P/E Comment siii_0807.qxp 8/2/07 8:17 PM Page 20 Russia: The Bear Roars Continued from Page 17 Mobile TeleSystems MBT Star Rating QQQ Business Risk Spec. Fair Value ($) 68.00 Current Price ($) 63.95 Market Cap ($bil) 25.4 Dividend Yield (%) — Size of Moat Narrow Consider Buying ($) 35.40 Consider Selling ($) 83.60 1-Yr Hi/Low ($) 70.39/31.30 Stewardship — P/E 23.7 Vimpel-Com VIP Star Rating Business Risk Fair Value ($) Current Price ($) Market Cap ($bil) Dividend Yield (%) Size of Moat QQQ Spec. 113.00 105.90 21.7 1.5 Narrow Consider Buying ($) 58.80 Consider Selling ($) 138.90 1-Yr Hi/Low ($) 118.55/46.86 — Stewardship P/E 26.5 Price/Fair-Value Ratio ** All International Stocks Emerging Mkt Stocks Developed Mkt Stocks U.S. Stocks 1.04 1.10 1.03 0.95 **Median price to fair value ratios among Morningstar’s coverage universe. Data as of July 31, 2007 Russian Telecom Firms On my visit, I met with representatives of Rostelecom, Golden Telecom GLDN, Mobile TeleSystems MBT (otherwise known as MTS), Sistema, and Comstar. I was also scheduled to meet with people from VimpelCom VIP, but they stood me up. In other countries where the long-distance telephone market was deregulated, the incumbent has lost significant market share, but that hasn’t happened in Russia. Because of Russia’s unique tariff structure, the majority of the cost of a long-distance call is paid to Svyazinvest, the local operator outside of Moscow or MGTS, the operator in Moscow. This precludes other operators from cutting prices significantly to take market share. Golden Telecom has become the largest provider of telephone services to businesses in Moscow, where it holds a 42% market share, and the firm is growing rapidly as its clients move from Moscow to St. Petersburg and beyond. A major reason for Golden’s success in the corporate market is the poor state of Svyazinvest’s and MGTS’ networks. Both are private companies, but Comstar owns stakes in both. Comstar confirms Golden’s claims that the incumbent’s networks aren’t up to snuff. This is leading large corporations, especially global ones, to use Golden or other alternative carriers. On the wireless front, growth in Russia has been phenomenal, going from 1.4 million subscribers, or less than 1% penetration of the population, in 1999 to 152 million subscribers, or 105% penetration, by the end of 2006. The two biggest beneficiaries of this growth have been MTS and VimpelCom. Both have shown tremendous growth in subscriber base, revenue, and profits over the past seven years. With penetration rates of more than 100%, one might think that the market is quite saturated. However, Russia counts this number by SIM cards rather than by the number of phones, as most Western countries do, and many people have SIM cards from more than one operator. Because of the difference in accounting for penetration, I think there is still growth left in the Russian market. Both MTS and VimpelCom have also been expanding into other countries of the former Soviet Union, where MTS has a first-mover advantage over VimpelCom. The other countries have smaller populations, but also have lower penetration levels, which will add additional growth opportunities for both firms. Two other things I learned. I’ve been concerned about what would happen to all these new wireless subscribers if the price of oil dropped. Sistema, a large conglomerate, owns a bank and makes short-term loans for people to buy $500 wireless handsets, which are not subsidized in Russia. People will pay them off, and after a year’s use, take out a new loan for a new phone to always be on the cutting edge. People will likely stop buying new $500 phones if oil prices drop, but I don’t think they’ll stop using the phones, as the average bill is only $10 per month. The other issue I’ve had is this: Why won’t the government take control like with Yukos? Managers think because they started companies from scratch rather than buying them cheap from the government that the government will let them be. After all, the government has been a big beneficiary of the improved networks that it couldn’t afford to build. Unfortunately, none of the Russian stocks Morningstar covers are cheap currently, but with the historical volatility of the country’s stock market, I think opportunities could present themselves in the future. And as I’ve said before, it is important to be familiar with investments before an opportunity hits. One final humorous story. Because of the quantity of land in Russia, Moscow doesn’t have a central business district. Companies are headquartered all over the city, which is built in concentric circles moving out from the Kremlin. Left turns are not allowed at major intersections, causing drivers to overshoot their destination and either do a series of right turns or find a small street where a left or U turn is allowed. The left turn issues, and Putin’s increased power, has led to the political saying that “at least they can’t turn left.” œ Contact Allan Nichols at allan_nichols@morningstar.com siii_0807.qxp 8/2/07 8:17 PM Page 21 Special InternationalInvestor Insert Allied Irish Banks AIB Allan’s Position Ireland’s growth has been impressive and looks sustainable. Allied Irish continues to benefit from this. International Stock Focus | Erin Davis Morningstar’s Take Allied Irish is a solid, conservatively run bank riding the wave of favorable economic trends in Ireland. Rating 1-Yr High/Low Fair Value Current Price Consider Buy Consider Sell QQQQQ $64.38/48.03 $71.00 $52.23 $54.70 $89.00 Size of Moat Business Risk Market Cap Dividend Yield Revenues Wide -Avg $24.0 bil 3.7% $4.3 bil Stewardship — • Allied Irish Banks % Change in Price • S&P 500 Index 350 280 210 140 70 0 97 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 07 Data through July 31, 2007. Profile Management and Stewardship Valuation Allied Irish Banks is one of the top two banks in Ireland and has sizable investments in financial services firms in other countries: About half of its profits are generated abroad. The firm operates a specialty bank in Great Britain focused on midsize firms and highnet-worth individuals, and an international capital markets group. We applaud Allied Irish for its solid corporate-governance practices. The company requires the roles of chairman and CEO to be split and a substantial majority of the board to be independent. CEO Eugene Sheehy, 51, was appointed in 2005 after a series of scandals rocked the bank. He was seen as both an insider and an outsider because, while he has worked for Allied Irish since 1971, he spent three years in the U.S. as the CEO of AIB USA, overseeing the takeover of Allfirst by M&T MTB. Since his appointment as CEO, he has tightened up risk-management systems and brokered an agreement with the finance union to link employee compensation more closely to performance. We recently raised our fair value estimate for Allied Irish to $71 per share from $66 to account for cash flows accrued in 2006. We expect net income growth to average 6% annually through 2011, down from average growth of 30% since 2001, as Ireland’s economy cools. The most important factors affecting net income will be asset growth, net interest margins, and operating costs. We anticipate that asset growth will be 15% in 2007 and will slow to 7% by 2011, a tad above Ireland’s projected nominal GDP growth of 6%. We project net interest margins to be 2.25% in 2007, gradually increasing to 2.3% by 2011. We expect charge-offs will remain low by industry standards. We apply a 19% tax rate and charge Allied Irish an 11% cost of capital. Adjusting for the 2 for 1 ADR ratio and using an exchange rate of $1.34 we reach our fair value estimate. Ireland is one of the most attractive banking markets in the world, and Allied Irish’s position as the country’s largest bank has afforded it a wide economic moat. The Irish banking market is extremely consolidated; Allied Irish and its largest competitor, Bank of Ireland, are estimated to control more than 70% of the market for personal current accounts. This makes it unlikely that any new competitors will emerge to pose a serious threat to Allied Irish’s market share. Ireland also enjoys highly favorable economic conditions; in 2006, it benefited from 6% GDP growth and 5% job growth. Allied Irish has translated these ideal economic conditions into good returns on invested capital, averaging 16% since 2002. In Ireland, Allied Irish is a plain-vanilla bank that takes deposits, makes loans, and earns a moderate interest spread. We appreciate the bank’s conservative underwriting, which should limit write-offs in the event of a downturn. The bank’s loan and deposit growth, propelled by Ireland’s economic expansion, has averaged 19% and 11%, respectively, since 2001. We believe Allied Irish will be insulated from any slowdown in Ireland by its operations abroad, which generated about 40% of its income in 2006. The largest of these is its bank in Great Britain. It focuses on providing a high level of service to business customers in selected sectors, such as legal services and private education. Allied Irish’s goal is to continually expand profitability by increasing income 3% faster than costs. For the past three years, the bank has comfortably exceeded this goal. Allied Irish has brought its efficiency ratio, a common measure used to compare operating expenses with net revenue, down to about 45%. This is in line with our expectations for an exceptionally well-run bank. œ CS1_0807.qxp 8/2/07 8:10 PM Page 22 22 Corporate Executive Board EXBD Company Spotlight | Paul Larson and Brett Horn Brett Horn Stock Analyst Corporate Exec Board EXBD Star Rating QQQQQ Business Risk Avg Fair Value ($) 93.00 Current Price ($) 67.42 Market Cap ($bil) 2.5 Dividend Yield (%) 2.1 Size of Moat Q: Let’s get everyone up to speed. Can you explain what Corporate Executive does and how the firm makes money? Wide Consider Buying ($) Consider Selling ($) 1-Yr Hi/Low ($) Stewardship P/E In early July, I bought three stocks for the Hare Portfolio, including new holding Corporate Executive Board. Although the company was in the previous issue, I thought I’d have our analyst Brett Horn back to share even greater detail about this opportunity. Brett has been with Morningstar for about one year, and he also covers portfolio holding Western Union WU. 71.70 116.50 97.10/58.54 ¥ 33.3 A: Corporate Executive Board provides best-practices research. The company currently offers 43 separate programs covering topics specific to common functional areas (such as human resources and legal) and is used primarily by upper management. Member companies pay, on average, $34,000 per program per year to get access to the research and peer networking events. One important thing to understand is that the research is mainly generated from member companies’ experiences. Corporate Executive Board utilizes its members to investigate what important issues companies are facing and how different companies have tackled the problem. With approximately 3,700 member companies, Corporate Executive Board’s research teams have access to a large pool of information, which they use to determine which approaches are best, and, perhaps just as importantly, which common approaches are not effective. Q: How does this differ from what consultants typically offer? What is the value proposition for their clients, and how is it better than the substitutes? A: Consultants could be considered indirect competition for Corporate Executive Board, but the two could be just as accurately described as complements to each other. The main differences are that consul- tants are generally used for specific projects, and hiring a group of consultants is an expensive proposition. Meanwhile, membership in Corporate Executive Board programs is ongoing and relatively cheap. But it’s not a one-or-the-other proposition. Let’s say a human resources director is thinking about making some changes. A member of Corporate Executive Board will probably turn first to its research to look for ideas. If, based on that, a major reorganization needs to take place, some consultants will probably be called in. But even in this case, membership has probably saved some time and money. Using the research, the consultants can be brought in with a specific agenda and shorten the time they spend in the office and the bill. You could draw an analogy to investors’ options of subscribing to Morningstar or hiring a financial advisor to manage their portfolios. Individual investors might choose one or the other, or both. Investors might use Morningstar’s research to help make their own stock selections or use the research to surface ideas to discuss with their financial advisor. But being a Morningstar subscriber and hiring a financial advisor aren’t mutually exclusive choices. Q: Beyond the fantastic financial characteristics of this business, what other pieces of evidence make you think this company has a wide moat? A: I would first point out that Corporate Executive Board has consistently maintained client-renewal rates of 90% and above, even during the last recession in 2001. This is a strong indication that its clients see value in being members, and those relationships are quite sticky. It seems unlikely that high-level executives would give up access to research that helps them perform their duties, even if just at the margins, to save a relatively small amount of money. Also, the company benefits from a network effect. Having a large membership base means it has more empirical data on best practices and a stronger peer network. This improves the quality of the company’s programs, which in turn attracts more clients, and so on. Based on this, the company’s competitive advantage should only widen in the coming years as it increases its membership base. CS1_0807.qxp 8/2/07 8:10 PM Page 23 Morningstar StockInvestor Q: Is there anything preventing anyone from cloning this business model? What are the barriers to entry? A: At first glance, the barriers to entry would seem to be low, as it wouldn’t be terribly difficult for others to create and distribute best-practices research. But there are a couple of reasons why the firm should be able to hold off any potential competitors. First, the company has built a large base of research and staff that would be very difficult for any new entrant to match quickly. Also, there is something of a natural monopoly for this business, in my opinion. I can’t imagine that time-pressed executives would feel the need to subscribe to two sets of best-practices research. And, if they are going to choose only one, I think it’s a good bet they will go with the company that has more than 80% of the Fortune 500 as clients, as opposed to any new upstart. Q: I think the financial statements from this firm are stunning. Care to share the more salient statistics? A: During the last five years the company has grown at a 29% compound annual growth rate as it has added new clients and expanded its programs. On top of this, the company has been able to expand operating margins during the same period from 24% to 28%, if you exclude the effects of stock option expenses. The most impressive aspect of Corporate Executive Board’s statements is its ability to generate free cash flow. Clients pay their annual dues up front, but accounting rules require waiting to recognize the revenue over the course of the year. Operating cash flow is therefore consistently much higher than net income. Also, the business requires very little in the way of hard assets, which keeps capital spending down. In short, the company’s investment rate is negative, and growth actually creates more cash. These factors lead to an astounding amount of free cash flow, which averaged 32% of sales in the last three years, excluding the effect of deferred taxes. Returns on invested capital are essentially infinite because there is no invested capital at the moment. Q: What are the primary cash-flow assumptions standing behind your $93 fair value estimate? August 2007 23 A: We project revenue to grow at a 17% compound annual growth rate during the next five years. That’s a healthy growth rate, but much less than the company has achieved historically. On the margin side, we expect operating margins to increase from 23% in 2006 to 25% by 2011. There is a natural uplift to the company’s margins as it grows, as it is essentially taking the same pool of research and selling it to a bigger group of customers. As I mentioned, because the company has negative working capital, its operating cash flow is consistently much higher than its net income. Our model takes this into account and basically assumes the relationship between net income and operating cash flow stays steady. Q: If I am going to lose money with this stock, how might it happen? In other words, what are the risks? A: One risk is cyclicality. When the economy falters and corporate budgets get tight, the company has a much harder time sighing up new clients. Corporate Executive Board is seeing some of this tightness right now, which is part of the reason its growth has slowed in recent quarters. For the long-term investor, though, these cycles should even out in the end. The biggest risk is that the company’s growth hits a wall at some point in the near future. It has a fairly well-defined potential customer base, and at some point penetration may start to stall. However, I think the company has plenty of growth opportunities. First, the company has about 25% penetration into its potential customer base. While Corporate Executive has almost fully penetrated the top tier of companies, it’s really just starting to move into smaller firms. Based on the fact that the company has achieved more than 80% penetration into the Fortune 500, I don’t think doubling the overall penetration to 50% is a stretch. Secondly, the company can grow by crossselling more programs to existing clients. Currently, clients on average participate in about four programs, but clients who have been members over three years participate in an average of seven programs, and this average has been moving up steadily. To sum up, doubling the client base and the number of programs per client would quadruple the revenue base. œ CS2_0807.qxp 8/2/07 8:09 PM Page 24 24 Amgen AMGN Company Spotlight | Paul Larson and Karen Andersen Karen Andersen Stock Analyst Amgen AMGN Star Rating QQQQ Business Risk Avg Fair Value ($) 69.00 Current Price ($) 53.74 Market Cap ($bil) 62.3 Dividend Yield (%) — Size of Moat Wide Consider Buying ($) Consider Selling ($) 53.20 86.50 1-Yr Hi/Low ($) Stewardship P/E 77.00/52.36 ¥ 20.7 It‘s been a very difficult year for long-time Hare Portfolio holding Amgen, with several pieces of bad news negatively affecting the intrinsic value of its business. Here to talk about the issues is Karen Andersen, who has covered the firm the last two years. Q: What are the primary sources of Amgen’s revenue and profit today? A: Unlike its large pharma cousins, Amgen has a relatively small portfolio of drugs on the market— but most are highly profitable. In fact, Amgen has five drugs that are considered blockbusters, each with annual sales north of $1 billion. All of these drugs are true “biotech” drugs, variations of proteins that are manufactured by living cells. Amgen focuses on treating patients with kidney disease, cancer, or inflammatory diseases like arthritis and psoriasis. Last year, 46% of revenue—or roughly $7 billion—came from two similar drugs, Epogen and Aranesp, which treat anemia that can occur in dialysis patients as well as in cancer patients on chemotherapy. Although Amgen doesn’t release profit margins for individual drugs, I think it’s a safe bet that these two drugs, known as erythropoiesis stimulating agents (ESAs), have historically been on the more profitable end of the spectrum, based on a combination of ease of manufacturing and economies of scale. However, with 85% overall gross margins, the other products are hardly a drag on profitability. Q: We started the year with a fair value estimate of $91 for the company, and now we think the stock is only worth $69. Can you explain what happened? A: It’s safe to say this has been one of Amgen’s roughest years. We had anticipated some of the challenges, such as Roche’s efforts to introduce a drug that would compete with Amgen’s ESAs, or the polit- ical pressure to cut drug costs and create a pathway for the approval of generic versions of biologic drugs, or biosimilars. However, what we did not project was Amgen being hit with alarming safety data from multiple trials of its ESAs, pertaining to both dialysis and cancer patients. The Food and Drug Administration slapped a black-box warning on labels on the entire class of drugs in March, at which point I lowered my fair value estimate to $83 to account for the new label’s emphasis on using the lowest possible doses of these drugs that would be effective in preventing the need for a transfusion. Then in May, an FDA advisory committee assembled to discuss the use of ESAs in cancer patients, and from Amgen’s perspective, the meeting was a disaster. Not only were several committee members frustrated by the piles of clinical data that leave safety concerns unanswered, representatives from the FDA berated Amgen for failing to complete several promised clinical trials. In the end, the panel voted that Amgen should be required to perform additional clinical trials for these drugs and that the FDA should further restrict their usage—and perhaps even revoke approval for particular types of cancer treatments. This negative sentiment pushed my sales assumptions even lower, and I lowered my fair value estimate to $69. This meeting was followed a few days later with a proposal from Medicare to drastically reduce reimbursed ESA use in cancer patients. Q: How have you incorporated the larger required warnings and reduced reimbursements in your projections for Epogen and Aranesp? Why do you think these drugs will sell in the future at all? A: The warnings and reimbursement changes have so far had the biggest impact on my assumptions for Aranesp—I now see 2007 sales of the drug dropping by 14% from the roughly $4 billion in sales recorded last year, as off-label (unapproved) uses of the drug will all but disappear, and physicians will use more conservative dosing when treating patients for approved indications. This is a dramatic reversal for what had been one of the highest growth drugs at Amgen; 2006 sales growth for Aranesp in the U.S. was a whopping 33%. CS2_0807.qxp 8/2/07 8:09 PM Page 25 Morningstar StockInvestor I still believe ESAs have an indisputable role in the treatment of anemia in dialysis patients as well as cancer patients on chemotherapy. The chief safety concerns have revolved around a group of clinical trials that tested off-label uses of the drugs. Based on a compilation of data from trials involving more than 9,000 patients, these drugs don’t have an adverse effect on survival when used for approved indications. In addition, there is no good alternative; without drugs like Aranesp and Epogen, patients have a higher risk of requiring blood transfusions—lengthy, costly procedures that put the patient at risk of infection and further strain the already taxed blood supply. Q: Do you think Amgen still has a wide moat? A: In a word, yes. Although it’s true that Amgen’s cash-generating capabilities have their roots in the success of Epogen and Aranesp, we’d already been expecting that the firm would be forced to wean itself from these products in the future. Despite safety concerns, we think the lack of alternative treatments gives Amgen’s anemia franchise a solid foundation to rely on. With three other blockbusters and a growing pipeline, I think Amgen has amassed enough industry talent and drug development experience to allow it to continue generating returns above its cost of capital. Q: Let’s assume a worst-case scenario for Amgen’s anemia drugs. What would your fair value estimate look like? A: The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) recently announced their final decision regarding government reimbursement of Aranesp for cancer patients, which actually turned out to be much less severe than the initial proposal. While investors are concerned that similar restrictions could be slapped on Epogen for dialysis patients, CMS’ proposed reimbursement changes in this category are pretty minor. Moreover, if I completely remove Aranesp and Epogen from my valuation model as of the start of 2008, the fair value estimate drops by about $14 per share. Although this is highly unlikely, it does serve to show that the firm is not solely dependent on these two drugs. August 2007 25 Q: Does Amgen have anything going for it today? A: Amgen has broad-based experience with various avenues of drug development—monoclonal antibody Vectibix was approved last year to treat colorectal cancer, and Amgen has several novel small molecule drugs in development, which is traditionally the territory of large pharma. Amgen’s portfolio of approved drugs is getting a strong boost from dialysis patient drug Sensipar, which we think has blockbuster potential. The next drug likely to gain approval—perhaps early next year—is AMG 531, which has been shown very effective at boosting platelet count in patients with a rare bleeding disorder. We think AMG 531 could eventually be approved to treat a broader range of patients and that sales could reach $1 billion within five years of its launch. The star of the pipeline today is denosumab, an antibody with multibilliondollar potential that is in late-stage development for osteoporosis and bone cancer. Q: What are the other main projections in your discounted cash-flow model? A: During the next 10 years, I see average sales and earnings growth in the midsingle digits. Although generic biologic competition and reimbursement pressures should prevent operating margins from widening further, the firm should be able to maintain them. I’ve included competition from biosimilars in Europe starting at the end of this year, and though a pathway is still in the works in the U.S., we’ve assumed the first generic biologics will enter this market in 2010. Q: Any final words of wisdom? A: Anyone invested in Amgen today is already wellaware that biotech investing is not for the faint of heart. Amgen could suffer another blow before shares begin to recover in earnest. That said, Amgen is one of the world’s premier biotechs, and I think the market’s fears have made the shares a value today. Investors should be somewhat encouraged by Amgen’s view of the value in its shares. Buybacks are continuing at a frenzied pace; another $5 billion in buybacks was just approved by the board of directors. œ Co_Focus_0807.qxp 8/2/07 8:07 PM Page 26 26 Nike NKE Paul’s Position We hiked Nike’s moat rating to “wide” in late June. Tortoise Stock Focus | Brady Lemos Rating 1-Yr High/Low Fair Value Current Price Consider Buy Consider Sell QQQQ $60.35/37.76 $65.00 $56.45 $50.10 $81.40 Size of Moat Business Risk Market Cap Dividend Yield Revenues Wide -Avg $28.3 bil 1.6% $16.3 bil Stewardship ∑ • Nike % Change in Price • S&P 500 Index 200 Morningstar’s Take Promising growth opportunities, global scale advantages, and a history of product innovation position Nike to maintain market dominance in athletic apparel and footwear. We believe Nike’s iconic image, in addition to its diversified product portfolio and global presence, is a major competitive advantage. This brand prestige allows Nike to charge premium prices, which should help the firm earn returns on invested capital well in excess of its cost of capital. 160 120 80 40 0 97 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 07 Data through July 31, 2007. Profile Nike is the world’s largest athletic footwear and apparel brand. International sales to more than 160 countries account for more than half of the company’s total revenue. Primarily a wholesaler, Nike also operates about 400 retail stores domestically and abroad. Nike owns several footwear and accessory brands, including Cole Haan, Jordan, Converse, Starter, Bauer, and Hurley. Management and Stewardship Mark Parker was named CEO in 2006 following the resignation of William Perez, who clashed with founder and chairman Phil Knight. We think Nike is in good hands with Parker at the helm. A Nike employee for nearly 30 years, most recently serving as copresident with Charlie Denson, Parker brings plenty of industry experience. Perhaps just as crucially, he arrives fully wired into Nike’s unique company culture, an obstacle that outsider Perez could not overcome. We are confident Parker and Knight are capable of leading Nike through its latest growth cycle and maintaining its market dominance. Knight has sold some of his Nike stock since stepping down as CEO, yet still owns about 40% of the company with his Class A and B shares. Even though Knight is entitled to elect the majority of the directors, we believe the board is sufficiently independent; nine of the 11 directors are outsiders. Valuation Our fair value estimate is $65. We assume Nike’s sales growth, excluding the impact of exchange rates, will average 8% annually during the next five years. This is consistent with the average growth rate during the last five years. International growth, particularly in China, should offset any slowdown in the U.S. market. We anticipate that Nike will broaden its golf, pro apparel, and women’s footwear offerings and extend its Starter business within the mass channel. Our valuation model assumes that operating margins average just more than 13% during the next five years, up slightly from the average return during the last five years. Vital to the firm’s growth strategy is international expansion, and World Cup 2006 provided the ideal stage to showcase the Nike brand to an estimated 1 billion viewers around the globe. Sales of replica jerseys and boots helped expand Nike’s soccer division into a $1.5 billion business, more than double its size following World Cup 2002. We expect Nike to deepen its penetration of the massive soccer markets in Europe and South America through athlete endorsements and club licensing deals.The exploding popularity of basketball in Asia provides another avenue for growth in China, where Nike is already the top-selling brand and business has more than doubled the last two years. The Beijing 2008 Olympics should spark sales even higher. Domestically, Nike entered the low-price sneaker business in 2005 by introducing Starter footwear into Wal-Mart WMT. This foray into the mass channel offers significant growth potential without diluting the premium Nike brand. Even the best-run apparel companies are susceptible to unfavorable industry trends, however. In 2006, for example, the firm struggled in Europe, where fads favoring low-profile shoes hurt demand for Nike’s higher-price sneakers. Fortunately for Nike, expansion in other regions like China and South America more than offset weak performance in softer markets. Furthermore, Nike’s new low-profile footwear collection has been well-received by consumers. Although certain risks are largely unavoidable, Nike has demonstrated that its diverse product offering and global reach can provide a mitigating buffer unequaled in the industry. œ Co_Focus_0807.qxp 8/2/07 8:07 PM Page 27 Morningstar StockInvestor Discover Financial Services DFS August 2007 27 Paul’s Position Despite only a “narrow” moat, this one is quite cheap. Tortoise Stock Focus | Michael Kon, CFA Morningstar’s Take Rating 1-Yr High/Low Fair Value Current Price Consider Buy Consider Sell QQQQQ $32.17/22.38 $35.00 $23.05 $27.00 $43.90 Size of Moat Business Risk Market Cap Dividend Yield Revenues Narrow -Avg $11.0 bil NA% • Discover Financial Services % Change in Price $4.9 bil Stewardship — • S&P 500 Index 0 Discover Financial Services might appear to be an ugly duckling at first glance, but a closer look reveals a decent business with heaps of potential. Discover operates one of the two national closed-loop credit card networks in the U.S.; American Express AXP operates the other. Discover issues proprietary cards, extends card loans to cardholders, and acquires transactions from merchants whenever a cardholder pays with a Discover card. -4 -8 -12 -16 -20 07-07 08-07 Data through July 31, 2007. Profile Discover Financial Services issues credit cards and acquires transactions. It operates a closed-loop credit card network and also uses third parties to issue its cards. Discover extends card loans (receivables) to cardholders who wish to borrow through their credit cards. It also operates a PIN-based (online) debit card network (Pulse) in the U.S. and has a credit card-issuing business in the U.K. and credit card-acceptance agreements with JCB (a Japanese card firm) and China UnionPay (a Chinese card firm). Management and Stewardship CEO David Nelms has been at the helm of Discover since 2004. Nelms is an experienced executive and is surrounded by industry veterans. However, we think management still has to prove that it can successfully lead Discover as an independent firm, especially in light of the inferiority of its network. In the past, a great chunk of executive compensation was tied to the performance of the parent company. With the spin-off from Morgan Stanley MS, Discover will have to craft a new incentive plan that will place top executives in the same boat with shareholders. However, the firm hasn't disclosed enough information to conclude whether future compensation practices will achieve such goals. Valuation We think Discover is worth $35. We expect funding costs to rise after the spin-off because Discover will cease to benefit from Morgan's cheap funding programs. However, we think the spin-off will have a positive effect on overall performance because it will free Discover from any impediments that come with being owned by a big bank. After the spin-off, Discover should be better-positioned to pursue strategic alliances, especially with other banks. We expect card volume and the number of transactions to accelerate over the next five years, to a high-single-digit growth rate. We think this will enable noninterest income to increase by 7% and net interest income by 9% annually during the next five years. Discover’s network is inferior to peers’. Its cards are the least-accepted among the four major networks. Cardholders often view Discover as a second-choice card, leading to many inactive accounts (more than half of total accounts) and low spending levels per account. Discover also has fewer cards outstanding, and card volume—the total dollar amount cardholders spend—grows much slower than that of the other large networks. During the last three years, Discover card volume grew less than 5% annually, while other networks registered double-digit rates. The biggest weakness, in our opinion, is the firm’s revenue mix. Unlike Amex, which earns a boatload of discount fees (60% of revenue), the bulk of Discover’s revenue (about 60%) comes from the spread on card receivables. This suggests that Discover fails to fully monetize the operating leverage embedded in its network and has to rely on the performance of its receivables to fill its coffers. Discover still has a solid brand name and a network that, despite all the disadvantages, would be hard to duplicate. The firm also boasts low attrition compared with other issuers, because cardholders tend to keep using their cards once they get used to paying with them at certain merchant locations. In addition, the Pulse network makes Discover a large force in the debit card market, which is growing much faster than the credit card market. We also like the strategy of teaming up with third-party issuers and expect more partnerships of this sort. In the long run, these relationships will boost the number of cardholders and improve the acceptance of Discover cards. œ Co_Focus_0807.qxp 8/2/07 8:07 PM Page 28 28 Hershey HSY Paul’s Position Hershey is getting pinched by higher input costs, but the stock market reaction looks overdone. Tortoise Stock Focus | Mitchell Corwin, CFA, CPA Morningstar’s Take Rating 1-Yr High/Low Fair Value Current Price Consider Buy Consider Sell QQQQQ $56.75/45.37 $58.00 $46.10 $49.40 $76.10 Size of Moat Business Risk Market Cap Dividend Yield Revenues Wide -Avg $10.5 bil 2.3% $5.0 bil Stewardship ¥ • Hershey % Change in Price • S&P 500 Index 120 90 60 30 0 -30 97 Hershey’s supply-chain transformation should result in needed manufacturing flexibility and a lower-cost structure, expanding margins while supporting higher marketing costs. We believe that the firm is positioning itself well to drive sustainable moderate topline growth, though we continue to believe that it will remain challenged internationally. 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 07 Data through July 31, 2007. Profile The Hershey Company is the largest North American manufacturer of chocolate and nonchocolate confectionery products. The company markets brands, including Hershey’s, Reese’s, Hershey’s Kisses, Kit Kat, Almond Joy, Mounds, York, Jolly Rancher, Twizzlers, Ice Breakers, and Bubble Yum. The company derives about 10% of its sales internationally. Management and Stewardship Hershey is ultimately controlled by the Milton Hershey Trust, which owns Class B 10-to-1 supervoting shares that, when combined with its 7% ownership of common stock shares, give the trust nearly 80% voting power and 32% ownership. We don’t like these types of dual share classes that limit the rights of minority shareholders. In addition, the company and the trust have butted heads in the past. Without the support of the trust, an acquirer can’t seriously approach Hershey. The company has a stockholder protection rights agreement, which gives older shareholders a preferred stock dividend should an outside party attempt to acquire more than 15% of the shares. CEO Rick Lenny earned a reasonable $1.1 million of salary in 2006, and we were pleased that no bonuses were paid out to executives in light of a disappointing year, and salaries were frozen into 2007 for Lenny and two other executives. Directors are elected annually, but only two are elected by common shareholders. Valuation We think Hershey is worth $58. The company’s top line should rebound a bit from increased marketing support and improving performance of core brands in the United States, but we are cautious regarding the long-term success of the new platforms. Some of that will be offset by higher marketing costs, but gross margins should also improve as the company’s product mix shifts toward more premium items and higher-margin, single-serve products. We assume that operating margins will increase to nearly 23% in five years from a restructuring-adjusted 20.4% last year. Transitioning away from limited editions and into new platforms, such as premium chocolate and refreshments, should give Hershey more sustainable top-line growth. However, growth will come at a higher cost. The limited-edition products not only provided incremental sales but also increased consumer awareness around the company’s core brands. Absent that sort of halo effect, the firm is substantially increasing its marketing spending to reinvigorate growth in its core Hershey, Reese’s, and Kisses franchises. Plus, more incremental advertising dollars will be necessary to introduce products under Hershey’s new platforms. To support higher average marketing expenditures and specialized products and packaging, Hershey is embarking on a $500 million supply-chain transformation project. We think the economics of the project are compelling, with the company expecting to save $180 million annually by 2010. It is important to note that the number doesn’t take into account the offset from annual increases in marketing costs. The cost savings and increased advertising support give us more comfort that Hershey will be able to improve margins while continuing to strengthen its foothold in the domestic confectionery market, where it holds about 30% market share, and 45% in chocolate. The company’s free cash-flow margins and returns on invested capital remain at the high end among consumerproducts firms, justifying its wide moat. We are less confident about Hershey’s global efforts, though. Despite some recently announced joint ventures, the firm has its work cut out for it competing in China and India against more well-established players, such as Mars and Cadbury Schweppes CSG. œ Co_Focus_0807.qxp 8/2/07 8:07 PM Page 29 Morningstar StockInvestor Lowe’s LOW August 2007 29 Paul’s Position Both Home Depot and Lowe’s look inexpensive today. Tortoise Stock Focus | Brady Lemos Morningstar’s Take Rating 1-Yr High/Low Fair Value Current Price Consider Buy Consider Sell QQQQQ $35.74/26.15 $39.00 $28.01 $33.20 $51.20 Size of Moat Business Risk Market Cap Dividend Yield Revenues Wide -Avg $42.2 bil 0.8% $47.2 bil Stewardship ∑ • Lowe’s % Change in Price • S&P 500 Index 425 340 255 170 85 0 97 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 07 Data through July 31, 2007. Profile While housing market worries could pressure sales over the next few quarters, we like Lowe’s long-term prospects and expect the retailer to continue to gain share of the fragmented home-improvement market. We believe it can leverage industry-leading customer service, shopper-friendly stores, and a proven business model to profitably expand domestically and abroad. Lowe’s Companies is the second-largest home-improvement retailer in the world and operates approximately 1,400 warehouseformat stores throughout the United States. The company’s stores offer products and services for home decorating, maintenance, repair, and remodeling. Lowe’s targets retail do-it-yourself and doit-for-me customers, as well as commercial business clients. Management and Stewardship Robert Niblock, who previously served as president of Lowe’s, became CEO and chairman in 2005 after his predecessor retired. In 2006, Niblock was paid approximately $2 million in salary and incentive compensation and was given about $4.5 million worth of stock and option awards. Overall, we believe that executive compensation is reasonable, given the company’s impressive track record. While senior managers are relatively young (no one on the executive team is over 60), they do average several years of experience with the company. We believe that the board of directors is sufficiently independent, yet we think staggered three-year terms for directors limit the influence of outside investors. Executive officers and directors own less than 1% of Lowe’s common stock. Valuation Our fair value estimate is $39. We assume the U.S. housing market remains soft over the next few quarters and that same-store sales growth is flat in 2007. We estimate that same-store sales growth will improve slightly over the next five years as the housing market rebounds. In 2007, we expect Lowe’s to open about 150 stores in the United States and five stores in Canada. We believe Lowe’s can maintain its rapid-growth strategy over the next several years by expanding within the United States and Canada and entering Mexico. Based largely on new store expansion, revenue growth should average about 10% annually over the next five years. Weak same-store sales growth should reduce operating margins to roughly 10% in 2007, but we expect a rebound thereafter. In order for Lowe’s to succeed, it must offer consumers a compelling reason to shop its stores rather than Home Depot’s HD (the primary competitor in virtually every market), and we think it does. Given that the two firms’ pricing and merchandise selection are largely comparable, the key differentiating characteristics become customer service and shopping convenience. We believe Lowe’s has excelled in these areas by keeping stores well staffed and designing intuitive store layouts, among other customer-focused initiatives. Not surprisingly, Lowe’s routinely outperforms Home Depot in customer satisfaction studies. We’re also encouraged that Lowe’s is sticking to its core retail strategy of aggressively opening new stores in the United States and Canada, as well as Mexico beginning in 2009. With just a 7% share of the U.S. home-improvement market, Lowe’s still has plenty of room to expand, particularly in the quickly growing installation-services segment. Furthermore, Lowe’s stores’ superior shopping experience allows them to prosper even in locations where they overlap with other home-improvement retailers. Lowe’s has seized on Home Depot’s stumbles to steal share. Home Depot’s renewed focus on retail could lead to increased competition, but we’re convinced the North American market can support this emerging duopoly. Despite Lowe’s runner-up position to Home Depot, Lowe’s is the 11th largest retailer in the world and can capitalize on its scale advantages. Thanks to substantial buying power and efficient store operations, Lowe’s consistently earns returns on invested capital well in excess of its cost of capital, and we expect that trend to continue in the future. œ Cover_0807.qxp 8/2/07 8:36 PM 30 Page 30 Options for Long-Term Investors Continued from Front Cover eBay EBAY Star Rating QQQQQ Business Risk -Avg Fair Value ($) 49.00 Current Price ($) 32.40 Market Cap ($bil) 44.0 Dividend Yield (%) — Size of Moat Wide Consider Buying ($) 41.80 Consider Selling ($) 64.30 1-Yr Hi/Low ($) 35.41/22.83 Stewardship ∑ P/E 32.7 Coca-Cola KO Star Rating Business Risk Fair Value ($) Current Price ($) Market Cap ($bil) Dividend Yield (%) Size of Moat QQQQ -Avg 60.00 52.11 120.6 2.5 Wide Consider Buying ($) 51.10 Consider Selling ($) 78.80 1-Yr Hi/Low ($) 54.49/43.48 ¥ Stewardship P/E 23.2 apply. The largest in my mind is the fact that options insert a level of complexity. Namely, when trading options, one not only has to get the direction a stock is going to move correct (a difficult enough an endeavor), one also has to worry more about magnitudes while also considering timing. Someone buying and holding a solid business for the long haul need not worry about short-term timing and the magnitude of stock price movements. After all, common stocks have no expiration date. But with options, timing and magnitude are huge factors to consider. The upside is that options can be used in a myriad of ways to create income, increase returns via leverage, and lower risk by providing “insurance.” While Warren Buffett once famously called derivatives, “financial weapons of mass destruction,” stock options can be a positive force if used wisely and in moderation. Below are some of the more basic options strategies. In this article, I will not go into the more complex and exotic strategies—spreads, straddles, strangles, ladders, and so forth. It’s an understatement to say I am just scratching the surface here, but we will have much more to say about options in the future. Buying Calls Perhaps the easiest way to juice potential returns on the really fat pitches the market is offering is to simply buy call options. Think of call options as putting TNT into your bat. In general, the amount of leverage involved is correlated to how far “in the money” an option is. Buying calls far out of the money is one of the most leveraged bets one can make, while buying options far in the money is a comparable risk to using margin. Examples, again, are probably the best teachers. Remember the $30 strike, January 2009 eBay calls priced at $8? If the stock closes near our current $49 fair value estimate for eBay before expiration, these options would be worth $19 apiece ($49 - $30 strike). If I bought these options, I would have a return of more than double my initial investment, versus “only” a 50% or so return if I had just held the stock. Don’t forget that leverage can cut both ways. If the market doesn’t come to its senses about eBay before expiration and the stock was at $30 in 30 months, I’d lose all of my investment in this call option. But if I only held the shares, I’d only have a nominal paper loss and still actually own the shares. When buying call options to create leverage, it makes sense to me to buy options with as long an expiration as possible. I’ll gladly pay more for longer-dated options if it means minimizing the chance I will get my timing wrong. My edge as an investor comes largely from my focus on intrinsic value, not from being able to guess short-term stock movements better. Buying long-dated options plays to my strength while minimizing an area in which I have no edge. Covered Calls When one embarks on a covered call strategy, usually the goal is to create additional income and return from positions already held in a portfolio. A covered call strategy involves taking something already in a portfolio and selling out of the money call options at a price one would indeed be willing to sell. For instance, let’s say I wanted to do a covered call strategy in the Tortoise. There are 200 shares of Coca-Cola KO in the portfolio, and I could sell (write) two call contracts on those shares. Our fair value estimate for Coke is $60. At this writing, I could sell options with a $60 strike and a January 2008 expiration for $0.70, taking in $140 (2 contracts x $0.70 x 100 shares), minus commission (let’s assume $10). If Coke’s stock sticks around the low $50s over the next five months, I still collect the $0.34- per- share quarterly dividend from the underlying shares in addition to the $130 I collected from selling the option, essentially doubling my income for Coke. If Coke appreciates to our $60 fair value estimate, I’m happy with the capital appreciation on my shares, and still collect the $130. Only if Coke’s stock appreciates past $60.65 before expiration do I start to forfeit the upside. The key danger with a covered call strategy is that I am still taking a risk with the underlying shares. If Coke’s business were really only worth $30 tomorrow and the stock closed the gap to this theoretical Cover_0807.qxp 8/2/07 8:36 PM Page 31 Morningstar StockInvestor near-doomsday intrinsic value, the $4,800 paper loss I would incur on my 200 underlying shares would greatly overshadow the $130 in extra income I produced. You might say that it is not worth losing a dollar in underlying capital to gain a dime in income. This is why I would limit doing a covered call strategy to very solid companies in which one has a lot of faith in the durability of the business, such as those companies contained in the Tortoise. August 2007 31 juice returns in times when one is flush with cash and the market is offering few bargains to put that cash to work in stocks. After all, there will always be attractive wide-moat companies out there, and there will always be a price at which I’d be willing to buy those companies. With this strategy, I can keep my powder dry in times of overvaluation, while also generating income. You might say it is like getting paid to patiently wait for the fat pitches. Options Summary Call Put Long Short Right to Buy Right to Sell Obligation to Sell Obligation to Buy Selling Baby Puts “Baby puts” refer to put options that are far out of the money and therefore trade cheaply. Investors will sell these baby puts on stocks that they are comfortable purchasing at a specific price, which will be the strike price of the put they are selling. Typically, this is the price that builds in a margin of safety to their estimate of the stock’s fair value. Let’s use Coke as an example again. Our “Consider Buying” price on Coke is $51.10, and I would be very happy to purchase Coca-Cola for $45 per share. I could sell two put contracts with a $45 strike and a January 2009 expiration for $1.50, netting me $290 after $10 commission (2 x $1.50 x 100, minus $10 commission). If Coke falls below $45 between now and January 2009, I might be required to buy 200 shares at $45, something I would probably be doing anyway. If Coke never goes below $45 again, I pocket the $290 as well as any interest from the cash I have set aside to secure this trade. This strategy is not without risk. If one does not have enough cash in their account to purchase the stock, margin calls could result. As such, it’s advisable to have plenty of cash on hand with this strategy. Also, a fresh piece of news could surface between the time one sells the put and expiration, and this news might change our opinion of the fair value of the stock. By selling put options, I would be giving up the flexibility to incorporate new information into our fair value estimate for a certain period of time. All that said, selling baby puts is a great strategy to Index Puts One way I’ve seen investors use options is by buying put options on the major market indexes. You might call this strategy “buying insurance” on the portfolio in case of a major market correction. It’s also a way to minimize short-term systemic risk (noncompany-specific risk) of the market. For instance, I can buy S&P 500 index puts with a 1,300 strike and December 2007 expiration for about $13 today, or $1,300 for one contract. If the market goes into the tank between now and the end of the year, closing at 1,200 (about where the market was in late 2005), these options would be worth $100 each, or about $10,000. Of course, I would likely have some meaningful declines in the market value of my core stocks portfolio were the market to fall this far, but an index put would offset some of that decline. On the other side of the coin, if the market continues to go up, this “insurance” I bought will go unused, but the value of my core portfolio would be higher. Puts Versus Shorting Though we don’t focus on shorting companies here at StockInvestor, I still occasionally make bearish bets on individual stocks in my personal accounts. I’ve come to the conclusion that buying put options is a much more attractive way to make these bets than shorting. After all, my potential loss when shorting a stock is infinite. I don’t like having potentially infinite losses, because nothing (and I mean nothing!) in the market is a sure bet. By buying puts to make a bearish bet, the most I can lose is what I paid for the contract. If you have any questions about options, don’t be afraid to contact me (Paul_Larson@morningstar.com) or Continued on Back Cover Cover_0807.qxp 8/2/07 8:36 PM Page 32 Options for Long-Term Investors Morningstar StockInvestor Volume 7, Number 2 Continued from Page 31 Equities Strategist and Editor Paul Larson Phil Guziec (Phil_Guziec@morningstar.com). Phil is a long-time Morningstar analyst who has become our in-house options guru. Again, expect to see much more on options in the near future. About Tender Offers I often get questions about what to do with tender offers received in the mail. Right now, two portfolio companies—Expedia EXPE and Home Depot HD— have tenders currently outstanding, while other companies in the portfolios including Biogen Idec BIIB and Microsoft MSFT have made offers in the recent past to repurchase shares from owners. this strategy work in practice. The market is just too efficient, and the market price and actual company repurchase price will tend to converge at expiration. Of course, one could try to game the system and tender their shares at a higher price than the stock market is offering with the intention of buying those shares back at the (hopefully still) lower market price when the tender expires. For instance, I could tender my Home Depot shares today at, say, $43 with the intention of buying them back at the current market price near $38. The problem is that only rarely does I might seriously consider a tender offer under only one circumstance—if the tender offer was made at prices above fair value and above what I could get in the open market. This hasn’t been the case recently, nor do I expect it to be the case often in the future. The bottom line: I am putting the offers from Expedia and Home Depot into the proverbial circular file. I’m also hoping the firms buy back a boatload of shares at prices below our fair value estimates. œ Morningstar StockInvestor 225 West Wacker Drive Chicago, Illinois 60606 Director of Stock Analysis Pat Dorsey Karen Andersen, Mitchell Corwin, Erin Davis, Sumit Desai, Brett Horn, Michael Kon, Brady Lemos, Erin Swanson Copy Editors Kevin O’Shaughnessy, Ryun Patterson Designer Christopher Cantore Design Intern Meghan Tweedie Data Team Desiree Deleoz, Jeff Manczko, Neelm Pradhan Programmers Eider Deleoz, Christine Tan Publisher Paul Larson owns the following companies mentioned in this article: BIIB, +EBAY, EXPE, HD, KO, MSFT Maureen Dahlen Product Manager Sara Mersinger 1 5 Paul has bought the stock in the past month. 2 5 Paul has sold the stock in the past month. Chief of Securities Analysis Haywood Kelly Performance (%): Morningstar StockInvestor Portfolios vs. S&P 500 President, Securities Research Catherine Gillis Odelbo Period Tortoise Hare Combined 2001* 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Trailing 12 Months Since Inception** Since Inception*** 9.1 -1.6 26.2 13.1 8.0 13.7 12.4 90.6 11.1 0.7 -23.9 26.3 26.9 3.2 22.0 31.8 62.7 8.3 4.9 -12.3 26.2 18.8 5.8 17.3 20.6 76.7 9.7 S&P 500 -4.8 -22.1 28.7 10.9 4.9 15.8 16.1 33.2 4.8 Data as of July 31, 2007. Returns include interest and dividends. *Since Inception 6-18-01 **Total Cumulative Returns ***Annualized Returns © 2007 Morningstar, Inc. All rights reserved. Reproduction by any means is prohibited. While data contained in this report are gathered from reliable sources, accuracy and completeness cannot be guaranteed. The publisher does not give investment advice or act as an investment advisor. All data, information, and opinions are subject to change without notice. Reprints of articles and information appearing in Morningstar StockInvestor are available in quantity. 312-696-6100. For inquiries regarding your subscription, contact: newslettersupport@morningstar.com. Please address all correspondence to Maureen Dahlen, Morningstar, Inc., 225 W. Wacker Dr., Chicago, IL 60606. Subscribers Download Morningstar StockInvestor Early Want to get next month’s StockInvestor even earlier? Go to http://msi.morningstar.com and log in to get a free electronic copy of the September issue. This electronic copy will be available on or after September 7. We are providing this electronic copy free Allan Nichols Stock Analysts Contact Paul Larson at paul_larson@morningstar.com My thinking concerning what to do with these offers is pretty simple. If the company is offering to buy my shares below fair value, I generally ignore the offer (and hope that legions of other shareholders take the offer and accrete value to the remaining shares). This has been the case with all the tender offers from portfolio companies in recent years. The way I view it, if I would not sell my shares on the open market at a given price, why would I be any more interested in selling them to the company itself at that same price? International Strategist of charge to all of our customers in addition to your normal printed copy, which will arrive in the mail as usual. Also visit this site to monitor the Tortoise and Hare portfolios, the Bellwether Watchlist and the International Stalwarts. Periodicals Postage P a i d Chicago, Illinois and additional offices Morningstar StockInvestor (ISSN 1098-819X) is published monthly by Morningstar, Inc., 225 West Wacker Drive, Chicago, IL 60606. For address changes, please call our product support line at 312-424-4288. For subscriptions call: toll-free 866-608-9570. Periodicals postage paid at Chicago, IL and at additional mailing offices. POSTMASTER: Send address changes to Morningstar StockInvestor, 225 West Wacker Dr., Chicago, IL 60606. MSII09H 0810 (ISSN 1098-819X)