A pleasant St Ives
And a bad memory
Just on a whim really, I calculated the median values for some of my favourite financial statistics and then screened the entire market for for companies that were above average in every respect.
Only eight companies managed to the beat the averages, and only one of those had a financial year end in the second half of 2011. It was St Ives. This is how it matched up against the market:
| Ratio | St Ives | median |
| price to book value | 0.67 | 1.29 |
| 10y return on equity | 10.31% | 10.1% |
| equity to assets | 58% | 53% |
| F_Score | 7 | 5 |
| cashflow ps/eps | 5.38 | 1.66 |
Source: Sharelockholmes.com, 20 Dec 2011
I know what you’re thinking. St Ives is an old economy business. It’s ten year return on equity figure is flattered by big profits some time ago. It’s probably not doing as well now. How can an a company that makes its money selling printed marketing materials be thriving in the age of the Internet?
It appears to be. For a start an F_Score of 7 is a sign of a company in good financial health. A recent interim management statement reveals the new financial year has started well and that the company is moving away from commoditised print markets.
And in terms of profitability it’s held up pretty well during the recession, at least as well as the typical UK listed company according to the figures:
| ROE | 3y ROE | 5y ROE | 10yROE | |
| median | 6.9 | 7.1 | 9.2 | 10.1 |
| St Ives | 11.1 | 7.6 | 9.9 | 10.3 |
Source: Sharelockholmes.com, 20 Dec 2011
Eleven per cent ROE last year is significantly better than the market median, and since it’s also better than St Ives has managed in the recent past it too suggests the company is performing well.
I’m thinking the unthinkable as I cycle through Peter Lynch’s models. Printing is a cyclical business, but it seems to be weathering the cycle better than the average company. Maybe it’s a turnaround, but by the same logic it doesn’t seem to have been in that much trouble.
Could it be this relic of the twentieth century, this printing company, is forging a future as a stalwart of the twentieth century?
Maybe I’m not the only person thinking St Ives might surprise. The directors have been buying lots of shares.
The only problem is, I really hated it last time I looked at it. I was puzzled by the fact that despite remaining profitable, it had not increased shareholder wealth, and I was suspicious of the amount of change in the business – necessary no doubt, but risky too.
In fact it’s maintained profitability in terms of return on equity, not by maintaining the numerator in the return on equity calculation (net profit has halved), but by reducing the denominator (equity or book value has also halved).
So St Ives has been struggling after all, profits have plunged, and shareholders are poorer. That begs the question of whether its current book value, the basis of my observation the shares might be cheap, is trustworthy. It hasn’t been.
4 Comments
Leave a comment
Comments
- Richard Beddard on Learning from Lauren
- Mark Carter on Learning from Lauren
- Richard Beddard on Ambivalent about French correction
- Mark Carter on Ambivalent about French correction
- Ken Kahura on Towards the perfect PE
- Richard Beddard on Games Workshop in two minutes
- Ethereal on Games Workshop in two minutes
- Monevator on Throwing the net wide open
- Richard Beddard on Throwing the net wide open
- Monevator on Throwing the net wide open
- Richard Beddard on Throwing the net wide open
- Monevator on Throwing the net wide open
- The cyclically-adjusted P/E ratio (PE10 or Shiller PE) on State of the market
- Philip O'Sullivan on Churchill China in 1 minute 53 seconds
- Richard Beddard on Churchill China in 1 minute 53 seconds
- Market Musings 1/5/2012 « Philip O'Sullivan's Market Musings on Churchill China in 1 minute 53 seconds
- Philip O'Sullivan on Churchill China in 1 minute 53 seconds
- Brad on Million Dollar Traders
- Stefan | Simple Value Investing on Pensions: peril or profit?
- Richard Beddard on PV Crystalox Solar in 1 minute 56 seconds
RB on Twitter
- @pdosullivan Thanks Philip. Ditto.
- Interesting thoughts from @mcturra2000 on magic formula investing http://t.co/JEq0Ak1j my reply: http://t.co/UHRnYZKR
- Just discovered there are two Mervyn Kings. This one hits the bullseye https://t.co/JmPZPIIp This one moves the target https://t.co/JmPZPIIp
- @smarkus Thanks
- Thinking of tackling Next L:NXT next. It scares me witless. @spbaines and @GeoffGannon wld have me rely on earning power. Soooo hard...
Latest posts
- French Connection in 2 minutes 9 seconds
- Restoration man
- Redefining French Connection
- Leases key to retailer’s financial position
- Ambivalent about French correction
- Three earnings yields
- Premier Foods in 2 minutes 11 seconds
- Throwing the net wide open
- Holders Technology in 2 minutes 8 seconds
- Churchill China in 1 minute 53 seconds
Sections
Companies
Archives
Blogroll
- Alphaville
- Barel Karsan
- Eurosharelab
- Expecting Value
- Gannon on Investing
- Mark Carter
- Monevator
- Musings on Markets
- My Investing Notebook
- Neonomic
- Oddball Stocks
- Peston's Picks
- Philip O'Sullivan
- Seth's Posterous
- The Value Perspective
- Turnkey Analyst
- UK Value Investor
- Value Stock Inquisition
- Valuhunteruk.com
- Wexboy



Interesting analysis Richard. I bought St Ives at 56p a few years ago (that was my maximum buy price with a healthy margin of safety). I sold at 100p, which I think is 25% over valued (my trigger for a sale). My valuation was 75p.
So that means, I think you right!
Hi Neomonic, it looks like you timed that trade perfectly. I might look into it further. It really depends on whether I think the write-offs have stopped, which will be difficult to be confident about because it has invested in new businesses – often risky.
Are the row labels (St Ive and Median) on your second table muddled? Or am I just getting confused. The numbers don’t seem to match the text.
Hi Dave,
Oh dear. Yes they were muddled (I’ve corrected them now). Thanks for pointing out the error.