- Magnet is Continuing to Justify the Transaction Based on
Outdated, Misleading Information
- Four Software Takeovers at Higher Premiums Since Magnet's
Takeover Announcement
- Nellore Urges Shareholders to Follow Leading Independent
Proxy Advisor Glass Lewis' Recommendation AGAINST, Comments on
ISS
- Nellore Suggests Shareholders Read Recent Notes From Brokers
Quoted by Magnet
PALO
ALTO, Calif., March 17,
2023 /PRNewswire/ - Nellore Capital Management LLC
("Nellore) today provided final commentary to explain its
opposition to the proposed C$1.8
billion takeover of Magnet Forensics Inc. ("Magnet") (TSX:
MAGT) by the private equity firm Thoma Bravo.
Sakya Duvvuru, Founder and
Portfolio Manager of Nellore Capital, said "the Software PE market
continues to be strong and Magnet stands out as an especially weak
negotiation in comparison. The presentation put out today by Magnet
is further proof that the Special Committee doesn't understand the
value of the company, which continues to be justified by outdated
and misleading information."
Ending Where We Started: Magnet is a Special Business
Creating Continued Shareholder Wealth
Magnet's operating and financial model are such that roughly
every 4 years, revenue converts into free cash flow ("FCF"). For
instance, the company generated US$27mmof revenue in 2018 and
generated US$33mmof FCF in 2022. The company generated US$50mmof
revenue in 2020, and per Management Forecast, expects US$65mmof FCF
in 2024. The company is expected to generate the equivalent of 2022
revenue, US$99mm, in 2026 FCF -> a compounding machine! Thus,
one could pay up to 20x 2023 revenue (>100% above current offer
price), and still earn a double digit return over 4 years.
Materiality of Q4 FCF on Realizing Fair Value
It seems like Magnet (and its Special Committee) are either not
aware of, or don't appreciate, how FCF can drive returns for the
buyer. Consider that by waiting for March
9th instead of January
19th, Magnet's Last Twelve Months ("LTM") FCF
doubles, and at the offer price, is actually trading 13% below the
average over the last twelve months!
EV / LTM FCF
This is especially significant because the last twelve months
have been especially punitive toward high growth, technology
companies. Yet, here we are with an offer price that is below the
average in that punitive period. Applying the unaffected average of
43x on LTM FCF post Q4 results and Thoma
Bravo's 37% median premium results in a offer price of
C$60 per share. Or, using the
unaffected stock price on January
19th of C$38.15, we derive a
multiple of 32x LTM FCF. Using the same multiple on 2024 FCF and
discounting back to today, we get to C$60 per share.
Further, using the same methodology Magnet uses on slide 3 of
today's presentation to justify the transaction, we can see that
not only is Magnet not trading at 56x estimated 2023 FCF, it is
trading at just 38x twelve months trailing FCF and well below the
peers:
EV / LTM Free Cash Flow
Not only is there no control premium here, Magnet consideration
is not even at the level of transaction unaffected, slower growing,
lower margin public comps. Applying the median multiple of peer
group results in a stock price of C$66. Applying a further control premium
results in a price >C$80. The
Special Committee should have understood this and negotiated using
this information.
Four Software Takeovers at Higher Premiums
Since the Magnet transaction was announced on January 20th, takeovers by private
equity ("PE") firms have been announced for four other public
software companies with one-day unaffected premiums ranging from
29% to 62%. Clearly, the 15% premium for Magnet is far too low.
Notably, three of the takeovers were announced just this week,
highlighting the underlying demand for recurring revenue and
software business models even in the face of Silicon Valley Bank
issues and general macro uncertainty. Further, the size of the deal
values, the variety of players investing, and the unaffected
premiums paid all highlight the vibrancy of the Software PE
market.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Unaffected
Premia
|
|
Date
|
|
Target
|
Acquiror
|
Deal
Value
|
|
Rule
of 40
|
1-Day
|
30-day
VWAP
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
01-20-23
|
|
Sumo Logic
|
Francisco
Partners
|
1.7bn
|
|
15 %
|
57 %
|
50 %
|
|
Post SVB /
SBNY:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
03-13-23
|
|
Momentive
|
STG
|
1.5bn
|
|
10 %
|
46 %
|
51 %
|
|
03-13-23
|
|
Qualtrics
|
Silver Lake +
CPP
|
12.5bn
|
|
33 %
|
62 %
|
73 %
|
|
03-14-23
|
|
Cvent
|
Blackstone
|
4.6bn
|
|
28 %
|
29 %
|
54 %
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mean
|
|
22 %
|
49 %
|
57 %
|
|
|
|
|
|
Median
|
|
22 %
|
52 %
|
53 %
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
01-20-23
|
|
Magnet
Forensics
|
Thoma Bravo
|
1.4bn
|
|
74 %
|
15 %
|
12 %
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Moreover, high growth, high quality software companies Kinaxis
and Docebo have both reported strong earnings in the last two weeks
and are both trading above their pre-earnings reports. Cellebrite
is also trading up 15% since its strong Q4 report.
Don't fall for Magnet's downside risk scare tactic. To the
contrary, Nellore believes the stock will start to price in
US$65 million of FCF in CY'2024 and
trade above the deal price.
Comments on ISS
We believe even the cautionary support recommendation from ISS
is not warranted. We can just agree to disagree about the
significance of Jim Balsillie
choosing the Rolling Shareholder option, procedural depth of the
market check of reaching out to just two financial sponsors, the
differential consideration and the lack of value for Grayshift
synergies for SV shareholders. But we will not let the following
ISS assertions go unchallenged:
Valuation methodologies:
- ISS claimed "it is not illogical or unprecedented to think
about software transactions through a FCF multiple lens, and such
an approach would likely ascribe a higher intrinsic value to MAGT.
However, there is not enough evidence to conclude that the
valuation supporting this transaction was not credible"; The
facts below indicate that the supporting valuation is not
credible
- We believe that you do not HAVE to use FCF multiples as a
valuation methodology, but methodologies based on other financial
metrics, especially revenue, require more careful consideration of
growth, margin, and quality characteristics in the reference
range
- As Glass Lewis points out, the issue is not the methodology
chosen but the "the multiples applied by MS here are
substantially misaligned with the Company's stand-alone trading
patterns (e.g. application of 2.5x and 4.5x 2023 revenue multiples,
despite the Company's average NTM revenue multiple of 7.0x in the
one-year prior to announcement and while trading at NTM revenue
multiple of 8.9x on market close the day prior to announcement; we
see similar discrepancies with respect to NTM EBITDA)."
- ISS specifically points to Datto's fairness opinion as lacking
FCF-based valuation methodologies. That is true but they use an
EBITDA range of "16.0x – 30.0x" and highlight "unaffected EBITDA
Multiple for Datto was 23.2x"
-
- If Datto deserves 16-30x for a 20% revenue grower and the
unaffected multiple was 23.2x, then how about Magnet? Magnet's
reference range is 22.5x – 27.5x for a 35% grower and the
unaffected multiple prior to announcement was 42.0x, 53% above the
high end of the range.
- Similarly, the "unaffected Revenue Multiple for Datto was
5.4x based on the Analyst Projections" and the financial
advisor's range for Datto's fairness opinion was "4.5x to
7.5x."
-
- Again, Magnet is a 35% grower versus 20% for Datto and only
gets 2.5 – 4.5x, while the unaffected multiple is 8.9x.
- Lastly, we believe Independent Valuator's otherwise pristine
DCF analysis is also flawed by a poor terminal value assumption,
which again doesn't jive with reality: "considered the implied
terminal enterprise value to LTM revenue multiple, which ranged
from 2.1x to 3.0x, and the implied terminal value to LTM EBITDA
multiple, which ranged from 7.5x to 10.6x"
- In the end, we just believe that it is easiest to look at FCF,
since Magnet consistently produces it, but we are open to the
appropriate Revenue and EBITDA multiples, as long as they are
adjusted for growth rates, margins and cash flow generation
Standalone Path:
- Worth repeating that only 60% of Magnet's business concerns
Public Safety, Grayshift is not relevant to the Private Sector
business.
- Within the Public Safety business, the vast majority of
customers REQUIRE dual sourcing or triple sourcing extraction
vendors. CEO says so himself on 08.02.22 at the CG conference
- It has been over 8 months since Magnet lost Grayshift to
Thoma Bravo and changed their
friendlier GTM partnership structure, Magnet has reported two of
its strongest quarters ever
- Further, Cellebrite is also available as a mobile extraction
M&A target, and is available at a similar enterprise value as
Grayshift. Lastly, Grayshift has a heavy debt load and has a very
small revenue base – are they really going to pose a threat to
Magnet's Artifact Library? I think Thoma
Bravo/Grayshift needs Magnet more than Magnet needs
Grayshift
Share Price Volatility:
- ISS claims "Magnet share price was volatile and lost ground
in late 2021 and early 2022 – Magnet fell 76.4 percent from its
all-time high to its all-time low closing price (Aug. 31, 2021 to June 16,
2022)"
- Nellore considers that period in July to September 2021 to be driven by non-fundamental
buying in a very tight float, immediately post IPO. The Board
agrees given their call out of the "No News" press release released
on 08/31/21 on Slide 12 of the
February 10th
presentation
- Thus we believe that ISS should only consider the period of
trading following Magnet's secondary transaction on December 14, 2021. Abiding by this ourselves, we
start our EV/LTM FCF analysis starting on January 1, 2022
Comments on Research Analyst Commentary
The tone of the analyst community has moved significantly toward
our favor since our initial press release on February 9th, the release of the
management forecast on February
22nd, and finally the release of Q4 results on
March 9th. Even so, Magnet
again continues to highlight research reports from January 20th despite more recent
commentary from the same institutions.
- RBC, March 9th: "Solid
Q4 adds fuel to the takeout debate" "Strong results reaffirm that
purchase price too low for investors."
- CG, March 9th:
"Outstanding Q4 ahead of the March 23
vote" "Q4 results were outstanding again and would normally have
led to a big jump in the shares if this was still trading on
fundamentals."
- NBF, March 9th:
"standard beat from Magnet and given the Company is in the process
of a takeover, the only thing the results would do is to add
further uncertainty to the shareholder vote"
Nellore Capital Signing Off: Protect Your Interest, Vote
AGAINST
Nellore is the only party that is 100% aligned with its fellow
SV shareholders. We are sincerely trying to present the facts as
they are and attain full value for all of our Magnet
shares.
Nellore continues to urge shareholders to use to GOLD
proxy to vote AGAINST the proposed takeover.
If you have already voted another proxy, you can still vote the
GOLD proxy AGAINST the takeover. Only the later-dated
vote will be counted. The voting deadline for the GOLD proxy
is Monday, March 20 at 5pm Toronto
time.
About Nellore Capital Management LLC
Nellore Capital Management invests in entrepreneurially managed,
competitively advantaged technology businesses globally for the
long term.
For further information:
Investor contact
Sakya Duvvuru, Founder &
Portfolio Manager, Nellore Capital Management LLC, Ph:
501-551-0128, Email: sakya@nellorecapital.com
If you require assistance with voting your shares, please
contact Carson Proxy Advisors:
North American Toll Free Phone: 1-800-530-5189; Local (Collect
outside North America):
416-751-2066 Email: info@carsonproxy.com
1 Based on
closing stock prices as of March 16th, 2023, except for
Magnet at offer price of C$44.25. FCF is defined as Cash Flow From
Operations less Capital Expenditures and Capitalized
Software.
|
|
2 In good
conscience, we couldn't bring ourselves to include TDC as a
comparable for Magnet, despite the Board and its advisors choosing
it as one. It is a legacy data warehouse provider that is declining
in revenue. If we were forced to include TDC, we would also include
SNOW, an innovative data warehouse provider that has a Rule of 40
that is more like Magnet's. Including both TDC and SNOW cancel each
other out, leading to mean / median of 60x FCF. Including TDC only
leads to a mean of 54x FCF and median of 46x FCF. Both are still
materially above Magnet's 38x.
|
View original content to download
multimedia:https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/nellores-final-remarks-the-facts-just-dont-add-up-vote-against-301775358.html
SOURCE Nellore Capital Management LLC