QAV 431 Club

Cameron 00:12

Welcome back to QAV, TK, Episode#431. You’re in week five of lockdown and I’m in week one of lockdown, staring down the barrel of probably five or more weeks up here in Brisbane.

Tony  00:28

Well it’s good, QLD is only five weeks behind now, it used to be ten years behind.

Cameron 00:35

How are you holding up?

Tony  00:37

Yes, good. I mean there’s not much change to life but

Cameron 00:42

You’re wearing a shirt made out of crocodile skin by the looks of it today– Did you catch and skin that croc yourself [unintelligible 00:51].

Tony  00:53

Well it’s not leather, it’s material, it’s just a print.

Cameron 00:56

just a crocodile print?

Tony  00:59

Yes.

Cameron 01:00

Good stuff. Well, we got a lot to talk about today in the market, a lot of news, a lot of things going on. I want to start with a QAV rankings. Thank you to everyone from QAV club that’s gone up to our QAV rankings spreadsheet been throwing up their results there. I have to update mine and the QAV ones for last month but there’s some really good results trickling in from people that have been around for a while. 43%, 45% since inception, and I want to particularly do a give a shout out to Troy who posted in our Facebook group, I think last week that he’s had a 54.61% return for the last financial year.

 

Tony  01:50

Fantastic.

Cameron 01:51

Sensational results. So congratulations, Troy. Congratulations to everyone who’s posting their results on their like in terms of last financial year Darryl posted 51.87%…

Tony  02:08

17% for the last month as well.

Cameron 02:11

Yes, so good work, guys. Big news for Afterpay. Today they’re being sold.

Tony  02:24

Is that going ahead? Have you heard of it’s been accepted or nor or is it just an offer at this stage?

Cameron 02:32

According to the Afterpay board of…. whatever, approved it, endorsed it, accepted it, Afterpay’s board unanimously endorsed the deal in the absence of a better offer saying, ‘an independent expert concluded it was in the best interest of shareholders.’

Tony  02:52

The board of Afterpay had gone…… [laughter]

Cameron 02:57

Yes

Tony  02:57

[unintelligible 03:00] just launched a competing product. Everyone’s crowding the market. Regulators are having a look at it. [laughter]

Cameron 03:07

They’ve probably been— They’re being acquired by square founded by the Twitter guys, Dorsey, etc. They’ve probably been turning down their offer for the last six months and telling him to go to hell and then they are like, ‘Got an offer… Still on the table’. Anyway, so I think the article says that the offer is about a 30% premium to what the share price was trading at. The square offer of $126.21 per Afterpay share represents about a 30% premium to the stock’s closing price on Friday, which is great news for Afterpay shareholders unless they bought it. Six months ago when it was trading at around $160 in which case they’re never going to see that money again. So it kind of depends I guess when you bought it.

Tony  04:14

Yes, if you bought after COVID when that was 16 bucks a share or something you’ve done really well. Good luck to them.

Cameron 04:25

What else is going on in the news this week? I want to thank Persian master whoever he or she may be for review of the podcast they put up an Apple, appreciate that. I’ve been asking people lately to give us more Apple reviews and I appreciate Persian master taking the time. MML Tony, what the hell happened to it? What the hell MML. That’s what I want to ask. MML just sort of dive bombed on this last week. What happened there? Because I read a report in the morning that said, they’d issued sort of a preliminary results, and they were saying, as I read, it all sounded pretty positive and upbeat and then the share price takes like 30%.

Tony  05:12

So MML, SLR (Silver Lake Resources) and Aurelia AMI also, all had quarterly reports coming out in the last week or so and they all they all precipitated the share price decline, because of them, and for different reasons, I guess, but it’s a commonality. The Medusa one was because their cost went up for the quarter. So Medusa.

So, there’s a thing called ‘All in Sustainable Costs’ and it’s kind of a benchmark way of measuring costs if you’re a miner, particularly a gold miner and basically, it’s like cost of goods sold, if you’re owning an industrial company or a factory or something like that. But it does add in things like exploration costs and it does add in things like corporate overhead. So, it’s trying to give you an overall picture of costs, and to have one benchmark to compare minds with and it’s been a bit of a history to get to this stage.

So way back when, like 20 years ago, miners were always judged by their cash cost, which was just what they spent and then people said, hang on, if you’re doing lots of exploration, the cash cost might be misleading, because you’re just looking at the costs that are associated with mining, that you’re not exploring. If you’re looking at if you if you have to close the miners remediation costs, there’s a whole lot of things which are excluded by just the cash costs of mining the oil. So the mining association got together and came up with a sort of combined metric for it and that’s evolved into all in sustainable cost, which is the basic measure. The issue for Medusa was they came out with a quarterly report saying they’re all in sustainable costs was I think….

 

Cameron 07:14

It went up to US $1,594 per ounce up from $1,304 per ounce in March 2021.

Tony  07:26

Thanks for finding those figures quickly and if you think about it, the gold price is about 1800 US dollars per ounce. So at $1600 US per ounce for the last quarter, they’re closing in on breakeven, if not a loss situation for their mind. So that was the initial reason for the selloff. However, they’ve also in their call the announcement forecast their end of year results which are getting close to being finalized and the on sustainable costs for the year on average, we’re still down around 1300, which is pretty standard for the gold mining industry. Most miners are in that sort of 12 to 1400 range. Further analysis looks like for Medusa that they’re doing some work on the mine.

So up until recently, they’ve been a– what’s called a Shaft Mine. So you know, you get out a lift, an elevator to get to the mine face.

Cameron 08:24

He’s talking about shaft, shut your mouth.

Tony  08:31

And now they’re putting a ramp in. So, they’re putting out what’s called an Incline and so they can drive trucks up and down to the mine phase, which is expensive thing to do, which is what’s push their costs up because I started work on it and it’s generally lumped in with exploration costs, because as they drill to do that, they might find some more gold.

So, there’s a reason behind why their costs are up. But as often happens with quarterly reports, the market doesn’t stop and ask for a reason. It just jumps. Let’s sell the stock and that’s one of the things that you know, Buffett’s called out over the years and other people are calling out over the years is, we shouldn’t have quarterly reports, they just focusing everyone’s attention on the short term, you should be looking at the long term and this is a classic case.

Medusa are trying to improve their long term prospects, trying to make the mine more efficient, trying to get at a lower ore body by getting trucks down into the deepest part of the mine and not just guys in hats with jackhammers going down an elevator. So this is a classic case where short terms trumped long term. That’s that. There was a couple of other things with the other miners. So Silver Lake, and the Aurelia both had good quarterly reports but they called out the fact that they were starting to see inflation in the mining industry.

So contractors were costing more to hire, other service providers who are putting their fees up, and are also finding it difficult to manage the COVID situation with fly-in and fly-out workers, for example. So there’s there was good results, but then they kind of come with caveats and so again, people are like, in any sign of an issue jumping and dumping the stock. That leaves us with a sort of decision to make, what do we do? So Medusa Mining was in our dummy portfolio, it came back to the price that we paid for it and I decided to sell and to buy something else on our checklist and that kind of caught people by surprise, a couple of things. It’s really, on a case by case decision.

So, if we had bought Medusa for lower price, it’s still way above its sell price. If you weren’t about to lose money on it, then I’d say keep it. I would wait before buying it because as we’ve talked about before, I don’t like buying things that are in a short term decline and that’s where it stands at the current time for Medusa, it’s the share prices retreated, or I will wait to see turn the corner. So we know it with what we hope with through the bottom. So that’s the reason for rotating it in our dummy portfolio and that’s what we call rule one, ‘don’t lose money’ and the logic behind that is, if the share gets back to what I paid for it, then I prefer to sell it and buy something else and yes, I might lose out hypothetically, if the share price turns around from there.

But I don’t want to lose money, which I potentially could do, or could risk if I held on to it and the share price kept going down. So there’s two risks there:

  • One is that you miss out on the upside, because you sold out at breakeven.
  • The other one is that you save the risk of losing money because it keeps going down.

Essentially as caution, nothing for that insurance except for the transaction costs, I guess, because by selling at breakeven, we haven’t incurred any capital gains tax liability and we’re still exposed to upside because we bought another stock with the proceeds. So, I’d expect that stock to go up anyway, because it’s high up on our checklist.

So, I kind of see it as being almost a free insurance on not losing money. That’s why I sell and it comes back to breakeven. So for the people out there who are questioning why we’re selling Medusa, because it was at breakeven, and I didn’t want to take the risk of losing money on it. Now it can go both ways, we’ve had cases before, like we sold Ramelius resources out of the dummy portfolio last year, when it got back to our buy price, I voted rule one, and then Ramelius promptly turned around and rocketed up.

So it can’t go against you. But we would have bought something with the proceeds of selling Ramelius and that would have done well too because, we had a good year last year. So, I like to protect my downside and speaking of Aurelia Metals, which is one which I have held through my breakeven point, it’s still been going down. So that was one where I thought G is the market over selling this, it’s back to what I paid for it. It’s way above its sell price on our three point trendline. I’m going to keep it and it’s just cost you cost me money since then. So I kind of keep it in the portfolio now as a reminder to me to [laughter] next time it occurs.

Cameron 13:07

Well, I was going to ask you with MML I bought it on the 11th of June at its all-time peak of 94 cents and then it dropped within like a week down to 81 cents, dropped the further way down at 80 cents and I held on to it because it was way above its 3 point trendline then it shot back up to 93, 94 cents on the 19th of July and I was saying to Taylor, ‘See that’s why you hold’ and then I sold it a week later at 81 and a half cents again, and I dropped back down– I should have— if it drops so quickly after we bought it we maybe should have sold it faster just gone screw the 3 point trend line just you buy it and it drops just get get out.

Tony  13:46

Yes, I think that’s a safer rule. In which case you would have taken a 10% loss which you can use for capital gains in the future but you are covering that downside that, it’s not just a 10% loss that can keep going. You know, to be honest, like I just gave up bit of a thumbnail sketch on quarterly reports for those three gold companies, but I don’t want to get into having to know so much about gold mining that I need to analyze their quarterly reports and make an informed decision about the share price drop, is that a good or a bad thing? You know, I’m focused on our checklist metrics, and what to do from a portfolio point of view, rather than trying to work out whether the markets right or wrong about this particular gold stock.

Cameron 15:30

So, Mark, and a number of people asked us, with reference to MML, how does rule one override the 3 point trendline? If I understand what you’re saying, It’s, if you buy a stock, and then its share price takes a significant backward slide by 5 or 10%?

Tony  16:06

Well below what we paid for it.

Cameron 16:08

Anything…

Tony  16:09

Back to what we paid for it.

Cameron 16:10

Yes, if it goes down 1%?

Tony  16:15

Well, no, because oftentimes, we’ll buy something and it might drop 1%, because our buying may force the price up by 1%. So that often happens as [crosstalk] [laughter] Well you just may have bought on the wrong day and it can be a 1% swing.

Cameron 16:31

Well, the Cameron Curse says that, ‘Whenever I buy something, it immediately goes down’. So, I’ll be selling everything.

Tony  16:40

Well, I feel like I’ve got a curse on me because like we did a pull up part on Medusa mining like a week ago or something or two weeks ago.

Cameron 16:45

Yes, you were talking about how great it was on Phil Muscatello’s show.

Tony  16:48

Yes, that’s right. So that happens too.

Cameron 16:53

And you were doing MIL, is it was your other one you were doing that had the emphasis of matter. Hasn’t been a good week. [crosstalk] If you are buy something, just shows that you’re human, like all of us, Tony I like it. If you buy something and it drops by x percentage.

Tony  17:20

If you bought something and the next day, it was 1% Lower, I wouldn’t sell because I think that’s just sort of normal market volatility. But if you bought it and it went down, say 5%, definitely by 10%, I’d be selling out but the case I’m speaking of is, was Medusa mining where we bought it, it went up and it’s come back to the buy price, that’s much easier to put rules in place. [crosstalk] rule one.

Cameron 17:47

Yes, if you buy it and it goes up and it comes back to your buy price, sell it even if it’s above its 3 point sell line.

 

Tony  17:55

Correct.

Cameron 17:57

If you buy something and it immediately drops by 5 to 10%, sell it?

Tony  18:03

Sell it.

Cameron 18:05

And if you buy something and it’s been going up for a good period of time then the 3 point sell line is our benchmark for when we sell.

Tony  18:15

Correct.

Cameron 18:18

If neither of the first two conditions have been met condition three holds

Tony  18:28

I’ll just spend days reading contracts that’s like close 13.1 [crosstalk] [laughter]

Cameron 18:35

Yes, I heard that. Well, that helps me. I hope that helps everyone else out there and I will update the Bible to reflect that wording for future reference. I want to go check WWG now that I bought today and see how much it’s dropped since I bought it because I had to sell Humm today because Humm breached sell lied on Friday and then jumped up today after an hour after I sold it on the news of– it’s come back.

Tony  19:17

So not only is the Cameron Curse responsible for stocks going down. It’s like they go up after you’ve sold them. [laughter]

Cameron 19:26

$39 billion dollar acquisitions happen when I sell something.

Tony  19:34

I’ve got a stock I want you to sell.

 

Cameron 19:37

Imagine if I’d sold Afterpay and then that acquisition news came out that would be the real thing. WWG is up, that’s good. Now you wanted to talk about oil last week Tony, but we didn’t get time. Do you want to talk about oil still this week? I know you touched on it briefly last week real quick.

Tony  19:53

[crosstalk] When I raised it, it was getting down towards the commodity sell price but it’s back up, I think again into the mid-70s. So the sell price was about 66. So that’s not really an issue so much at the moment. It was when last week because OPEC had a bit of a falling out and there was some disagreement about what the volume target should be and basically, OPEC and Russia control what the oil price does by how much buy into the market. It’s a cartel. So there was some disagreement there.

Anyway, that’s now passed, and things have been smoothed over and the oil prices back up into the mid-70s. That’s good. But there’s been a couple of developments which are of interest. One is BHP have decided to sell off their oil business. So that was interesting, I thought, and partly, they’re trying to assuage investors who want them to get out of fossil fuels.

 

So they’re out of coal, and now they’re getting out of oil. But that means someone’s going to buy those oil assets and probably get a good deal, because I don’t think BHP will be an intentional seller, they’ll be a motivated seller, so they’ll probably not get the best price. But anyway, we’ll see what happens. I did think maybe Woodside or Santos might pick them up. But Santos have now gone into a tie up with Oil Search, which is a company that’s not only our checklist, but Santos is also has been a Papua New Guinea oil explorer. I think they are refiner but they certainly take the crude oil out and sell it. So export is what I am looking for. But they’ve had problems for a long time, either with PNG from sovereign risk point of view, or just managing, operating in that kind of environment and it’s always been a real hit and missile search.

So Santos tying up with them as seen by the market as being a way of improving the operational capabilities of Oil Search and Oil Search certainly does have lots of reserves.

So I think it’ll be a good thing for Santos, which is a share that I own it’s been a checklist for a while. The interesting thing about the Santos approach is that it’s a merger of equals. So it’ll have to be approved by shareholders of both companies and it’ll mean that— I think Santos from memory gets the majority stake in the combined or Santos shareholders get the majority stake in the combined company and Santos his board and management will take over and run it. The reason for that is, Santos doesn’t have the PE premium to go and make a script offer for all search and that will lead me to think a lot about what’s going on in the mergers and acquisitions market at the moment, it’s starting to feel a bit like 1985,86 all over again.

There’s lots of m&a activity and the sell the sale of Afterpay is a classic example of that and it gets driven from time to time in the market generally towards the end of a cycle a boom cycle and usually because it’s fueled by debt, or high PEs and so both of those are happening in the market at the moment. There are the market PE is up and that means that a company that’s on a high PE which I’m sure square would be, it’s a tech darling from the US, I don’t know what the PE for it, it’s probably triple digit. That allows them to offer a script to buy out other companies at a much more attractive basis, then paying cash for the shares, because their scripters is basically overvalued.

So, you see this happening time and time again, at this stage in the market. Companies who’ve got high PE ratio start taking over companies that have lower PE ratios. Even though Afterpay has a high one, and leveraging that difference in the PE ratio, which is more attractive than paying cash for shares. The other way that they can do it is to get lots of bit which is possible now because interest rates are low and I think the classic example of that at the moment is the Boral takeover by seven group, which has basically happened, seven have had to borrow a lot of money to have the takeover go through because they weren’t really trying to take over the company, you know, just trying to increase their shareholding and more people then they thought sold into their offer, which wasn’t that great. It wasn’t much about what the share price had been historically.

And now seven have a lot of debt, which they’ll pay down because borrower selling assets including a US business and then they’ll return that capital to shareholders and now seven being the biggest shareholder we’ll get the majority share of that. But I think you know, there’s still potentially have a fair bit of debt to deal with and that’s fine when interest rates are low, but when interest rates get start to rise again, we’ll see, which should have taken over experts who have been over leveraged and we’ll also see that when interest rates start to rise, which will affect how OIP ratio stocks and PEs will drop and that will just stop takeover activity from them.

So it will be interesting over the next probably 1-3 years to see how all these mergers and acquisitions finish up and they can as they did in 87, when you had all the corporate raiders like Ron Brierley and Adelaide Steamships and Alan Bonds, borrowing heavily to buy out other companies, and then when interest rates started to rise, they all went bankrupt and that sort of threw the market into chaos. That may happen again, may not but it may happen again. So I think we’re starting to see the seed sign of that kind of play out by the end of this boom cycle. Not trying to forecast but I’m saying I’ve seen that before.

Cameron 26:06

Did I think this time it’s different, Tony?

Tony  26:09

I do not know.

Cameron 26:11

FMG

Tony  26:14

I just wanted to make a couple of points. It’ll be interesting to see what happens when they report and Rio has reported and has now come on to the checklist. Quite high up in our top scorers. I still got a QAV score of 0.58. So Rio Tinto is another iron ore mine, which is a competitor for FMG.

Cameron 26:34

Sorry, while you’re on that, what’s your price to cash flow for Rio because mines like over 10. I saw a lot of people on Facebook saying it was on the checklist but on the scorecard but for me the PCF is very high.

Tony  26:51

Hang on. I’m just looking up for you. I’m getting for Rio price to cash flow. I have 1.6

Cameron 26:58

What? It was 10. When did it stop being 10? I ran up a scorecard last weekend it was 10. I mean, I did [crosstalk] All right. So what changed between when I ran this Friday morning and Friday afternoon?

Tony  27:35

Whole of the cash. Yeas so the last numbers were from December and you know that now they’ve had an iron ore price above 200 bucks for another six months. It just does wonderful things for these iron ore miners. So we’ll see the same thing with Fortescue Metals Group, but they’re already on the top scorers list. But yes, Rio is now on. So I just wanted to want to talk about that before we go back for the Fortescue Metals.

So, it’s now in the company reporting season, if you go into for those people who are Stock Doctor subscriptions, you can look at the recent updates, which is worth doing at the moment until we start getting into the real bulk of the reporting season, which is next week and the week after but at the moment, you can go on the Stock Doctor and click on Tools and then halfway down you’ll see recent updates and if you go into that, and I select all companies and then for the update types, I deselect everything except for company financials updated and then click Refresh and I’ve set the date range for this past week. There’s only been 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 companies reported right in the last week.

So these are the ones that are starting to report for the financial season. I think most of those listed investment companies which reported early so we’ve got stocks called Whitefield which is an LLC, Brickworks Investment (BKI investments LLC), Magellan financial LLC. But we have got Rio in there and one that just came up in the last few hours called Oceana Gold, which we can look at. So rather than do a complete update, what I do for this is, I go back into the tools, do a stock filter for today.

Download a new QAV download, but all I do is select the row with Rio in it and it just popped into my most recent download to the quick and dirty way of doing an update for Rio.

Cameron 29:58

Sorry, just walk me through that again slowly. So you go into stock filters and then do what’s?

Tony  30:06

Select the QAV filter, Run it, Save it to the CSV and then rather than go through the whole process of doing an update of my master spreadsheet which, we, as we know, can take half an hour or so. There’s only been one company that’s reported. I’ll just open that download. Find Rio Tinto. Do a search and just pull out that line and just chose a new updated financials and paste it in here, to the latest download. You made me laugh. My tea went down the wrong way.

Cameron 31:01

I’ve set a benchmark. I have to try and do that once a week. See if I can make Tony do a spit take with his [unintelligible 31:08]. So you grab the real line here. Copy it and paste it in

Tony  31:20

[crosstalk] QAV download data tab. I then go through and check the manually entered scores for Rio. Well, as soon as you do that, copy and paste, you’ll see the price to cash flows changed. It’s dropped back to 1.6.

Cameron 31:40

And I’ve gone up cut 7.11. Now what? Yes, we have a look. I mean, I haven’t done the manual data, but that’s not going to change the price.

Tony  31:52

They’re going to change that. Okay, so I’ve got Rio Tinto. Let me just go from left to right in the columns. I’ve got 30th of the sixth 21 is the latest. Yep, update. Sorry, let me just freeze the panes again.

Cameron

“Freeze the panes and the rest will follow. Freeze your pains Don’t forget to swallow.”

Tony 

Equity 77 billion. Average trade. 132 million. EPS before abnormals is 1.5 1500 cents. EPS afterwards 1497 EPS forecast $2.10 a share. So 2100 cents, share price I’m using 1.3169.

Cameron 32:48

I’ve got 1.3307.

Tony  32:51

OK, I will update.

Cameron 32:52

Not going to make a huge difference but yes.

Tony  32:55

Price to consensus target 100%, price to Lincoln Val 102%, market cap 49 billion, net operating cash $30.5 billion, free cash flow 1300 cents, borderline star stock, 371 million shares outstanding, 6.8% yield, etc. etc. ROE of 35%. Stock Doctor is giving us a price to cash flow of 7.10.

Cameron 33:31

Oh, that’s what I’m looking at.

Tony  33:33

So we need to go across to column AG.

Cameron 33:38

Oh, well I’m not using your sheet I’m using the Flitty sheet, let me go and have a look on the other tab.

Cameron 33:51

[irrelevant talk] RIO’s is not even showing up in this tab.

Tony  33:58

So I’m getting operating cash per share of 82 bucks and the price to operating cash flow 1.62. It is strange though normally Stock Doctor is pretty similar to what I calculate it to be.

Cameron 34:13

Yes, well, I think Eddie Donato on Facebook when I raised this question, said something about different ways of looking at the shares.

Tony  34:26

Stock Doctor use– We use shares on issue and Stock Doctor use diluted shares.  So, let me just compare the shares in [crosstalk] shares outstanding. I’ve got 371 million. What is Stock Doctor saying?

Cameron 34:48

OK, now in the QAV analysis I’m getting priced operating cash flow 1.62– difference to Stock Doctor 340%.

Tony  35:01

It’s worth investigating, isn’t it? Let’s have a look at that. So I call up Rio and Stock Doctor. That is good, that’s why we put that check in there to see if there’s a big difference. Now the shares on issue will be in the financial statements section, financial metrics.

Cameron 35:28

Eddie said, ‘This is where you have to decide whether to use Stock Doctor diluted weighted number of ordinary shares of 1628 million results in price to cash flow of 7.11, and score around 0.08 without entering manual data, versus fully paid ordinary shares of 371 million results in price to cash flow of 1.62 and score around 0.454 without entering manual data.

Tony  35:58

So yes, that’s exactly right there. Let’s explore it. So Stock Doctor is saying diluted weighted number of ordinary shares is 1.6 million. We’re say shares outstanding is 371. That’s a big difference, isn’t?

Cameron 36:20

It is.

Unknown Speaker  36:23

Why would there be such a big difference in those diluted weighted number of ordinary shares?

Cameron 36:30

What’s 1.3 billion shares between friends, Tony?

Tony  36:37

That’s a lot, isn’t it? Let’s call up the annual report. Even though I have to use the old one because the new one it won’t be out yet. I don’t think…

Unknown Speaker  36:45

I, just between you and me. I’m flagging that we’re 37 minutes into the show.

Tony  36:51

OK, well, you want me to take this offline and come back with a reason?

Cameron 36:55

No, it’s fine. I just want to let you know, because I don’t want to work you for two hours like I did last week. I felt bad. So I just want to keep us both cognizant of the time. That’s all.

Tony  37:08

Yes, OK.

Cameron 37:09

You know, the show is the show. So if we just do two questions, and we do two questions, if we don’t really have time for that, I think anyone’s going to mind.

Tony  37:17

Well, I’m going to have to noodle around here and find out what the differences so let’s pop that and I’ll come back to people.

Cameron 37:22

Yes, OK. Thanks.

Tony  37:25

I’ll send you a stock journal. Maybe tomorrow, and I’ll go through it and try and work it out. Good point, that shouldn’t be that far apart. Because right [crosstalk 37:33] only difference between fully issued shares and diluted, it’s just things like options but they can’t be six times the number of shares on issue as options there is got it. I think there’s a mistake there somewhere. I have to track it down.

Cameron 37:49

Right. Oh, good pick up. Tony and Eddie. On the Facebook page. Eagle-Eyed Eddie as I’ve often said. So “Hey, Cameron in the editing room here on Tuesday, the third of August, Tony did post on Facebook about an hour ago. I think there is an error in Stock Doctor looks like they have only counted the shares listed in Australia. Rio has a London listing as well looks like all the other data is for the combined company. I’ve just emailed Stock Doctor to confirm. I believe the correct shares on issue should be 1618.1 million. I get this from their annual results, which say for the purpose of calculating basic earnings per share the weighted average number of Rio Tinto PLC, and Rio Tinto Limited shares outstanding during the period was 1618.1 million being the weighted average number of Rio Tinto PL c shares outstanding of 1246.9 million plus the weighted average number of Rio Tinto limited shares outstanding of 371.2 million”.

Then Tony says, “Using 1618.1 million shares on issue changes the QAV score for Rio to 0.10” and then Tom Stevens, replied Tony, “Thanks very much for looking into it and following up with Stock Doctor, I think you’ve got the Stock Doctor hotline, they’ve updated it already. So that answers that issue and it drops down from 0.54 down to 0.10 on the scorecard’. But, again, this strikes me as another example of what happens when we have many eyes  in QAV Club, looking at this stuff, picking up anomalies and errors, and then we can address them”. So yes, another great example of the power of the QAV community in action.

Tony  39:49

So that was Rio, I was going to talk about Fortescue Metals Group, I’ll just do it quickly. Really just a bit of commentary because I’m starting to see again, some sort of late stage market activity. So the fact that there’s a high dividend being paid is a way of twiggy for us taking money off the table, because he’s not going to keep it invested in Fortescue, and try and grow the business, he’s paying it out as dividends, which is a way of him getting money out of the company. They’ve got a dividend payout ratio, I think it’s now about 80%, which is quite high and then they’ve got other 20%, that remains at least 10%, I think is going to their new Fortescue green ventures, business, which is trying to use hydrogen to make steel, amongst other things, which is a pivot away from mining iron ore.

So that’s another sort of take on the light stage checklist and then at the most, they’re going to reimburse 10% in the business. So that’s getting pretty low for any sort of business to only need 10% capital to either just to spend on the business, either replacing things or exploring or putting in new infrastructure to ship all that kind of stuff. So I’m kind of forming the view that Fortescue is being set up to survive once the iron ore price turns down. Question is, when that’s going to happen? I don’t know. But sort of interesting situation there. Twiggy, for us is probably the best entrepreneur I’ve seen or one of the best anyway, in Australia’s history.

So, you know, if he thinks that hydrogen and the production of steel using hydrogen is the way to go, then he’s probably right and that could easily blow up into being a big growth area for the company, in which case  Fortescue will be OK, but let’s just see how it plays out.

Cameron 41:50

So this new green investments company that he’s doing is a subsidiary of FMG. I thought it was a separate interest.

Tony  41:59

No, it’s a part of FMG. So he does have lots of other interests, which he’s diversifying into as well. But I know FMG is trying to find a way to use hydrogen to make steel, and therefore I guess, sustain its market.

 

 

Cameron 42:18

So the 80% he’s taking off the table is what he’s putting into his outside of Fortescue investments.  Fortescue itself is trying to pivot.

Tony  42:31

Yes. Anyway, that’s what we’re interested. We’ll see what happens when the results come out, we’ll get paid a big dividend. The share price is going to be driven by the iron ore price, which has gone on for a lot higher and a lot longer than people thought and who knows where it’s going to go to? I’m not trying to forecast that. But yes, it’s of interest that Twiggy is saying, ‘Hmm, this may be getting towards the end’.

Cameron 42:55

He just dug all the iron ore out of Australia, there’s nothing left to dig in.

Tony  43:00

There’s still plenty of iron ore in Australia. What he’s saying is it might be worthless. We can’t go on forever in this purple patch, which is true and he’s saying I need some money to shore up my position when it does turn down.

Cameron 43:16

OK, do you want to go on with these other news stories or do you want to jump into questions?

Tony  43:21

No, let’s jump into questions. That’s fine.

Cameron 43:23

Stock of the week. Cash converters. For your pulled pork  this week. [crosstalk]

Tony  43:31

Let’s see how I go. Can I drop the share price on Cash Converters  [laughter]?

Cameron 43:36

Don’t, because I own it, so be careful here TK, I also owned MML, so you ruined MML for me. Don’t ruin this one.

Tony  43:46

Well, I still own MML too. So it ruined it for me as well.

Cameron 43:50

You can afford everything ruined every now and again. I can’t say much.

Tony  43:56

You will, one day. So, CCV (Cash Converters) most people wouldn’t know what Cash Converters are. It’s basically a pawn shop franchise. [crosstalk]

Cameron 44:10

OK, that’s less interesting.

Tony  44:13

Yes, so it’s a place you can go and trade in secondhand goods and either get paid for them or get a loan and you can come back later and buy them back. Been around for a long time, reasonably checkered career being looked at by various governments to see whether they were charging you serious interest in the past, and asking people to take out loans on difficult conditions. So they’ve weathered all those storms and are now coming back and doing OK.

So whatever you think of Cash Converters, from the point of view of providing an outlet for people to sell goods cheaply, through which they may have come through, come via interesting means, not necessarily purchasing them originally. I’m trying to tread carefully. I remember when I was living in North Carlton when I first moved to Melbourne and we were robbed and lost my guitar and the cops just said, just walk up and down live on the street all the pawn shops. You’ll get it back. Don’t worry about it.  [Laughter] Sure enough there it was.

Cameron 45:23

You found it? Why did you do then just tell the cops and they went and…

Tony  45:29

No, I bought it back for 100 bucks.

Cameron 45:32

Oh, right. You still have it?

Tony  45:36

No, it was terrible guitar. [laughter] Very cheap strap copy anyway.

Cameron 45:42

Yes, I’ve got one of those. Anyway ……

Tony  45:45

[crosstalk] But yes, great. So, the Cash Converter business is exactly though. it’s allowing people to get short term loans, I’ve done a lot of work moving into loaning people money, because I now have a lot of data about who they loan to, what their repayment schedules are? And I’ve tailored products around that sort of end of the market. So that’s been working well for them. Anyway, I don’t want to focus on the business per se, but look at the numbers. So they have a QAV of 0.44 at the moment. Reasonable size, but not overly big. So average daily transaction of 90,000. Quality score is pretty good 10 out of 13 for 77%. The yield is 3.7%, which is a good yield and they commence paying dividends last half. So that’s actually a thing in their favor, I think to the fact that when a company is confident enough, the board’s competent enough to pay a dividend, I think is actually a positive. So, it might be something to put in the checklist going forward, but I haven’t yet but anyway, it’s got a dividend.

Now, it’s above the mortgage rate. Probably one of the biggest things about it is that, its equity per share is 50 cents per share price is at 26 or so 26— 26.5 today . So it’s actually has more equity per share than you’re asked to pay. So your classic case here of buying a dollars worth of value for 80 cents. So that gives us some good scores when we look at the price to book ratio.

I’ve noticed a couple of times now with my analysis in Stock Doctor, when I download price, the consensus forecast is coming up as a one on the checklist. But if I go into the front page of Stock Doctor, there’s no consensus forecast. So not sure what’s going on there. It’s showing that Cash Converters is below it’s consensus forecasts, but it’s not telling us what that consensus forecast is.

So I’ve raised this with Stock Doctor last week, I haven’t heard back on this but a case with this company a couple of other ones. So the score may go up or down or sideways or go down slightly. If we lose a point there one Stock Doctor get to the bottom of it, but we’ll see. What else the strong financial health and it’s been steady for a while.

Again, price to operating cash flow quite low of 1.74 PE of 9, return equity of 5.8686 which is the low but that’s probably because there’s lots of equity. So given that there’s 50 cents a share of equity, you’d have to make a lot of money to give a good ROE on that stock. So that’s one of the ways that ROE can mislead, but put all that together  and it’s quite high on our top scorers list and it had a 3 point turn around in the last six months and it was off the checklist because of sentiment. but it is come back on in the last month or two.

Cameron 48:47

And the most important thing on the checklist I think with CCC is; I actually bought it for my own portfolio late last week. So the share price has obviously come back a bit since then. So it’s a good time for people to have a look at it.

You’re welcome everybody.

I should sell it immediately.

It will definitely go up if you do that.

All right. Well, let’s move on to questions. Tony, we got a few this week, don’t know if we’ll get through them all. A couple leftover from last week that we should start with this one’s from John, “Hi! Cam and Tony. A while ago, Tony and Dylan did some great work looking at which factors on the checklist had the biggest impact on QAV performance the average 20% performance attorneys got over the years as a combination of all the factors and the sentiment from memory Dillon and Tony found that the price to operating cash flow made up about 13% of the 20% total and growth in asset value was around 5%. Once Tony and Dylan have completed their analysis, are there any plans to adjust the total score calculation to weight each factor according to the research, maybe we could run a challenger portfolio to test it, obviously because the existing system works so well. There may not be any great rush to do this”. Cheers, John.

Tony  50:03

Thanks John. So you’re right, the two big heavy lifters for us a price to operating cash flow and increasing net equity. It’s on the list for Dylan, we’ve spent a lot of time trying to get 3 point trend lines working and shout out to Brett for his help with that but the problem is at the moment that, even though we’ve got a formula, which looks like it works, it’s just becoming too computationally intensive to go back over 10 years worth of shared data and back test things. So trying to find a way of achieving something which is robust in terms of drawing a line, but also computationally easier to make the backtesting feasible, otherwise it just runs for years.

So let’s slow this down more than I would have liked and the fact that Dylan only really works on things, on his holidays, he does work on them when schools in, but he’s obviously focusing on school… Let’s just slow this down. So I was hoping to be ahead of where we are, but we’re not, but we’re getting close. Once we get the trendline worked out, then we can backtest things like playing around with the score for things like price to operating cash flow and net operating equity.

Interestingly, the price to operating cash flow has a big impact on our checklist anyway, because we divide the quality score by the price to operating cash flow and as we’ve seen before, that price to operating cash flow of less than 7 really drives the numbers for QAV. So I don’t know if we’ll play around that much with that. We’ll just keep dividing by that to get the final QAV number. But certainly, other things in the checklist will have their weightings change once we can do some testing and optimize it. Apologies it’s taking too long, but that’s just where it is.

Cameron 51:58

Yes, it’s good. But at some point, we may have a modified checklist that has some different weightings.

Tony  52:06

Yes, correct.

Cameron 52:08

Thank you, John. Elmar says, “I’m hearing a lot of resource development in our area – gold mine by De Grey, magnesium mined by Element 25. Elmar works in the mines over in WA, and I’m wanting to throw money at them in order to gain the maximum possible!!! I know it’s speculative (foolish), but I’d like to know how or where Tony would go to do a more in depth analysis to take out more of the speculation”. Cheers, Elma.

Tony  52:42

Well, easy answer the checklist by the miners of the scoring well on my checklist, I mean, to use those two examples that Elmar mentioned, ‘De Grey’s Mining and Element 25’. If you look at those from a checklist point of view, it’s the greys or they both had negative operating cash flow for I think there are, if not, then most of their entire life and the Grey listed in 2002, and Element listed in 2011. So that’s a long time to be ramping up a mind and not producing any sales to cover the costs. Doesn’t mean they [unintelligible 53:22] next half, they may well turn around, but that’s when I’ll be looking at them. But you know, both of these are kind of typical specky miners their announcement driven. They’ll continually try and put out a positive spin on their latest quarterly report, on their latest ore update, on the latest price of whatever they’re mining, and try and drive a share price investment that way. But yes, the QAV process ignores all that.

So I’ve never really looked hard at them and I wait until I start shipping and we can see some cash flow, see whether all that 10 or 11, 12 years of investments been worthwhile. The other thing about companies like that is; they inevitably will ask for more money from their shareholders, they’ll say, well, we’re getting close to our first shipment of ore  if only we could have this rail line between our mine and the coast. We’d be able to ship and then you’re up for more money. So whatever it is, rail lines

Cameron 54:20

Sound like exploration. They sound like documentary filmmakers, Tony.

Tony  54:24

Yes.

Cameron 54:26

We need a little bit of extra money to go and do a reshoot?

Tony  54:31

Yes, correct. Subtitle it, translated to different languages. So I’m not going to touch them. I think Element 25 has recently said, they’re going to ship their first door soon so we may see some positive cash flow out of them but that’s the time to look at them. Yes, she’ll give up the first bit of specky share price gain. But on the other hand, you might have invested for 11 years, waiting for that first shipment before to turn the best into a proper business and not just the guy with a pick out in the desert somewhere, building stuff. But there are resources out there, people do deep analysis onto these companies and can provide good advice.

Tony  55:13

So, Tim Treadgold is the resource I often go to, to look at these analyses on mines. I hate to say but hotcopper often tracks these kinds of stocks and will have opinions but they are opinions rather than being necessarily based in hard data and the same with Google News. If you see a share price, suddenly go up or go down, have a look at Google News and see if we can work out what drove it but these companies are usually driven by announcements. Yes, we’ve just struck a new load , our exploration has been good. We have more reserves under management, all that kind of stuff. But they’re not the kinds of things that I want to look at or invest in.

Cameron 55:56

So the fact that a mine is doing a lot of development, it doesn’t really impress you a great deal. It’s you want to see money in the bank?

Tony  56:08

Yes, it’s kind of worries me in some respects, because they would have asked people to pay for that recently, or they’re about to ask people to pay for it in the future. So yes, you need to wait until you get some cash flow and the pay for these kinds of things before you can really assess whether it’s worthwhile from an investing point of view.

Cameron 56:28

OK, thanks. Thank you, Elma. John, again, or another John, who knows?

“Hi, Cam! how are you? ”

“I’m good. Thanks, John. Thanks for asking.”

In the last podcast, you mentioned the frustration of calculating your annual return when your capital invested varies over the year, there’s a couple of go, and by the way, I’ve reached out to Stock Doctor and asked them if they can make someone available to come on and talk about how to do that in Stock Doctor and they haven’t really got back to me on that yet. But Fingers crossed. ‘This information is all held by your online broker’, says John and so it can be calculated by them. Where are you several online brokers, unfortunately– You can set the date range and then tell it to do a time weighted average or a money weighted average calculation. The money weighted works well if you’ve been moving capital in and out, you can also decide on a benchmark, and it plots a graph showing how the capital is moved over time.

‘Another tip to look out for the broker should be able to provide a list of transactions that you can download into MS Excel or Google Sheets and send to your accountant. This speeds up the capital gains tax calcs for your tax returns. Considering cost per trade is only around $6 is a pretty good service’. I think he’s talking about interactive brokers there, as the broker. ‘It is pretty good service and probably should be part of the decision as to which broker to pick I imagine some of the more expensive brokers have this service to would be interesting to know. Looking forward to hearing your son break into a podcast with his lightsaber’. Well, he could except he and his mother took the lightsabers to a park to play with about a month ago and then about two weeks later, Fox was like where’s my lightsabers and we realized they’d left him there. Left him at the park. So lightsabers gone. But thank you, John. Yes, money waited, time waited. I know that both [unintelligible 58:26] and share side and Stock Doctor all have those. But I’m still not sure how it works or how to read it. I guess I could read up and understand it a little bit.

Tony  58:37

Yes, appreciate that, and as we spoke about before, I think if you’ve got a small portfolio, we’ve taken money in and out, any of those calculations are going to look a bit strange. So, I thought a bit more about what we were talking about. The way that I probably approach it is to drop your trades into Excel and then trade by trade or company by company, look at how much capital you deployed in that investment and whether it made money or not and then do a weighted average. So basically, for example, if you had $1,000 in MML, for three months, and it went up 100 bucks, let’s say 10% profit over three months, just as an example. If you had 1000 bucks in CCP called critical and it went up, you know, if you made $300 over 2 months, or 3 months, then you’ve got a 30% return and if you add up all of those different transactions for the companies that you’ve had, and then divide them to get an average per month and then multiply that by 12. That’s probably the closest you’ll get to a weighted average for the year. Does that make sense?

 

 

Cameron 59:47

So get the returns for each stock and then work out what the return is per month depending on how long you have carry the investment.

Tony  1:00:00

You might need to do it per week if you’ve sold them quickly.

Cameron 1:00:04

And then add all those final results up.

Tony  1:00:09

Yes, so you’ll need to take into account the capital, so it’s a weighted average. So if you had stock A with $1,000 in it for this period, and you made a loss this much, that’s the first entry in your spreadsheet and then stop be do the same. So you get us, tell you up all the capital that was invested, tell you up all the money you made and get an average over that time period, whether it’s weeks or months, and then multiply that out to get a yearly value. Yes, a bit of mucking around

Cameron 1:00:42

Dylan busy over the next week. I get… [laughter] Dave from Nui phonetic 01:00:49]., “Hi Cameron longtime listener, medium term subscriber, first time questioner. First, thank you wholeheartedly to you and Tony for what you’re doing with QAV in short, this shit works”. Thanks for confirming Dave from Nui. “Performance. I started allocating share investing capital the QAV in early April and now I have 60 to 70% of my book in top score accompanies, my winners slash/ratio and returns are aligned with the long term QAV results. I’ve missed a couple of the big winners now a few solid performers and had a dud or two I’m cautious of the late market stage, I literally started at all-time highs, so I’m using tight trailing sell orders set up break even once a stock has risen a bit to respect Buffett Rule#1 where you’re way ahead of me Dave, this has exited me early pre three BTL on a few positions a couple of those have cost me a couple saved me. I’m also doing a bit of fudging e.g. I have bought from down the bottom of the list when I like a company.

I’ve scored a couple of winners doing this that are continuing to perform. Also, I’ve plucked 3 companies off the watch list prior to a by 3 PTL signal, on the basis they will keep going, 2 have worked, 1 is hovering where I bought it. I also had 2 I was looking at but didn’t buy and went on to return positively 40% and 100%. So this is something I’m grappling with how to identify the stocks that have started their uptrend and will keep going and getting in earlier than the 3 point trend line by signal and therefore exponentially increasing gains from the winners and initial observation a common theme in the watch list winners has been very low price to cash suggesting the market can’t resist them eventually, or very high quality, suggesting the uptrend is based on solid foundations will continue to 3 PTL breach”.

Let me stop there and pause for breath. Tony, any comments on that so far?

Tony  1:02:53

Sounds like Dave invests like I do. You know, looking at the watch lists, occasionally buying something from the bottom. Signing up for rule one, all those things are exactly what I do, so good on you. In terms of getting things earlier, it’s very tempting and occasionally, I do but I’ve been a bit more disciplined lately. It can go either way.

So what he’s saying is that, if you think about the banks last year, generally what happens is we’ll get a company that comes out of reporting season, where the score is has gone from bad to good, the quality score, I mean, and even the QAV score has gone from bad to good if you ignore the fact that they haven’t had reached their 3 point buy price and so you have a look at the graph and you say well, that the share price is a long way from the buy price, but this is going up and then it’s just the lineup, it’s just a captain’s choice, it’s a pick as to whether you want to invest in that company or not, and take the risk that keeps on going.

So that’s certainly open to people to do. I’ve done it from time to time and generally it’s with a company I know a lot about and I guess that was the basis for fudging some of those companies as well that I was looking for a buy price that was lower than it would have been drawing a traditional 3 point trend line. So I get it– Yes, it’s the age old story, there’s so many stocks on the top scorers list, you need to go looking for things early. Really, that’s kind of where my thinking is at the moment. But yes, certainly go for it if you want to.

Cameron 1:04:37

Dave continues, so read Roger Montgomery’s book valuable. One of the key takeaways for me was to look for companies that have an ROE of greater than 20% and then buy them when they’re cheap. So I set up a filter in Stock Doctor. By my reckoning 90 plus percent of companies this filter returns have appeared on QAV lists since I’ve been involved and more importantly, most of the real big winner I’ve seen it there too, IIS, GRR, CAI  etc. So I’m considering adding an item to the checklist is ROE greater than 20%? 1 for a ‘yes’ blank for a ‘no’. So it’s a booster, would appreciate Tony’s thoughts.

Tony  1:05:15

Yes, look ROE always come up a couple of times from our listeners and it’s the kind of first metric that investors will tell you to look at. But that’s had a couple of downsides to it over the years, the first one being that, it means that management can gain ROE to make it look more attractive for people to invest in the company and we already saw before with Cash Converters, they have a relatively low ROE of about 5 or 6%, which I think is a bad metric. In their case, they just have lots of equity. So equity is the divider in return on equity and if you have lots of equity, which was something we look for, then you have to have a really, really big return to also have a high ROE. So that’s the first thing.

Second thing is ROE can be manipulated by taking on debt and remember that equity is assets minus liabilities.

So I would much rather buy a company with low debt, and low ROE because there’s lots of equity, rather than buy a company with high ROE. Because the equity has shrunk because they take on lots of debt and the this was the case, probably not so much these days. A lot of analysts have learned their lessons but slowly over the last 20 years, maybe back in the 90s in particular, there was this whole mantra of getting rid of lazy balance sheets and corporate advisors, stock analysts, investment bankers were just ascend on companies like a Cash Converters, and say to them, you’ve got a lazy balance sheet, your ROE is low. You’ve got all these assets you could be leveraging, why aren’t you out there borrowing money and doubling in size and of course, all that did was introduce a whole heap of risk to these companies, which were really solid, really well managed, but they were set upon by people who wanted to get a high ROE and so you know, that’s what happens in the investment world

People focus on one metric, and it’s a bit like your health, you can’t sort of say, you know, eating fish or supplements will lead to a longer life because you know, it’s a good antioxidant. That’s just one part of a healthy diet, focus on the rest of your diet rather than just taking a fish oil supplement. It’s a bit the same with our weight. So it’s one metric, and it’s been done to death over the years, it’s been gained over the years.

So I’m a bit wary of it. Having said that, I went through the top scorers and had a look and there’s kind of a split between high ROE, as Dave said, but there’s also lots of companies which have low ROE, and some will even have negative ROE. So it’s actually an interesting thing to analyze. So I’m going to ask Dave to set up a couple of portfolios in Stock Doctor, or whatever uses just a couple of dummy portfolios, and I’ll do the same, I’ll go back through my old records and try and do it from maybe 18 months ago, and just put the top scores list into those with are we above 20%, and those below 20% and let’s just see if there’s any meaningful difference to those two pools of stocks, and maybe we have a third one those with negative ROE, because that’s also on our list.

So I’m looking at companies like mine, which have a negative ROE, but they’ve done well for us. Just as well as those with a high ROE we’ve done— So let’s have a look and then come back and compare results and yes, maybe he’s right, maybe we should put the foot on the scales when it comes to high ROE but let’s just prove it first.

 

Cameron 1:09:01

There you go, Dave, there’s your homework. Well, Dave’s got a few more questions and there’s a couple of others from Duncan and Michael, but I think we’re well over time. So, let’s save those for next week time.

Tony  1:09:13

OK, sure.

Cameron 1:09:16

Quickly watched anything, read anything that you can recommend to us this week?

Tony  1:09:21

No, not really, been watching the golf at the Olympics, which has been fun. I can’t recommend anything else. Watched a couple of crappy movies, which I wouldn’t recommend, reading. So you think you know what’s good for you, which is the Norman Swan book, which is good. That’s why I talked about supplements, because he poopooed supplements in it. So that’s a good read  and that’s probably following on from the comments last week on Facebook group about being immortal and what the compound interest would be like if you had longer lives. It’s worth doing

Cameron 1:09:57

By the way a very old friend of mine who runs the biggest supplements company in Australia told me over lunch a few years ago, ‘Yes, most supplements are bullshit. They do nothing for you. They’re all placebo’.

Tony  1:10:10

Yes. I remember reading the ‘Singularity is Near’ and then the sequel to that by Kurzweil . I think it was something about live long enough to live forever and he talks about how to live longer and take supplements and then he refers you to his website where he sells supplements and I just thought it’s a bit self-serving.

Cameron 1:10:31

He doesn’t make enough money at Google.

Tony  1:10:33

Yes, that’s right.

 

 

 

Cameron 1:10:36

I watched Nights of Cabiria, a Fellini film, 1957, Award for Best Foreign movie and I think his wife one Best Actress in a foreign movie or something for. If you like a bit of old Italian classics?

Tony  1:11:03

I do.

Cameron 1:11:04

Well unfortunately at this juncture, we had technical problems with Tony’s microphone and we had to just cut it. So that is the show for this week. I do want to point out that, again, I’m editing this the following day, Tuesday, the 3rd of August,  CCV, Tony’s pulled pork of the week has now dropped more than 5% below what I paid for it last week. So I am going to have to invoke rule one, the episode didn’t even go out and this has happened. Tony just had to talk about it and I don’t know. the internet, the ears,  everybody’s listening. It’s already dropped below my buy price and now I’m going to have to sell it as soon as I finish editing the show.

So thanks a lot Tony. Hope you pick something different next week, I have to make a rule from now on when Tony picks a pulled pork he doesn’t do stuff that I own. On the flip side, glad he didn’t talk about AIS because it’s up 14% already today and it’s only 1:30 in the afternoon. So that’s a beauty. But yeah, CCV dropped 5% today for some reason.

Anyhoo, them’s the breaks. Have a great week, folks. Talk to you soon. Ciao. Stay safe!