Gunns
have been trying to point out ( Gunns after the deluge ) how they differ from the
recently fallen Timbercorp and Great Southern.
What about Forest Enterprises Australia Ltd
(FEA)? Any similarities?
A common thread in all the MIS companies is
that ANZ in the banker for all four. Little wonder they’re nervous. With such
exposure it’s little wonder they were so ruthless with Great Southern. They
didn’t allow them an inch. Forced them into voluntary administration and then 2
days later appointed their own Receiver to take charge.
FEA was the Leader of the Pack 10 years ago
when Northern Tasmanian was invaded by MIS companies acquiring farming
properties.
For about the last 6 or 7 years they’ve
withdrawn from the front line and tried to develop a more stable business.
A recent podcast available via the ASX site
dated 27th May 2009 has attempted to downplay the importance of MISs to FEA’s
business. The approach was to look at composition of gross revenue.
Revenue from MIS activities in 2007/08 was
$106 million (51%), timber revenue was $39 million (18%), and woodchips revenue
from a 50% joint venture $23 million or 12%. The revaluations of land and
standing timber assets contributed 17% of gross revenue. (this latter is
included as revenue for accounting purposes, although only a book entry).
In 2007/08 MIS activities contributed $70
million to the bottom line, sawn products $3 million and woodchips just under
$2 million. After deducting items like interest, the profit before tax was $67
million.
The bottom line was almost exclusively
produced by MIS activities.
In the first 6 months of 2008/09, MIS
contributed $7 million to the bottom line, woodchips about $200,000 and sawn
timber a loss of $2.7 million. After interest expenses and unallocated
overheads the loss was $6 million.
The key to FEA’s short term future is new MIS
sales.
Whilst the cash for MIS sales comes in before
30th June, most is not booked as revenue until the following year. A total of
$57 million received before 30th June 2008 will be included as MIS revenue in
2008/09 when plantations are established. Other MIS revenue comes from ongoing
MIS fees. MIS revenue of $37million for the first 6 months produced MIS profits
of $7million (referred to above).
Hence the accounts for 2008/09 will still show
adequate MIS revenue, as most had been collected prior to 30th June 2008.
But the most crucial question is to what
extent new MIS sales in the second half of 2008/09 will fill up the cash tin
which is starting to look a little empty.
The business produced $66 million cash from
operations in 2007/08. But the first 6 months of this year the cash from operations
was minus $5 million compared to plus $6 million for the corresponding period
in the previous year (although $7 million of this turnaround can be explained
by the 2008 tax bill that needed to be paid).
In the accounts for the last 6 months ending 31st
December 2008, the current assets available to discharge the current
liabilities were starting to look a little lean and the Directors decided to
sell $59 million worth of land to assist. If MIS sales fail to live up to
expectations then the land proceeds will certainly be needed.
A recent report in The Australian suggested
FEA may be struggling to sell the land. http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/business/story/0,28124,25523596-36418,00.html.
The queue for new MISs is much shorter than
previous years although the yield from the 1993 crop harvested in 2007/08 was
over 400 tonnes per hectare over a 14 year rotation, better than predicted and
far better than companies like Great Southern. But the area was tiny.
The after tax return to an investor was still
only 7% pa. Not particularly flash given the extra risks.
FEA’s Directors have recently described their
gearing level of 40% as conservative. Few who have just witnessed the speedy
departure of Great Southern and Timbercorp would have used the same adjective.
At 31st December 2008 net debt was $197
million (bank debt of $207 million less cash of $10 million).
FEA aims to become a vertically integrated
forest company. Currently most of the product used at the Bell Bay sawmill is
purchased as part of the 290,000 pa tonnes of softwood previously supplied to
Auspine.
FEA doesn’t own or control much softwood
resource as part of their MIS business and FEA’s hardwood plantations are yet
to be integrated into the sawmilling operation.
The integration process has a way to go.
In order for FEA to survive MIS sales will be
needed. For a few more years at least.
No comments:
Post a Comment