13. Project Larch II Flashcards

1
Q

Walk me through Project Larch II.

A

I am part of a four person deal team that is currently advising a $6 billion specialty chemical company on its potential $400+ million acquisition of the polypropylene licensing and catalyst business of a chemical conglomerate

The seller has chosen to actively market this business for divestment as they continue to selectively prune assets that are no longer a strategic or financial fit. We view the polypropylene licensing and catalyst business as an attractive complement to our client’s catalyst technologies business with tremendous potential for a synergistic combination. Our client is attracted by its leading market positions, global reach and potential for growth.

We have been asked to assess the attractiveness of this strategic acquisition opportunity, lead the due diligence efforts and construct a comprehensive valuation analysis. As the only analyst on the team, I have analyzed trading multiples and precedent transactions, built a preliminary accretion / dilution analysis and started constructing a plant-by-plant valuation model.

We have assessed the competitive landscape and determined that only a few other legitimate competitors exist. We have made a preliminary recommendation that we believe will position our client as a front-runner in the bid process ($500 million all-cash bid).

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
2
Q

Walk me through the industry research that you did.

A

I put together a market study that analyzed the polypropylene supply / demand outlook

a. Analyzed global PP demand and capacity growth
- Historical PP demand growth of 4.5% and capacity growth of 6%
- CMAI projects demand growth for PP at an annual run-rate of ~5% through 2018 while capacity growth is expected to decline to growth of 2-3% annually
- Growth will be fastest in China, Central/Eastern Europe as developing countries shift from a largely agrarian to an industrial economy bringing growth opportunities for PP to substitute for paper, metal, wood, glass and natural fibers
- In China and SE Asia, consumption growth of PP is significant because of its importance in film in the packaging of textiles and general consumer goods and the high usage of polyolefin fibers in production of agricultural bags and twine
- PP consumption continues to grow 1.3-1.7 times GDP even in industrialized regions such as N.A., Western Europe and Japan
- Substitution for other polymers has been the significant driving force for this extraordinary growth, which in turn has been supported by continued investment in process and catalyst technology

b. Analyzed North American polymer pricing trends
- Since the trough in 2008, the recovery in PP prices has outpaced other polymers because of its high correlation to oil prices (~$2,000 / MT)
- PP and PE prices price in line
- PVC is the cheapest (~$1,000 / MT)

c. Analyzed polymer pricing ratios
- The ratio of PP to other polymer prices has increased significantly overhistorical averages
- PVC includes relatively price-stable salt and PE is mostly made from natural gas ingredients
- Since 2007-2008, massive capacity additions have forced older units to be rationalized, while the steep crude oil price increase has created some fundamental shifts in the light olefin markets, creating a long-term increase in the propylene to ethylene price ratio. Accordingly, PP has become more expensive relative to polyethylene, promoting shifts from PP to alternative products like HDPE, where possible.

d. Analyzed global demand by end use
- PE has the largest end market overlap with PP; specifically, PP and HDPE have the greatest intermarital competition in injection molding and film & sheet
- PP End Uses: Injection molding (35%), film & sheet (23%), raffia (17%), fiber (14%)
- PE End Uses: film & sheet (51%), injection molding (13%), pipe (10%), blow molding (12%)

e. Analyzed natural gas and oil pricing trends
- In recent years, natural gas prices have decoupled from crude oil prices as reflected in the oil/natural gas ratio increasing dramatically over the economic equivalency of ~8
- Opportunity now exists for North American-based gas feedstock consumers to leverage a significant cost advantage

f. Analyzed ethylene and propylene production mix
- North American production of propylene: 50% by product of petroleum refining, 45% co-product of ethylene cracking
- North American production of ethylene: 26% naphtha, 69% gas liquids

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
3
Q

Walk me through the firm specific research that you did.

A

Analyzed the catalyst and licensing competitive landscape

a. Analyzed PP technology licensing market shares by capacity
- Analysis of PP sites globally indicates that target has the #2 position with 17% share of licensed capacity even though it is a very minor producer of PP resin

b. Target geographic distribution
- 19% NA, 25% Middle East, 39% Asia, 13% Europe, 5% SA

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
4
Q

What was the strategic rationale for the investment?

A

The polypropylene catalyst and licensing business is an attractive complement to our client’s Catalyst Technologies division, specifically its specialty catalyst business unit. Our client is attracted by a number of factors including:

(1) the target’s leading market position
(2) history of innovation
(3) globally recognized brands
(4) blue-chip customer base
(5) potential for growth

There is substantial potential for a synergistic combination between the target and our client’s existing polyolefin catalysts manufacturing, development and marketing operations

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
5
Q

What are the five most notable merits of the deal?

A

Acceleration of specialty catalyst growth plan

(1) Become #2 player
(2) High growth market at 5% per year
(3) Fits with emerging markets strategy for future growth
(4) Accelerates implementation of existing PP strategy
(5) De-risks existing PP strategy by acquiring strategic manufacturing capabilities

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
6
Q

What are the potential risks and pitfalls?

A

(1) Integration risks
(2) Uncertainty of what to do with PP licensing business
(3) Synergy realization; huge component of returns on investment

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
7
Q

Describe the catalyst industry.

A

The definition of catalyst is a substance that alters the velocity of a chemical reaction without itself being consumed. Although this is theoretically true, in practice catalysts decrease in activity with use and suffer losses in material handling, thus requiring periodic replacement. These factors, together with economic growth and discoveries of new uses for catalysts, contribute to the continued growth of the catalyst business.

The other side of the picture is the drive to find ever-more-efficient, long-lived, active and selective catalysts. Economic and practical considerations provide incentives for the development of new catalysts and greater understanding of catalysis in general. Development is further driven by the need for new sources of energy and chemicals, concern over environmental pollution, the desire for new types of products, and the cost of and potential restrictions on the availability of the noble metals used in many metals.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
8
Q

What is the size of the market and its growth prospects?

A

Process catalysts, a $16 billion-per-year business worldwide, play a vital role in the economy. The value of products dependent on process catalysts, including petroleum products, chemicals, pharmaceuticals, synthetic rubber and plastics, and others, is said to be around $600 billion per year. About 90% of chemical manufacturing processes and more than 20% of all industrial products employ underlying catalytic steps.

There are three major process catalyst market segments, including chemical processing, petroleum refining, polymerization The global catalyst market value can be broken down into three segments (1) chemical processing catalysts ($6.5 billion) (2) petroleum refining catalysts ($5.6 billion) (3) polymerization catalysts ($3.9 billion)

Major market segments within the polymerization catalyst market include polyethylene, polypropylene and polyvinyl chloride. Polyolefin catalysts are the largest single market sector with about 50-60% of the total polymerization market (~$2.1 billion). Polyolefin catalyst consumption is nearly flat. The 6-7% growth in polyolefin production is compensated mostly by the development and use of higher-efficiency catalysts

The polypropylene catalyst market is expected to grow at 5% annually.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
9
Q

Discuss the industry outlook and trends.

A

Polymerization catalysts are required for the production of polypropylene and other plastics. Polypropylene is the second most commonly used plastic in the world with approximately 25% of the global polymer demand. Due to its balanced product performance, advantaged specific gravity and market versatility, PP is often used as a substitute for other plastics (PVC, PE, PET, PS) and can replace other materials including metal, paperboard, and glass in specific applications. Increasing demand from emerging geographies for sustainable product solutions and durable alternatives to other plastics and materials is expected to drive worldwide growth of PP by ~5% annually over the next five years.

The global trends in PP resin development can be summarized as lighter, tougher, faster, cleaner and clearer. The latest catalyst and donor developments for the target’s proprietary process technology address these trends with improved stiffness-impact balance, higher melt flow for faster processing, lower volatile organic compounds, and improved organoleptics and reduced haze

PP Catalyst Market participants and market shares:
Lyondell Basel: 30%
Other: 18%
BASF: 16%
Sinospec: 11%
Dow: 10%
Mistui: 8%
Grace: 7%

Combined #2 player with 17% market share

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
10
Q

How will the target company outperform, underperform or be neutral with the industry?

A

Outperform. Annual growth rates are expected to be about 5% over the next 5 years, with highest growth rates expected in the emerging geographies of China, Central and Eastern Europe, Latin America and Middle East & North Africa. Over 50% of PP demand is expected to be in China and Asia where the target’s proprietary process technology is well positioned with positive momentum resulting from recent licensee wins. This technology has been selected in 33% of the licensing decisions made in China over the past 5 years, which provides strong basis for additional growth, as China looks to be become more balanced between demand and installed capacity.

Its PP catalysts currently benefit from the widespread adoption of the PP licensed process technology. As the technology continues to maintain its recent track record of licensing success, the target expects organic growth of their catalyst systems. These catalyst systems can also be used with other widely adopted gas-phase polypropylene manufacturing technologies, including those of Lyondell Basel and BASF. One of the target’s key initiatives is to expand the use of catalysts outside of its proprietary PP process technology, which is expected to provide significant growth opportunities.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
11
Q

Is there fragmentation in the PP catalyst market?

A

The catalyst industry is highly segmented, with 40 major firms supplying the North American market for catalysts. No single company manufacturers all types, and companies generally specialize in types of catalysts that fit their technical or raw material strength.

The two largest producers are BASF and WR Grace. These two companies account for 25-30% of the total North American market on a dollar value basis. Because catalyst suppliers generally do not compete directly with one another across all market segments, market shares and relative sizes tend to be somewhat meaningless.

There are only a handful of major players within the PP catalyst market. Six major producers represent 82% of the global PP market.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
12
Q

Is there seasonality / cyclicality?

A

Process catalysts play a vital role in the economy and demonstrate relative resilience during market downturns. Additionally, seasonality does not have a significant overall effect on catalysts

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
13
Q

Is the polypropylene catalyst market attractive?

A

Relatively attractive market

Intensity of competition: (MODERATE) numerous competitors but differentiated product
Threat of new entrants: (LOW) high R&D requirements; capital intensive; high customer loyalty; proprietary technology is difficult to replicate (huge secrecy factor)
Threat of substitutes: (LOW) highly differentiated technology with high switching costs due to underlying process technology requirements
Bargaining power of buyer: (LOW) although buyers are highly concentrated, catalyst business provides a relatively inelastic demand and strong customer retention characteristics; continuous need for catalyst supplies translates into relatively inelastic demands; furthermore, catalyst supplies are often specifically tailored to a given production facility, meaning sales are often “sticky” with infrequent switching between catalyst suppliers
Bargaining power of supplier: (LOW) commoditized metals that can be accessed from a number of different suppliers

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
14
Q

Describe the customer.

A

The target has strong positioning with core growth oriented customer base

Customer = global polypropylene producers (Braskem, Petrochina, Sinochem, Sabic, Reliance Industries, Shenhua Group

Due to the strength of the target’s proprietary process technology, it has enjoyed broad based adoption from customers around the world. Customers recognize the value of the target’s proprietary process technology’s mechanical simplicity and operational efficiency as approximately 60% of the currently licensed capacity is with repeat licensors.

Customers are motivated by quality of catalysts an on-going contact after the licensing of technology – key to maintaining strong customer relationships.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
15
Q

What does your client do? What are its key financial metrics?

A

Our client is a global specialty chemicals company operating out of three business segments, including Catalyst Technologies, Materials Technologies, and Construction Products

Total Sales: $3.2 billion
Total EBITDA: $608 million 
TEV / EBITDA: 8.9x
PE: 62.8x 
Debt / EBITDA: 1.8x
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
16
Q

Describe the business segments of your client.

A

Catalyst Technologies (40%, $1.3 billion): Produces and sells fluid catalytic cracking (FCC) catalysts and hydroprocessing catalysts (HPC) for the refining industry (78% of segment revenues) as well as Polyolefin Catalysts for the plastics industry (22% of segment revenues)

  • Catalysts for refining industry facilitate the processing of heavy crudes into lighter, high-value end-products as well as upgrade petroleum products by removing impurities
  • Polyolefin catalysts are used in the production of polypropylene and polyethylene

Materials Technologies (27%): includes silica-based engineered products used in a variety of applications as well as sealants and coatings for packaging

Construction Products (33%): offers a number of chemicals and solutions to enhance the properties of building materials

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
17
Q

What does the target company do?

A

The target business consists of two core businesses:

(1) PP Process Technology Licensing – develops and licenses polypropylene process technology
- Enables 17% of global installed PP capacity, which ranks #2 in the industry
- Based on PP licenses awarded in the last 5 years, the target’s proprietary process technology has successfully obtained over 25% of newly licensed capacity
- The broad adoption rate of the process technology is primarily driven by its technical superiority, low investment and operating cost, and capability to produce the broadest mix in the industry

(2) Polypropylene Catalysts – develops, manufactures, markets and sells catalysts and donors used in the manufacturing of polypropylene resins (second most common plastic)
- Offers integrated catalyst and donor solutions that are advanced and easy to use
- Although they are custom-engineered for the target’s process technology, they also have application in competing gas phase processes
- Catalysts primary function is to polymerize the propylene and other monomers into polypropylene and drive the product morphology and bulk properties
- External donor works in conjunction with the catalyst to control the specific properties of the PP produced and fine tune product performance

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
18
Q

What are the company’s competitive advantages?

A

(1) Technological superiority that results in simplicity, low investment costs, low operating costs, and reliability
- Smallest footprint in the industry
- Lower conversion costs
- Lower ongoing operating costs
- Higher reliability and on-stream time
(2) Customer service – on-going customer support has led to customer retention (60% of currently licensed capacity is with repeat licensors)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
19
Q

What the company’s strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats?

A

Strengths: #2 market position; technological superiority (simple, low cost, effective)
Weaknesses: custom engineered catalyst systems with proprietary process technology; need to develop capabilities across other competing processes
Opportunities: well positioned to capitalize on high growth in emerging countries such as China, eastern Europe and India
Threats: competing technologies eroding market share

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
20
Q

What is the management team and culture like at the company?

A
98 total employees
Manufacturing and Engineering (50)
R&D (27)
Supply Chain (2)
Commercial (13) 
Other (6) 

Comprised of highly experienced experts in the catalyst industry

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
21
Q

What does the company’s supply chain look like?

A

Chemical elements such as Titanium trichloride are transformed into usable catalysts, which are sold to polypropylene producers. The end users include packaging, container, automotive and textile producers, such as Dixie and Produmaster

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
22
Q

How does the company’s competitive advantage improve its position within the industry?

A

Highest Value PP Technology: Its proprietary process technology is well-established in the industry and is well positioned to increase its share of installed capacity, especially in emerging geographies

Strong Positioning With Core Growth Oriented Customer: Customers recognize the value that the process technology offers and confirm their commitment to the technology platform with repeat licenses. Almost 60% of installed capacity is with customers that have repeatedly licensed the technology to meet their poly propylene manufacturing needs

Integrated Licensing & Catalyst Business: Combining the licensing of technology with catalyst sales generates a highly synergistic business model; success in technology fuels catalyst sales growth. Once a process technology is licensed, it naturally facilitates the continued sales of catalysts into the licensed manufacturing process. For example, one catalyst brand is commercially uses in 75% of the proprietary process technology licensed capacity.

23
Q

How does the company make money? (profitability analysis)

A

The business makes money in two ways:

(1) Sale of catalysts to PP producers

Price: average catalyst sales price ($ / kg); grow at rate of inflation
Volume:
-Existing: forecasted existing plant-by-plant PP capacity times average capacity utilization divided by average catalyst mileage (Tons PP / kg catalyst) times % Larch share
-New: cumulative [new licenses times (average plant size divided by average catalyst mileage)]

VC:

  • Raw materials
  • Freight
  • Utilities (natural gas)

FC:

  • Depreciation
  • Manufacturing and maintenance
  • Shared SG&A costs

(2) Lump-sum licensing fees (typically collected within the 3-4 year period from when the license agreement is signed and the plant becomes operational)
Price: $ Fee / MT of capacity (projections are given for next 4-5 years because contracts have been signed) times average plant capacity

Volume: # of licenses signed per year (assumed to be 2 per year)

VC
-Given gross profit margin (fixed

FC:
-Shared SG&A costs

24
Q

What does the competitive landscape look like?

A

The target’s proprietary process technology has 17% of the installed PP capacity, which ranks second in the industry. As a result of its technological strength, the target has increased its position in recent years. Based on PP licenses awarded in the last 5 years, the target has successfully obtained over 25% of newly licensed capacity

Licensing: a few big players representing 68% of installed capacity; there are six other major competing other technologies, and a large number of less dominant players that represent 32% of the PP licensing landscape

  • Largest player has benefitted from its overall large position in the PP resin business
  • Target has the leading position both in terms of investment and production costs for PP
  • Compete on technology, ease of use, customer service, initial investment cost, operating cost

Catalysts: a few big players representing 59% of PP demand; target has 8% market share of PP catalyst demand; three other top players (32%, 12%, 7%)

25
Q

What is the company’s overall strategy?

A
  • Integrated licensing and catalyst business: combining the licensing of technology with catalyst sales generates a highly synergistic business model; success in technology licensing fuels catalyst sales growth. Once a process technology is licensed, it naturally facilitates the continued sales of catalysts to the licensed manufacturing process (target’s catalysts are used in 75% of target’s licensed proprietary process technology)
  • Well established in the industry with prospects for high growth in emerging geographies
  • Strong positioning with Core Growth Oriented Customer Base:
26
Q

What is the company’s value proposition?

A
  • Operational simplicity
  • Low initial investment costs
  • Flexibility
  • Quality catalysts provide consistent results
27
Q

What are the company’s plans for growth?

A

Emerging geographies: over 50% of PP demand is expected to be in China and Asia where the target’s proprietary process technology is well positioned with positive momentum resulting from recent license wins. The target’s technology has been selected in 33% of the licensing decisions made in China over the past 5 years.

28
Q

What is their market share?

A

Licensing: 17% of installed capacity
Catalyst: 8% of PP catalyst demand

29
Q

Who is their customer base?

A

Blue chip global producers of PP.

  • Petrochina
  • Sinochem
  • Braskem
  • Sabic
  • Reliance
30
Q

Who are the suppliers?

A

Miners and producers of chemical elements such as titanium

31
Q

What were the model drivers?

A

Key model drivers:

  • Rate of inflation
  • Plant-by-plant capacity forecasts
  • Capacity utilization
  • Average catalyst mileage
  • Licenses per year
  • Fee per license
  • Average capacity per new plant
32
Q

How did you come up with revenue growth rates?

A

(1) Sale of catalysts to PP producers

Price: average catalyst sales price ($ / kg); grow at rate of inflation
Volume:
-Existing: forecasted existing plant-by-plant PP capacity times average capacity utilization divided by average catalyst mileage (Tons PP / kg catalyst) times % Larch share
-New: cumulative [new licenses times (average plant size divided by average catalyst mileage)]

VC:

  • Raw materials
  • Freight
  • Utilities (natural gas)

(2) Lump-sum licensing fees (typically collected within the 3-4 year period from when the license agreement is signed and the plant becomes operational)
Price: $ Fee / MT of capacity (projections are given for next 4-5 years because contracts have been signed) times average plant capacity

Volume: # of licenses signed per year (assumed to be 2 per year)

33
Q

What were the major cost drivers?

Catalysts

A
Catalysts
VC:
-Raw materials
-Freight
-Utilities (natural gas)

FC:

  • Depreciation
  • Manufacturing and maintenance
  • Shared SG&A costs

Licensing
VC
-Given gross profit margin

FC:
-Shared SG&A costs

34
Q

What are the historical and projected financials?

A

Unfortunately, we have not yet received a complete set of historical financials so we have not had the opportunity to begin modeling. Management has given us rough guidance in terms of Revenue and EBITDA based on previous projects involving the target.

Combined Revenue: 2012A $122mm, 2013E $128mm

Combined Gross Profit: 2012A $64mm, 2013E $68mm
Combined Gross Margin: 2012A 52%, 2013E 53%

Combined EBIT: 2012A $48mm, 2013E $52mm
Combined EBIT Margin: 2012A 39%, 2013E 41%

Combined EBITDA: 2012A $52mm, 2013E $57mm
Combined EBITDA Margin: 2012A 43%, 2013E EBITDA 45%

35
Q

What was the growth rate of revenue?

A

YoY Projected Growth rate is 5%

PP Market is expected to grow around 5%

36
Q

What is the growth rate of EBITDA?

A

YoY Projected EBITDA is expected to grow at ~9% as a result of favorable licensing margins in the near term

37
Q

What were the comps? How did you choose them? Where are they trading?

A

Catalysts: no pure play catalyst companies exist; most competitors are chemical conglomerates that produce catalysts in one of their many business segments; best public comp is composed of three business segments
(1) Catalysts – offers refinery and polymerization catalysts

(2) Polymer Solutions – chemicals used in plastic enclosures for consumer and industrial goods (comps: A. Schulman, Polyone, Spartech)
(3) Fine Chemistry – bromine products used in chemical synthesis, oil and gas well drilling and completion fluids, among other things (Comps: Cambrex, Lonza, Siegfried)

We performed a SOTP for the company in order to determine the implied current and long-run multiple for the catalyst business

Albemarle SOTP
2013E Implied Catalyst multiple (Albemarle) = 10.6x
2014E Implied Catalyst multiple (Albemarle) = 10.2x
Implied Long-Run Catalyst multiple = 11.4x

Catalyst 2013E EBITDA = $282mm
Implied TEV = $2,989

Polymer Solutions 2013E EBITDA = $198mm (@ 8.1x)
TEV = $1,604

Fine Chemicals = $185mm (@ 7.2x)
TEV = $1,343

WholeCo = $665mm (@ 8.9x) 
TEV = $5,935

Client SOTP
2013E Implied Catalyst Multiple (Client) = 10.9x

Catalyst 2013E EBITDA = $407mm
Implied TEV = $4,456

Materials 2013E EBITDA = $162mm (@ 8.4x)
TEV = $1,358

Construction = $185mm (@ 9.5x)
TEV = $1,242
WholeCo = $700mm (@ 10.1x) 
TEV = $7,056

*Note: Net Debt includes $550 million of post emergence net debt, $494 million of unfunded asbestos-related liabilities, $433 million of warrants associated with settlements to asbestos claimants, and benefit of $291 million related to client estimate of PV of NOLs

Licensing: again, no pure play process technology companies exist; large chemical conglomerates license their process technology; we chose a set of six engineering, procurement and construction companies because they provide similar services to that of the target (contractor designs the installation, procures the necessary materials and builds the project, either directly or by subcontracting part of the work in return for a lump sum fee)

Median TEV / LTM EBITDA: 9.1x
Median TEV / 2013E EBITDA: 7.3x
Median TEV / 2014E EBITDA: 6.1x

Median LTM PE: 18.8x
Median 2013E PE: 14.9x
Median 2014E PE: 12.3x

Long-Run TEV / NTM EBITDA: 8.1x

38
Q

What are the acquisition multiples? How does the multiple compare to past transactions?

A

Based on a current trading multiples, long-run multiples, and precedent transactions, we think that our client should pay 10-12x for the catalyst business and 8-10x for the licensing business. On a consolidating basis, we think our client should pay 9-11x (9x if there is no competition for the asset and 11x if there is intense competition)

At our recommended $500mm purchase price (which is based on limited information), our client would be paying ~9.5x LTM EBITDA

Catalyst precedent transactions analysis is based on the break-up analysis of Engelhard (acquired by BASF in 2006), a former American Fortune 500 company which focused primarily on the production of catalysts.

Implied LTM EBITDA multiple = 13.9x

Catalysts 2005 EBITDA: $329mm
Implied TEV = $4,575

Pigments 2005 EBITDA: $95mm (@ 8.4x based on pigment precedents)
Implied TEV = $802

Metal Trading 2005 EBITDA: $30mm (@ 10x based on BX estimates)
Implied TEV = $304

WholeCo 2005 EBITDA: $454 (@ 12.5x)
Transaction Value = $5,680mm

Catalyst precedent transactions show a median LTM EBITDA multiple of 8.5x. However, we place heavier weight on two transactions in particular due to their heavy focus on catalyst technologies: Engelhard (implied catalyst multiple of 13.9x; actual transaction multiple of 12.5x and Sud-Chemie (implied catalyst multiple of 12.7x; actual transaction multiple of 11.1x)

Licensing precedent transactions show a median LTM EBITDA multiple of 10.3x. This is based on a set of nine transactions in the engineering, procurement and construction industry.

39
Q

Walk me through the accretion / dilution analysis.

A

$500 = All cash purchase price

2013E
Acquirer Net Income: $342 mm
Target Net Income: $34 mm
Combined Net Income: $376 mm

Plus Pre-tax synergies: ($0.6) mm
Less Interest Income on BS Cash Used: ($10) mm (@ 2% cash interest rate)
Less Interest Expense on Incremental Debt: $0 mm
Less: Incremental D&A on Write Up of Book Value: ($3) mm
Total Pre Tax Adjustments: ($13)

Plus Tax Benefit from Adjustments: $5 mm = -35% * -13
Pro-Forma Net Income $367 mm
Pro-Forma Share Count: 76 mm

Pro Forma EPS: $4.85
Standalone EPS: $4.52
% Accretion: 7.4%

Pre-tax cushion to breakeven: $39 mm

  • Note:
  • Book Value assumed to be 50% of purchase price, which means there is a write-up of $250 mm
  • 75% attributed to goodwill; 25% attributed to PPE
  • PPE $62.5; after tax (1-35%)62.5 = $40.6
  • Assume useful life of 15 years; D&A write-up of $2.7
40
Q

What are the potential synergies to be gained?

A

In 2013, we estimate that there will be negative synergies as the acquirer adds 1 purchasing headcount, EHS legal costs, and IP portfolio maintenance costs (SG&A)

In 2014, we estimate synergies above these additional costs (SG&A), including

  • Savings related to lab and pilot plant costs
  • Site consolidation savings
  • Headcount reduction (SG&A)
  • Improvement in manufacturing costs by moving switching plants (COGS)
41
Q

What is the initial recommended bid amount and deal structure?

A

Based on limited information (need due diligence), we think that ~$500 million bid might be a good starting point; we would not specify the EBITDA or multiple assumption to the seller; but this would be between 9x-10x.

We think that the company should make an all cash offer given its substantial cash reserves and relatively conservative leverage (1.8x Debt / EBITDA). Industry average leverage is ~2.25x

4x current ratio

Potential for a partner during the second round

42
Q

What are the sources and uses of funds?

A

Sources: $500 cash
Uses: $500 Purchase Price
The company is going to be purchased on a cash free, debt free basis

43
Q

Are other competitive bids likely? Would another financial or strategic buyer pay more?

A

We evaluated 25 different strategic buyers and the likelihood of participating in the bid process. From that list, we determined that there are four strategic buyers that will definitely participate, six likely, and three maybe.

We looked at the following

  • Diversified independent catalyst manufacturers (5): 3 likely
  • Independent refining catalyst manufacturers (4): 1 likely
  • Engineering procurement and construction companies (8): 1 definite, 3 maybes
  • Polymer manufacturers (8): 3 definite, 2 probably

Private equity firms like SK Capital, which specializes in chemicals, are natural buyers for non-core businesses of big corporations, such as the target.

In theory, PE should not be competitive for this collection of assets. However, they make up a large portion of the buyers universe and abundant liquidity. The Styron (Dow carve-out) precedent and a “platform” rationale could invite bids that assign a competitive value

44
Q

Was it an auction, limited auction or sale?

A

It is a broad auction; they publicly announced that they would actively market the business for divestment.

45
Q

What was your role in this deal?

A

My role thus far has been to lead the research efforts and underlying analysis related to evaluating the target as a potential acquisition opportunity.

46
Q

What was the team structure?

A

I am the only analysts on the four person deal team leading the buy side advisory. There is one associate, one vp and one md.

47
Q

What were your day-to-day responsibilities?

A

I have been responsible for fielding questions from the client and performing the comparable company and precedent transaction analyses

48
Q

How did you value the target company? What was the value under each methodology?

A

We plan on doing a full valuation model for the target. We are going to evaluate each business independently and run two different DCFs for each business. We are also using different trading multiples and precedent transactions for each business.

49
Q

Discuss the model that you built.

A

We have not yet built the model but we are in the process of collecting all publicly available information in order to drive our model so that we are prepared when the data room opens. We are going to build a plant-by-plant model based on projected capacity and catalyst mileage

50
Q

Explain the most challenging parts of the deal.

A

The most challenging part of this deal so far has been working with limited information. So far there has been a lot of speculation. There will be a whole lot of clarity as soon as the process really kicks off and the information starts to pour in.

51
Q

Discuss your favorite part of the deal.

A

Being able to put on my investor cap and think about all the different reasons this could be a good investment has been truly fascinating. Unlike sell-side banking where every deal is a good deal, we really needed to think through the potential pitfalls of this acquisition.

(1) Integration risks
(2) Uncertainty of what to do with PP licensing business
(3) Synergy realization; huge component of returns on investment
(4) Transfer of intellectual property
(5) Ability to sign new licenses and retain customers

52
Q

Is this a good investment? Why or why not?

A

Based on preliminary analysis, I believe that this is a good investment opportunity for our client for a few different reasons.

(1) Become #2 player
(2) High growth market at 5% per year
(3) Fits with emerging markets strategy for future growth
(4) Accelerates implementation of existing PP strategy
(5) De-risks existing PP strategy by acquiring strategic manufacturing capabilities

53
Q

What are some areas for further due diligence?

A

Given the fact that we are still very much at the early point of this bid process, we view there to be many areas for further due diligence.

Operations

  • Tolling arrangement for Larch to produce the parent company’s needs for PE catalysts
  • Is there enough capacity at the plants to meet the plan for PP catalyst and the parent company’s PE catalyst requirements without capacity expansions?

Personnel

  • What is the management structure at each plant?
  • Which R&D employees would be transferred with the business?
  • How is SG&A allocated across licensing and catalysts?

Intellectual Property
-How will the parent ensure the transfer of all manufacturing know-how and technology to the buyer?

Site Visits
-Need to visit the main manufacturing plants with access to all equipment and all floors so that we can evaluate the condition of the equipment and validate synergies