5 Comments
User's avatar
Martin Dawson's avatar

> of all it’s not a large amount and second of all it’s buying shares at a premium to NAV (so it’s actually dilutive to shareholders).

No, that's not true and not how it works. Companies aren't worth their NAV, their are worth their future discounted fcf.

It's only value desctructive if a company buys back shares when the share price if overvalued to it's future discounted free cash flows, NOT nav.

Expand full comment
The Oak Bloke's avatar

Hi Martin, Depends on the sort of business (an investment co vs a trading co) but I do take your valid point. SUP isn't an investment business, it's a trading co and therefore you're spot on and agree I'm wrong on this and shall adjust my article to reflect this. Thank you.

Expand full comment
Martin Dawson's avatar

I don't think that's true, NAV is a book value, you have to convert it to market value with your own DCF to figure out if buying back shares is value destructive or not.

Even if it's using mark-to-market accounting for it's assets it's not going to have all it's investments in level 1, or even if it does, those prices attached by the public market might be totally wrong and overvalue/undervalue the shares.

Expand full comment
The Oak Bloke's avatar

The quantitative is qualitative - yep. But Analysts frequently use discount to NAV so to say “it’s not true” is itself not true. But whether it’s accurate is debatable, and to your point the quality and timeliness of data of those assets is a value judgement and … qualitative

Expand full comment
Ulrich K's avatar

Backing up the truck here...

Expand full comment