GuruFocus Premium Membership

Professional Value Investing Tools at Affordable Prices

Try It 100% for 7 Days!


Go Long RIMM and Stop Listening to Sell-Side Analysts: RIMM, AAPL

August 04, 2011 | About:
When a stock is pricing the worst case scenario for the company, as long as anything goes right, there’s money to be made — and probably a lot. Back in January 2009 Apple (NASDAQ:AAPL) shares were pricing such a scenario — at one point the stock traded at $78 a share. After factoring in the $25 billion in cash in the balance sheet, the deferred revenue from sales of iPhones (back then over 24 months), and the fact that stores around the world were packed with customers, the P/E of less than 10 (excluding cash) was essentially pricing a worst case scenario.

Research In Motion (RIMM) today is a similar example. I’m not arguing that RIMM will beat Apple, or that it will dominate the mobile market, or that it won’t see declining revenue. All I’m saying is that as long as anything goes right for the company, RIMM is trading at an absurdly low valuation. As Soros said, “My approach works not by making valid predictions but by allowing me to correct false ones." RIMM at $24 is a false prediction. Apple was my largest position in early 2008, I own an iPhone, and RIMM is now my biggest stake.

First, let me divert to clarify an important difference in the incentives of two different groups (both composed mostly of well-educated and smart people): sell-side analysts and investors. Sell-side analysts are compensated based on two things: a) generating research that is in demand and b) how close their price targets track share prices (mostly by how they get promoted or recruited). As long as an analysts gets it more right (less wrong) than their peers, they are rewarded.

This brings up an important issue. If a stock is trading at $25 a share and the most bullish estimate is $39 a share, an analyst has very little incentive to print a $70 a share target even if that’s what he objectively believes. The incentives will dissuade him from doing so. First, in the short run he will have to deal with skepticism and criticism from bosses, colleagues and clients. He will appear as insane to some, and as biased or too dramatic to others.

Second, even if he ends up being right he won’t gain much more by stating that his target is $70 a share, instead of $40 a share — in the end he was still the analyst with the closest target.

Third and most important, he can always adjust his targets (in as little as a few days as you’ll see below). So to him, printing a $70 a share target doesn’t make sense. The problem of sell-side analysts is not that they don’t know the company well — the problem is that incentives are misaligned and thus targets biased and useless.

Unlike sell-side analysts, investors have a high incentive to buy when the upside skews the expected return of an investment. If a reasonable upside scenario is $70 a share rather than $40 a share, this is very important. In addition, for those of us who believe in fundamental valuation, our fair value targets will move over time but probably not by much in the short term. Right now RIMM has that positive skew.

I state this difference because after going over so many of the recent downgrades for RIMM I cannot stop myself from thinking back to Apple a few years ago. Below I list sell-side research targets for Apple from Jan 2007 to July 2011. Apple is a good example to use because it has been beating estimates and launching successful products since 2007. So there should be no justified reason for a huge volatility in targets, especially in the short run.

The average target price that RBC Capital, Piper Jaffray, Citi, Deutsche Bank, Barclays, Sanford Bernstein, BMO Capital, and JPMorgan stated from January 2007 to December 2010 for AAPL is seen below. Remember that there is little material change in fundamental information intraquarter.

Dec ‘07, AAPL price $198, average recommendation $213

March ‘08, AAPL price $144, average recommendation $198 (as price came down, so did the ‘targets’)

June ‘08, AAPL price $167, average recommendation $228 (as price went up, so did the ‘targets’)

Sep ‘08, AAPL price $114, average recommendation $187 (as price came down, so did the ‘targets’)

Dec ‘08, AAPL price $85, average recommendation $142 (as price came down, so did the ‘targets’)

March ‘09, AAPL price $105, average recommendation $120

June ‘09, AAPL price $142, average recommendation $161 (as price went up, so did the ‘targets’)

Sep ‘09, AAPL price $185, average recommendation $209 (as price went up, so did the ‘targets’)

Dec ‘09, AAPL price $211, average recommendation $249 (as price went up, so did the ‘targets’)

March ‘10, AAPL price $235, average recommendation $271 (as price went up, so did the ‘targets’)

June ‘10, AAPL price $252, average recommendation $332 (as price went up, so did the ‘targets’)

Sep ‘10, AAPL price $284, average recommendation $354 (as price went up, so did the ‘targets’)

Dec ‘10, AAPL price $323, average recommendation $390 (as price went up, so did the ‘targets’)

If you drill down to the recommendations of specific sell-side analysts it looks even more ridiculous (I picked RBC Capital as an example — some of the others have similar behavior):

RBC Capital

05/05/08, AAPL price $185, target: $220

09/29/08, AAPL price $105, target: $140 (3 months later the analyst implies the business is worth 40% less)

10/22/08, AAPL price $97, target: $125 (after 23 days the analyst claims the business is worth 10% less)

01/15/09, AAPL price $84, target: $70 (this is the same analyst that 3 months ago had said the business was worth 80% more, and just 7 months before said the business was worth 200% more)

04/20/09, AAPL price $120, target: $95 (analyst keeps following the price trend, albeit slow to catch up)

04/23/09, AAPL price $125, target: $165 (analyst concludes 3 days later that the business should be worth 74% more!)

07/22/09, AAPL price $156, target: $190 (stock goes up, so does the target)

And it keeps going like this...

Soros has written extensively about the reflexivity issue in the markets. With companies like RIMM or Apple, that are very well known to retail investors, sell-side analysts contribute immensely to a positive feedback loop. If the stock price goes down, analysts will adjust downward. This causes some investors to sell prematurely and the shares to drop even further. This in turn triggers more analysts to revise their estimates downward, which causes further price pressure. An on an on... until the trend is reverted. Just like in a bubble.

There are clear fundamental issues and questions with RIMM. It should’ve never been a $144 stock, and maybe should be valued between $50 a share and $70 a share. (To put in perspective, at $75 a share RIMM would be trading at 12x P/E. Nokia right now trades at 18x P/E. One could make similar pessimistic scenarios for Nokia).

More than 20 downward revisions in the last month is a bit extreme. For this stock to be trading at 3.9x P/E (less than 3x if you exclude cash) also strikes me as overly pessimistic. No debt, $3 billion in cash. Even if you assume that earnings will drop 50% in the following year and that only the international division grows, it is much more attractive than Infosys and other international tech companies. Today, Netflix (NFLX) is worth more than RIMM yet produces less than a tenth of the income. Facebook is worth six times RIMM yet RIMM produces more five times higher income than Facebook (which means you pay 30 times more for FB).

At the time RIMM last reported earnings, I didn’t own the stock and was not following it. As the stock crashed I poured over the financials and I realized year-over-year revenue and net income grew. In fact, earnings beat analyst estimates and they also announced a buyback (5% of shares outstanding). But because they revised year guidance downward the market panicked. As Buffett’s has often said, "Be fearful when others are greedy, and greedy when others are fearful."

There are bad scenarios for RIMM and they have been very well documented. At this price all of them are priced in. So let’s focus on a few possibilities that could happen. I’m not predicting anything — but as long as anything turns out a little bit better than expected the shares have significant upside ($60 a share is not an unreasonable scenario — that is a 150% or more return).

- Order of Playbook tablets by a government or large institution.

- Playbook is the only tablet that has received FIPS from the U.S. government.

- Russia has stated that it might ban the iPad from government use because of security concerns.

- Playbook is the only tablet to have received approval from the Australian authority for government use.

- RIMM’s international growth continues to do well (year-over-year revenue growth from international markets was 67%. India is seeing good success with the new Blackberries).

- Management teams up with a PE firm for a buyout of the business.

- Microsoft (NASDAQ:MSFT), Google (NASDAQ:GOOG), Infosys, IBM (IBM), Nokia, Samsung, Amazon (NASDAQ:AMZN), Cisco (CSCO), Facebook or any other company takes it over. Not unreasonable when you realize that RIMM just fired 11% of the workforce and the COO is retiring. Ballmer dodged a question about a takeover of RIMM. After Microsoft acquired Skype it let go a good portion of the employees.

- RIMM splits the business in two and unlocks value (as suggested by an analyst).

- RIMM increases buyback or starts issuing a dividend.

- As Mark McKechnie, an analyst at ThinkEquity, suggested, the company opens up its secure network operations center, or NOC, to other smartphone platforms.

- Sale of patents to Google or other interested parties.

Just like Apple at $78 was absurd, RIMM at anything under $35 also is. “History never repeats itself, but it often rhymes.”

Rating: 4.2/5 (70 votes)


Topwine - 4 years ago
Great article. A lot of the same reasons why I am long significantly as well.
Tkervin - 4 years ago
An interesting re-write of this article would replace all references to Apple with AOL.
AlbertaSunwapta - 4 years ago
Cute! And replace RIM with Kodak. :-)

I agree, RIM is looking interesting but a market sensing a recession and an expectation of government funding cuts and RIMs incredibly strong competition will just lead to even deeper cuts to RIMs prospects. I expect it will soon be a deep value consideration for market mining prospectors.

Note: as of last week, I'm long Kodak. No position in RIM yet.
Guruofallgurus - 4 years ago

I agree 100%, I have written to RIM almost exactly what you wrote. I am long RIM and I dont carewhat these analysts. momentum guys do, but anything under $60 is a good buy. If a 5 year horizon, then I would be looking at $100 or more. Remember RIM is in a very high growth industry and is love din ex-USA markets but also in USA, serious people use BB.
Sivaram - 4 years ago

ALBERTASUNWAPTA: "Note: as of last week, I'm long Kodak. No position in RIM yet. "

What's your thesis for Kodak?
Tomiyaki2 - 4 years ago

As an Investor, i only believe in what i saw.......In any resto in indonesia, it will be Strange iif No one holding up their BBM......... everyone of my friends and business associate OWN Blackberry and sometime 2..... me myself being a BBM user, the latest update to FB is simply efficient. and at current price of 3 xs shock...... IF GOLDMANSACH is to have RIMM under CONVICTION BUYLIST, i will

SELL immidiately.....other then that....I TRUST MY OWN EYE....and by the way ....I LOVE BLACKBERRY.....why, I DUNNO.....maybe Obama knows why
Fkattan - 4 years ago
Ivi, thank you very much for the article. Do you have any idea what the assets (net of debt) are worth?

Thanks again

Tkervin - 4 years ago
My wife's large regional law firm is now supporting iPhone. My wife, who lived with her Blackberry has made the move to the Apple product and can't believe the improvement. She handles a couple hundred emails per day in her position as company CMO and for the longest time RIM was the only game in town. Many, many in this firm are switching and I believe that will be a trend once company i.s. departments support the platform. RIM's moat was business. That will soon not exist and they will have to compete on features, ease of use, and apps. I frankly don't see that being successful.

As to the above comment that "serious people use BB".....I will let her know, she will get a chuckle out of it....her firm's i.s. manager was just fired for holding that, and other techie views not in step with what the firm's lawyers and senior staff wanted.
Alleygator - 4 years ago
Excellent point Tkervin. Everyone knows that anecdotal evidence is the best indicator of overall economic conditions!
Tighanx - 4 years ago
I am not saying rimm is not a good pick. But RIMM is definitely NOT AAPL years ago. Year ago, AAPL was taking market share rapidly, it was just the economy slowed down. Today, RIMM is keeping losing market share, it is a value only if you expect a turnaround.
PHILCIR - 4 years ago
RIMM is tough and will likely turn out to be the ultimate value trap like NOK. The reason -- looking in the rear view mirror and anchoring their past. the only thing that counts is what's in front. Anchoring is built into our DNA.
Ivi - 4 years ago
Regarding Tighanx comment: "

If you now combine the two articles and realize how much RIMM's portfolio of patents is worth (almost 3 times as big as Motorola's) then you realize RIMM has very strong upside.

Thanks for all you comments.
Ivi - 4 years ago

Regarding Tighanx comment: "RIMM is definitely NOT AAPL years ago..."

I agree with his comment. That is why in the article I'm pointing out that an absurdly low valuation for AAPL was 10x P/E (~$76/share) while for RIMM an absurdly low valuation is 6x P/E. (6x P/E equates to $35/share and on Friday it closed under 4x P/E).

I also agree with his point on market share. But the way I evaluate investments is in terms of valuation. Apple certainly deserves a premium to RIMM. It would make sense to me that if Apple trades at 15x P/E maybe RIMM trades at 10 or 12x P/E. But if it trades at 4x P/E, I just think the market is overreacting. Anyhow, I continue to be long RIMM and have also been adding since the day I posted the article.

Also you may find these two links interesting:

If you now combine the two articles and realize how much RIMM's portfolio of patents is worth (almost 3 times as big as Motorola's) then you realize RIMM has very strong upside.

Thanks for all you comments.
Ivi - 4 years ago
Fairfax bought 6.3million shares of RIMM during Q2 2011. For those of you who haven't heard of Fairfax and Prem Watsa, here are two links...

Ry.zamora - 4 years ago
I just love your introduction. Just goes to show career risk is omnipresent in the analyst profession.

Judging from the smorgasbord of patents RIMM has under its belt, obviously that company's the beast in Patent Protection, not to mention the pessimistic valuation is rather alluring. If there's one thing I'd like to know now (if only to strengthen the good outlook this piece has shed on RIMM), what were their unit sales like over the past few years?

Tkervin - 4 years ago
Question to RIMM bulls. Is the current (as I type) 20% pull back in RIMM share price and the third straight quarterly miss an additional buying opportunity?
Boneflute - 4 years ago

This "third straight quarterly miss" that the WS makes into a tragedy was the 1st (plus the revision in April 2011). The March quarter was in line.

In sales numbers was 4.17 vs. 4.2-4.8M, that is less than 1% off the low limit.

Anyways, everybody ant their grandma knew this was to be a crappy quarter, migrating from OS6 devices to OS7. They have actually sold through 13.4M devices, while shipping 10.4M. I'm actually impressed, given that they sold OS5 and OS6 devices. And this sell-through device graph definitely looks better than the shipped number, and it's also more market-sensitive.

What is important now is how the OS7 devices will sell. If the figure Balsilie threw at the conference is near correct (35% of the devices in the last Q were OS7, and they only shipped for 1-2 weeks) they should come around 16M units.

But we'll see.

Buying opportunity? Your call. :-)

RIM is priced for 50% probability of folding in two years and 50% being bought.

What is for sure is that if the sales will be in line next Q you won't see the stock at these values anymore. Ever. (Unless, of course, they do another split, which I wouldn't, given the amount of speculation)

Please leave your comment:

Get WordPress Plugins for easy affiliate links on Stock Tickers and Guru Names | Earn affiliate commissions by embedding GuruFocus Charts
GuruFocus Affiliate Program: Earn up to $400 per referral. ( Learn More)