Hide

FocusBar

Subscribe to Premium Member
Free 7-day Trial
All Articles and Columns »

Corinthian Colleges - The Case for Growth

November 26, 2012 | About:
Here’s an established, geographically diverse business with high margins, low cyclicality and a defensible market position in a rapidly growing industry. It trades at 2x FCF — a 50% yield.

There’s a very good reason for this. The market mistakenly believes the cash flow is unsustainable — this business is toast.

The Company

Corinthian Colleges Inc. is a large American entry-level, post-secondary career education company. The company serves some 100,000 students from 100 schools in the U.S. and 16 schools in Canada. Corinthian's top market is California (roughly 25% of total).

The main program area is health care. Other programs include criminal justice, business administration, information technology, vehicle maintenance and construction.

The company has 16,000 employees, including 6,000 faculty of which 1,750 are full-time.

The company was founded in 1995 and has been publicly traded since 1999.

Shares trade on the Nasdaq at $2.20, for a market capitalization of $185 million.

The Growth

Traditional, state-funded, colleges are turning away millions of students. Specifically for the health care industry, there is a massive, acute and growing shortage of trained professionals. Historically, health-care professionals were trained at state-funded community colleges.

While states are required to provide primary and secondary education to children, they are not required to provide post-secondary education to adults. As state budgets have come under pressure, this has led to a significant reduction of funding for community colleges.

In California alone, the state’s 112 community colleges have turned away 300,000 students since 2008. There are almost 2 million students within the California Community Colleges system training to be nurses, welders, auto mechanics, airplane mechanics and construction workers. New students were turned away for no other reason than the fact that the state’s colleges had insufficient funds and capacity.

As a result, students have no option but to take a loan from the federal government and enroll at one of a handful of schools that comply with the standards that make them eligible for title IV funding.

Why Has There Been No Growth Recently?

Until 2010, Corinthian Colleges basically signed up anyone and everyone. The government assumed adult students loading up on federal loans to pay for their tuition would work hard to get a diploma, land a better job and repay the loans. Government was wrong.

While it lasted, the for-profit institutions took the business. It was easy money. If students didn’t show up, the institutions could simply pocket a portion of the fees without providing a meaningful service.

Then, the Department of Education (ED) changed the rules. Now the schools are accountable for outcomes and the default rates on the loans. Any institution whose cohort default rate equals or exceeds 25% may lose participation eligibility in the guaranteed loan program. Its students will be denied access to the federally guaranteed student loan programs.

In response, Corinthian Colleges stopped enrolling at-risk students. The result is a step change in student population.



The at-risk students were replaced by an increasing number of quality full-time students who were turned away by the traditional state-funded colleges. Default rates on the loans have been decimated. There has been a dramatic improvement in the retention of students (57% to 80%). Less churn should have an impact on profitability going forward.

Now that the company has brought outcomes in line with the new rules, Corinthian Colleges can once again start enrolling the growing number of students that are being turned away from state-funded schools. This market opportunity is many multiples of current revenue.

Management

In November 2010, Jack Massimino returned as CEO to whip the company into shape in response to the new regulatory environment. Prior to this re-appointment, Massimino served as chairman of the board. Jack Massimino had previously served as CEO from November 2004 until July 2009.

He took on a lot of extra work. He took on some extra responsibility. He declined to take a raise.



Much of the incentives came in the form of stock options. They have double-digit strike prices. Massimino stands to lose millions of dollars unless the company’s stock trades at double-digit prices within a few years.

As is usual, the board has set minimum stock ownership guidelines for the CEO. Massimino is expected to own an amount of stock worth at least 3x his annual salary.

Including the options, Massimino owns 2 million shares (2.2%). At current prices, that’s roughly 5x his base salary. Nevertheless, like other insiders and most recently Ruane Cunniff, he is accumulating more stock.

Specific Risk

Market risk. I was bullish on this stock at much higher prices. The thesis then was that the company should be able to earn 55 cents per share, assuming the company could stabilize its student population at 100,000. After two years, I stand by that thesis. As is my experience with any stock I like, the mere fact that I believe it’s a bargain doesn’t prevent the market from cutting the share price in half.

Political Risk. It is a popular pass-time for members of congress to bash for-profit institutions. A lot of proposed legislation is leveled at the for-profits while ignoring the inefficiencies at the traditional (not-for-profit) state-funded colleges. Some of this stuff may actually stand up to the scrutiny of the courts.

Compliance. COCO needs to comply with a lot of regulations. Including the new regulations from the ED. Many of COCO's programs are less than one year. Unlike the competitors offering multi-year programs, they can react quickly. They can test new programs and teach-out underperforming ones in months. That is precisely what they are doing. Of course, the regulations also form massive barriers to entry. There is a reason most of the traditional colleges don't apply and their students have no access to the federal loans.

Corinthian has been operating succesfully in Canada (Ontario) for many years. In Ontario, the Ministry of Training, Colleges and Universities has a policy whereby the government will only guarantee defaulted student loans to a certain capped amount (25%), beyond which the applicable private career college is responsible for guaranteeing repayment. This is much tougher than any of the new US regulations but it does not prevent Corinthian from making money in Canada.

Value

Back in 2010, I estimated earnings power of $50 million on a hopefully stable student population of 100,000. That’s a profit of $500 per student, or $0.55 per share.

Over the last 12 months, the company generated $100 million of FCF ($1,000 per student) while its student population grew. As we have seen, churn has declined. The company is retaining its students. This should have a positive impact on both the student population and administrative overhead going forward.

Since 2010, the company has:
  1. Shed some $200 million of goodwill.
  2. Depreciated PP&E at $75 million per annum. That’s pretty steep for PP&E with a book value of $600 million.
  3. Spent the better part of $200 million on capital expenditures. Again, they did that on property that was worth $600 million to begin with.
The non-cash charges cause GAAP earnings to temporarily understate FCF and IMO owner earnings too.

Based on the information available today, I believe my estimate of earnings power of $0.55 per share is still pretty pessimistic. Current FCF points to a figure that’s twice as high.

Disclosure

This is not a recommendation to buy or sell anything. I own shares of Corinthian Colleges Inc. and the Washington Post company. I have no position in any of the other stocks mentioned.

Any and all questions welcome as usual.

Read more

Community colleges turning away students
Community colleges failing to train nurses despite heavy demand
Bill Gates talks about education and state budgets
A feeble attempt at a writeup (2010)
Recent Proxy
Recent 10q
Bill Gates talks some more.

About the author:

I define intrinsic value as the price I would gladly pay to own the business outright. With current management in place. For most stocks, that value is 0. As of September 2012, I'm the author of the monthly Buffett-Munger Best Bargains Newsletter.

Visit batbeer2's Website


Related links:


Tickers in the article:


Download guru portfolio report (PDF format):

Bill GatesDownload Guru portfolio report
Bill Gates (Updated on 05/23/2013)

What Worked in the Stock Market for Long-Term Investors?

Extensive research has found that the companies with predictable revenues and earnings outperform the market average; they also suffer lower probability of loss. As a matter of fact, this kind of companies are exactly what Warren Buffett wants to buy and hold forever. Please read the research about what worked in the stock market:

Part I: What worked in the market from 1998-2008? Part I: Predictability Rank
Part II: Role of Valuations
Part III: Intrinsic Value, Discounted Cash Flow and Margin of Safety


Rating: 4.1/5 (39 votes)

Comments

jasonfrey33
Jasonfrey33 - 5 months ago
Thanks for the article. I am reviewing the regulatory compliance. Last reported 3 year default rate at 27%, I know they expect improvement in 2012, but this is a high rate. I believe they also have 35/101 campuses not at gainful employment placement rates goal. COCO also has 328 million in guaranteed 3rd party off balance sheet student loans. I would expect a high default rate on these loans, possible 100 mil of bad debt expenses going forward. The $37.6 mill in cash will help to cushion these loan losses along with any lawsuits they may face going forward. It would seem to me that the company is worth at least $400 mil. even if all the cash is used for lawsuits, bad debt expense. Why this stock over ESI, APOL or DV? I have reviewed STRA, they are still not cheap enough for my taste. EDMC has repriced all their options a few months ago, combined with the heavy debt load and variable rate revolving credit lines I would not touch them. CECO will likely burn through its cash this year to pay for campus closings. Still some potential in that company. Devry is in my opinion best buy for the price.

batbeer2
Batbeer2 premium member - 5 months ago
Hi Jasonfrey33,

>> Why this stock over ESI, APOL or DV?

Three reasons:
- I know more about COCO than about the others. I've been following it longer.
- They are at the entry level with programs typically lasting less than one year. This means they can react quickly to the changing environment by adjusting the composition of the student population.
- I already own Kaplan in that space.

At the end of the day I believe a collection of schools with 100,000 students, each paying about $15,000 per annum to get an education, should be worth a bit more than $2000 per student. Especially if the number of students is growing.
buynhold
Buynhold - 5 months ago
Batbeer,

Thanks for another interesting writeup! Couple of thoughts:

1) Isn't current owner-earnings more like $50 mil or so, once you take out the unlikely to be repeated working capital improvements (they detracted from FCF last year, look at these over a few years and you'll see)?
2) Here's an article on a big reason behind the default rates going down:
[higheredwatch.newamerica.net]

If this is indeed the case, it could very well be that the improvement isn't sustainable over time, maybe just long enough for Massimino to cash in on his stock options (i.e., a cigar butt investment) :)?
varunfriend
Varunfriend premium member - 5 months ago

Capella (CPLA) is another interesting company - its a regionally accredited, exclusively online postsecondary education company. It offers bachelor's, master's, and doctoral programs in behavioral health and human services, business management and technology, public service leadership, and education. More than 80% of students are enrolled in master's or doctoral programs. Capella serves roughly 39,000 students.

No debt
Generate abt 1180$ FCF / student
Almost $10 / share in cash
FCF / share = $3.6
FCF Yield = 13%

The risk with for profit sector is regulatory and in the present polarized environment looking for scapegoats that could be the telling factor in terms of what happens in the industry.

Another way of playing this could be to just buy the basket of for profits .. that will certainly do well over time.
batbeer2
Batbeer2 premium member - 5 months ago
>> The risk with for profit sector is regulatory and in the present polarized environment looking for scapegoats that could be the telling factor in terms of what happens in the industry.

Yes. They won't kill the for-profits though. In the end, the for-profit system is better for the budget.

- The federal government borrows money at 2% (10 year treasuries) and lends it to students at 3%.
- Students look for a school that caters to their needs (open market).
- The schools are responsible for managing the portfolio of loans and keeping default rates low.
- If they do all that and still manage to make a profit, the profit is taxed.

That is a lot cheaper than simply handing tax dollars to traditional community colleges and universities.

This driver is not going away despite a lot of noise by politicians. It's a good thing the government is regulating this industry but again, it is not going to kill it.

>> Another way of playing this could be to just buy the basket of for profits .. that will certainly do well over time.

Yes. For me, picking individual stocks keeps me honest (thinking and acting like an owner not a stock renter).
batbeer2
Batbeer2 premium member - 5 months ago
Hi Buynhold

Thanks for the kind words.

>> 1) Isn't current owner-earnings more like $50 mil or so

$50 million is fine by me. I've dug into the FCF more than I've talked about in the article.
Mine's a bit higher ($ 75m) because I think they've been spending a lot (more than run-rate) on Capex.

>> 2) Here's an article on a big reason behind the default rates going down:

I was aware of the article you point to. It neglects to mention retention is up (churn is down). That's not just paper trickery. It supports my thesis that the business has fundmentally improved.

From the article:

To accomplish a lower reported default rate, Corinthian hired three contractors. One was General Revenue Corporation, which devoted 60 full-time employees to call former Corinthian students who were late making payments but not yet in default. The company also hired two firms, ROI and TEAM Enterprises, to send out 30 or more people to knock on former students’ doors to secure ‘cures.’ This same document reveals that students in late stages of delinquency but not yet in default -- a period during which they are the biggest threat to Corinthian’s default rate – could be contacted up to 110 times per month. Another internal document shows that, in order to achieve the company’s desired default rate, the call center run by General Revenue Corporation would make between 2 and 2.5 million calls a year, or 429 calls per employee per day to former Corinthian students


So here we have a private company fighting to reclaim some of your tax dollars from people defaulting on federal loans. The author of that article thinks that's bad (unsustainable?). IMHO this is precisely how the broken banks should have managed their loan portfolio. Also, I presume Corinthian Colleges now has a pretty clear picture of who is likely to service their loans (or not). That's pretty valuable information when enrolling (or not) new students.

From the article:

A numbers game, indeed. By pushing former students to get forbearances and deferments on their loans, Corinthian has been able to artificially lower its schools’ rates and make sure that these institutions continue to receive hundreds of millions of dollars in federal student aid funds each year.

In short, even if you take a dim view of these practices (I think it's fine but that's just some Dutchman's opinion), the result supports the thesis.
jasonfrey33
Jasonfrey33 - 5 months ago
Regarding the 90/10 rule. Many for-profits claim they cannot lower tuition without violating the 90/10 rule. This creates an environment that fosters competition on items aside from price. My understanding is that a lower cost to attend a college would result in the student obtaining all funding from federal loans. A higher cost results in students meeting the cap on federal loans and forces the student to take out private loans in addition. It looks like the 90/10 rule protects non-profits and for profits from price competition. Thoughts?

batbeer2
Batbeer2 premium member - 5 months ago
>> It looks like the 90/10 rule protects non-profits and for profits from price competition. Thoughts?

Corinthian is lowering its tuition rates as we speak. As you point out, rates were previuosly raised to comply with 90/10. It seems they are happy with the 90/10 revenue split within the current student population. If they weren't, they wouldn't be lowering rates.

Schools have some operating leverage. Attracting 25% more students with 10% lower rates will always make business sense. Even for the public schools. For the for-profits, 90/10 will counteract that somewhat. The days of opening the floodgates are over.
buynhold
Buynhold - 5 months ago
>> So here we have a private company fighting to reclaim some of your tax dollars from people
>> defaulting on federal loans. The author of that article thinks that's bad (unsustainable?). IMHO this
>> is precisely how the broken banks should have managed their loan portfolio.

I would say the author there is correct in saying that the reported drop in default rates (from 25% to 3%) is not sustainable, since deferment will only prevent defaults where there is a liquidity problem (same goes for the broken banks - it won't fix solvency issues with the defaulters; IMO the banks should have made their bondholders take a haircut when faced with solvency problems (and not the taxpayer)).

However, I do agree with you that the information COCO gets through this process can be used to drastically (and sustainably) reduce actual default rates so they can keep qualifying for federal funds (without the need to play numbers games to satisfy changing regulations).

APOL has a similar valuation, and I really like the fact that the Sperlings own a huge chunk of it, but as you point out, COCO should be more nimble in the face of changing regulation. Tough call (for me!).
batbeer2
Batbeer2 premium member - 5 months ago
>> Tough call (for me!).

May you have lots of problems like that ;-)
jasonfrey33
Jasonfrey33 - 5 months ago
I see in the last conference call they got the private lenders to reduce the interest rates on student loans. In turn COCO made some promises to the lenders. Do you know where to find info on the new terms?

Quite a few student class action lawsuits pending. It appears that APOl had students sign an agreement upon enrollment to waive rights to such lawsuits. Have you accounted for a possible loss on lawsuits? If so how large, or do you feel current reserves are adequate?

With 37.5 mil in cash and a revolving credit line nearly maxed out, do you see a risk in obtaining additional credit if a large settlement is reached?

Are you concerned about current gainful employment compliance, or do you feel this will be resolved easily?

Just interested in a second opinion as these issues carry over to most for profits.

Great work and thank you.

batbeer2
Batbeer2 premium member - 5 months ago
Hi Jasonfrey33,

Thanks for your questions.

>> With 37.5 mil in cash and a revolving credit line nearly maxed out, do you see a risk in obtaining additional credit if a large settlement is reached?

No.
1) In a couple of years they've reduced debt from 300m to 100m. Obviously the debt capacity of the company is higher than the current load.

2) You'll notice they reported a high receivables balance. That's cold cash sitting at the ED that they've probably collected by now. Read the 10q for detail.

3) It may be class action but there are many variables involved. The class can't be very large (pun intended). You'll notice the average COCO school has 1000 students.....

These are adults who physically signed some important documents. They didn't succeed at their endeavors and they are blaming the school. Meanwile, it's not COCO that loaned them the money.

If I had to argue the case before a judge, I would go looking for someone who completed the course, fully cooperated with all the efforts of the school to help get a job and was clearly lied to before being enrolled. I doubt there are many of those.

Assuming you find 10 000 of them and they settle for an amount equal to triple the tuition fees they paid to begin with, the liability should be less than $150m. You must find them before COCO gets to them and offers to make their debt problems "go away" if they sign on the dotted line.


>> Are you concerned about current gainful employment compliance, or do you feel this will be resolved easily?

I'm not concerned.

1) COCO makes money in Canada where the rules are tougher. Why shouldn't they be able to comply in the US?

2) One court has overturned the new rules. IMO the rules are an improvement but I also think they're borderline in a legal sense. Party A borrows some money from B. Party C, who has no authority over A or C, is punished if A doesn't pay back. That's probably a pretty tough rule to uphold in many American courts if push comes to shove.

3) To me there's no question they can comply. They could shrink to half the student population - enrolling only the best of the best (lets call them AAA rated). At current prices you would still be looking at a cheap business. It's more a question of whether you believe management is knowingly running the business into the ground by continuing to enroll at-risk students. I don't believe that's the case.


>> Have you accounted for a possible loss on lawsuits?

Yes. I consider it immaterial to the thesis.

For anyone wishing to question the practice of accounting for an unknown liability, I refer you to a thread on WCG here: [www.gurufocus.com]

From that old thread:

Lets me put it the way Graham put it. Had you had the option of buying the rights to the settlement.... You would pay the state an X ammount and take over negotiations with WCG from there. What would that have been worth to you. 100 M ? 500 M ? 1000 M ? 50 M ?

No way would a reasonable investor have been willing to pay 500 M for the right to collect on any settlement or fine. Why then would those investors subtract >> 1B from the price of the company ?
batbeer2
Batbeer2 premium member - 5 months ago
@ Buybhold

I had a brief look at APOL. It's much cheaper than it was and the balance sheet sure is impressive. WOW.

I like the fact that Ruane Cunniff is buying. Yeah, that may be similar. I'll give it a pass because I already have Kaplan in that particular space.
jasonfrey33
Jasonfrey33 - 5 months ago
Thank you for the insights, especially the lawsuit perspective. Reverse engineering at its finest.

batbeer2
Batbeer2 premium member - 5 months ago
@ Jasonfrey33

One more thing.....

Imagine you are the lawyer working on this in California. You have hunted down a number of former students who all say they worked hard and were lied to so now they're jobless and penniless. You get 50% of any settlement (yeah you're that kind of lawyer).

As you are preparing for your day in court, you get a call from Ronald Olson (Tolles, Munger and Olson). Olson is a California Lawyer who just happens to sit of on the board of WPO who happen to own 11% of COCO. A stake they bought when Gates was on the board of WPO (Melinda). Unlike you, Olson has been in the the for-profit education business for a decade.

Olson is acting on behalf of COCO and has access to the files of all your clients from when they were at school.

How do you fancy your chances in court now?

Olson is offering $ 45m (remember, you get half). What are you going to do?

Just some fun and idle speculation..... couldn't resist :o)
batbeer2
Batbeer2 premium member - 3 months ago
The 10-q is out, shares are down.

The good:
- The company has eliminated some $100m of debt. I find it remarkable that the company trades for $ 200m while it has shown it is able to retire $100m of debt in six months (now down to $31m.)

- More students are staying longer. Churn has been further reduced. There may be fewer students (2% less) but more of them are studying full-time. For a given period, a full-time student brings in more revenue than a part-time student. As a result, revenue is up.


The bad:
- The number of students (excluding Quickstart) is down. There were still too many ATB students and the company had to shed a few. This is probably the number the market is focussed on.


The ugly:
- In November, the ED sent a letter in which they claim the company was not in compliance during 2011 (under the previous CEO). COCO may need to post a letter of credit to the ED to the tune of $175m.

I cannot imagine the ED denying COCO's students access to title-IV (pulling the license) for being out of compliance in 2011 (they are in compliance currently). A lot of aspiring nurses and medical assistants will have no where to go if the ED does that. Having said that, it is an ugly possibility.

If push comes to shove, I believe COCO could come up with $ 175m. They've serviced higher amounts of debt in the past. Nevertheless, this issue is pretty ugly and could become uglier.
blainehodder
Blainehodder - 3 months ago
It is absolutely absurd how cheap this is. I am stepping in here at 2.30.

I don't think the ED is going to pull the title IV funding over a write-down of goodwill. COCO is fully in compliance for 2012 and is even in compliance under the EDs (asinine) ruling with the restated results.

The rest of the lawsuits seem to be a joke.

The industry has taken an unbelievable beating and has been completely written off as a poor idea by many (even value investors) as people refuse to sit on MTM losses, and refuse to catch falling knives.... but this is blasphemy to me. True Grahamites should look past the fibbonacci spaghetti spiral technicals, and peer through the shroud of uncertainty.

What isn't to like? The company has a great 2 step catalyst including ED reversal on Financial Responsibility compliance for title IV, and of course the inevitable buybacks. The company's trading price relative to normal earnings power is just too cheap to ignore. Barring a complete distaster in the appeal process forcing an LOC raise, this can easilly trade for many multiples of the current price.

Great analysis and writing Batbeer2 as usual! Lets hope we aren't wrong.
batbeer2
Batbeer2 premium member - 2 months ago
Thanks for the kind words.

I'm heavily invested here.
longleaf
Longleaf premium member - 2 months ago
Hi Batbeer2, I am debating if APOL and COCO are value trap rather than value investing within 5 years from now. Both of them heads 5 years low. Do you think they qualify for " Cigar-Butts" or "Buffett-Munger"? Since federal funding is shrinking for long run, can you highlight the key factors that will boost both companies to recover the revenue and margin stream eventually? Or they are just net-net bargain candidates ?
batbeer2
Batbeer2 premium member - 2 months ago
Hi Longleaf,

I like your name.

>> Do you think they qualify for " Cigar-Butts" or "Buffett-Munger"?

Both


>> Since federal funding is shrinking for long run, can you highlight the key factors that will boost both companies to recover the revenue and margin stream eventually?

Federal funding is not going to shrink. It's the state funding that will shrink. The states are in financial trouble. Unlike the feds, they don't have a money press. The states have to fund primary and secondary education. They don't have to fund post-secondary education. This will force them to cut back in a huge way on the budgets for post-secondary education. It's happening now. Budgets for the state-funded colleges are being cut at double-digit rates. Every year. Many state-funded colleges are no longer admitting new students as we speak.

90% of post-secondary education is funded by the states. (straight funding not loans!). That is going to shrink to 10% before all is said and done. The 10% of post-secondary education that is currently being funded by the feds is going to balloon to 90%. Broadly speaking, federal funding is a loan system. Taxpayers are probably better off even if just 10% of students repay the loans.

All that the ED has accomplished is that it is now very tough to get into this business. The for-profits that are eligible and are able to remain so, will grow 10 fold. You'll note COCO has been enrolling a lot of full-time (healthcare) students in recent quarters. Where did those students come from? COCO used to enroll only students who were unable or unwilling to attend full-time courses at state-funded schools. That has changed.

As I see it, COCO has room to grow at least 5-fold in the next 5-10 years. It currently trades at 2x run-rate earnings. That is why I say "both".
blainehodder
Blainehodder - 2 months ago
Link to the CS conference:

[seekingalpha.com]

Check out this passage:


You can see that in the first 6 months of the year, we generated about $102 million of operating cash flow. We used that largely to pay down debt, which if you go to the next to the bottom line, you can see debt went from $149 million down to $47 million. That's using our operating cash flow to pay debt back.

Market cap is 184M!!!!!!

On the financial responsibility and Title IV eligibility :

And so as a result, we're going through the process. We have done a number of things. We gave them 3 options to consider. The first option was we revised our 2011 numbers, which put us in the zone above 1 because we had a number of schools that we put into discontinued operations in 2012. And when you do that, you revise your 2011 filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission. And as result, that improved our performance in 2011.

The other thing we did based on a request from the department is we accelerated our filing for 2012. We've submitted that back in December. We think we're in a very good place. We think we're above 1.5 for 2012, and we think we're going to be above 1.5 for 2013. And so those were 2 of the options.



And then the third option, obviously, was to get the accounting right. So that's where we are. We're in reconsideration on that. I'm in routine conversation with the department, the most recent was about 3 weeks ago, and they're just going through a process. So that's what's happening on ED.

If I could find more securities like this I would be happy.
batbeer2
Batbeer2 premium member - 2 months ago
We used that largely to pay down debt, which if you go to the next to the bottom line, you can see debt went from $149 million down to $47 million. That's using our operating cash flow to pay debt back.

Yeah. To me that's a pretty clear indication that the company is capable of generating $100m of owner earnings. In fact, it is doing just that.

We're in reconsideration on that. I'm in routine conversation with the department, the most recent was about 3 weeks ago, and they're just going through a process. So that's what's happening on ED.

This reminds me of the situation with WCG in 2008/09. At the time, WCG was trading at 1x owner earnings and there was an investigation that was dragging on and on. To those willing to look, it was clear WCG had mended its ways but there was still uncertainty regarding the ongoing investigation.

At one point, it dawned on me that a regulator is unlikely to shut down a business for something they have known for years. The regulator would have to explain that the situation was totally unacceptable. They would also have to explain why they had allowed the business to operate for another two years before shutting it down. That is a very tough combination to sell.

Arne Duncan knows he will be unable to answer a lot of tough questions if he takes COCO to the woodshed now. The ED would be in crisis in trying to explain corrective action two years after the fact.

In short, I believe the ED is looking for ways to settle this peacefully. It will take a while though.

An old discussion with WCG trading at $7-$13: [www.gurufocus.com]
longleaf
Longleaf premium member - 2 months ago
Hi Batbeer2, Thank you for inputs. 1) I will lower my expectation since it's related too much politics and assumptions here. 2) I will wait the next market correction to tell if it hit rocky bottom already. 3) I will treat it as a tiny antique collection to put in a drawer for a couple of years to see. Thanks again.
batbeer2
Batbeer2 premium member - 1 month ago
COCO has released the three year cohort default rates as determined by the department of education.

The weighted average of the Company’s institutions was 19.0%, a 9.2 percentage point decrease from the 28.2% weighted average for the three-year measurement of the 2009 Cohort. For the 2010 Cohort, none of our institutions exceeded the 30% default threshold.

IMHO COCO is doing a good job. Some would argue they are doing it by less than etical means. Either way, the company is currently in compliance. It's also earning lots of money.

When the stock first headed south (2010), the bear case could be summed up as:

If the the ED doesn't shut down these schools for being out of compliance, they will at least crack down hard enough to permanently impair margins.

It is now 2013 and it is just not happening.

Even if the ED should come out with a new and tougher set of rules, logic dictates that the outcome will be the same. COCO will simply adjust. Since students can't enroll elsewhere, tougher rules will only serve to raise prices.

This is not a bubble. The number of students in the US is not growing. Neither is the total cost of education. It's just that more students are enrolling at for-profit schools and students are now paying for a greater percentage of the cost of their education.

Students are not taking those loans because they want to or because the loans are so cheap. They would rather not take a loan at all. They just don't have other options. The state funded colleges are basically bankrupt.

People buy Apple because they want to..... untill they don't.
People enroll at COCO because there's no alternative. That's a moat.

Just some thoughts.
blainehodder
Blainehodder - 1 month ago
Everything appears to be chugging along nicely. It is great to see the default rates under control. It can only serve to boost the ED's confidence in COCO and the title IV loan portfolio. Interesting that the stock has cratered in the past few days with what I can only describe as good news.

It seems it will only be a few more quarters before the cash will start to pile up here since the majority of interest bearing debt has been cleaned up. Now lets just hope for an announcement of a resolution on COCO's Title IV eligibility. I don't mind the massive short interest either, as it could act as decent fuel.

batbeer2
Batbeer2 premium member - 1 month ago
Worst case scenario, COCO needs to post a letter of credit to the tune of $1B. I don't think it's likely but I can't rule it out completely either.

A $1B letter of credit would be a problem (IMO non-fatal) but if the ED waits some longer, COCO's balance sheet will be so strong that they could do it without much trouble. COCO could subsequently argue they have been in compliance since and then the letter of credit would be put back to them.

As I understand it, the letter of credit is not a fine!
blainehodder
Blainehodder - 1 month ago
No, it is definitely not a fine. It is a standard LOC. The worst case scenario really appears to be 175 Million LOC to be posted. While I honestly believe the ED will repeal this ruling, if COCO is forced to come up with 175 million to be posted, it could be somewhat problematic. They simply do not have that much cash on hand (yet).... This leaves seeking capital in the market (and therefore dillution possible). Bankruptcy is a small possibility.

At current prices paid, I'll take on that risk. Remember all, the ED has real risk here too. If COCO can't come up with the money, that has real consequences on all of the students as they would no longer be eligible for federal loans. That is an enormous political risk which can be avoided with the stroke of a pen. I'm willing to play chicken with the ED. The ED is not incented to force the LOC issue, particularly given the loan portfolio to COCO students is improving, and COCO is not currently violating any metrics.

Here is the relavant info from the quarterly

The Company continues to believe its calculations regarding the 2011 composite score are correct, however in November 2012 the Company received a letter (the “ED Letter”) from the San Francisco/Seattle Participation Division of ED in which ED took a contrary position with regard to the treatment of the goodwill impairment charge and the security deposits described in items (1) and (3) above. Based on its treatment of these items, ED calculated the Company’s composite score for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2011 to be 0.9. The ED Letter further outlined the means whereby the Company can continue to meet ED’s alternative standards of financial responsibility by either (1) agreeing to become provisionally certified, accepting cash monitoring level 1, and posting an irrevocable letter of credit equal to 10% of the Title IV Program funds received by Corinthian during the fiscal year ended June 30, 2011 (calculated by ED to be $175.7 million), or (ii) remaining unconditionally certified and posting an irrevocable letter of credit equal to 50% of the Title IV Program funds received by Corinthian during the fiscal year ended June 30, 2011 (calculated by ED to be $878.5 million). The Company believes these amounts may have failed to account for refunds made during fiscal 2011, and therefore may overstate the Company’s total Title IV revenue during the year. Provisional certification status would not limit the Company’s access to Title IV Program funds, but would subject the Company’s institutions to closer review by ED and could limit the addition of new programs and locations.

batbeer2
Batbeer2 premium member - 1 month ago
>> if COCO is forced to come up with 175 million to be posted, it could be somewhat problematic. They simply do not have that much cash on hand (yet)....

IMO that wouldn't be a problem at all. COCO used to service more than $300m worth of debt without any problems. They're now down to $50m or so. Methinks they could easily borrow that kind of money in days. It's the $800m letter that worries me. Then again, that would be their own choice.
blainehodder
Blainehodder - 1 month ago
I suppose you are correct Batbeer2. I don't foresee that much trouble getting the needed financing, given the cleaned up balance sheet of the prior Q.

Ironically, this would hurt the current equity ratio in the financial responsibility metric though, but it won't push them into danger territory. I guess equity dilution isn't very likely unless they need to come up with the larger 878M sum.

I am really tempted to add to my position tomorrow morning if at these levels.

longleaf
Longleaf premium member - 1 month ago
I saw Wells Fargo filed 13G/A on April 11, added some shares for COCO.
swnyc2
Swnyc2 - 3 weeks ago
Batbeer2,

Management seems to be politically savy. First they commission a "research" study that shows an increasing need for higher education. Then they add two people to the board who should help them deal with the ED.

The more I learn, the more I can't understand why this stock is so cheap - even considering "the bad" and "the ugly" above.

A concern I always have in these situations is what I don't know (that the market does know).
I was wondering if there is a "gotcha" in the default numbers?
Namely, COCO student's default rate looks fine now. But, if COCO aggressively encouraged defaulting students to apply for a temporary loan extension, could that make the default numbers temporarily look better than they really are. Namely, after the one year extension expires, the student default rate could skyrocket and COCO could be in big trouble.
This is just a hypothesis. I don't know if this is even a possibility because I don't know how these student loans work.
Is this a concern you've looked at?
If so, I was wondering if you could share what you've learned?

Thanks!
swnyc2
Swnyc2 - 3 weeks ago
Batbeer2,

One more thing... I was a bit put off that on their recent conference call they didn't offer cash flow guidance for the full year. I thought it was a bit odd. Do you make anything of that?
swnyc2
Swnyc2 - 3 weeks ago
Never mind that last comment, JM cleared it up.
batbeer2
Batbeer2 premium member - 3 weeks ago
>> I saw Wells Fargo filed 13G/A on April 11, added some shares for COCO.

Yes. Then again, the Washington Post company sold some shares. They once owned 8%. Now its 6%.

>> But, if COCO aggressively encouraged defaulting students to apply for a temporary loan extension, could that make the default numbers temporarily look better than they really are. Namely, after the one year extension expires, the student default rate could skyrocket and COCO could be in big trouble.[/i

COCO isn't forever responsible for the behavior of their (former) students. Whether or not they have aggressively pushed out those loans.... I know I would. Being aggressive on the loans on day one while also enrolling less risky students to prevent future problems seems logical. Whether or not the former is the case is IMO irrelevant to the thesis. The important bit is that you can see the latter happening in the trailing 9 months. Student population is down while revenue is flat/up. They have more full-time students now. To me this means there's less risk in the current population.

By the way, define "in big trouble". Worst case, a given institution (that's not all of COCO) is disallowed from enrolling students that are paying for tuition with title IV loans.... until that institution gets its act together. Even if you assume management is less than ethical, this would only happen if they were dumb as well. The logical thing to do is to stop enrolling those students before the s#!t hits the fan. You'll note COCO has been "teaching out" a number of schools.

FWIW, I believe current management is both ethical and smart. The former CEO may have been less than brilliant. Peter Waller overloaded the balance sheet and triggered the issue`with fiscal 2011 "financial responsibility composite score" that could potentially force COCO to post a letter of credit to the DoE. Meanwhile he was spending cash to buy back shares. That's a dumb combination.


My best guesses as to why this is cheap:

- Many avoid the for-profit industry. It's perceived to be risky.
- Those that do invest in the space avoid COCO. It is perceived to be the worst within the industry.
- Because Master's degrees are worth more than diplomas, investors feel schools at the lower end of the spectrum should be economically worth less too... FWIW, I believe the reverse is true.
- If you invest in HPQ and the stock tanks, people will ask you "what is wrong with HPQ?" If you invest in COCO and the stock tanks people will ask "what is wrong with you?"
batbeer2
Batbeer2 premium member - 3 weeks ago
I should probably read the transcript of the conference call. It seems I'm the only one on this thread who hasn't done that yet :o)
swnyc2
Swnyc2 - 3 weeks ago
Batbeer2,

Thank you so much for your thoughts.

I guess I just don't understand the risk.
>>
- Many avoid the for-profit industry. It's perceived to be risky.
The for profit industry is filling a perceived consumer need that the not-for-profits can't or wont.
The desire for the service is relatively consistent.The company is profitable

-Those that do invest in the space avoid COCO. It is perceived to be the worst within the industry.
Why is it the worst? It has default rates that are well below federal requirements. According to yahoo finance data, as of the end of 2012 there is no net debt (cash on hand = total debt). Companies without debt don't go bankrupt.
As for the letter of credit issue, I think that it's unlikely to happen for many of the reasons described above. Furthermore, even if it did happen, the letter of credit is not a fine. They should be able to borrow the money (or worse case sell equity) for the LOC. But the money they raise for the LOC is an asset that eventually would be returned to the company - assuming the default rate doesn't go up, but they're in control of that.

If COCO has owner earnings of only $0.45 per share ($500 per student x 90,000 students) and they don't grow at all, they could pay a 10+% dividend indefinitely (with only a 50% payout ratio). That's a HUGE margin of safety!! What are the shorts thinking???

By the way, Batbeer2, I was wondering why you removed SPLS from your portfolio? You've been so patient with COCO over the years, Why not SPLS?
batbeer2
Batbeer2 premium member - 3 weeks ago
>> I was wondering why you removed SPLS from your portfolio? You've been so patient with COCO over the years, Why not SPLS?

I still like SPLS, I just like QUAD more. The thesis is similar. Both operate in an industry that is facing both cyclical and structural pressure and both are in much better shape than their direct comps.

BUT.... QUAD has roughly 10% market share and SPLS is at 30% already.
batbeer2
Batbeer2 premium member - 3 weeks ago
>> What are the shorts thinking?

I think Chanos says it best. It was a while ago though. That interview has been dug up more recently.

IMHO, If only 50% of the loans are ever repaid, that's still much more effective than the traditional system. Traditionally, states funded 80% of the cost of education directly. While some like to think that is how it should be, I believe the states simply won't be able to pay for it any longer. Importantly, they don't have to. This is a HUGE part of their budget and its discretionary. There is no law compelling states to pay for the tuition of adults.

Also, I've seen some arguments that title IV is fueling a bubble. IMO the education "market" isn't growing or "hot". There aren't many more students today than there were a decade ago. It's just that the for-profits have taken market share. As for the huge increase in tuition rates, that's not a result of higher wages or bonuses for anyone involved. I believe It's the result of reduced public spending by the states.

Please leave your comment:


More Gurufocus Links

GuruFocus Affiliate Program: Earn up to $400 per referral. ( Learn More)
Get WordPress Plugins for easy affiliate links on Stock Tickers and Guru Names
Free 7-day Trial
FEEDBACK

This article has been successfully added into your Bookmark.

Members Only. Please Sign Up or Log In first.

Bookmark of this article has been deleted.