Contrarian Corpus
activist full deck initial thesis
2023-05-11 · 41 pages

The Goodyear Tire & Rubber Company GT

Goodyear's industry-low 5% margin and under-monetized 715-store retail platform create $32/share of value vs $11 today — via board refresh, retail sale, and operational review.

Thesis

Elliott argues Goodyear — the #1 US tire manufacturer with a 125-year brand and 21% replacement-volume share — has materially underperformed for a decade due to self-inflicted operational missteps, most notably the 2018 TireHub distribution JV that cost ~$400M in lost profit and widened the margin gap with Michelin and Bridgestone to ~700bps. Management has missed every long-term target since 2016 (falling ~70% short of the $3B segment operating income goal) and lowered margin guidance repeatedly. Elliott recommends three actions: refresh the board with five new independent directors, monetize the ~715 Company-owned retail stores (worth nearly the entire market cap at peer multiples), and launch an operational review to recapture 385bps of SG&A, go-to-market, and brand/SKU margin. Combined, these unlock $32/share — 179% upside from $11 — assuming no multiple expansion.

SCQA

Situation

Goodyear is the #1 North American tire manufacturer with 21% replacement share, the three largest NA plants, leading OE attach rates with GM/Stellantis/Ford/Tesla, and a 125-year brand — operating in a favorable high-value-added tire market.

Complication

Despite these advantages, Goodyear posts industry-low 5.1% operating margin — ~560bps below peers and widening — driven by a failed TireHub distribution JV, bloated SG&A, uncontrolled SKU proliferation, and an under-invested retail platform.

Resolution

The Board should appoint five new independent directors with auto/operations expertise, sell the ~715 Company-owned retail stores to de-lever, and form an Operational Review Committee to recapture the 385bps margin gap.

Reward

Monetizing retail ($4/share) plus recapturing 385bps of margin ($16/share) yields a pro-forma share price of $32 — 179% upside from $11 — assuming no TEV/EBITDA multiple expansion.

The three reasons

  1. 1

    Retail stores alone could be worth nearly Goodyear's entire market capitalization

  2. 2

    Operating margin of 5.1% vs 10.7% peer average — gap has widened, not closed

  3. 3

    CEO missed 2016 Investor Day $3B target by ~70%; margin promises repeatedly broken

Primary demands

  • Appoint five new independent directors identified by Elliott with automotive and operational experience
  • Monetize Goodyear's ~715 Company-owned consumer retail stores via sale to a focused, well-capitalized buyer
  • Form an Operational Review Committee to close the margin gap vs. Michelin and Bridgestone
  • Conduct a management review and consider leadership change
  • Use retail sale proceeds to de-lever the balance sheet

KPIs cited

CY2022 adjusted operating margin
Goodyear 5.1% vs peer average 10.7% (Pirelli 14.8%, Michelin 11.9%, Bridgestone 11.7%)
Operating margin gap vs Michelin/Bridgestone
Widened from (1.0)% in 2016 to (7.0)% in 2023E
10-year cumulative TSR underperformance
(208) vs S&P 500; (156) vs 2021 proxy peers; (332) over current CEO tenure
US replacement volume share
21% #1 (Michelin 15%, Bridgestone 14%, Continental 8%)
SKU count
376 SKUs — ~2x Bridgestone's 200 and Michelin's 150
SG&A reduction since 2016
Goodyear only (128)bps vs Michelin (369)bps and Bridgestone (242)bps
Channel cost / TireHub drag
Sell-out ASP +38% vs sell-in +24% since 2016 — ~$400M lost profit / ~205bps on 2023E revenue
Company-owned retail footprint
~1,025 global stores; ~715 consumer retail generating ~$1.5B revenue and ~$195M EBITDA
Retail store valuation
12.9x public peer / 14.6x precedent TEV/EBITDA multiples imply ~$2.4B net proceeds
Invested capital vs NOPAT 2016-2022
Invested capital +46% while NOPAT declined 42%; Michelin +38%/+26%, Bridgestone +38%/+7%
2016 Investor Day target
$3B segment operating income by 2020; 2020 actual ($14M); 2022 only $1.3B
Margin upside bridge
+385bps = 114bps SG&A + 201bps go-to-market + 70bps brand/SKU
Management incentive payout
~115% annual payout ratio over last three years despite poor performance
Sell-side coverage
7 analysts cover Goodyear vs 12-20 for peers (Continental 20, Pirelli 19, Michelin 18)
Retail-platform unit CAGR 2017-2022
Goodyear (3%) vs Driven Brands 14%, Mister 12%, Boyd 11%, Valvoline 9%, Monro 4%

Pattern membership

Where this document fits across the library's 12 rhetorical / structural patterns. Orange cells are present in this deck; neutral cells are not.

Precedents cited

  • Mavis Tire sale to BayPine (16.7x LTM EBITDA)
  • Pep Boys acquisition by Icahn Enterprises (14.2x)
  • Midas acquisition by TBC Corporation (13.0x)
  • Driven Brands' acquisition of International Car Wash Group (2020)

Composition what's on the 41 slides

Visual + textual elements counted across every slide in this deck. Hover a box for what that element is; click to see every slide in the corpus that uses it.

Slide gallery ·

All 41
No slide inventory yet

Pass-2 extraction may still be in progress for this deck.

Notes

Strong example of a fully-branded activist campaign — bespoke 'Accelerating Goodyear' wordmark (chevron arrow, Goodyear yellow-on-blue) with companion microsite AcceleratingGT.com. Cover features a Goodyear-liveried race car. SCQA structure is tight: Market Leader / Poor Performance / Accelerating Goodyear tri-column (p6) then four numbered grievances (p17). Rhetoric relies heavily on quoting CEO Kramer and former CFO Darren Wells verbatim to document repeatedly-broken margin promises (p29). Ex-employee and ex-competitor quotes reinforce operational critique. Elliott signals breadth of diligence (90+ former-employee interviews, ops consultant, customer surveys, shareholder survey). Stake (~10% / ~$1B, reported publicly the same day) is NOT disclosed inside the deck. All pages bear '10XEBITDA.com' watermark — indicates this copy was redistributed via a third-party repository.