Contrarian Corpus
activist full deck initial thesis
2021-05-01 · 13 pages

Hilton Grand Vacations HGV

HGV is overpaying 10x EBITDA for Diamond and handing Apollo effective control with no premium; standalone HGV is worth $55 — shareholders should vote AGAINST.

N 4 Narrative
V 3 Visual
C 3 Craft
Source URL unavailable

Thesis

Land & Buildings urges HGV shareholders to vote AGAINST the proposed acquisition of Apollo-owned Diamond Resorts International, arguing the deal overpays at 10x 2019 EBITDA versus BofA's own fairness range of 6.5-8.0x and issues HGV stock at $40.55, the low end of BofA's $35.75-$50.75 valuation. The structure hands Apollo a 28% stake, two board seats, and a voting obligation to back the HGV board in contested elections — an effective transfer of control without any control premium. Standalone HGV is worth $55 per share applying Marriott Vacations' 11.2x multiple to management's 2022 EBITDA, and is forecast to grow EBITDA 16% annually through 2025 versus Diamond's 4%, with outsized exposure to recovering Las Vegas, Orlando, Hawaii and Japan leisure markets that Diamond would dilute.

SCQA

Situation

Hilton Grand Vacations is a timeshare operator positioned for a strong post-pandemic recovery given heavy exposure to Las Vegas, Orlando, Hawaii and Japan, with management forecasting 16% standalone EBITDA CAGR from 2022 to 2025.

Complication

HGV's board agreed to buy Apollo's Diamond Resorts at 10x EBITDA (vs BofA's 6.5-8.0x fairness range), issuing stock at the low end of its own valuation and granting Apollo 28% ownership, two board seats and voting obligations that entrench management.

Resolution

Shareholders should vote AGAINST the Diamond Acquisition so that HGV remains a standalone company, preserves its superior growth profile and avoids ceding effective control to Apollo without payment of a control premium.

Reward

Standalone HGV is worth approximately $55 per share — applying Marriott Vacations' 11.2x EBITDA multiple to HGV's own 2022 EBITDA forecast — versus issuance at $40.55, implying material upside preserved by rejecting the deal.

The three reasons

  1. 1

    HGV paying 10x EBITDA for Diamond vs BofA fairness range of 6.5-8.0x

  2. 2

    Apollo gets 28% stake and board rights — control transfer with no premium

  3. 3

    Diamond dilutes HGV's 16% EBITDA growth to 4% — standalone worth $55/share

Primary demands

  • Vote AGAINST HGV's acquisition of Diamond Resorts International
  • Preserve HGV as a standalone company to capture 16% EBITDA CAGR
  • Reject transfer of effective control to Apollo without a control premium
  • Reject issuance of HGV shares at $40.55 — the low end of BofA's fairness range

KPIs cited

EBITDA multiple paid for Diamond
10x 2019 EBITDA vs BofA fairness range of 6.5-8.0x
BofA implied equity value for HGV
$35.75-$50.75 per share; HGV issuing at $40.55 (low end)
BofA DCF equity value for Diamond
$580mm-$1,110mm vs $1,479mm paid (~75% premium)
BofA EBITDA equity value for Diamond (2022E)
$490mm-$970mm vs $1,479mm paid (~100% premium)
HGV standalone EBITDA CAGR 2022-2025
16% vs Diamond 4% (1,200 bps gap)
Apollo post-merger ownership of HGV
~28% stake with two board seats and voting obligations
HGV standalone fair value
$55/share at 11.2x VAC multiple on 2022E EBITDA
HGV revenue mix by market
40% Las Vegas + Orlando, 22% Hawaii, 12% Japan, 10% Regional US, 16% other
Diamond equity offer trajectory
Raised from $935M in June 2020 to $1.5B (~50% increase)
Synergy target
$125M — at risk given 2018 investor day miss

Pattern membership

Where this document fits across the library's 12 rhetorical / structural patterns.

Precedents cited

  • Marriott Vacations (VAC) 11.2x EBITDA multiple as standalone valuation benchmark

Notable slides (6)

Notes

Merger-vote campaign deck (not a classic proxy contest). L&B opposes HGV's Apollo-structured acquisition of Diamond Resorts, arguing overpayment and covert control transfer. Presentation date not printed on cover; inferred from filename and April 30 response reference. Stake not disclosed in this document. Six of thirteen pages are titled 'HGV's Misleading Claims' — structured as point-by-point rebuttal of HGV's April 30 Schedule 14A response, which is an unusually dialogic format. Mark Wang CEO quote on page 12 used to corroborate L&B's Japan recovery thesis rather than expose a contradiction, but quote-contradiction framing applies to HGV's fairness opinion (10x paid vs 6.5-8x BofA range).