Contrarian Corpus
activist full deck follow up
2019-02-13 · 58 pages

Pershing Square Holdings, Ltd. (annual portfolio update; covers CMG, ADP, QSR, LOW, SBUX, HLT, UTX, HHC, FNMA/FMCC) PSH

N 3 Narrative
V 3 Visual
C 2 Craft
Original source ↗

The three reasons

  1. 1

    PSH trades at 27% discount to NAV despite 13.8% net CAGR since 2004 vs 8.4% for S&P 500

  2. 2

    Concentrated portfolio of high-quality, FCF-generative compounders outperformed S&P by 1,500bps YTD 2019

  3. 3

    Restructured firm (74 to 38 employees) refocused on core principles and constructive activism

Primary demands

  • Close PSH's ~27% discount to NAV via tender, buybacks, removal of 4.99% ownership cap, and a new quarterly dividend
  • UTX: separate into three independent companies (Aerospace, Otis, Carrier)
  • CMG: complete operational turnaround under new CEO Brian Niccol
  • Lowe's: narrow EBIT margin gap to Home Depot under new CEO Marvin Ellison

KPIs cited

PSH discount to NAV
~27% as of 2/12/2019
PSLP net CAGR since 1/1/2004
13.8% vs 8.4% for S&P 500
2018 net return (PSH)
-0.7% vs S&P 500 -4.4% (375 bps outperformance)
2019 YTD net return (PSH)
24.7% vs S&P 500 9.7% (1,500 bps outperformance)
PSH new quarterly dividend yield
$0.10/share = 2.5% yield, vs ~2.1% S&P 500
Free float reduction since April 2018
24.5% via $300m tender + $520m PSCM affiliate purchases
Headcount reduction
From 74 employees at peak to 38 today
Lowe's EBIT margin
9.3% vs Home Depot 14.5%; mgmt targets 12% medium-term
UTX sum-of-parts discount
~30% to peers; trades at 14x P/E despite double-digit EPS growth
ADP guidance EPS FY2021
~$7 vs ~$4 at time of initial investment; targets 23-25% EBIT margin vs ~32% structural potential
Portfolio EBIT margin (2019E)
22% vs 15% for S&P 500 ex Financials/RE/Energy
Portfolio EBIT growth 18E-20E
14% vs 8% for S&P 500 ex Financials/RE/Energy
Total Firm AUM
$7.9bn as of 2/12/2019, up from $6.4bn at 12/31/2018
Starbucks new unit pretax returns
~55% in U.S. and ~75% in China
Hilton net unit growth
6-7% annual; pipeline = 40% of current rooms

Pattern membership

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

Notable slides (9)

Notes

Annual LP update for Pershing Square Holdings (the publicly-listed closed-end fund), not a single-target activist deck. Three-part narrative: (1) close the NAV discount via capital actions + dividend, (2) prove the firm has 'returned to roots' after the 2015-2017 drawdown via headcount cut and discipline, (3) walk through each portfolio company. Peer-gap framing applied at fund level (PSH vs hedge funds; PSH vs S&P 500) and at position level (LOW vs HD; UTX vs aerospace peers). 'What we said / What we did' framing on slides 21-22 is a clean before/after device. Tone is collaborative/promotional rather than adversarial — no villain, no quote-contradiction, no fraud rhetoric. UTX breakup is treated as won (announced Nov 2018). CMG and ADP positioned as in-progress activist wins. Useful as a specimen of post-drawdown 'comeback narrative' construction by an activist fund.