MIFA AG (ISIN DE000A0B95Y8) – ALL THAT INVENTORY AND THE SUPPOSEDLY LARGEST BICYCLE COMPANY OF THE WORLD
Disclosure: I do not have any interest in MIFA shares or bonds and I do not plan to invest, neither long nor short. This is a “for education purposes” analysis only..
Background
MIFA is a German based manufacturer of bicycles. I had actually included them into the peer group when I looked atAccell, the Dutch bicycle company some time ago. The company went public in 2004. Its largest shareholders are the CEO (24%) and Carsten Maschmeyer, the billionaire former CEO of the controversial financial services company AWD.
A few days ago, they shocked their shareholders by sending out a press release which in my opinion is among the “all time greatest” press releases ever.
The headline was thee following:
DGAP-News: MIFA expands Management Board and announces prospective net loss for 2013
That doesn’t sound good but the highlights are within the release:
- Preliminary FY 2013 net loss of EUR 15 million
To put this in perspective, those are the accumulated earnings of MIFA since 2004:
| MIFA | Net income |
|---|---|
| 2004 | 1,8 |
| 2005 | 1,7 |
| 2006 | 0,5 |
| 2007 | -2,0 |
| 2008 | 1,2 |
| 2009 | 1,7 |
| 2010 | 0,4 |
| 2011 | 2,0 |
| 2012 | -1,0 |
| Total | 6,3 |
So the loss is around 2,5 times their accumulated profits of their prior 9 years of operation. Not bad and shareholders didn’t seem to like that one:
Where it gets really interesting, is the explanation for the loss which really caught my interest:
This net loss for the year is mainly attributable to a failure to meet sales revenue expectations during the 2013 financial year. Inventory positions were incorrectly booked in connection with thelaunch of a new accounting system in the second quarter 2013. The cost of materials was understated accordingly in the quarterly financial statements for the second and third quarters of 2013. As MIFA does not conduct inventory-taking during the course of the year, the company failed to identify the erroneous bookings until the preparation of the annual financial statements.
So what they are saying is: Sorry, we launched a new accounting system in Q2 2013 and screwed up our accounting for those last few quarters. This sounds unprofessional but rather innocent.
A quick attempt at some “forensic” accounting analysis:
Well, let’s have a quick look how this looks based on their own published numbers. If the cost of materials was the problem, we should easily see this in the share of material cost divided by sales. This is a table I have prepared over the last 15 quarters:
>
| Cost of material | against average Q | |
|---|---|---|
| Q1 2010 | 71,3% | -0,2% |
| Q2 2010 | 67,1% | 1,5% |
| Q3 2010 | 63,6% | -1,1% |
| Q4 2010 | 65,8% | 6,1% |
| Q1 2011 | 74,3% | 2,8% |
| Q2 2011 | 60,5% | -5,1% |
| Q3 2011 | 69,8% | 5,1% |
| Q4 2011 | 55,3% | -4,4% |
| Q1 2012 | 71,3% | 0,2% |
| Q2 2012 | 66,3% | -0,7% |
| Q3 2012 | 68,3% | -3,6% |
| Q4 2012 | 58,1% | 1,7% |
| Q1 2013 | 69,0% | -2,4% |
| Q2 2013 | 68,6% | 2,9% |
| Q3 2013 | 57,2% | -7,5% |
| avg Q1 | 71,5% | |
| avg Q2 | 65,6% | |
| avg Q3 | 64,7% | |
| avg Q4 | 59,7% |
What I did is the following: I calculated the share of materials per quarter and then, as the bicycle business is cyclical, calculated averages per quarter. Then in a final step I subtracted the averages from the actual numbers to see the variation.
The table shows clearly, that variations of +/- 5% are not unusual. Indeed, Q3 2013 looks strange as the cost of material seems to be too low. But on the other hand, Q2 looks normal (material cost above average). So the “accounting software problem” seems to have kicked in only in Q3. However the impact of that problem is far from 15 mn EUR.
MIFA had around 20 mn “gross” sales. So if we assume that material costs would be average for Q3 at around 65%, then the impact of the new accounting system would have been around -1,5 mn EUR (pre tax). This is somehow less than the 15 mn loss (post tax) MIFA indicated.
So we can quickly summarize at this point: The new accounting system only explains around 1,5 mn EUR loss, not 15 mn.
Digging deeper: Inventory levels
So the question is: Where did the other 13,5 mn EUR loss come from ? Let’s have a quick look at their inventory levels.
| Inventory/12 m sales | vs 12 m ago | |
|---|---|---|
| Q1 2010 | 43,7% | |
| Q2 2010 | 42,6% | |
| Q3 2010 | 40,9% | |
| Q4 2010 | 50,4% | |
| Q1 2011 | 56,4% | 12,7% |
| Q2 2011 | 43,0% | 0,4% |
| Q3 2011 | 39,1% | -1,8% |
| Q4 2011 | 40,4% | -10,0% |
| Q1 2012 | 57,8% | 1,4% |
| Q2 2012 | 48,1% | 5,1% |
| Q3 2012 | 53,4% | 14,3% |
| Q4 2012 | 61,0% | 20,6% |
| Q1 2013 | 77,7% | 20,0% |
| Q2 2013 | 59,0% | 10,9% |
| Q3 2013 | 64,2% | 10,8% |
This table shows per quarter the inventory level divided by 12 months trailing sales. Then in a second step, in order to eliminate the seasonal effect, I calculate the change per quarter from a year ago. As one can easily see, something seems to have changed in the second quarter 2012. Inventory levels went up and never came down. And just for reference: Accell manages to work with inventory levels of around 30% per year-end, half of what MIFA is showing.
What also seems to be a strange coincidence is the fact, that MIFA stopped to break down inventory in their 2013 quarterly reports. Before, they would split it out in finished but not sold products etc, whereas from Q1 2013 we only get one line for total inventory. A large inventory in my opinion is a big problem for a bicycle companies. Mostly, they renew their models annually. Full prices are only paid by customer in spring time, the later in the year the higher the discounts.Especially with Ebikes and their components, which improve a lot over the annual cycle, old stuff will require large discounts to sell them.
Finally a last look on the relationship actual sales vs. produced but not sold. Normally, due to the seasonality, MIFA would build up inventory (i.e. produce more than they sell) in Q4 and Q1 and then sell more than they produce in spring/summer (Q2 and Q3).
| Total production | Sales | Unsold products | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Q4 2011 | 11.435 | 7172 | 4.263 |
| Q1 2012 | 40.731 | 38.297 | 2.434 |
| Q2 2012 | 41.758 | 41.668 | 90 |
| Q3 2012 | 17.426 | 17.463 | -37 |
| Q4 2012 | 13.782 | 13.836 | -54 |
| Q1 2013 | 43.025 | 35.954 | 7.071 |
| Q2 2013 | 44.535 | 46.653 | -2.118 |
| Q3 2013 | 20.167 | 15.079 | 5.088 |
This table shows us that they had the usual inventory build up in Q4 2011 and Q1 2012 but that they failed to sell this in 2012. We then see a huge inventory build up again in Q1 2013 (on top of the large base). Then there was some selling again in Q2 2013, but the really strange thing is the inventory build up in Q3 2013.
So again, this underlines the impression that the problems started already in 2012 and that most likely the inventory is much to high.
Other stuff
When I quoted the press release above, I left out a few passages.
Mr. Wicht is currently unavailable to the company due to illness.
Mr. Wicht was the long time CEo and 24% owner. That he just dissapeared is not a good sign.
As far as the corporate bond that was issued in 2013 and existing bank credit facilities are concerned, it cannot be excluded that one or several of the financial covenants included
in the bond and credit facility terms cannot be complied with in the 2013 financial year. This might result in a special right of cancellation for the respective investors. If this were to occur, the company plans to convene a bondholders’ meeting to coordinate a corresponding amendment to the bond terms. The company would also examine other refinancing options in such an instance.
Oh oh, covenant breach, this does not sound very promising. I am pretty sure, bondholders and banks will not consent to anything, unless additional (dilutive) equity wil be injected.
And finally the “carrot on a stick”:
LETTER OF INTENT SIGNED REGARDING CO-OPERATION WITH HERO CYCLES
MIFA has made significant progress with its planned strategic partnership with Indian company HERO Cycles Ltd. (“HERO”). MIFA has signed a letter of intent with HERO that comprises a EUR 15 million investment by HERO. Further details relating to the transaction are subject to final due diligence, and to agreements where the parties are in advanced negotiations. Besides an equity investment, the strategic partnership includes an extensive cooperation venture between MIFA and HERO in the purchasing and product purchasing areas, especially in the case of electric bikes and motors. Legally-binding agreements with HERO are expected within the next few weeks. In terms of revenue, HERO is the world’s largest bicycle manufacturer.
Two comments here:
1. In technical terms, a letter of intent has no legal implications. Hero Cycle can walk away at any time if they don’t like the terms.
2. According to this report, Hery Cycles had sales of 1.450 “Crores” Indian rupees. One crore is 10 million so we are talking abot 14.5 bn Indian rupees of sales. Sounds like a lot, but with a 60:1 INR/USD exchange rate, we are talking only about 240 mn USD annual sales. So in terms of revenue, Hero Cycles is only around 60% the size of Accell. And the largest bicycle manufacturer in the world by sales is Giant from Taiwan with 1.8 bn sales or 7,5 times the sales of Hero cycles.
So the claim that Hero is the largest bicycle manufacturer is clearly wrong and in my opinion could be interpreted as misleading investors believing that there is a “deep pocket” Indian investor, whereas in reality, Hery cycles is only a relatively small company selling lots of ultracheap bicycles. If I calculated correctly, they are selling ~5 mn bicycles in India per year which results in an average selling price 44 USD per bicycle. I just found this link with the 2014 line up of Hero. Most of the models indeed are in the 40-50 USD per bicycle range. And by the way, the bicycle business in Indiadoesn’t seem to be so great either at the moment.
And for the avoidance of doubt: Hery Cycles IS NOT part of the much bigger Hero Motor group. They do have the same founder but split up a few years ago.
Summary:
I do not claim to really understand what MIFA was doing and I have no idea if they will survive or not. However, just by looking at their historical material costs and inventory level, it seems unlikely that the newly introduced accounting system could be responsible for a 15 mn loss. For me it is much more likely that the inventory build up at least since mid 2012 lead to overstated results over a longer period of time. The 15 mn loss announced seems to contain a significant write down on inventory as well. I could imagine that they might have to restate older financial statements as well.
For someone analyzing MIFA in detail, it would not have been that hard to see that something was going really wrong. Drastically increasing inventory levels in a seasonal business are always a really bad sign, at least as bad as increasing receivables.
For the shareholders and bond holders, there is still the hope that Hero Cycles from India might be the much needed saviour, although the false claims made in the press release should make one suspicious and I highly doubt that those guys have such “deep pockets”.
Let’s wait and see but this will not be easy for MIFA.
