Understanding management priorities on price

Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinterestlinkedinmail

I’ve been wrestling with the issue of divergent interests between management and shareholders of a public company. How can the stock price of a great business be very undervalued and management be unconcerned? (Successive fundraisings that dilute long term holders are a sign of that, for example).

I didn’t have the smarts to work it out but fortunately I know a man who does. Benjamin Graham, the father of value investing, worked this out 50 years ago in his book “The Intelligent Investor”.

I’ll quote him at length below, where he cuts the Gordian knot:

Benjamin Graham

“Why is it that insiders may have no interest of their own in following policies designed to provide an adequate dividend return and an adequate average market price? It is strange how little this point is understood. Insiders do not depend on dividends and market quotations to establish the practical value of their holdings. The value to them is measured by what they can do with the business when and if they want to do it. If they need a higher dividend to establish this value, they can raise the dividend. If the value is to be established by selling the business to some other company, or by recapitalising it, or by withdrawing unneeded cash assets, or by dissolving it as a holding concern, they can do any of these things at a time appropriate to themselves.

“Insiders never suffer loss from an unduly low market price which it is in their power to correct. If by any chance they should want to sell, they can and will always correct the situation first. In the meantime they may benefit from the opportunity to acquire more shares at a bargain level, or to pay gift (and prospective estate) taxes on a small valuation, or to save heavy surtaxes on larger dividend payments, which for them (sic) would mean only transferring money from one place where they control it into another.”

Facebooktwittergoogle_pluslinkedinrssyoutube

3 thoughts on “Understanding management priorities on price

  1. I too have long been concerned at managements seemingly ambivalent attitude to the share price so what are we to take from your post?

    1. SM management are unconcerned over share price?

    Ken K has stated on the past that the share price is one element he cannot control.

    There would perhaps be a tad more concern if senior management had significant holdings in the company derived from their own hard earned cash rather than grant of opitions. Alignment of incentives etc.

    Management response to this has historically been that this is not the norm for Australian companies. Can’t comment on that.

    2. Is there a takeover coming?

    KK has confirmed that in the past discussions with companies have taken place although seeming not with any high degree of conviction.

    Personally the more SM executes on it’s plans the more likely this is in my mind the most likely exit strategy.

    Where does this leave investors?

    Excellent company / tech, gaining traction in auto, fleet minor hiccup on Gen II other business verticals to come online…

    Execution is key now and valuation will rise

  2. Hi Chris
    A good article if but on the cryptic side. Do you believe (or know) that insiders at SEE are aware of information ie Toyota etc and that when they are ready to realise the full value of SEE will release said information, maybe at the time of a low ball bid?
    Thanks

  3. interesting reading about seeing machine shares,, specially by Colin Barden.
    I am a ( small ) share holder of seeing machine. I am a bit concern, since last few days these shares are on a downward slope. may be it is a temporary hitch, due to
    some hidden reasons. if anyone knows about this, please assure/ advice.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *