Altria Group Vs. Philip Morris International: Dividend Distribution Payout And Projection Analysis

| About: Altria Group, (MO)

Summary

I decided to provide an article comparing one of my longest-held stocks, MO, to its affiliate, PM, regarding an important dividend sustainability metric.

This article first provides a brief overview of MO's and PM's business operations to get a better understanding of each company's main product segments.

This article then provides a unique, comparative analysis of both companies' adjusted diluted EPS, dividend per share rates, and target dividend distributions payout ratio over the past several years.

This article also provides a dividend distribution guide for readers to use as the companies report over the foreseeable future.

My current buy, sell, or hold recommendation for MO and PM, along with my projection for each company's 2016 dividend rate, is in the "Conclusions Drawn" section of the article.

Focus of Article

The focus of this article is to analyze Altria Group, Inc.'s (NYSE:MO) and Philip Morris International, Inc.'s (NYSE:PM) dividend sustainability by spotting certain patterns that have occurred over the past several years. This article first provides a brief overview of MO's and PM's business operations to get a better understanding of each company's main product segments. This article then provides a unique, comparative analysis of MO's and PM's adjusted diluted "earnings per share" ("EPS"), dividend per share rates, and "target dividend distributions payout ratio" for the past several years. This analysis will show past and projected data with supporting documentation within three tables.

I am writing this article due to the continued requests to provide an analysis on MO and PM. MO has been the "steady Eddy" stock within my investment portfolio for the past six years. Due to the notion that some market participants have recently shifted to more "defensive" stocks, I believe MO and PM could be a good investment (at the right price) for readers wanting limited downside risk while obtaining an attractive yield. Understanding certain correlations within a company's business operations can shed some light whether a company is possibly "overvalued" or "undervalued" strictly per a "numbers" analysis. This is not the only data that should be examined to initiate a position within a particular stock/company. However, I believe this analysis would be a good "starting point" to begin a discussion on the topic. My current buy, sell, or hold recommendation for MO and PM will be in the "Conclusions Drawn" section at the end of this article.

MO's Product Segment Overview

MO, through the company's subsidiaries and affiliates, manufactures and sells cigarettes, other tobacco-related products, and other nicotine-containing products in markets within the United States of America ("USA"). The following are its four main product segments: 1) Cigarettes (manufactured and sold by Philip Morris USA Inc.); 2) cigars (manufactured and sold by John Middleton Co.); 3) smokeless tobacco (most manufactured and sold by U.S. Smokeless Tobacco Company LLC); and 4) wine (produced and distributed by Ste. Michelle Wine Estates Ltd.). MO also currently has a 27% equity ownership stake in SABMiller (OTCPK:SBMRY) which is currently in the process of being acquired by Anheuser-Busch Inbev SA/NV (NYSE:BUD). Let us get briefly describe MO's four main product segments.

MO's cigarettes product segment is lead by the iconic brand "Marlboro®" (Marlboro). Simply put, Marlboro accounts for a large proportion of sales/revenue. This includes all products under the Marlboro name (red, gold, black, etc...). MO's cigarettes product segment also includes other premium brands such as "Benson & Hedges®", "Parliament®", and "Virginia Slims®". MO's cigarettes product segment also includes "discount" brands such as "Basic®" and "L&M®".

The cigars product segment is led by the brand "Black & Mild®" (Black & Mild). It also includes an "other" sub-classification. However, MO's other cigars product segment accounts for only a fractional share of sales/revenue when compared to Black & Mild.

MO's smokeless tobacco product segment includes brands such as "Copenhagen®" (Copenhagen) and "Skoal®" (Skoal). These two brands account for a majority of sales/revenue within the company's smokeless tobacco product segment. Its smokeless tobacco product segment also includes an "other" sub-classification.

The wine product segment includes brands such as "Chateau Ste. Michelle®", "Columbia Crest®", and"14 Hands®". MO's wine product segment also includes an "other" sub-classification which includes various other brands which individually account for only a fractional share of sales/revenue when compared to the other three brands listed above. Now that we have a better understanding of MO's four main product segments, let us now describe PM's main product segment.

PM's Product Segment Overview

PM, through the company's subsidiaries and affiliates, manufactures and sells cigarettes, other tobacco-related products, and other nicotine-containing products in markets outside of the USA. In my opinion, PM currently has one main product segment, cigarettes.

Similar to MO, PM's cigarettes product segment is lead by the iconic brand Marlboro. Simply put, Marlboro accounts for a large proportion of sales/revenue. This includes all products under the Marlboro name (red, gold, black, etc...). However, when compared to MO, PM's sales/revenue of Marlboro account for a lower percentage of total sales/revenue (proportionately speaking). This is mainly due to the fact PM markets products to the rest of the world and usually keeps specific product names/labels which were previously acquired to maintain brand recognition. PM's cigarettes product segment also includes brands such as L&M, Parliament, "Bond Street®", "Chesterfield®", "Philip Morris®", and "Lark®". The cigarettes product segment also includes an "other" sub-classification. This includes many local/regional cigarette brands located throughout the world.

Now that we have a better understanding of MO's four main product segments and PM's main product segment, let us now begin the comparative analysis of each company's adjusted diluted EPS, dividend per share rates, and target dividend distributions payout ratio.

MO Versus PM: Adjusted Diluted EPS And Target Dividend Distributions Payout Ratio - 2013

MO's executive management team has stated the company's Board of Directors ("BoD") bases its dividend per share rate directly off of adjusted diluted EPS. Its executive management team has continued to reiterate the BoD's "annual target distribution" is 80% of its annual adjusted diluted EPS. It should be noted adjusted diluted EPS excludes one-time "special/extraordinary" items and certain tax/litigation expenses. It has also been implied PM's BoD uses adjusted diluted EPS as an important factor when setting an appropriate dividend per share rate. However, since PM manufactures and sells its products outside the USA, the company also has to account for foreign currency adjustments. As such, it provides adjusted diluted EPS both prior to and after foreign currency adjustments.

To compare/contrast MO's and PM's adjusted diluted EPS, dividend per share rates, and target dividend distributions payout ratio during 2013, Table 1 is provided below:

Table 1 - MO Versus PM: Adjusted Diluted EPS And Target Dividend Distributions Payout Ratio - 2013

Click to enlarge

(Source: Table created entirely by myself, partially using MO and PM data obtained from the SEC's EDGAR database)

Using Table 1 above as a reference, MO reported adjusted diluted EPS of $2.38 per share for 2013 (see blue reference "A" in Table 1 above). When broken out, MO reported adjusted diluted EPS of $0.54, $0.62, $0.65, and $0.57 per share for the first, second, third, and fourth quarters of 2013, respectively.

When calculated, Altria's target distribution to shareholders for 2013 was $1.90 per share (see blue reference "C" in Table 1). This equates to a quarterly target distribution of $0.476 per share for 2013 (see blue reference "(C / 4)" in Table 1). In comparison, MO distributed dividends of $0.44, $0.44, $0.48, and $0.48 per share for the first, second, third, and fourth quarters of 2013, respectively. When combined, this was an annual dividend distribution of $1.84 per share. As such, when compared to MO's target distribution of $1.90 per share for 2013, the company had an annual underpayment of $0.06 per share. When calculated, the company had an annual target dividend distributions payout ratio of 97%, which was a slight underpayment. When basing MO's target distribution for 2013 on the new "run-rate" dividend of $0.48 per share which began in the third quarter of 2013, the company theoretically had an annual overpayment of ($0.02) per share. This simply means MO would need to boost the company's 2014 annual diluted EPS by at least $0.02 per share to match the quarterly dividend increase of $0.04 per share which began in the third quarter of 2013. Now let us take a look at what happened with PM during 2013 regarding the same metrics.

Still using Table 1 above as a reference, PM reported adjusted diluted EPS of $5.40 per share for 2013 (see blue reference "A" in Table 1 above). When broken out, PM reported adjusted diluted EPS of $1.29, $1.30, $1.44, and $1.37 per share for the first, second, third, and fourth quarters of 2013, respectively. When excluding PM's annual foreign currency adjustment of ($0.34) per share, the company reported adjusted diluted EPS of $5.74 per share for 2013.

When calculated, PM's target distribution to shareholders for 2013 was $4.32 per share (see blue reference "C" in Table 1). This equates to a quarterly target distribution of $1.08 per share for 2013 (see blue reference "(C / 4)" in Table 1). In comparison, PM distributed dividends of $0.85, $0.85, $0.94, and $0.94 per share for the first, second, third, and fourth quarters of 2013, respectively. When combined, this was an annual dividend distribution of $3.58 per share. As such, when compared to PM's target distribution of $4.32 per share for 2013, the company had an annual underpayment of $0.74 per share. When calculated, PM had an annual target dividend distribution payout ratio of only 83%, which was a modest (some could argue material) underpayment. When basing PM's target distribution for 2013 on the new "run-rate" dividend of $0.94 per share, which began in the third quarter of 2013, the company theoretically had an annual underpayment of $0.56 per share.

I believe most would agree that, by looking at the data within Table 1, there was a higher probability that PM would increase the company's 2014 dividend by a larger amount (proportionately speaking) when compared to MO. This is due to the fact MO had a target dividend distributions payout ratio of 97% during 2013 while PM's ratio was only 83%. Now let us take a look at what happened during 2014 and see if this same trend persisted.

MO Versus PM: Adjusted Diluted EPS And Target Dividend Distributions Payout Ratio - 2014

To compare/contrast MO's and PM's adjusted diluted EPS, dividend per share rates, and target dividend distributions payout ratio during 2014, Table 2 is provided below:

Table 2 - MO Versus PM: Adjusted Diluted EPS And Target Dividend Distributions Payout Ratio - 2014

Click to enlarge

(Source: Table created entirely by myself, partially using MO and PM data obtained from the SEC's EDGAR Database (link provided below Table 1))

Using Table 2 above as a reference, Altria reported adjusted diluted EPS of $2.57 per share for 2014 (see blue reference "A" in Table 2 above). When compared to MO's adjusted diluted EPS of $2.38 per share for 2013, the company increased its annual adjusted diluted EPS by $0.19 per share or 7.98% during 2014. I believe this was an encouraging sign. When broken out, MO reported adjusted diluted EPS of $0.57, $0.65, $0.69, and $0.66 per share for the first, second, third, and fourth quarters of 2014, respectively.

When calculated, its target distribution to shareholders for 2014 was $2.06 per share (see blue reference "C" in Table 2). This equates to a quarterly target distribution of $0.514 per share for 2014 (see blue reference "(C / 4)" in Table 2). In comparison, the distributed dividends are $0.48, $0.48, $0.52, and $0.52 per share for the first, second, third, and fourth quarters of 2014, respectively. When combined, this was an annual dividend distribution of $2.00 per share. As such, when compared to MO's target distribution of $2.06 per share for 2014, the company had an annual underpayment of $0.06 per share. This was the same exact underpayment when compared to 2013 (a sign of consistency). When calculated, MO had an annual target dividend distribution payout ratio of 97%, which was again a slight underpayment. When basing its target distribution for 2014 on the new "run-rate" dividend of $0.52 per share, which began in the third quarter of 2014, the company theoretically had an annual overpayment of ($0.02) per share. This simply means MO would need to boost the company's 2015 annual diluted EPS by at least $0.02 per share to match the quarterly dividend increase of $0.04 per share, which began in the third quarter of 2014. Again, this was the same exact overpayment when compared to 2013 (another sign of consistency). Now let us take a look at what happened with PM during 2014 regarding the same metrics.

Still using Table 2 above as a reference, PM reported adjusted diluted EPS of $5.02 per share for 2014 (see blue reference "A" in Table 2 above). When compared to PM's adjusted diluted EPS of $5.40 per share for 2013, the company decreased its annual adjusted diluted EPS by ($0.38) per share or (7.04%) during 2014. I believe this was a discouraging sign and was in direct contrast to what occurred within MO. When broken out, PM reported adjusted diluted EPS of $1.19, $1.41, $1.39, and $1.03 per share for the first, second, third, and fourth quarters of 2014, respectively. When excluding PM's annual foreign currency adjustment of ($0.79) per share, the company reported adjusted diluted EPS of $5.81 per share for 2014. When compared to its adjusted diluted EPS (excluding foreign currency adjustments) of $5.74 per share for 2013, the company increased its annual adjusted diluted EPS (excluding foreign currency adjustments) by $0.07 per share or 1.22% during 2014. Even though this was a slight increase when compared to the prior year, I believe this minor increase should be seen as "cautionary".

When calculated, PM's target distribution to shareholders for 2014 was $4.02 per share (see blue reference "C" in Table 2). This equates to a quarterly target distribution of $1.00 per share (rounded) for 2014 (see blue reference "(C / 4)" in Table 2). In comparison, PM distributed dividends of $0.94, $0.94, $1.00, and $1.00 per share for the first, second, third, and fourth quarters of 2014, respectively. When combined, this was an annual dividend distribution of $3.88 per share. As such, when compared to PM's target distribution of $4.02 per share for 2014, the company had an annual underpayment of $0.14 per share. When calculated, PM had an annual target dividend distributions payout ratio of 97%, which was a minor underpayment. When basing its target distribution for 2014 on the new "run-rate" dividend of $1.00 per share, which began in the third quarter of 2014, the company theoretically matched dividends to its target dividend per share rate.

I believe most would agree that, by looking at the data within Table 2, there was a fairly even probability that PM would increase the company's 2015 dividend by a larger amount (proportionately speaking) when compared to MO. This is due to the fact MO had a target dividend distribution payout ratio of 97% during 2014, which was the exact same ratio PM now had (as compared to 83% during 2013). Now let us take a look at what happened during 2015 to see what trends occurred.

MO Versus PM: Adjusted Diluted EPS And Target Dividend Distributions Payout Ratio - 2015

To compare/contrast MO's and PM's adjusted diluted EPS, dividend per share rates, and target dividend distributions payout ratio during 2015, Table 3 is provided below:

Table 3 - MO Versus PM: Adjusted Diluted EPS And Target Dividend Distributions Payout Ratio - 2015

Click to enlarge

(Source: Table created entirely by myself, partially using MO and PM data obtained from the SEC's EDGAR Database (link provided below Table 1))

Using Table 3 above as a reference, MO reported adjusted diluted EPS of $2.80 per share (rounded) for 2015 (see blue reference "A" in Table 3 above). When compared to its adjusted diluted EPS of $2.57 per share for 2014, the company increased its annual adjusted diluted EPS by $0.23 per share or 8.75% during 2015. I believe this was an encouraging sign as its annual adjusted diluted EPS percentage continued to increase by high-single digits. When broken out, MO reported adjusted diluted EPS of $0.63, $0.74, $0.75, and $0.67 per share for the first, second, third, and fourth quarters of 2015, respectively.

When calculated, its target distribution to shareholders for 2015 was $2.24 per share (see blue reference "C" in Table 3). This equates to a quarterly target distribution of $0.559 per share for 2014 (see blue reference "(C / 4)" in Table 3). In comparison, MO distributed dividends of $0.52, $0.52, $0.565, and $0.565 per share for the first, second, third, and fourth quarters of 2015, respectively. When combined, this was an annual dividend distribution of $2.17 per share. As such, when compared to MO's target distribution of $2.24 per share for 2015, the company had an annual underpayment of $0.07 per share. When compared to a $0.06 per share underpayment for 2013 and 2014, this was a $0.01 per share additional underpayment. When calculated, MO had an annual target dividend distributions payout ratio of 97%, which was a slight underpayment. It should be noted this was the same exact payout ratio when compared to 2013 and 2014. Again, this showed consistency, which readers should find reassuring. When basing its target distribution for 2015 on the new "run-rate" dividend of $0.565 per share, which began in the third quarter of 2015, the company theoretically had an annual overpayment of ($0.02) per share. This simply means MO would need to boost the company's 2016 annual diluted EPS by at least $0.02 per share to match the quarterly dividend increase of $0.045 per share, which began in the third quarter of 2015. Again, this was the same exact overpayment when compared to 2013 and 2014 (another sign of consistency). Now let us take a look at what happened with PM during 2015 regarding the same metrics.

Still using Table 3 above as a reference, PM reported adjusted diluted EPS of $4.42 per share for 2015 (see blue reference "A" in Table 3 above). When compared to PM's adjusted diluted EPS of $5.02 per share for 2014, the company decreased its annual adjusted diluted EPS by ($0.60) per share or (11.95%) during 2015. I believe this was another discouraging sign and was in direct contrast to what occurred within MO. When broken out, Philip Morris reported adjusted diluted EPS of $1.16, $1.21, $1.24, and $0.81 per share for the first, second, third, and fourth quarters of 2015, respectively. When excluding PM's annual foreign currency adjustment of ($1.20) per share, the company reported adjusted diluted EPS of $5.62 per share for 2015. When compared to PM's adjusted diluted EPS (excluding foreign currency adjustments) of $5.81 per share for 2014, the company decreased its annual adjusted diluted EPS (excluding foreign currency adjustments) by ($0.19) per share or (3.44%) during 2015.

So, even as management continues to reiterate the "headwinds" PM faces regarding negative foreign currency adjustments, I would point out that even when excluding these adjustments, the company's adjusted diluted EPS decreased during 2015 when compared to the prior year. As such, I believe this decrease should be seen as a negative trend. Part of the decrease in adjusted diluted EPS is the fact management stopped repurchasing shares at the start of 2015 as the U.S. dollar continued to strengthen when compared to most global currencies.

When calculated, PM's target distribution to shareholders for 2015 was $3.54 per share (see blue reference "C" in Table 3). This equates to a quarterly target distribution of $0.88 per share for 2015 (see blue reference "(C / 4)" in Table 3). In comparison, PM distributed dividends of $1.00, $1.00, $1.02, and $1.02 per share for the first, second, third, and fourth quarters of 2015, respectively. When combined, this was an annual dividend distribution of $4.04 per share. As such, when compared to PM's target distribution of $3.54 per share for 2015, the company had an annual overpayment of ($0.50) per share. When calculated, PM had an annual target dividend distributions payout ratio of 114%, which was a modest (some could argue material) overpayment. When basing its target distribution for 2015 on the new "run-rate" dividend of $1.02 per share, which began in the third quarter of 2015, the company theoretically had an annual overpayment of ($0.54) per share. This means PM would need to boost the company's 2016 annual diluted EPS by at least $0.54 per share to match the quarterly dividend increase of $0.02 per share, which began in the third quarter of 2015. While this specific metric is not the "only" factor the BoD considers when determining PM's dividend per share rate, I would point out the BoD only increased the company's dividend by $0.02 during 2015, which was the lowest increase since it was spun-off from MO back in 2008. Simply put, this was in direct relation to the company's decreased adjusted diluted EPS during 2015 when compared to 2014. During 2013 and 2014, the BoD increased PM's dividend by $0.09 and $0.06 per share, respectively.

I believe most would agree that, by looking at the data within Table 3, the is a very low (10%) probability that PM will increase the company's 2016 dividend by a larger amount (proportionately speaking) when compared to MO. This is due to the fact MO had a target dividend distributions payout ratio of 97% during 2015 while PM's ratio was now 114% (as compared to 83% and 97% during 2013 and 2014, respectively).

Conclusions Drawn

This article first provided a brief overview of MO's and PM's business operations to get a better understanding of the company's main product segments. This article then provided a unique, comparative analysis of both companies' adjusted diluted EPS, dividend per share rates, and target dividend distributions payout ratio for the past several years. By doing so, this article analyzed their dividend sustainability by spotting certain patterns that have occurred over the past several years. In addition, this article provided a general dividend sustainability "guide" for readers to use as MO and PM reports future earnings.

The following was MO's target dividend distributions payout ratio for 2013, 2014, and 2015:

2013 Target Dividend Distributions Payout Ratio: 97%

2014 Target Dividend Distributions Payout Ratio: 97%

2015 Target Dividend Distributions Payout Ratio: 97%

Since the management has provided guidance that MO's annual adjusted diluted EPS for 2016 will likely be in a range of $3.00-3.05 per share (which calculates to a target distribution to shareholders of $2.42 per share), the company should easily be able to cover the new annualized run rate dividend of $2.26 per share, which began in the third quarter of 2015. In addition, using MO's adjusted diluted EPS as a key metric for future dividend distributions, I am projecting the company's BoD will declare a dividend of $0.61 per share beginning in the third quarter of 2016. This would be a $0.045 per share increase from the current dividend of $0.565 per share or an increase of 8.0%. I believe this should be seen as a positive trend.

The following was PM's target dividend distributions payout ratio for 2013, 2014, and 2015:

2013 Target Dividend Distributions Payout Ratio: 83%

2014 Target Dividend Distributions Payout Ratio: 97%

2015 Target Dividend Distributions Payout Ratio: 114%

Since the management has provided guidance that PM's annual adjusted diluted EPS for 2016 will likely be in a range of $4.25-4.35 per share (which calculates to a target distribution to shareholders of $3.44 per share), the company will have a problem being able to cover the new annualized run rate dividend of $4.08 per share, which began in the third quarter of 2015. Even when excluding PM's projected annual foreign currency adjustment for 2016 of ($0.60) per share, management is projecting the company's adjusted diluted EPS will likely be in a range of $4.85-4.95 per share (which calculates to a target distribution to shareholders of $3.92 per share). This amount will also not cover the new annualized run rate dividend of $4.08 per share, which began in the third quarter of 2015. I believe this should be seen as a negative trend. As such, I am projecting PM's BoD will declare a dividend of $1.00-1.05 per share beginning in the third quarter of 2016.

I believe it is a very high (90%) probability MO will declare a dividend increase, beginning in the third quarter of 2016, that is higher (proportionately speaking) when compared to PM. Based on MO's adjusted diluted EPS for 2016, the company has a "price-to-adjusted diluted EPS" multiple of 20:1 while PM's multiple is 19:1 when excluding foreign currency adjustments. However, when including PM's projected foreign currency adjustments for 2016, the company has a price-to-adjusted diluted EPS multiple of 21:1.

My Buy, Sell, Or Hold Recommendation

Due to the notion that some market participants have recently shifted to more "defensive" stocks, I believe MO and PM could be a good investment (at the right price) for readers wanting limited downside risk while obtaining an attractive yield. Regarding Altria, through a continued dominate retail market share in the cigarettes and smokeless tobacco product segments (both continue to have over 50% retail market share), an attractive retail market share of machine-made large cigars (near 30%) and a growing wine product segment, I believe MO will continue to provide attractive quarterly results. As a "bonus" per se in my opinion, MO also currently has a 27% equity ownership stake in SBMRY which is currently in the process of being acquired by BUD. As such, MO's investors have some exposure to the brewing industry, which adds even more "insulation" during a "bearish" market.

In addition, there is a high probability MO will continue to repurchase shares of its common stock throughout most (if not all) quarters for the foreseeable future, which has cumulative net benefits to shareholders. Furthermore, the company has a much lower impact from the recent negative foreign currency adjustments suffered by most multinational companies due to the strengthening U.S. dollar. In fact, PM has suspended the company's stock repurchase plan due to the recent weakening of most global currencies when compared to the U.S. dollar. Since MO only has to worry about the strengthening U.S. dollar in regards to the company's 27% equity investment in SBMRY (likely conversion to BUD shares in the future), negative foreign currency adjustments only have a minor impact on its financial statements. I believe MO's low exposure to negative foreign currency adjustments should be seen as positive catalyst.

From the analysis provided above, including additional factors/catalysts not discussed within this particular article, I currently rate MO as a sell when the company's stock price is trading at or greater than $67.50 per share, a hold when trading between $57.51 and $67.49 per share, and a buy when trading at or less than $57.50 per share.

As such, I currently rate MO as a hold since the company's stock price recently closed at $60.55 per share as of 2/19/2016. I will look to add to my existing MO position at $57.50 per share.

From the analysis provided above, including additional factors/catalysts not discussed within this particular article, I currently rate PM as a sell when the company's stock price is trading at or greater than $90.00 per share, a hold when trading between $80.01 and $89.99 per share, and a buy when trading at or less than $80.00 per share.

As such, I currently rate PM as a sell since the company's stock price recently closed at $91.94 per share as of 2/19/2016. I will look to initiate a position in PM at an entry point of $80.00 per share.

Final Note: Each investor's buy, sell, or hold decision is based on one's risk tolerance, time horizon, and dividend income goals. My personal recommendation will not fit each investor's current investing strategy. I first initiated a position in MO back in late 2009 and continued to increase my position at periodic intervals from 2010 to 2013. Up until MO's dividend for the fourth quarter of 2014, I reinvested all quarterly dividends. Since then, I have elected to receive cash instead of reinvesting my dividends. In the future, I may decide to once again reinvest all dividends received. The weighted average purchase price of my entire MO position is currently $26.115 per share. This weighted average per share price excludes all dividends received/reinvested.

Disclosure: I am/we are long MO.

I wrote this article myself, and it expresses my own opinions. I am not receiving compensation for it (other than from Seeking Alpha). I have no business relationship with any company whose stock is mentioned in this article.

Additional disclosure: I currently have no position in BUD or PM. I have no "direct" position in SBMRY.

Editor's Note: This article discusses one or more securities that do not trade on a major U.S. exchange. Please be aware of the risks associated with these stocks.