SA Editor Samir...'s  Instablog

SA Editor Samir Patel
Send Message
I joined Seeking Alpha as a Senior Editor in September 2012. I work closely with company leaders on content and publishing initiatives, primarily the SA Pro and SA Buyside platforms. A little about me: - I'm a native Texan. - I'm a value investor; I always enjoy reading well-constructed and... More
  • When "Up 85% YTD" And "Cheap Stock" Aren't Contradictions: The Curious Case Of HP 3 comments
    Aug 17, 2013 10:33 PM | about stocks: HPQ

    The perils of being a value investor: you think slash know a stock's cheap, but you're hesitant to buy more shares because it's trading 40% above your cost basis from a few months ago. And then you watch it go up double digits again. And once that's happened, then you model out fair value, and shares are still trading at a 15% discount to even a conservative estimate, which would normally be enough for you to buy, except you're up substantially on your cost basis and hate buying stocks that are up.

    Sigh. If only I liked riding momo trains.

    The true story above describes my love-hate relationship with HP (NYSE:HPQ). I looked into it last summer as part of my broader thesis that the "death of the PC" was being overhyped, leaving a lot of "old tech" companies (INTC, STX, WDC, DELL, CSCO, MSFT) trading at bargain-bin valuations while "social" darlings like FB, ZNGA, and GRPN were trading at stratospheric multiples. Fast-forward twelve months, and the former group is well on its way to recovering from the extreme pessimism, and the latter group has (mostly) had a reality check.

    Of all the companies I looked into, HP was not high on my must-buy list. The valuation was cheap, but they were on a massive spending spree, acquiring companies left and right. Everyone knows how that went for them. As a value investor, I tend to not like it when companies massively overpay for companies, then discover that not only was the purchase price too high, but that the purchase might have been inadvisable at any price.

    Anyway, to make a long story short, I ended up initiating a small position because it was cheap, and when it got really cheap after the $8.8 billion Autonomy writedown, I substantially increased my position.

    Still, I had serious reservations about the company. I liked Whitman, and the stock was an obvious buy at $13 (or $12, or wherever) but it was one of those moments where "risk is always and everywhere a function of price" came into play. Didn't like the company, but the price was literally too good to turn down - to turn a common analogy on its head, it was like picking up 24-carat diamonds in front of a toy bulldozers.

    Eventually the market realized how inefficient it had been, and HP minted as much cash flow in a half as they'd guided for in a year, and now we're here, 100% upside later. Along the way, I've grown to like Whitman, and think she's doing a great job of turning the company around. While I think PCs will stabilize and servers/services/software will return to growth at some semi-undeterminable point in the future, I'm not so confident in printers/printing. I could talk a lot more about my thoughts here, but this is intended to be a quick blog post rather than an in-depth thesis, so feel free to comment with questions/thoughts.

    That leaves me wondering what to do with my position - buy more? Hold? Sell? Quick multiple checks implied the stock was cheap, but it's certainly not a screaming buy like it was in the teens. So I decided to run a DCF model.

    Keep in mind this is rough; there are still parts of it that need to be fleshed out (there are a few interesting items in working capital, for example) but it substantiates that even under pretty sad assumptions, the stock's still trading at a decent discount to fair value.

    DCF Conclusions

    You may be wondering why I didn't include a bear case. Here's why: the assumptions in my bull case are hardly heroic (you may notice revenue doesn't go anywhere) and the assumptions in my base case are downright pessimistic.

    Base Case Assumptions

    I have some spare capital to deploy, and I already hold quite enough of INTC and WFCWS (see here and here for the respective write-ups). Based on the results above, as well as my intuition that things won't turn out as badly as my overconservative projections suggest... well, HP could still have pretty good long-term upside from here.

    Lest I sound too sad about a stock trading at $26 and change when I started buying it in the high teens and kept buying it on the way down... well, I'm mad I didn't buy more. But hindsight's 20/20, and some say the three most dangerous words in investing are "I missed it."

    Rant of the day over. I promise my next post will be more opportunity-centric and less me-centric.

    Disclosure: I am long CSCO, DELL, HPQ, INTC, MSFT.

    Additional disclosure: I am also long WFCWS. I may add to my HPQ position in the next 72 hours.

    Stocks: HPQ
Back To SA Editor Samir Patel's Instablog HomePage »

Instablogs are blogs which are instantly set up and networked within the Seeking Alpha community. Instablog posts are not selected, edited or screened by Seeking Alpha editors, in contrast to contributors' articles.

Comments (3)
Track new comments
  • SA Editor Samir Patel
    , contributor
    Comments (163) | Send Message
    Author’s reply » Bought substantially more after earnings. Hugely undervalued on the basis of FCF.
    22 Aug 2013, 10:01 AM Reply Like
  • SA Editor Samir Patel
    , contributor
    Comments (163) | Send Message
    Author’s reply » Operating company will have zero net debt by the end of the year, which means the massive FCF relative to market cap (16-20% FCF yield at the current price) will be available for accretive buybacks, higher dividends, etc.
    22 Aug 2013, 10:07 AM Reply Like
  • Brian Grosso
    , contributor
    Comments (949) | Send Message
    This is great stuff. Never took a deep look at HP but I think most people would admit Whitman is extremely talented and a great youthful face for the company.


    Liked the layout of your DCF ss and although I typically rely much more heavily on EV/normalized FCF multiples alone because of the over-complication created by DCF, I will definitely be using this.


    I can really relate to your conflictions with the chart. I think the best approach is to think of the chart as just a single aspect of a much larger valuation. If the stock is at an all-time low, then that makes it seem a bit cheaper and vice-versa, but it is mostly a psychological metric and should not make or break your analysis and be the ultimate determining factor in what you do with the stock. Stocks can always go lower than lows and higher than highs, and often do.
    9 Nov 2013, 04:03 PM Reply Like
Full index of posts »
Latest Followers


  • I think $VOD's value is much too low.
    Sep 3, 2013
  • At the after-hours price, $HPQ is trading at a >15% FCF yield according to my model. If it holds, will probably buy more tomorrow.
    Aug 21, 2013
  • Interesting thoughts from McKinsey on making earnings calls more productive:
    Aug 5, 2013
More »
Instablogs are Seeking Alpha's free blogging platform customized for finance, with instant set up and exposure to millions of readers interested in the financial markets. Publish your own instablog in minutes.