Cable networks are spinning, and you're listening to Motley Fool Money. I'm Ricky Mulvey. Join today by returning champion Bill Barker. Bill, how you doing? I'm well. Thanks. How are you? I'm doing well. It's good to have you back on the show. Haven't seen you in a few months. We've got a little bit of Nvidia, and then I want to talk about this Comcast spinoff.
Dylan's going to cover this more on the Friday show, but I want to, I mean, it's the biggest company by market cap or it's consistently trading places is the biggest company by market cap. And they reported earnings yesterday. I think my big takeaways are that the data center business is rolling.
with revenue up more than 100% from the prior year, and that's from a base of 14.5 billion. Expectations are starting to match up to what they're doing, and some investors are doing a little profit-taking. What stands out to you about NVIDIA's quarter? Well, it's a phenomenal quarter, and as you say, expectations were largely met, and those that
figured that NVIDIA always exceeds expectations and not only exceeds them by normal amounts, but excessive amounts might find that this one time NVIDIA has only exceeded expectations by a kind of normal amount and that they have beaten expectations and raised guidance, but not to the extent that
has been going on in some quarters in the past, and that's really a function of the law of large numbers. It gets harder and harder when you start talking about quarters involving $37 billion to just be increasing things by an annual rate of 100%.
Also, you get more eyes once you start getting into that trillions of dollars in market cap for folks to make guesses about what kind of money you're going to make. One number I want to zero in on because I think this is incredibly impressive for NVIDIA and a lot of investors believe it to be impressive. This is a company that makes 75% in gross margin. Have you seen anything come close to that? What is NVIDIA doing to make that? Well, certainly nothing close to it in terms of hardware, in terms of chips.
And it's a function of the demand that they are able to sell at rates that are sort of unheard of. And these are gross margin rates above that level in the software space are not unprecedented. But you're talking about something in the sort of 30% or so range for Intel.
I think their current gross margin is 34%, and AMD's is 48%, and so in videos it's 75%, 76%. That does, as you say, highlight that they are doing something that their competitors are nowhere close to doing.
I want to get to this Comcast story. This is big news for media observers, and that's that Comcast is spinning off its cable assets, including USA Network, MSNBC, and CNBC. Spinoff is expected to be valued at about $7 billion, not going to take hold for a year, according to reporting I saw in the Los Angeles Times.
Before we get into the specifics of why Comcast is doing this, this is something that stock market investors will experience sometimes. I think it recently happened with Kellogg spinning off its serial division. It happened a long time ago when G.E. owned the NBC universal assets. So broadly, why do companies spin off departments, even when they're making money, making a profit, into new publicly traded companies?
Let me be a variety of reasons. In this case, I think it's a capital allocation decision. You've got one part of the company, for instance, that is growing but not growing as fast as another part, and that slower growing part would like
the attention of the company and like to have money thrown its way and they say if you give us a billion dollars we'll turn it into 1.1 billion over two years we will we will grow your investment 10% over two years and there might be another part of the company that is saying well you give us a billion dollars to
improve our business, we'll do double that, right? So this is a way of letting a very sort of unified part of the company, that being that the cable channels operate with their own capital allocation decisions and prove that maybe, you know, they can, they could raise money from outside of the company or they can make deals with other cable channels that might need a new home.
in a way that becomes very uninteresting to a very large company. That is, as I think Charlie Munger or Warren Buffett, maybe Charlie Munger said to Warren Buffett, if something isn't worth doing at all, it's not worth doing well. And so even if you can take a small thing and grow it,
Decently, if it just doesn't move the needle on a very large company, it's kind of like who cares if you can do something interesting. It doesn't matter to the big parent. And you spin something off. It's a smaller entity and increasing something by a reasonable percentage is meaningful once you identify a small company that can allocate capital well.
Well, one thing the big parent certainly cares about is streaming, streaming subscribers and getting people to watch Peacock. And one may think that you could take these cable channels, USA Network, MSNBC, CNBC, and make them play nicely in that streaming world. But ultimately, why don't you think that NBCU could make these channels work in this new streaming environment?
I think that a lot of the sports and news coverage they've got is consumed live, the sports coverage, in particular news coverage, maybe less so. But old news is just not interesting to be able to forever go back and watch the November 21st edition of cable news chat is not something that many people are going to go back to.
The Wood Peacock really is better at movies and shows. You don't need to watch a show within a year, 10, 15 years of when it came out. It's just as good years later. That's not the case for most of these channels that are going to be part of this spinoff.
Yeah, and I think it's impossible to have this discussion without mentioning. People have also lost a lot of trust in cable news outlets, and in terms of viewership, they're slipping viewers a little bit. MSNBC losing viewers after the election of Donald Trump, and one may think that after what happened in 2016, you would see a big spike in cable news viewership, but that's not playing out this time.
And also the median age. There's the median age for cable news viewership for not just MSNBC, but Fox News and CNBC is also around 70. So I would imagine the executives here are looking at this and saying, you know what, this is really expensive. And we don't think we're grabbing that younger generation of viewers that are that we want to get onto these streaming platforms.
Yeah, I think all those data points are true. I think MSNBC is also potentially quite an anchor around Comcast Neck if it wants to make acquisitions and the administration is hostile to MSNBC for not being sufficiently praising the administration. They may just
do exactly what has been promised, which is to exact retribution on whoever isn't on board. So I think that's maybe a consideration, but really, you know, these things don't seem to have a fascinating future in the current construction.
to Comcast and to many, many, many others. So let's talk about the spinoff because the new CEO who's currently the NBCU group chair, Mark Lazarus, told a group of employees, and this is according to Los Angeles Times reporting.
Quote, I completely empathize with people who think that this would be a bittersweet thing. I think it's exciting because very few times in life you have the opportunity to be part of what all call a well-funded startup. I think there is a way to make channels like CNBC work in 2024 and grab newer generations of viewers. But how could a group of cable networks function is a well-funded startup? Is it possible?
Well, I mean, they have real viewers, real revenues. They are profitable. So as a startup mentality with a new horizon to look at and we can take what we've got right now.
and rearrange it and make deals with the other bundlers. There are lots of ways to pursue the future in this business and have at the very least intellectually exciting time with a changing landscape. And they are not in desperate need of anybody to fund them. They've got profitable operations.
That's it. Look, he's obviously spinning things too, right? Let's, let's, he's saying that he, he perceives this before I get to why this is exciting. I understand why there's a lot of fear, right? But let me now spin that for you. All right. Both of those things can be true. There's a, there are a lot of people that are, they're worried about their jobs and, and how
this is going to play out and whether the future is any brighter than the present. And there are people put in charge whose job it is to be positive. Why don't you think Comcast shareholders are really reacting to this spin-off? The stock barely budged on the news? Well, it's going to spin this off. The shareholders aren't really going to wind up with anything that different than what they started with. That they will have Comcast
independent of the spinoff and the spinoff, right? So they'll have a little bit of both.
And both of them will be able to pursue their own agendas. And so it's marginally good, I think, if they had conflicting agendas, ones which the capital allocation decisions were affected by any politics or any internal strife. So it's marginally positive to shareholders, but not much.
You own the same things, but in a different package. The stock is barely budged in the past five years, but it has paid a dividend in 2014 Comcast paid a dividend of 45 cents a share in 2024. That's $1.24. They're trying to use their balance sheet to return capital to shareholders and sometimes mature companies returning capitals to shareholders can be wonderful stock investments. But is there anything about this company that gets you interested is a long-term stock investor?
No, not me. There are those that are interested. If you're talking about Romainco, so you've got Spinco, that's what's being spun off. Romainco, what remains?
It's been a well-run company. It's doing things with Internet, with cable bundling that people will continue to use, and certainly the Internet, there's some pricing power at the moment there. But I think that they are more looking like a utility than they used to. I want to move on quickly to this micro-strategy story, because, Bill, this is
This is wild. So MicroStrategy, which is a Bitcoin holding company with a side of enterprise software, has announced that it will offer institutional investors the opportunity to buy convertible bonds. It's 0% interest. They're going to sell about $2.5 billion worth of these bonds. It's 0% interest, so it can buy Bitcoin.
First of all, how do convertible bonds work and is it common for these bonds to pay nothing in interest? When you think of bonds, you think about getting a little, uh, you're getting a little paycheck until the company pays back the value of the bond. Uh, well, it is not common to have.
a zero percent interest. A bond is like a regular bond in other cases and pays interest to bond holders. On top of that has the option for conversion of the bonds into stock in under certain scenarios. You don't have to offer as high a yield rate. The bond, the coupon doesn't need to be as high because you've got this
kicker of some equity conversion opportunities. Microstrategies 0%. And there were conversion strategies. And maybe there's a lot of fine print that you got to go through. So do your homework on this one. But you're betting on the price of Bitcoin held by microstrategy somehow making you money. Because the conversion opportunities on this one include
dates out in 2028 and 2029 and microstrategy being able to convert into cash or a combination of cash and equity depending on its price and what it feels like doing. So buyer beware on this one. But there are many buyers today as there are four
virtually anything that has the residue of Bitcoin upon it. So why not, instead of just the residue of Bitcoin, why not just buy the thing or even an ETF? I don't understand why an institutional investor would do the loop-de-loop of buying a convertible debt for MicroStrategy to go buy Bitcoin that they can then return whenever they feel like it, instead of just buying Bitcoin. Well, I think you've raised a good point.
I'm not going to come out and defend what they've done, although MicroStrategy has done this very effectively to date. There's also a way in which it operates as a hedge against the actual direct holding of MicroStrategy, so you can offset it with the convertible bond.
reduce your risk because, you know, micro strategy has such a volatile stock price that if you hold a lot of it, then there, you may want to hedge that with this. So it's, it's not something that explains itself on the first read, I would say. But as you point out, there are, there is institutional interest. And I think part of it is, is the Hedgick strategies have made available through this.
Much like watching Fight Club, it changes every time you watch it. I also wanna do a quick note. It's not any time MicroStrategy wants there are rules of when it can call back the bond, quote, subject to certain conditions on or after December 4th, 2026, MicroStrategy may redeem for cash all or any portion of the notes at a redemption price equal basically to the principal amount. Gotta get that one right if I'm talking about dead securities. Anyway, Bill Barker, appreciate you being here. Glad to have you back. Thanks, thanks for having me.
How about a read without a chief investment officer? That actually might be a good thing. Up next, on in Chalk of the Loop hosts Matt Argusinger and Anthony Chavone for a scoreboard episode breaking down East Group properties. Premium Motleyful members get access to all scoreboard episodes in the video library, but even if you're not a member, and by the way, you should be a member. It's a great way to get premium coverage of stocks and investment analysis. Anyway, if you're not a member, you can watch this one in full on YouTube. I'll include a link in the show notes.
Today's show is brought to you by Vanta. Proving trust is more important than ever, especially when it comes to your security program. Vanta helps centralize program requirements and automate evidence collection for frameworks like SOC 2, ISO 27001, HIPAA, and more. So you save time and money and build customer trust.
And with Vanta, you get continuous visibility into the state of your controls. Join more than 8,000 global companies, including Atlassian, Flow Health, and Quora, who trust Vanta to manage risk and prove security in real time. Now, that's a new way to GRC. Get $1,000 off Vanta when you go to vanta.com slash fool. That's vanta.com slash fool for $1,000 off.
Welcome to the latest Motley Fool scoreboard. I'm on in Chockeville and we've got longtime fools, Anthony Chabone and Matt Argersinger giving a one to ten rating to the Sun Belt Area focused industrial read that I may or may not have thought made backpacks. It's e-screwed properties, ticker symbol EGP.
As always, we'll rate East Group Properties business. It's management and it's financials. We'll talk valuation. If there's timefalls, play armchair, CEO, and we will top it all in about 12 minutes or less, maybe even shorter. So let's get to it. Matt, how do you rate the strength of East Group's business, including factors like its industry and its competition? Scale of 1 to 10, 10 is invincible. One is hopeless.
Well, on and on, I'm going with eight pretty high for East Group properties. It's an, as you mentioned, it's an industrial REIT. It is mostly focused on the Sun Belt. Most of its properties, almost all of its properties are kind of shallow bay distribution oriented think warehouses, logistics facilities, and what they call last mile locations. So really strategic real estate, that's important for three big trends that I'm going to talk about, which one being the obvious one is e-commerce.
We are living in a more and more e-commerce world, more and more retail sales of being driven, of course, by online sales that fits perfectly into e-substrategy. The second big trend is, you said at Sunbelt, they derive about 70% of their operating income from states like Texas, Florida, Arizona, North Carolina. These are among the fastest growing states in the country. So a lot of people are moving to, a lot of businesses are going to. That's a big tailwind for them. And then post-COVID,
We've seen this really need for companies to really optimize their supply chains, have higher inventory ratios, practice what they call just in case inventory management. God, that's another big huge tailwind for Easter properties. I would say the one reservation I have about Easter and why I don't give it
9 or 10 is they are among the smaller REITs. They are a large industrial REIT, but they're still less than a tenth of the size of prologists, for example. It's still a highly fragmented market with lots of supply, and they're very development focused at East Group. So it's more capital intensive than maybe other REITs. So that's why I'm given an 8 out of 10.
Yeah, I'll go with the seven free groups business. Matt, you mentioned a lot of the major things, but another thing that I like about East Group is that about 50% of their portfolio has been developed internally. So I think that's really important because they can design the properties to their specifications. They can build them for the long term.
And then the other thing I like about them too is that they have the most diversified tenant base out of, I think, any industrial read their top 10 tenants account for just about just under 8% of their total annualized base friends. So I think that's really important. And then aside from the e-commerce and migration trends that you mentioned earlier,
I just think industrial real estate is an advantage property type. If you think about a warehouse, right? It's just four walls, you have a ceiling, you have a roof. There's not a lot of recurring capital expenditures involved with maintaining a warehouse. And that allows more cash to ultimately be returned to shareholders. And I'll only give it a seven because
This business is a little bit reliant on outside forces that aren't necessarily within the company's control. So you think about like supply and demand fundamentals, the health of the economy and migration trends as well, although those have been positive recently, but I'll settle with a seven. Yeah, given that smaller size, that diversification that you were talking about really gives me some comfort where it's not just relying on, you know, you won't want to see 32% is from this one big tech company. Let's move on to management, Matt.
Scale of 1 to 10. 10 is Warren Buffett, of course, and one is Homer Simpson.
I might be a little high here, but I'm going nine out of 10 on it. And that's because I'm just really impressed by CEO Marshall Loeb and what he's done. His tenure goes back to 1991 with East Year Properties. He was with the company for the first 10 years of his career. He went off to be an executive at a couple of other publicly traded rates before rejoining East Group in 2015 and then becoming its CEO in January 2016. And since Loeb became CEO in January 2016,
East Group has outperformed the S&P 500 by more than 80 percentage points. That's hard to do as a REIT, especially in recent years. Real estate has been in a pretty big bear market. East Group has continued to outperform and deliver amazing returns. I'm going to steal a page from Ants Playbook here, but one of the great ways you can measure REIT's management is how they've grown the dividend versus the rest of the company.
Each group has grown as dividend by about a 13% annual annualized rate over the last 10 years. Over that same span, each group shares outstanding and total debt outstanding have both increased at just around 5% annually. So the dividend growth is way ahead of those critical capital parts of the company. I think that's a really strong sign of management, so I'm very impressed here.
I'm also going to go high here at an eight, uh, bat, you mentioned martial lobe, just in the tremendous CEO since he's been there. I also like looking at the proxy statement two for REITs cause at the end of the day, they're, they're advocating capital. And that's what we, we need to focus on as, as read investors. And if you look at their compensation incentives, they're based on FFO per share. So per share metric, that's good based on same property and a wide growth. And then a couple of balance sheet metrics, like that, the EBITDA and a fixed charge coverage ratios.
as well as total shareholder returns. So I think it's kind of rare for a REAP management team to be compensated on balance sheet metrics. So I think that's definitely a good sign. And then something unique about e-scroups of management team that you really don't see in any other REAP is that they don't have a chief investment officer.
I find that fascinating. All the development, all the acquisition, all the disposition activity is decided by the local teams that are operating those assets. And I think that's good for talent development too, like Marshall Lobe was in charge of that at one point in his career at East Group. So I just kind of like how that
East group has a decentralized culture. The only reason I give them Nate is because of low incentive ownership at only around 1.5% of shares outstanding. That tends to be fairly common for eats just because of the way they're structured. So I'll go with an eight. All right, financials, Matt. A 10 is a fortress. A one is yikes.
I'm dishing out another nine here. So just a quick financial snapshot of East Group looking at just their second quarter results, the most recent results. The operating portfolio was 97% occupied as of the end of June. Rental rates, new and renewing leases, up 60%. That's an incredible same property net income of 5% funds from operations, which is the key measure of a REITs cash flow. That was up 8.5%. I can't recall
a quarter going back many years where East Group has not shown growth in funds or operations per share. So the business is performing really well. And if you look at the balance sheet, you've got debt to total market cap of just 16.9%. Debt to EBITDA is less than 4X. Both of these metrics are very strong for REIT. And with interest rates headed lower now, East Group's balance sheet is only going to get de-risk and their liquidity is only going to get higher. So I just think they're in a really great position financially.
Yeah, I'll go with an eight for the financials. Matt, you mentioned the FFFB share growth that the earnings growth, that earnings growth is like the phenomenal dividend growth as well. The East Group has paid a dividend for 179 consecutive quarters. They've also increased or maintained their dividend for 31 consecutive years, including increases in each of the last 13 years.
So this is a steady dividend grower. You can see that cash that they generate flowing back to shareholders, which we love to see. In August, the increase their dividend by more than 10%. So that's a good sign. And over the last 10 years, they've grown their dividend by just about 150%.
So really impressive there. And you mentioned the strong balance sheet too. Death to EBITDA is an all-time best for the company. They're at the market capital of 20%. I mean, typically in the private real estate market, you'll typically see like loading the values closer to 60% or 70%. So this is a very, very well capitalized company. I only give them an eight because of their size, which you mentioned earlier, Matt. They're a little bit smaller. They can't necessarily get the
the best terms, the best interest rates on new debt that they issue, like somebody like a prologist can. So that's the only reason why I give them an eight, but definitely a strong company here. You can tell how much they like the company because they're both kind of apologizing when they give like an eight. Let's talk valuation. How well will these groups stock do over the next five years and how safe is it? Keeping in mind a 10 is a short thing. One is a lottery ticket.
Yeah, so over the last five, 10, 15, and 20 year periods, these group has delivered a compound annual total return north of 10%. So I'm going to go between 10 and 15% annualized of the next five years. Today, if you look at its dividend yields at a yield of about 3%, it's growing its dividend at a 10% rate.
So theoretically, that should produce a total return of around 13%. So I think that's reasonable. And I mean, you factor in the tailwinds of e-commerce, some about migration, some of the rent growth that's already embedded in its below market leases that it has within its portfolio. I think that's going to lead to at least double digit returns from here.
I'm also going 10 to 15%. I'm a 7 in terms of my confidence with that. The valuation is a little high. If you look at what they're guiding for for FFO per share this year, the stock right now is trading around 22, 23 times that figure. That's a little high, even though I think Easter does deserve a premium.
Uh, as, as Ant mentioned, dividend yield is right around 3%. You add the, that's the dividend growth or to the F of Oprah share growth. Easy to see double digit returns here, but valuations a little high. So I'm not, I'm not super confident in it, but I give it a seven for that. And I should say, I don't think I mentioned I'm also going with the seven, uh, because of the valuation.
We're going to skip armfare CEO in the interest of time and go straight to everyone's favorite topic. I expect to hear pro lodges somewhere in here. Anthony, is there a company needs group property space that you like better?
Yeah, there's this company called Prologious. That's my topic. Just a massive company. I think it has a market cap of over $100 billion, but I still don't think the market fully grasps, like just how strong this company really is with its management team, its balance sheet, just everything involved with the company. It's just phenomenal.
I got to say Poulogis as well. And real estate size does make a huge difference for returns. And as Ant mentioned earlier, access to the capital markets. And so yeah, Poulogis is the picket. I love East Group and I own both East Group and Poulogis. But if I had to pick one, I'd probably go to Poulogis.
As always, people on the program may have interests in the stocks they talk about, and the Motley Fool may have formal recommendations for or against, so don't buy or sell stocks based solely on what you hear. All personal finance content follows Motley Fool editorial standards and are not approved by advertisers, the Motley Fool only picks products that will personally recommend to friends like you. I'm Ricky Mulvey, thanks for listening, we'll be back tomorrow.
