The Australian Wine Industry Essay Example for Free

The Australian Wine Industry Essay The Mcguigan interest in the Australian Wine Industry goes back four generations. Owner Patrick McGuigan the first of four generations to enter the wine industry was a dairy farmer by trade. Percy McGuigans career was spent at Penfolds. Prior to retirement in 1968 Percy purchased Dalwood estate and renamed it Wyndham Estate. Two years later he sold it to his son Brian McGuigan. Brian McGuigan has been involved in the wine industry for over thirty five years. He developed Wyndham Estate Wine Company in the Hunter Valley and built sales in excess of 1,250,000 cases to become the leading exporter of Australian wine. In 1992 Wyndham Estate was acquired by French Company ? Pernod-Ricard group, Orlando Wines. Later that year, after the acquisition Brian McGuigan established a new company McGuigan Wines as a publicly listed company. In 2001 McGuigan wines merged with Simeon Wines to create Australias 4th largest wine company and in October 2003 McGuigan Simeon Wines Limited (MSWL) purchased Miranda wines. MSWL distributes to over 25 countries including United States, Ireland, New Zealand, Germany and other mainland countries in Europe. They export over 20 million litres (30% of MSWL wine production) annually. (www. mcguiganwines. com. au) MSWL reported a 2004/05 net profit of $35. 9 million, down 10. 8% on the previous year. Brian McGuigan believes this is mainly due to the oversupply of grapes and does not foresee any positive movement in grape prices for the next two years. (AAP Newswire 13/9/2005) ?MGSW is targeting focus on a number of things but in particular costs, costs, costs. He said he had been ? embarrassed by the 2004/05 result as a stronger local currency and an over supply of grapes in Australia and overseas weighed on profit growth. (AAP Newswire 13/9/2005) Financial Analysis The following key financial ratios for MSWL are for the period 2003 to 2005. (MSWL Annual Financial Report 30 June 2005 30 June 2003) Working Capital 2005 ($000)2004 ($000)2003 ($000) 377418 ? 124905 = 252,513 332319 135304 = 197,015 255854 ? 105775 = 150,079 Profitability Profit Margin Ratio 2005 ($000)2004 ($000)2003 ($000) 45112 368050 = 12. 2% 40248 305708 = 13. 1% 32204 283450 = 11. 3% Gross Profit Ratio 2005 ($000)2004 ($000)2003 ($000) 91111 368050 = 24. 7% 88931 305708 = 29% 74096 283450 = 26%. Return on ordinary shareholders equity ratio 2005 ($000)2004 ($000)2003 ($000) 35895 (361288 + 332641)/2 35895 346964. 5 = 10% 40248 (332641 + 270452)/2 40248 301546. 5 = 13% 32204 (270452 + 226093)/2 32204 248272. 5 = 12. 9% Return on Assets 2005 ($000)2004 ($000)2003 ($000) 35895 (681471 +625006)/2 35895 653238. 5 = 5. 4% 40248 (625006+566916)/2 40248 595961 = 6. 7% 32204 (566916+471306)/2 32204 519111 = 6. 2% Asset Turnover 2005 ($000)2004 ($000)2003 ($000) 368050 (681471 +625006)/2 368050 653238. 5 = . 56 305708 (625006+566916)/2 305708 595961 = . 51 283450 (566916+471306)/2 283450 519111 = . 54 Operating Expenses to Sales Ratio 2005 ($000)2004 ($000)2003 ($000) 30809 368050 = 8. 3% 31953 305708 = 10. 4% 18937 283450 = 6. 6% Liquidity Ratios Current Ratio 2005 ($000)2004 ($000)2003 ($000) 377418 124905 = 3. 02:1 332319 135304 = 2. 45:1 255854 105775 = 2. 41:1 Quick ratio 2005 ($000)2004 ($000)2003 ($000) 12728+361288+ 120698 124905 = 494714 124905 = 3. 96:1 2654+332641+ 126534 135304 = 461829 135304 = 3. 41:1 773+270452+ 125028 105775 = 396253 105775 = 3. 74:1 Current Cash Debt Coverage Ratio 2005 ($000)2004 ($000)2003 ($000) 2523 124905+135304/2 = 2523 130104. 50 = 0. 019 times 5768 135304+105775/2 = 5768 120539. 50 = 0. 047 times (10040) 105775+119523/2 = (10040) 112649 = (0. 089) times Receivables turnover ratio 2005 ($000). 2004 ($000)2003 ($000) 320422+47628 120698+ 126534/2 = 368050 123616 = 2. 97 times 262025+43683 126534+125028/2 = 305708 125781 = 2. 43 times 248381+35069 125028 +87486/2 = 283450 106257 = 2. 66 times Average collection period in days 2005 ($000)2004 ($000)2003 ($000) 365 2. 97 = 123 days 365 2. 43 = 150 days 365 2. 66 = 137 days Inventory turnover 2005 ($000)2004 ($000)2003 ($000) (276939) 60018+51176/2 = (276939) 55597 = 4. 98 times (216777) 51176+32271/2 = (216777) 41723. 5 = 5. 19 times (209354) 32271+15817/2 = (209354) 24044 = 8. 70 times Average Days in Inventory 2005 ($000)2004 ($000)2003 ($000) 365 4. 98 = 73. 29 days 365 5. 19 = 70. 32 days 365 8. 70 = 41. 95 days Solvency Ratios Debt to total assets ratio 2005 ($000)2004 ($000)2003 ($000) 320183 681471 = 46% 292365 625006 = 46% 296464 566916 = 52% Cash debt coverage 2005 ($000)2004 ($000)2003 ($000) 2523 320183+292365/2 = 2523 306274 = 0. 008 times 5768 292365+296464/2 = 5768 294414. 50 = 0. 019 times (10040) 296464+245213/2 = (10040) 270838. 50 = (0. 037) times Times Interest Earned ratio 2005 ($000)2004 ($000)2003 ($000) 45112+1232+ 176690 1232+176690 = 223034. 177922 = 1. 25 times 51311+6004+ 145383 6004+145383 = 202698 151387 = 1. 33 times 46071+2559+ 175071 2559+175071 = 223701 177630 = 1. 25 times Free Cash Flow 2005 ($000)2004 ($000)2003 ($000) 2523-(22211) = (19688) 5768-(25006) = (19238) (10040)-(18913) = (28953) Summary of Financials (Working Capital, Profitability, Liquidity Solvency) Working Capital Management The working capital has incrementally increased from 2003 to 2005. This is due to the rapid expansion of the company during this period; and in particular the acquisition of Miranda Wines and a bottling plant at Merbein near Mildura. This expansion has required a significant increase in working capital. MSWL has a working capital of $252. 5 million for the financial year ended June 30 2005, which indicates that the company has an ability to pay its liabilities. (MSWL Annual Financial Report 30 June 2005 30 June 2003) Profitability The decrease in return on assets from 6. 2 percent in 2003 to 5. 4 percent in 2005 can also be attributed to the rapid expansion of the business during this period. The return on these assets may take up to three financial years to realise their full earnings potential. The 1 percent decrease in the profit margin ratio indicates that the decrease in return on assets was due to the decline in net profit rather than increasing assets. Return on shareholders equity has decreased from 13% in 2003 to 10% in 2005. ROE20052004 McGuigan 10%13% (June 04) South Corp-5% (Dec 04) Evans Tate-12% (Jun 04) When benchmarked against Southcorp and Evans and Tate the results are 5% and 12% respectively. (MSWL Annual Financial Report 30 June 2005 30 June 2003, Half year report Southcorp December 2004 Annual Report Evans Tate 2004). The downturn in net profit for 2005 has had a negative effect (decrease) on the following ratios; ?Return on Ordinary Shareholders Equity ?Return on Assets ?Profit Margin ?Asset Turnover ?Gross Profit (Kimmel et al, 2003 p 520, figure 11. 22) Liquidity Analysis of the current ratio indicates that it has been consistently high during the last three years ranging from 3. 02 to 2. 4 (2003). This can be explained by the high inventory levels carried by MSWL; resulting from the processing and bottling of the over-supply of domestic grapes. (MSWL Annual Financial Report 30 June. 2005 30 June 2003). Deloitte (2005) suggest that all wineries have a high current ratio as the wine sector is forced to hold high levels of inventories and generally has high current receivables and low current debt, as compared with other industries. The quick ratio indicates that the levels of liquidity for MSWL have remained relatively stable at 1. 2 times. This suggests the company is able to repay short term debt. However, it needs to be recognised that this figure of 1. 2 does not include the contribution of shareholder equity. Including shareholder equity inflates this figure to 3.96 times. (MSWL Annual Financial Report 30 June 2005 30 June 2003). The companys collection period of 123 days is the lowest for the period 2003 to 2005. However, it remains unacceptable high, perhaps reflecting the depressed state of the market. Deloitte, 2005 state that the intensified competition, high levels of production of red wine and increased consolidation within the retail sector are some of the factors that have presented financial challenges for the Australian Wine Industry over the past 12 months as evidenced in the 2004 Annual Financial Benchmarking Survey. MSWL, Australias third biggest listed wine maker has clearly suffered during this retail consolidation and continues to experience slow payment for its product via the domestic distributor duopoly (Woolworths and Coles-Myer). (MSWL Annual Report 30 June 2005 June 2003) Inventory turnover has decreased from 8. 7 times in 2003 to 4. 98 times in 2005. The results for 2005 indicate that inventory was sold and replaced approximately 50% less often than during 2003. This result reflects the oversupply of grapes in the market for the last two years. (MSWL Annual Report 30 June 2005 June 2003). Average days inventory has also been impacted by the oversupply of grapes with results increasing from 41. 9 days in 2003 to 73. 3 days in 2005, a 57% increase. These higher inventory levels also increase storage and interest costs. (MSWL Annual Report 30 June 2005 June 2003) Solvency Debt to equity ratio has decreased to 46% in 2005, indicating that 46% of assets have been provided by creditors. Debt to Equity Ratio20052004 McGuigan 46%46% South Corp-42% Evans Tate-64% When benchmarked against Southcorp and Evans and Tate the results are 42% and 64% respectively. (MSWL Annual Financial Report 30 June 2005 30 June 2003, Half year report Southcorp December 2004 Annual Report Evans Tate 2004) Times interest earned ratio has declined from 1. 33 in 2004 to 1. 25 in 2005, indicating that the companies interest expense was 1. 25 times the amount needed to cover interest expense. The reduction in the times interest earned ration is a reflection of the reported decline in profit at the 30th June 2005. (MSWL Annual Report June 30 2005 June 2003) Free cash flow has been negative for the last three years leaving limited opportunity for expansion. It would be unlikely that MSWL would make any major acquisitions in the near future but rather focus on reducing cost and processing efficiency. (MSWL Annual Report June 30 2005 June 2003) Significant key opportunities and risks for the company and investors in McGuigan; Opportunity MSWL primary focus is on improving bottling efficiency and cost by relocating their wine making bottling and storage to the newly acquired facility near Mildura. ?The acquisition consolidates our export production and packaging operations around the inland port of Mildura. Its proximity of our major wineries will bring significant operational efficiency gains and transport savings. (ASX Announcement 25/1/05) MSWL is negotiating with other wine companies wanting to outsource the production of their less expensive brands. ?This is very good for us because were a producer of a lot of that product and we look to continue to expand our business. (Adelaide Advertiser 26/1/2005) MSWL has experienced significant increases in export sales for the period 2004 to 2005. MSWL states, ? Total export sales, bottled and bulk, increased by 34% in dollar terms with significant increases in the UK/Europe and the United States. Actual sales volume by 40%. (MSWL Annual Financial Report 30 June 2005). As the export trend is increasing with new markets such as Japan this would be a significant opportunity for MSWL to further capitalise on overseas growth. (IBIS World Pty Ltd). Risks Distribution and operating costs are high therefore creating efficiencies to reduce expenses is essential. Net cash provided by operating activities has decreased in the period 2004 to 2005. (MSWL Annual Report June 2005). MSWLs Production is in direct competition from Australian wine packager and premium cork specialist Vinpac International, who service 183 Australian wine makers (www. vinpac. com. au). MSWL would need to remain competitive in cost and quality. Competition is increasing at the retail shelf space level due to the proliferation of global wine production over the past ten years. As production increases from South Africa and South America in the next several years, grape prices are likely to fall and will force Australian wine makers to reduce prices, which is adding to earning uncertainty. (IBIS World Pty Ltd). Other financial and non-financial factors that impact upon McGuigans performance and attractiveness as an investment opportunity. Exchange rate movements are leading to increased import competition affecting the Australian dollar returns that local producers receive from exports. They also impact on the demand for imports by altering their competitiveness. (IBIS World Pty Ltd). ?To a degree, the past decade has been subsidised by the falling Australian dollar. Now we have to pull our belt in and be super competitive. (Adelaide Review 2/9/2005). Branding is imperative for success in this industry since consumers typically choose a brand that they are familiar with, and hence, know that they can rely on its quality and taste. (IBIS World Pty Ltd). MSWL domestic and export bottled sales increased reflecting the continued focus on brand awareness. (MSWL Annual Report June 2005). Ownership of industry participants has included a phase of mergers and acquisitions, with larger firms taking an increase control of the market. This indicates consolidation, and an industry that is rapidly approaching maturity therefore marketing, distribution and export capabilities are growing in importance. MCWL would need to ensure they keep up with this growing industry pattern. (IBIS World Pty Ltd). Limitations of the analysis implications of these limitations for any investment decision Industry Diversification The financial analysis of MSWL has been benchmarked against two other known competitors, Southcorp and Evans and Tate. However, diversification may impede comparison with both competitors and industry. For example, Southcorp has diversified into other industries over the last twenty five years which hinders comparisons with MSWL who remain primarily focused on the wine industry. Alternative Accounting Methods Variations in accounting methods may also impact financial analysis when compared with other companies. For example, depreciation on Property Plant and equipment is calculated using straight line depreciation for MSWL and Southcorp whilst Evans and Tate have used a combination of straight line and reducing balance to calculate depreciation between 2003 and 2004. Cost Cost is traditionally not adjusted for price level changes and often unadjusted from different financial periods which leads to invalid representation of inflation or deflation (Kimmel et al 2005). MSWL has consolidated infrastructure in the form of bottling and wineries, whilst sourcing grapes from owned vineyards rather than contract growers representing a short to medium term cost. However, MSWLs vertical integration allows it to control the volume of its wine sold on the market thus regulating revenue growth. The inflationary increases in cost can be negated with the strategic sales of product at margins above these cost price increases. In conclusion; the above limitations and their implications need to be taken into consideration when making an investment decision. Certain analyses can mask the true investment potential of a company. Consideration of the industry and its trends, the accounting method employed and the costs involved in doing business all require careful deliberation before an investment decision can be made.Appendix A. References: www. mcguiganwines. com. au Accessed 12/10/05 AAP Newswire 13/9/05 MSWL Annual Financial Report 30 June 2005 MSWL Annual Financial Report 30 June 2003 Half year report Southcorp December 2004 Annual Report Evans Tate 2004 Kimmel et al, 2003 p520, figure 11. 22 Deloitte Annual Financial benchmarking Survey for Australian Wine Industry ? Vintage 2004 ASX Announcement 25/1/05 Adelaide Advertiser 26/1/05 IBIS World Pty Ltd accessed 1/11/05 www. vinpac. com. au ? accessed 1/11/05 Adelaide Review 2/9/05 Kimmel et al 2005.