Corus Entertainment

Corus Entertainment (TSX: CJR.B) has been a slow melting cube business case, dealing with the woes of competing against Netflix and streaming media, and the internet in general. Despite these competitive factors, they have still been able to generate a prodigious amount of cash flows.

They released their fiscal quarter results on January 12, 2024 and the following was their quarterly cash flow statement:

I’ve circled some relevant numbers. The key parts are that they have huge capital requirements to acquire program rights (this part makes the EBITDA look very attractive!) but these costs are necessary and increasing; they also have non-controlling interests which get claims to dividends that ordinary shareholders do not receive.

When netting this out, you have about $15 million in effective cash to work with. Management has a very strange interpretation of “free cash flow” which I won’t get into here.

This effective cash is contrasted to the $1.08 billion debt they have. Management is very fortunate to have $750 million of this at much lower fixed rates (5% and 6%) due 2028 and 2030 (the rest of it is in a credit facility) but needless to say, this leverage coupled with non-controlling interests do not leave the prospect of equity returns to be very good given the melting ice cube. The fixed rate debt is traded on the open market at a 13% yield to maturity at present.

There is some residual clout in ‘traditional media’ and Corus does still reach a lot of television sets and radios across the country. Perhaps some deep-pocketed individual will want to take control for strategic/political and not necessarily financial reasons.

The entity does appear to be more viable if they got rid of about half their debt.

Some quick thoughts at the beginning of 2024

Two data points, I am not adding any value to the universe with this post:

The Nasdaq 100 had a +55% year, while the Nasdaq Composite was +45%.

I don’t think there is any degree of active portfolio management that would match this number.

The correct strategy in 2023 was to put your portfolio into 5 equal-sized chunks, in NVidia, Facebook/Meta, Tesla, Microsoft, Amazon and Apple. (You can sub-in your favourite large-cap darlings here, including Google and the like, but you get the idea).

No sane portfolio manager would do this.

It is very similar to the times in 1999 how if you weren’t in technology stocks (whether large cap, or the trashiest of the trash dot-com companies) in 1999 that you were guaranteed to under-perform.

The question is whether we will see “momentum”, or “regression to the mean” going forward.

I truly don’t know anymore. I note that, separate to the investment world, I have been receiving some email correspondences that are worded like they were generated by ChatGPT. Indeed, when I entered the text of the email and asked for it to form a response, it spit out some language. I then asked ChatGPT to simplify it, and what came out looked like a carbon copy of what said individual emailed to me.

I think from this point forward I’m just going to resort to in-person face-to-face communication.

However, others will opt for the convenience of not having to parse language in their heads, let alone spill it out on a keyboard (or god help those that can use touchscreen phones to do their typing). They will not have to deal with grammar, or even have to think about anything. AI will take care of it.

So perhaps it isn’t too late to buy those deeply out of the money calls on NVidia, it is banking on the intellectual laziness of people – sadly a safe bet.

================

In 2024, Canada will have an active stock buyback tax of 2% applied on net share repurchases. While the legislation is more technically worded, essentially “net” in this case means that share buybacks beyond offsetting share issuances (whether through SPOs or option issuances, etc.) will be taxed at 2%. I don’t wish to get into the stupidity of how meddling in capital structure is going to cause perversions (indeed, prior to this, share buybacks are tax-preferential to dividends and this in itself was a perversion), but nothing makes the government more happy to claim to the public they are sticking it to greedy corporations with their share buybacks than applying an additional tax.

While 2% is not a huge penalty to pay, it is one more unnecessary friction impeding the return on and of capital. I am looking at the companies in my existing portfolio and am wondering if the ones voraciously performing share buybacks will be more keen to compensate through the issuance of stock options. Again, 2% is not a huge penalty to pay, but it is yet another annoyance.

Changing Course for 2024

You’ve got to know when to hold ’em
Know when to fold ’em
Know when to walk away
And know when to run
You never count your money
When you’re sittin’ at the table
There’ll be time enough for countin’
When the dealin’s done
– The Gambler, Kenny Rogers

This seems to be the most appropriate song to describe the feeling I am getting at the close of the calendar year.

Probably the biggest sign of whether you have a grasp of reality or not is whether your mental model of the world can correctly predict the future.

Unfortunately, as I have written here before, one does not necessarily need a truthful model of reality in order to survive. Donald Hoffman is a cognitive psychologist that has made some very interesting lectures on the matter and this disconnection between truth, reality and survival – this has always been in the back of my mind.

In particular in our 21st century age of information, mis-information and dis-information at our fingertips, coupled with AI bots, deepfakes, etc., it is getting very difficult to distinguish truth from fiction.

Ironically during the Covid era (from March 2020 onwards) I felt like (who knows whether I actually did!) I had a better grasp of reality than most, and indeed as it translated into the financial markets, it was a very rare time where most participants were so strongly positioned for disaster that it was possible to make reasonable gains when people’s perceptions of reality normalized to some semblance of truth (i.e. we’re not all going to die – just look at a chart of Moderna (MRNA) or Alpha Pro Tech (APT)!).

The financial marketplace is actually a reasonable place to measure the perception of one’s reality against others. Note I did not say “truth” – the old cliche of “the market may remain irrational longer than your ability to remain solvent” is true in many cases, say for those that wanted to short the economically unprofitable cannabis sector in 2016, the dot-com market in 1998, or the short-lived upsurge of plant-based meat companies IPO’ing around 2018-19. Never mind Gamestop! Even if your sense of reality is closer to the truth than others, the market can dictate reality for longer than one thinks.

Going back to present, the Covid effect has slowly abated over time and sometime around 2022 the markets began to be the same old efficient market machine that we have been used to – the primary difference between 2022’s market and onwards was that we exited out of the zero interest rate environment.

In retrospect, I was inappropriately positioned for 2023. It seems increasingly likely that the reality in my brain is not corresponding with what is actually going on out there, and as a result, I need to discard these narratives out of my head and start from the foundation again.

You could already tell that I had significant amounts of self-doubt in the middle of 2022 – where I mercilessly started to cull elements of the portfolio and raise cash, and I was soothed by the fact that cash had obtained a reasonable yield once again. The baseline performance for doing nothing (or rather resting on the sidelines) was actually pretty reasonable.

My doubts on my grip on financial reality have continued to increase even further – one should never invest when you are flying blind. The other rule is a break in thesis – one of my tenants going into the fossil fuel trade back in 2020 was that North American production would not be able to eclipse their Q4-2019’s highs for various reasons (resource exhaustion, drilled and uncompleted numbers low, lack of capital spending, later on – Russia being cut out of the oil equation, costs of drilling, self-induced ESG restrictions, etc.) but this is a failed and broken thesis. US production in particular is now at all-time highs, despite all the narrative.

World demand also continues to be very high but for whatever reason, there seems to be ample production capacity.

My continuing fossil fuel trade in 2023 has been incredibly offside with reality. I consider myself lucky to still be marginally positive YTD performance in what has been a very uninspiring year financially riddled with errors of omission (i.e. not listening to my instincts earlier and getting out at higher pricing).

Instead, what we are going to get might be similar to what happened in 2014, and is typical of cyclical industries – a terrible race to the bottom. Low cost producers and those that can provide additional value (e.g. refineries, mid-stream, etc.) will survive, but returns are likely going to be muted going forward. This is the conventional financial playbook and it is one that is telling me to fold ’em. And that I have been doing.

I did venture away from my Covid playbook a tiny bit in 2023, but not to a significant degree. 2024 will also exhibit a change in focus. The markets have always been about adaptation and survival and I am fortunate to begin the new year with half a clean canvas to work with. I am not in any rush to deploy capital, however – I am not at all sure that my grip on reality or the truth is quite where it needs to be. I am worried that my thoughts are currently too close to the consensus out there. As a result, if there are going to be any movements, they will be baby steps.

Bank of Canada – holding interest rates

In a decision that surprised nobody, the Bank of Canada kept the interest rates steady at 5% and gave the usual cautionary language that they’re watching the situation carefully.

However, my post is about the press conference the Bank of Canada held a day later, titled “What population growth means for the economy and inflation“.

In the Bank of Canada’s page describing this December 7 press conference, they highlighted the following quote (bold emphasis my own):

===============

“Strong immigration since the start of 2022 has helped increase Canada’s workforce…. And the larger workforce has boosted the level of our potential output by 2% to 3% without adding to inflation. This is a significant improvement, especially considering Canada’s otherwise rapidly aging population.”

===============

Then just a little bit lower down, we have the following (again, bold emphasis my own):

===============

The impact on inflation

When newcomers move to Canada, they need to buy many necessities to help them get settled. This increases demand for goods and services, which can have an impact on inflation.

Not all newcomers affect the economy in the same way. For instance, because of their high tuition fees, international students typically add to consumption more than many other newcomers. Overall, though, the initial boost to spending from the recent rise in newcomers has had very little impact on inflation.

But newcomers also need housing, and that’s a different story. Canada has long had housing supply challenges for many reasons, including:

* zoning restrictions
* lengthy permitting processes
* a shortage of construction workers

The result is that new housing construction has not kept up with population growth for many years.

With these housing supply challenges, the recent increase in newcomers has added to the pressure on rent and housing prices. And this has affected inflation.

Ultimately, Canada needs more housing, and the recent focus by all levels of government to increase construction is a welcome development.

===============

I take amusement in the phrases “without adding to inflation”, “which can have an impact on inflation”, “has had very little impact on inflation”, “this has affected inflation” all bundled together – talk about covering your bases!

The Bank of Canada is just as much a political beast as our members of parliament are in Ottawa, but the way they express it is different in flavour. They are trying to telegraph something fairly obvious, in that the component of CPI that is contributing the most to inflation is related to real estate:

It does not take a Ph.D. in economics to determine that if you admit a million people into the country a year, and the increase in housing stock is well less than a million homes, that prices are going to rise.

That said, the year-over-year comps for mortgage rates (looking at 5-year and variable) is about to level off in 2024 and this component of CPI will abate. The Bank of Canada raised to 4.5% on January 25, 2023 before taking a pause and then raised to 4.75% on June 7, 2023 and 5.00% on July 12, 2023. Energy prices have dropped considerably year-to-year and this will also provide a tailwind to the economy.

It reminds me of a fictional economic scenario where a loaf of bread costs $1.00 and next year it goes to $2.00. Inflation is 100%, people panic, and then some action is taken. Next year, the load of bread costs $2.04 and then everybody cries victory that they have conquered inflation. This will likely be the result of some disastrous economic decisions made during the Covid crisis.

No free lunch – CASH ETFs revisited

On October 31, 2023, OSFI gave out a huge “trick or treat” to high-interest savings ETF owners (CASH, PSA, etc.) in the following technical bulletin.

There is a transitional period until January 31, 2024 whereby banks and HISA ETF operators will come to a separate rate structure that will most likely involve another haircut of gross yield – the media quoted one analyst from TD that claimed it would be about 50bps, but my suspicion it will be about half of that.

This will still make cash ETFs competitive, but not the no-brainer compared to alternatives, which include high-credit short-duration corporate bond funds.

In other words – there is no free lunch.

CASH.to right now yields a net 5.18%, while the nearest corporate bond alternative (looking at ZST.to as a reasonable proxy for this – they survived March 2020 fairly intact) is netting 5.47% for half a year duration risk. Government of Canada 6 month debt is at 5.11%. CBIL.to is an average 1.8 month duration government bond ETF that yields a net 4.92%. Another relatively innovative product is target date maturity ETFs (looking at RBC’s RQL.to), which has an average duration of 0.63 years and a 5.16% net yield and by all accounts looks inferior to ZST.

What other proxies for Canadian short-term investment-grade corporate debt are out there? Most of them have duration of 2-4 years which involves a significant interest rate component exposure. The other question is whether half a percentage point is adequate compensation for (albeit very low) credit risk.

The yield curve continues to remain heavily inverted – 1 year to 30 year is roughly a -146bps differential, while the more quoted 2-10yr spread is -80bps.