Avation PLC (LON:AVAP) - Aircraft Leasing

Monday, Feb 19 2018 by

Hopefully my understanding of Avation (LON:AVAP) will assist anyone who may have a passing interest in aircraft leasing and prefer longer term investments... 

Avation's 2017-2018 H1 results are due 26 February 2018. There will be Update Call at 1pm GMT on that day. For the Webcast you can register in advance or on the day. It will also be available for replay on their Website. 

£AVAP are a small aircraft leasing company based in Singapore. They originally started out leasing old Fokker 100's in Australia but then graduated to becoming a major lessor for the highly successful and very much desirable ATR72 series aircraft. The ATR's are a turboprop aircraft for use on domestic and regional routes. The company then went on to lease the narrow-bodied A320's and A321's; there first foray into modern jet powered aircraft. As most readers will perhaps know, these aircraft are primarily for short-medium haul operations. At the end of 2017, Avation entered the twin aisle/wide bodied market with a Boeing B777-300ER and Airbus A330-300. For Avation, a typical ATR72-600 costs $19.8m, An A321 $51.3m, a B777-300ER $152m and a two year old A330-300 is around $93m. These are actual costs and not list prices which will be considerably higher. The difference between list price and actual price is largely accounted for by who the customer is and how many aircraft are being ordered and likely to be ordered in the future. Very few airlines pay anything close to list price.

There are 10 listed independent aircraft leasing companies globally but Avation is the only listed aircraft lessor in the UK which is not ideal. I am ignoring Doric as they are a specialist fund manager with an innovative method of financing A380's. 

The concept of aircraft leasing is quite simple. In practice airlines go to the aircraft manufacturer and place an order. Most of the time it takes 1-5 years before the aircraft manufacturer can start delivering the aircraft. The airline will pay a deposit but as the delivery time approaches they will (50% of the time) find a lessor and the airline will do a 'Sale and Leaseback' (SALB). Thus the lessor (in this case Avation plc) take ownership of the aircraft and agree to lease it back to the airline for a fixed rental charge and fixed time (usually 10-12 years). The point at which this occurs is usually on the delivery date.

The commercial aircraft leasing industry works very much on the same principles for all lessors. There has yet to be a 'disrupter' within the airline/commercial market.  Another key factor for all lessors is the value of the aircraft they own. In this field there are only two manufacturers that matter; Airbus and Boeing. Their duopoly* and production schedules ensure that demand exceeds supply. Also the value of aircraft is heavily influenced by aircraft trading between lessors and between lessors and airlines. Therefore it is in everyone's interests that a large number of lessors are in the business to enable a market between all of the industry participants. Hence Avation is a welcome addition to aircraft manufacturers, lessors and airlines.

* ATR are 50% owned by Airbus and although there are new entrants trying to get into this segment they have yet to prove themselves genuine competitors. As with Airbus/Boeing ATR have a large backlog of orders. 

The business model is easy to understand. Purchase new aircraft, which offer a lease yield of around 13%, with asset depreciation of about 5% per year. Apply 75% debt financing, at an interest rate of around 5%. Total other cash costs net off to around 1%.

Operationally, leasing is very much a low risk game for the lessor. It's the airlines responsibility to insure, maintain, repair and operate the aircraft. So even if there are major expenses due to mandatory modifications, for example, then that cost is the responsibility of the airline. At the end of the lease the airline return it to the lessor in a suitable condition (and that means plenty of life on the engines which for a B777 may cost $10-17m just on engine refurbishment).

Lease costs and rates will depend on a variety of factors. The aircraft purchase cost (big airlines get big discounts), credit worthiness of the airline, credit worthiness of the lessor, cost of finance, and estimated residual aircraft valuation (condition of aircraft, demand for used aircraft). All these things are relatable to each other. Typically an aircraft has a 25 year life span before it becomes truly uneconomic to continue operations; hence why the B777-200's are starting to leave the major airlines now.

Leasing aircraft is generally done in three 'tranches' over a 20-25 year life span of the asset. For all aircraft, a lessor is aiming to have the aircraft paid for within the first tranche, typically the first 12 years. After that the lease cost falls dramatically but conversely the rental yield goes up considerably (because the aircraft valuation is relatively low and the lease costs relatively high). The third period of rental is often seen as getting from it what you can as it heads to the scrap heap; however that can be very lucrative if the lessor knows what they are doing. Often aircraft are reconfigured to cargo carrying capability and/or end up in 'obscure' countries. The flip side is that as time goes on the element of risk increases considerably for the lessor as finding homes for these aircraft is problematical for a variety of reasons e.g. economics, spares, serviceability levels and legislation. It is therefore advantageous to have a 'young' fleet in the lessor's stable; not only to have a 'quality' customer but also to obtain financing at a cheaper rate.

Avation tends to have a loan-to-value ratio of around 75%. That's pretty much industry standard. With a current fleet value of over a billion USD that's an awful lot of dollars in interest that needs to be paid out by the company every year. So it's all about cost of debt. To a large extent the actual interest rate is not so important. The reason is that when Avation goes to the finance markets they enter into a fixed interest rate term commensurate with the lease period. In other words, even if interest rates were to triple over the next ten years it would have no effect on Avation's USD costs for that particular aircraft. If however interest rates would increase before the next aircraft SALB term is agreed then they pass the interest rate increase over to the airline. (It's not quite as simple as that but it largely gets the point across).

What is very important however is the cost of accessing the finance. Clearly if you or I go to a bank to borrow $20m we might expect to pay a higher interest charge than, say a large corporation. Now Avation have, in round numbers $750m debt to service then a 1% improvement on their finance cost would represent a saving of $7.5m per year... and that drops through to pure 'profit'. That becomes a highly significant improvement in profitability. And that number forever increases as each additional aircraft enters the fleet. In practice however that 'saving' can be employed elsewhere; but this demonstrates just how important cost of debt is for any leasing company.

So the question becomes, how do they reduce cost of debt? Currently they have raised loans via a $1000m Global Medium Term Note programme (Bonds) which payout/cost 7.5%, Junior secured borrowings sit around 6.3% and Secured borrowings at 4.3% interest. The bonds can be issued on a as and when basis; providing much needed flexibility for Avation.

Reducing the reliance on Junior debt has to be a goal. The bonds are (last time I looked) above par, and these are callable in 2020. (I should point out that not he entire $1000m has been issued as yet). So calling these notes above par will assist in reducing cost of debt. Junior debt costs are relatively high so a reduction in this will help a lot. How will this be done?

Cost of debt is a function of credit rating for the company. The better the rating, the cheaper access there is to money. In December 2016, Standard & Poor’s Global Ratings advised that Avation’s corporate credit rating has been upgraded to ‘B+’, Outlook Stable from ‘B’; the Senior Unsecured Notes rating was raised to ‘B’ from ‘B-’. So its going in the right direction. However the credit rating agencies look at a dynamic set of criteria to determine the credit ratings for Avation. For a very good read see this article by credit rating agency Fitch.  For those not inclined to read that lot the criteria can be boiled down to... credit ratings of their customers, age of the aircraft, market demand for aircraft, aircraft utilisation and the variety of customers and operating regions. Without doubt Avation have been addressing these issues. In FY2015 with a revenue of $57m, one customer representing 67% of that revenue. At HY 2017, the top three customers represents 86% of total revenue.  Now, the company will have a revenue of $115m (annualised) and the top customer represents 26% of revenue and the top 3 providing 60%. Put simply, they have progresses to almost double revenue and customers yet Avation have the same credit rating throughout.

I think for investors, if they hear rumours/statements about Avation re-financing then that is a potentially a big 'buy' flag to add or acquire Avation shares. Problem is that announcement could be next week, month, year or years away. We just don't know! It's my belief that Avation should be aiming at reducing cost of total debt from 5.1% as at 30 June 2017 to below 4%; but it needs a better credit rating to do so. That is not to say they cannot refinance as things are at present. For example, some of the very few older aircraft in the fleet probably have elevated cost of debt levels which potentially could be addressed. My overall point is that cost of debt is something investors should keep an eye on.

Another potential source of raising cash is the equity market. However, no one in their right mind would come to shareholders unless the shares were trading at a significant reduction to P/TBV. Also, for day-to-day aircraft trading the amount raised via a rights issue would not be particularly meaningful. Outside of this I suppose if they were in the market to acquire 20+ Airbus aircraft then that would change the landscape a bit!

The end of December was a pivotal moment in Avation's history. Not only did they add wide bodied aircraft to the fleet for the first time they did it with two different aircraft manufacturers and two different (new) customers. Additionally, in the same month, they delivered two ATR's. For such a very small team to handle that amount of new business is a credit to the company.

So what is a fair share price? For me it's a combination of two basic ratios which any investor can get their head around. Most major aircraft lessors (and by way of comparison major means 1000's of aircraft) trade around 0.8-1.1 book value. Avation already proved they were able to sell the ATR's last year above book value, so to my mind Avation should trade around P/TBV of 1 BUT, unlike the major lessors Avation have one advantage in the market place which the others do not have and that is growth. Whether you want to measure Total Fleet, Lease revenue, EBITDA or Total Assets growth you get the same story. Avation is very much a growth company and the market is not giving them credit for that element of the business. I mentioned before that Avation are on the only lessor listed in the UK. Perhaps influenced by bad memories from the old Guinness Peat (in the 1980's it became the world's largest commercial aircraft lessor only to fail spectacularly owing billions of dollars due to over-ambition and unfortunate timing) or the fact Avation are a 'tiddeler' in the Industry, Avation are not being recognised in the market, as yet.

Hidden assets: Avation have a number of ATR 'options' That means they have paid around $125k - 150k for each option to have an ATR built for a particular production slot. These options have a value which are listed as $3.7m when, at the FY end, they had 27 options (They now have 30). I had originally thought the $3.7m was for the entire 27 options but my understanding now is that value only applied to TWO aircraft options. i.e. an option is worth $1.85m. Thus they actually have around $50m worth of options but due for accountancy reasons they cannot be stated as such (why? I do not know; perhaps valuing something that can extends to 5 years into the future is the issue). Option valuation is largely determined by the backlog of orders. i.e. if an airline wants an ATR now and they have not ordered such 2-3-4 years ago then they need to find someone i.e. Avation, who has a production slot (option) and acquire the aircraft that way. Given there is now good cause to believe the ATR's now have exceptional demand (constrained by production of around 70-75 aircraft a year) then I see those options not losing any value.

On Dec 20/17 an IMS stated that the end December revenue run rate was $9.6m. This equates to $115.2m on an annualised basis. Remembering they sold 6 ATR's with >$20m reduction in lease revenue the December run rate number is a valid forecast for the current fleet. Given all the aircraft are on long term fixed lease contracts (without any complex payment plans i.e. monthly receivables for each aircraft are the same throughout the lease term) then, assuming there are no changes to the fleet the $115.2m is a reliable number and we can feel assured it will be no lower than this come H1 2018 (December). However, there will be additional aircraft entering the fleet over the next few months Potentially 8 additional ATR's adding around $150m in fleet assets and perhaps $5m in revenue depending on delivery schedule. I would also find it inconceivable that further jet aircraft are not added to the fleet by Dec 31/18

So what can we expect? Personally I don't see the financials being exciting at all. Revenue will be broadly flat due to the sale of the 6 ATR's and no revenue arising from the bankrupt Air Berlin A320 for a period of time. Little income arising from the widebodied aircraft being delivered right at the end of the HY. At best maybe $48m revenue but perhaps closer to $45m in reality. Admin costs will likely have crept up more than usual as the company expanded staff numbers considerably together with quite a lot travel related costs associated with the widebodied aircraft. EPS may even be below comparatives. I have pencilled in $0.10/share compared to $0.13 last year. However surprises either positive or negative may arise from the Air Berlin maintenance reserves and/or timing of finance charges. This aircraft had a surprisingly large amount of excess Maintenance Reserves with Avation and whilst I expect Easyjet would have negotiated the allocation of those reserves to come with the aircraft there may be sufficient 'left over' to make Avation shareholders happy. The RNS associated with the Air Berlin aircraft suggested otherwise but the wording used left this item open to interpretation. 

Perhaps if I was a new investor I would wait until after the H1 results are announced.

Full Year Forecasts (Dec 2018):

I don't know what's going on with published forecasts that I can see e.g. on Stockopedia but they are so far off the mark that I am suspecting they have not been updated for quite sometime.

At time of writing forecasts are 2018 revenue of $100m whereas I am very confident with known fleet information it is nearer to at $108m. Forecast for EPS is $0.22 and I am predicting nearer $0.27. That's including the 2% increase in shares issued over the period and excluding finance leases (Fokker 100's and x2 ATR's) However for sterling investors there has been a negative material change in the USD/GBP exchange rate. Even allowing for that, forecast P/E is around 12. But as I have mentioned earlier valuation should be against NAV (which I think will be around P/NTAV 0.8) and growth rate IMO.

Avation should be regarded as a long term investment. Outside of any short term take-over action (somewhat unlikely given Avation are a minnow) the business is not likely to set the world alight. It adds aircraft to the fleet, collects the lease payments, trade an occasional aircraft, rinse and repeat. Growth is all about increasing fleet size and profit is about reducing cost of debt.

Avation will be presenting at Mello 2018; why not ask a few questions directly?



As per our Terms of Use, Stockopedia is a financial news & data site, discussion forum and content aggregator. Our site should be used for educational & informational purposes only. We do not provide investment advice, recommendations or views as to whether an investment or strategy is suited to the investment needs of a specific individual. You should make your own decisions and seek independent professional advice before doing so. The author may own shares in any companies discussed, all opinions are his/her own & are general/impersonal. Remember: Shares can go down as well as up. Past performance is not a guide to future performance & investors may not get back the amount invested.

Do you like this Post?
36 thumbs up
0 thumbs down
Share this post with friends

Avation PLC is engaged in leasing of aircraft. The Company is a commercial passenger aircraft leasing group managing a fleet of 38 aircraft, which are leased to airlines globally. The Company's fleet includes Airbus A220, A320 and A321 narrow-body jets, Boeing 777-300ER and Airbus A330-300 twin-aisle jets, ATR 72 twin engine turboprop aircraft and five older Fokker 100 jets. It supplies regional, narrow-body and twin-aisle aircraft to the airline industry. It serves the commercial airlines. It owns, through its subsidiaries, a range of commercial passenger jet aircraft, which are leased to various airlines in Europe, Asia and Australia. The Company's subsidiaries include Avation Capital S.A., which is engaged in financing, and Capital Lease Aviation Limited and MSN429 Leaseco Limited, which are engaged in aircraft leasing. more »

LSE Price
Mkt Cap (£m)
P/E (fwd)
Yield (fwd)

  Is LON:AVAP fundamentally strong or weak? Find out More »

18 Posts on this Thread show/hide all

rhomboid1 19th Feb '18 1 of 18

Thanks Caracosa , that was one of the v best user contributions ever here..a fascinating business, if dividend payments were at a higher level i’d be very interested as part of my HYP , as a growth share I need to understand the risks more ..specifically given their higher cost of capital how can they be competitive without taking a higher RV risk or covenant risk than the bigger players? Also I see regular block orders being placed on Airbus & Boeing by these bigger companies....so they have a bigger pipeline & i’d imagine a lower purchase price?

| Link | Share
JohnEustace 19th Feb '18 2 of 18

The only point I would emphasise is that Avation (LON:AVAP) is a $US business. They trade and report in dollars but are UK quoted in GBP so UK investors need to keep in mind the exchange rate factor.

| Link | Share
Carcosa 19th Feb '18 3 of 18

Hi rhomboid1,

I think you are right to consider residual value risk when assessing an aircraft lease company but I do believe the concerns are a bit overdone in the retail investment community

Any aircraft leasing company can be broadly summarised as operating one of three startegies: Having a young fleet, a yield focus fleet (older fleet in second/third life cycles) or a combination of both.

A young fleet has newer aircraft that are still in the first aircraft life-cycle and are thus less subject to residual value risk. Companies such as ICBC Leasing, Avolon, BOC Aviation, and Air Lease use this strategy and have average fleet ages of between 4 to 5 years. Top 10 lessors have an average fleet age of 7.4 years. 

In Avation's case, from FY2015-17 to HY 2018 they have gone from 5.3, 4.2, 3.3 and 2.9 years respectively. On that basis RV risk is low; compared to their peers. Furthermore when you consider the aircraft types they have in the fleet, the demand for the aircraft, which would affect RV's, appears to be high. The ATR's are also highly valued compared to their purchase cost as evidenced by the 6 ATR sales above book value.

Another aspect is if Avation continue to provide widebodied aircraft to quality airlines then the acquisition cost will be below market value. 

For the large quantity orders of which you refer the majority of such orders are made by the airlines. So, for example, the recent Vietjet A320 aircraft that were financed by Avation were part of a much larger total order by the airline. Whether Avation managed to obtain the same margins as the other aircraft supplied by the larger leasing companies is indeed questionable but certainly the aquisitoin cost should have been the same. However, the longer term benifit to investors is that these aircraft can be re-financed at a lower cost, should the possibility arise whereas the larger leasing companies may have achieved the lower cost of capital from day one.

As we are talking credit ratings:
Avation: B+ (Standard & Poor, Fitch); BB (Egan Jones, JCR)
Avalon (a reasonable comparator of young fleet aircraft but with 908 aircraft):
BB (Fitch) Ba3 (S&P) BB+ (S&P) See this Wiki link containing a table of credit ratings ranking

JohnEustace... absolutely correct as I alluded to in my initial post. The only saving grace is that their entire business is US$ denominated.

| Link | Share | 1 reply
rhomboid1 19th Feb '18 4 of 18

In reply to post #327313

Thx for the excellent response, to take your example Vietjet ..they’ll have access to a number of lessors..one assumes they’ll take the cheapest lease cost, if the aircraft costs the same but Aviation has a higher cost of funds than the largest lessors then how can it win the business except by taking a lower margin, or tweaking the RV up a touch? Neither of those alternatives would be leave me particularly comfortable?

| Link | Share
Carcosa 19th Feb '18 5 of 18

rhomboid1, I agree they take lower margin (25-50bps perhaps) but the RV will be the same for all lessors as depreciation charges are industry standard. Hence if Avation can refinance then that's a boost to company profits. Vietjet took three aircraft lessors for their A320 fleet.

| Link | Share
Carcosa 19th Feb '18 6 of 18

In response to ridavies post on the SCVR:

The team has expanded considerably in recent times. Last reported figures are 20 people in total but now they have had further staff although I forget by how many (25+?). That should be good for a few years to come!

Jeff Chatfield is indeed a driven man and to see him 'walking' would be a huge surprise. If he does then I may be happy as I can only see the reason being a take over of around 320p plus! Now the company is gaining a foothold in the market and relationships are being forged by his team then his day to day influence decreases. Maybe.

Three are some institutional investors.

From the last AR:
Goldman Sachs Securities (Nominees) Limited 26.72%
State Street Nominees Limited 9.52%
Chase Nominees Limited 9.28%
Lynchwood Nominees Limited 8.61%
HSBC Global Custody Nominee (UK) Limited 6.18%

There is a problem though, the company really has to be well over GBP100m before institutional investors can look at the company.

| Link | Share
Andrew L 19th Feb '18 7 of 18

A very low ROCE business with considerable debt. They haven't appeared to be able to reduce their financing costs despite the expansion.

| Link | Share | 1 reply
simoan 19th Feb '18 8 of 18

In reply to post #327363

A very low ROCE business with considerable debt. They haven't appeared to be able to reduce their financing costs despite the expansion.

This is the wrong way to look at the fundamentals. Avation (LON:AVAP) is never going to look great on the standard valuation metrics used by Stockopedia. It's basically an asset play, like the property REITS - so lots of debt and low ROCE but high operating margins. Main thing that concerns me is the constant negative free cashflow. I don't like investments that never seem to generate cash...

All the best, Si

| Link | Share | 2 replies
ISAallowance 19th Feb '18 9 of 18

In reply to post #327368

Yes, based on the stockreport, cumulative negative free cashflow over the last 6 years of $14.37 per share has produced an increase in book value of $1.68 per share, for a business valued at approx 1x book.

That doesn't seem like the best investment proposition to me, unless I'm missing something, which is always possible.

| Link | Share
Andrew L 19th Feb '18 10 of 18

In reply to post #327368

simoan - I don't think this is an asset play. How can it be with an asset that is depreciating in value? The underlying business is not to increase the value of the assets it is to generate earnings. An asset play would be a real estate company.

High operating margins - Not sure how this is relevant? What investors want is a high ROCE with the operating margin only one side of that. The capital intensity (capital turnover) also determines the ROCE. Operating profit is before the interest cost.

Avation will probably do ok but people should be aware that this is a business using considerable financial leverage to bolster its returns to equity investors. The underlying business has a low ROCE. That is a disadvantage. You can't really spin a low ROCE as it is a negative. For a real estate company the value of the assets may increase but this isn't the case here. After 30 years the aircraft are of little use.

| Link | Share | 1 reply
simoan 19th Feb '18 11 of 18

simoan - I don't think this is an asset play. How can it be with an asset that is depreciating in value? The underlying business is not to increase the value of the assets it is to generate earnings. An asset play would be a real estate company.


Avation will probably do ok but people should be aware that this is a business using considerable financial leverage to bolster its returns to equity investors. The underlying business has a low ROCE. That is a disadvantage. You can't really spin a low ROCE as it is a negative. For a real estate company the value of the assets may increase but this isn't the case here. After 30 years the aircraft are of little use.

Well, I view it as an asset play. It's maybe a slightly simplistic way of viewing things but in reality the assets never depreciate as the company trades aircraft in the way a real estate company may trade properties. Are you saying property values only ever go up? this is why the age of the aircraft is so important as Carcosa has explained.

The share price definitely reacts to the NTAV of the aircraft as witnessed by the step up when a real valuation was put on the ATR fleet that was sold off last year. So the market pretty much agrees. Even more than that, the share price is affected by the value of the options for new ATR aircraft that Avation hold. It's not a manufacturer of widgets and so ROCE is a pretty meaningless metric IMHO. If you only invest in high ROCE companies you'll never invest in certain sectors e.g. property, financials, insurance etc. That's just the way it is but it doesn't necessarily make these sectors bad investments.

All the best, Si

| Link | Share | 1 reply
mojomogoz 19th Feb '18 12 of 18

In reply to post #327378

Its a to infinity and beyond business.

Simoan - as it grows it will be cash flow negative ex financing. When it stops growing it should turn cash flow positive.

Great note by Carcosa! I can't invest in a business like this as I am not smart enough to assess it out 25 years nor cute enough to spot when to trade out on stock specific rather than systemic reason. IMO this is a business that has a short volatility like business model. Steady until its not and then can be rather damaged quickly. its basically a flow arbitrage on differentials between financing costs and cash flows. Their are company specific risks to the business (making a mistake). They are probably quite avoidable. But there is a shared systemic risk across the whole aircraft space (manufacturers, operators, leasers, etc) that is hard to assess.

In maturity it may be possible for me to invest as will have considerably higher dividend and perhaps some opportunistic controversies around terminal values and longevity of some assets to take advantage of. But probably not, as I still wont be good enough to see it (or informed enough in the space).

More systemic crises are feared than happen...so there may be a chance to buy during one of the false starts


| Link | Share
Andrew L 19th Feb '18 13 of 18

In reply to post #327388

We could argue this all day. But low ROCE businesses are low quality business. It is the very definition of a low quality business. They may not be bad investments if they leverage up to increase returns to equity investors. However, they may be bad investments if the extra leverage results in a significant loss of value at some point.

Your argument is essentially that a low ROCE business can leverage up and generate strong long-term returns to equity investors. To do this it needs to have a relatively low risk underlying business. Avation might qualify but I don't think property, financials, insurance qualify.

Low quality businesses have to use significant leverage to attract investors. Hence the leverage is an indicator that the underlying business is fairly poor.

| Link | Share | 1 reply
simoan 19th Feb '18 14 of 18

In reply to post #327428

Your argument is essentially that a low ROCE business can leverage up and generate strong long-term returns to equity investors.

Well, I'm not arguing! I'm merely stating my opinion that ROCE is not a great metric to use for valuing some types of business, and I would suggest aircraft leasing, amongst a few others, is one such sector. That is all. If you use high ROCE as a requirement to make all your investing decisions I hope you can see there will be some sectors in which you will never invest. Perhaps they are low quality sectors, in which case you can just avoid them altogether like Terry Smith would. Other people may not apply a valuation based on ROCE in the way that you do, and that's fine - that's what makes a market!

All the best, Si

| Link | Share | 1 reply
Andrew L 19th Feb '18 15 of 18

In reply to post #327448

ROCE is not a valuation metric it is a quality metric. Yes there are some sectors I wouldn't invest in because of a low ROCE. It is not a case of ROCE based valuation it is a case of using ROCE to assess quality and then figuring what valuation multiple you might pay on the basis of that. You don't directly assess ROCE against valuation. You assess earnings/cashflow against valuation.

If you don't assess quality then surely you are missing something? If you don't use ROCE to assess quality then what do you use?

| Link | Share
smatthews1 20th Feb '18 16 of 18

Really excellent write up with avation, I have held these for a few years and been temped along the way to sell. Which I nearly did when they were announcing the sale of their atr's. However they only sold half were quick to recycle the cash into long haul jets. Seems a smart move and a good use of cash. With global interest rates still low and high demand with their jets and options, it doesn't look overpriced, I really can't find a good enough reason to sell them yet.

| Link | Share
matylda 20th Feb '18 17 of 18

I hold Avation (LON:AVAP) but just want to mention, for what it's worth, ROCE...

For me I like to look at ROCE vs Industry and Op Margin vs Industry too. I use them as basic quality measures of the business/management/products. Simple yes, but works for me but only when compared against Industry peers. Sure, its not infallible by a long stretch of the imagination, just a quick quality check for me.

Nice discussion.

Blog: Briefed Up
| Link | Share
Nicowilson 20th Feb '18 18 of 18

Hi Caracosa

Well done. This is an excellent article. It's probably one of the clearest pieces of writing that i've read in a long time.

Thank you.


| Link | Share

What's your view on this thread? Log In to Comment Now

You can track all @StockoChat comments via Twitter

 Are LON:AVAP's fundamentals sound as an investment? Find out More »

Stock Picking Tutorial Centre

Let’s get you setup so you get the most out of our service
Done, Let's add some stocks
Brilliant - You've created a folio! Now let's add some stocks to it.

  • Apple (AAPL)

  • Shell (RDSA)

  • Twitter (TWTR)

  • Volkswagon AG (VOK)

  • McDonalds (MCD)

  • Vodafone (VOD)

  • Barratt Homes (BDEV)

  • Microsoft (MSFT)

  • Tesco (TSCO)
Save and show me my analysis