This article provides in-depth fundamental analysis of Machino Plastics Ltd, an Indian auto ancillary player specializing in manufacturing injection plastic moulded parts for key players like Maruti Suzuki India, Suzuki Motorcycle India, Volvo Eicher, Hero Motors etc.
Machino Plastics Ltd Research Report by Reader
Overview of Machino Plastics Ltd:
Sector: Auto Ancillary – Plastics
Machino Plastics Ltd is predominantly engaged in the plastic injection moulding business over the past 3 decades. The company primarily serves customers who are in the auto ancillary space. Clients include Maruti Suzuki India, Suzuki Motorcycle India, Volvo Eicher, SMR, Hero Motors, Mikuni, Krisna Maruti and Bharat Seats.
Machino Plastics Ltd has a state of the art manufacturing plant at Gurgaon and Manesar, India. It is backed by microprocessor based Japanese injection moulding machines, a sophisticated design department and a highly trained and skilled set of the workforce.
If one looks at the history, Machino Plastics Ltd was started as an alliance among the Machino Group, Maruti Udyog Ltd and Suzuki Motor Corporation, Japan and till date has all 3 promoters in the company. The plant was set up within the erstwhile Maruti Udyog Ltd Joint Venture complex for moulding large components like Bumpers, Instrument Panels and Radiator Grills for the entire range of Maruti Cars.
Machino Plastics Ltd Set up its second unit for moulding small to large components at Manesar in January’ 2008. The company has also planned a capex of ~INR 70-80cr to expand its facility in the Manesar Plant in FY17.
Machino Plastics Ltd boasts of a state of the art – commendable manufacturing unit. The company has 41 injection moulding machines, sizes ranging from 100 Ton to 3150 Ton clamping force. It has been dealing in bulky and all sizes of plastic automotive components which can be supplied by setting production facility next door to the automobile industries. For supplying such components to the customer other than MSIL, it has to set up an additional facility.
With multiple machine lines procured from some of the best vendors across the world, the company can manufacture a variety of injection mouldings of varied size shape and requirement of the client. The list of the detailed machinery can be seen here. The company has a superior computer-aided design, and manufacturing system in place to simulate and streamline its product manufacturing. Details can be seen here.
Clientele of Machino Plastics Ltd:
Maruti Udyog, Suzuki Motorcycle, Volvo Eicher CV & SMR Automotive, Hero Motors, Mikuni. These clients contribute to the majority of its sales with Maruti dominating the list as the major contributor to its revenues.
Annual Report Takeaways – FY2016
- Majority sales goes to Maruti – a prominent shareholder
- Majority of RM comes from parent/group company Machino Polymer
- Nature of relationship- Maruti Suzuki India Ltd and Suzuki Motor Corporation are associate companies and the company is a joint venture company of Maruti Suzuki India Ltd and Suzuki Motor Corporation and Jindal’s since its inception
- Purchase of raw material by Machino Plastics Ltd from Machino Polymers Ltd- Machino has adopted Comparable Uncontrolled Price Method. Prices of raw material purchased from Machino Polymers Ltd is settled by Maruti Suzuki India Ltd and the same price is also approved for other vendors of Maruti Suzuki India Ltd by MSIL
- Except for payment of dividend to Suzuki Motor Corporation, there is no other material transaction with it, as it holds 15.35% of the share capital of the company. However, company supplies auto parts to Suzuki Motorcycles India Ltd, a group company of Suzuki Motor Corporation.
- Approx. 230,000 shares are still in physical form as per ARFY16
- Sanjiv Jindal takes home 60lks pa plus 1% of Net Profit
- 60 lakhs goes towards director fees, 57lks for CFO (Aditya Jindal), CS SK Agrawal
- Overall as compared to cash profits earned (~17cr, Management takes about 2cr ~ less than 15% of cash profit)
- The Manesar Plant of the company is now the focus area for all future growth of the company
- Cost of borrowing is about 12% — which is in line with market rates
- SHP latest shows very minimal institutional holding – a positive
Historical Financials and Valuation of Machino Plastics Ltd:
Machino Plastics Ltd has made decent strides in the past year. Its half-yearly EPS is 6/share and CMP is 200. On a very abstract note and annualising the earnings company trades a little under 20X FY17E earnings. At the time of writing this note, Machino Plastics Ltd seems to be fairly priced in with all its peers given the general scenario.
The rate at which it grew in past 2 quarters (specifically the last quarter) suggests an untapped potential. One has to wait if the run rate is repeated for its Dec 16 quarter and March 17 quarter. We shall know for sure by Feb 17 (that’s when tentatively Machino will disclose its Dec 16 results) if the run rate has been met. Also one can fairly take a look at how Maruti does in terms of monthly sales to have a fair idea of the repercussions on Machino.
I shall present an “as is” analysis and factual points of its financial strength and historical performance below followed by some major observations regarding the entire company. These will be a blend of good and not so good facts and observations:
Key Financial Facts FY2007-FY2016
- Average 12-15cr of “Cash Profit” every year since 2007 (Although they haven’t grown – in fact, CAGR is -2%)
- A consistent dividend paying company (with the exception of FY12-13-14)
- Book Value has been compounded at 4% CAGR and stands at 70/share as of FY16
- EBITDA margins have fallen over the past 9 years (from an average of 12-15% to 7-9% as of FY16); same can be concluded for cash profit margins
- ROA and ROE also have fallen consistently over the past few years and stand at single digits as of now – this is a major concern
- ROCE/RONW has averaged 10% and is improving since past 5 years
- Asset turn is steady at 1.5x along with Inventory turn at 27x
- Cash conversion cycle is of average 20 days (a significant plus point as it becomes a working capital light model)
- Decent interest coverage, debt to equity ratios (2x and 0.78x respectively) however current ratio averages 1 over the 9 year period. D/E has been falling since 3 years
- Sales have grown by a CAGR of 9-10% over the past 7 years, total cash flow from core ops stands at 150cr+ over a period of 10 years, whereas PAT stands @ 23cr, PBT stands @ 38cr. The cumulative depreciation given over the same period is 115cr which is 73% of the companies operating profit
- Machino Plastics Ltd has ploughed back about 10cr in reserves, borrowed 15cr in debt and invested about 44cr in fixed assets (net of depreciation) over the past 10 years.
- Machino Plastics Ltd is having a consistent negative working capital/net current assets
- There is not historical evidence for a case of extremely high return ratios/growth etc.
- Machino Plastics Ltd has aggressively made investments in fixed assets and paid off certain long-term borrowings in the past decade to utilize its cash profits. (Total FA investment is 176cr which is financed by a blend of internal accruals, cash profits and debt taken). Of this 176cr the company has provided for 115cr+ in depreciation and sold off the balance as a regular business outcome
- Perhaps the reason for the consistent negative working capital is the company is significantly using its cash profits in capex without disturbing the operating cycle. This is to be considered a big positive
- A total capital put back in business is about 200cr (increase in reserves, investment in fixed assets, and debt taken) over the past decade. As against this the cash operating profit churned out is about 150cr on a cumulative basis. This is an ROIC of ~75%. No equity dilution has happened over this period
- Mcap stands 125cr, free float is 32cr – Machino Plastics Ltd is below microcap category and there are virtually no sellers. A closer study of the SHP will display that most of the stock has been cornered by long-term investors sitting on the stock for past 3-5 years
- Maruti – a key stakeholder and a key customer in itself is a positive for Machino Plastics Ltd and its single reliance on Maruti is not a significant red flag. (Maruti holding 15% is unlikely to hurt its own operations by pulling the plug on Machino) – It’s a unique partnership
- At 200 the stock is richly valued and definitely has not shown a staggering growth in terms of topline. Illiquidity and its hidden business model value (along with cornered stock) had a positive effect on its valuation.
- Machino Plastics Ltd has made efforts to entertain other clients as well so that sole dependency on Maruti is reduced – however there is no obvious reason to do so
- Local vendors pose a bigger threat to Machino Plastics Ltd in its expansion plans, non-Maruti companies may not prefer Machino for parts that local vendor would provide at a significantly lower cost. Expansion spree may backfire if Machino doesn’t get decent non-Maruti customers
- Suzuki has a plant in Gujarat – churning out Balenos under the flagship NEXA brand – Suzuki is a stakeholder in Machino as well and this would benefit the company and take it towards its next phase of growth. The investment Suzuki has made in this Hansalpur based facility is about $1400mn with a capacity of 2.5 lakh units’ pa.
The management of Machino Plastics Ltd is shy and does not interact with other stakeholders. However, the company put out a budget in June 2016 outlining their clear intentions of a P&L budget expected for the next two fiscals – FY17, FY18. The PAT for FY17 at the time was pegged at 95 lakhs and FY18 was at 5cr. H1FY17 the company has clocked close to 4cr PAT! The management is envisaging a 5x jump in the next fiscal – however, they are running one year ahead of the targets.
Our own sense is that any meaningful correction in the counter should be a decent investment opportunity. Regular and active monitoring needs to be done in the nano-cap stock since management is not clear in stakeholder engagement. One can keep this stock on its radar and also watch Maruti’s sales and performance over the next few quarters. (Remember despite demonetization Maruti’s sales rose in November!)
Management Analysis of Machino Plastics Ltd:
Related Party transaction one of my personal observation is that since it’s a Maruti joint venture company there are a lot of these that will pop up. Nevertheless here are a few more points on your guidelines that I feel are worth a look.
- Maruti Suzuki, Grand Master Mold (GMM), Machino Polymers are basic corporate entities where the company is involved.
- Naturally maximum sales go to Maruti and procurement goes to Machino Polymers and GMM
- None of the directors is related to each other except father-son duo of Sanjiv & Aditya Jindal
- No significant red flags as far as other details are concerned with Management background etc.
The views expressed here are my own and I am not a SEBI registered investment advisor. Calculations are approximated and sources used for this note are the company website, annual reports and ACCORD Fintech database). This is not a BUY recommendation and one must consider talking to a professional financial advisor before taking any action on this note.
Dr Vijay Malik’s Response
We appreciate the hard work you have put to prepare this report on Machino Plastics Ltd. The report is useful for any investor who wishes to analyse Machino Plastics Ltd. I thank you on behalf of all the readers of www.drvijaymalik.com for the time & effort put by you.
Let us analyse the past financial performance of Machino Plastics Ltd:
Financial Analysis of Machino Plastics Ltd:
Machino Plastics Ltd had been growing its sales at a moderate pace of 7-10%% year on year over last 10 years (FY2007-16). The growth has been currently sustained by its plants in Gurgaon & Manesar. To sustain the growth momentum in future, Machino Plastics Ltd has been doing additional capacity addition both at its existing plant at Manesar as well as a new plant in Madhya Pradesh.
The plant at Madhya Pradesh seems to have witnessed a lot of delays as Machino Plastics Ltd has started work on the plant in FY2013 and had initially expected to complete the construction and start operations of the plant in April 2014. The below excerpt from the FY2013 annual report (page 9) indicates the original completion plans of the management about this plant.
Your company has acquired Land in Pithampur (Indore), Madhya Pradesh and has started construction of the building to manufacture plastic moulding components. The Company is likely to commence its business from April, 2014.
However, as per the FY2016 annual report (page 55), the plant is yet to be operationalized.
Machino Plastics Limited (Plant III)
Plot No. 527, Industrial Area
Sec-3, Pithampur Distt. Dhar
(Yet to commence production)
The minimal capex spending by Machino Plastics Ltd in last two financial years (FY2015 and FY2016), when it spent about ₹1 cr. and ₹5 cr. on capex respectively, indicates that the company has gone slow on completion of the new plant. However, the balance sheet declared by Machino Plastics Ltd for Sept 30, 2016, indicates that the net fixed assets have increased by about ₹15 cr. from ₹77 cr. at March 31, 2016, to ₹92 cr. at September 30, 2016.
The increase in NFA by ₹15 cr. along with the depreciation expense of ₹5.6 cr. in H1-FY2017, indicates that the company has spent about ₹20-21 cr. of capital expenditure in H1-FY2017. An investor should contact the company or wait for the annual report for FY2017, which might be published in July-Sept 2017 to understand the details of the capex and the plant on which the company has been doing it.
The company has been growing in the past and the capex plans indicate that the company has a strategy in place to create the capacity to generate future growth.
However, when the investors analyse the profitability margins of Machino Plastics Ltd, then it would indicate that both the operating profitability margin (OPM) and net profit margin (NPM) have been fluctuating widely during last 10 years (FY2007-16). Operating profit margins (OPM) have been varying from 18%-9%-16%-8%-11% and net profit margins (NPM) have been fluctuating from 7% and net losses (FY2012-14) over the years.
Such fluctuating margins are characteristic of companies, which have low bargaining power with their customers. In such businesses, companies find it difficult to pass on the increase in raw material costs to their customers quickly and thus take a hit on their profitability margins.
The concern about the susceptibility of the profitability margins to the changes in the raw material prices has also been highlighted by the credit rating agency CRISIL in its rating rationale for Machino Plastics Ltd in October 2016 (page 1):
These strengths are partially offset by the modest scale of operations, high customer concentration in revenue, and vulnerability of operating margin to volatility in raw material prices
The management of the company has also highlighted the vulnerability of profitability margins in the annual report of FY2016 (page 39) in the section management discussion and analysis under “Risks and Concerns”:
• Volatility in the prices of material and other inputs could erode the industry’s cost competitiveness. Furthermore OEMs reduction in prices every year.
• Intense competition from counterparts may add further pressure on margin of manufacturers.
This statement by the management of Machino Plastics Ltd highlights the key factors being faced by auto ancillary players in India. Apart from the intense competition from other players, the fact of very strong customers (OEMs) ensures that OEMs extract every bit of profitability from their vendors.
It is said that OEMs keep a close watch on the financial results of the vendors and the moment OEMs notice that the vendors are making good profitability margins, immediately a request/instruction of discount in the purchase price is sent to the vendor by OEMs.
Therefore, in the case of auto ancillary industry, unless the manufacturers have some very strong competitive advantage, it is very difficult to find sustained good profitability margins. No wonder that Machino Plastics Ltd had to report losses in FY2012-14.
The tax payout ratio of Machino Plastics Ltd has been fluctuating by a huge margin over the years. In FY2016, the company has reported 72% tax payout ratio. We advise that the investor contacts the company to understand the tax payouts done by the company.
Also Read: How to do Financial Analysis of a Company
Operating Efficiency Analysis of Machino Plastics Ltd:
Operating efficiency parameters of Machino Plastics Ltd reflect that over recent years, Machino Plastics Ltd has been able to improve its operating efficiency on almost all the parameters.
Net fixed asset turnover ratio (NFAT) has improved from 1.58 in FY2012 to 2.59 in FY2016. The inventory turnover ratio has improved from 16 in FY2007 to 33 in FY2016.
Receivables days of Machino Plastics Ltd have also improved from 38 days in FY2008 to 20 days in FY2016. However, when an investor analyses the summary balance sheet declared by Machino Plastics Ltd on Sept 30, 2016, then she would notice that the receivables have suddenly increased by 21 cr. from ₹11 cr. at March 31, 2016, to ₹32 cr. at Sept 30, 2016.
An investor should monitor the receivables levels and check whether the abrupt increase in receivables is a one of within the year phenomenon or the high receivables continue until March 31, 2017, when the company would declare its summary balance sheet with Q4-FY2017 results.
The above analysis indicates that Machino Plastics Ltd has been able to manage its inventory and receivables efficiently over the years and it has ensured that the profits of the company are not stuck in working capital and are available as cash profits to the company.
When we analyse the cumulative profits and cash flow data for last 10 years (FY2007-16), then we realize that during these 10 years, Machino Plastics Ltd has been able to convert its profits into cash flow from operations. PAT for these 10 years (FY2007-16) is ₹23 cr. whereas the CFO over the similar period has been ₹153 cr.
The key factors leading to the significantly high cCFO over cPAT over last 10 years are the depreciation expense of ₹115 cr, which is a non-cash expense and therefore, does not involve cash outflow in the years in which the depreciation expense is reported. The other factor leading to high cCFO over cPAT is the interest expense of ₹39 cr. over FY2007-16, which being a financial cash outflow is adjusted while calculating the CFO.
Efficient working capital management by Machino Plastics Ltd leading to good cash profits has ensured that the company has been able to meet almost its entire capex of ₹153 cr. done over last 10 years from its operating cash. The incremental debt of about ₹16 cr. from total debt of ₹18 cr. in FY2007 to ₹34 cr. in FY2016 has been used to meet the interest costs during the last 10 years.
The significantly higher cCFO over its cPAT due to proper working capital management has ensured that the company has been able to manage its capex by keeping its leverage (debt to equity) levels at constant levels with a slight improvement over the years.
In light of this fact, it assumes significance that any deterioration of working capital management either in inventory utilizations or receivables management would lead to lower CFO and the company would have to rely more on the external sources of funds like debt or equity dilution to fund its capex plans.
The same impact is already visible when an investor compares the financial position of Machino Plastics Ltd over March 31, 2016, and Sept 30, 2016.
As highlighted above in our analysis, the investor would notice that in H1-FY2017, Machino Plastics Ltd has done a capex of about ₹21 cr. and also that during H1-FY2017, the receivables levels of the company have witnessed a significant increase by ₹21 cr. from ₹11 cr. at March 31, 2016, to ₹32 cr. at September 30, 2016.
The investor would notice that as Machino Plastics Ltd is not able to collect its receivables, the capex of ₹21 cr. in H1-FY2017 has been funded by debt by the company. The company seems to have raised additionally about ₹22 cr. in H1-FY2017 as the debt of the company has increased from ₹34 cr. at March 31, 2016, to at least ₹66 cr. at Sept 30, 2016.
(The level of debt at Sept 30, 2016, is mentioned as “at least ₹66 cr.” as there might be some portion of the long-term debt, which might be mentioned by the company in other current liabilities, details of which are not provided by companies in the summary balance sheet declared by them with half yearly results.)
The above analysis clearly indicates that the moment Machino Plastics Ltd witnessed delay in collection of receivables, it had to rely on debt to fund its capital expenditure plans. In light of this fact, it is essential that investors keep a close watch on the recent increased receivables levels of the company going ahead.
Investors should be cautious of investing in companies, which might have to fund their expansion plans by raising debt and more so when these companies do not have high profitability margins. This is because, in such companies, high debt has the potential of increasing the risk of bankruptcy and reduced profitability under tough business conditions.
You should read the analysis of two other companies: Ahmednagar Forgings Ltd and Amtek India Ltd, to understand the impact low fixed asset turnover can have on the debt levels of companies. You may read their analysis here:
When an investor analyses the annual reports of Machino Plastics Ltd, then the investor would notice that the company has been sourcing its raw material from its promoter entities. As per the FY2016 annual report, the primary entity from which Machino Plastics Ltd procures its raw material is Machino Polymers Ltd:
The management has disclosed in the FY2016 annual report (page 10) that the pricing of raw material from Machino Polymer Ltd is settled by Maruti Suzuki Ltd, which is benchmarked with other vendors as well.
Purchase of raw material by Machino Plastics Limited from Machino Polymers Limited: your company has adopted Comparable Uncontrolled Price Method. Prices of raw material purchased form Machino Polymers Limited is settled by Maruti Suzuki India Limited and the same price is also approved for other vendors of Maruti Suzuki India Limited by MSIL.
We have observed in the above analysis that Machino Plastics Ltd is not able to pass on the increase in raw material prices to its end customers like Maruti Suzuki Ltd and Suzuki etc., which are its key shareholders as well. As a result, its OPM has been fluctuating over the years and has also led it to report losses during FY2012-2014.
However, when an investor analyses the credit rating report of the promoter group company Machino Polymers Ltd, from which Machino Plastics Ltd buys a lot of raw material, then the investor would notice that the promoter group entity Machino Polymer Ltd has clauses for passing on the increase in raw material costs to its customers. The credit rating report of Machino Polymers Ltd by ICRA in Dec 2016 (page 1) highlights this key fact:
Additionally, the company‘s margins remain susceptible to fluctuation in raw material prices as was evident during 7M FY2017 (provisional). Although there exists a provision of raw material cost pass on with a lag of one quarter with most of the customers, the quarterly lag exposes the company to such fluctuations in the interim period.
As a result, we find that the subject company Machino Plastics Ltd is in a peculiar situation where its profitability margins are getting squeezed from both the ends:
- At one end, its key customers like Maruti and Suzuki, who are its shareholders as well, do not allow it to pass on the increase in inputs costs to them
- At the other end, its key supplier Machino Polymers Ltd, which is controlled by its promoter shareholder, passes on all the increases in raw material costs to it.
No wonder that the poor entity Machino Plastics Ltd has been reporting erratic profitability margins and even losses over the years when two set of its shareholders have the contractual arrangements with the company, which benefit respective shareholders at the cost of Machino Plastics Ltd.
In such a situation, we do not believe that the arrangement of Maruti Suzuki Ltd being its key customer as well as a key shareholder is doing a lot of good to the company.
Further advised reading: How Promoters benefit themselves using Related Party Transactions
Additional aspects and annual report analysis of Machino Plastics Ltd:
While analysing the annual reports of the company further, the investor notices some of the other key findings as well:
1) A penalty by BSE for not appointing woman director as per statutory requirements:
FY2016 annual report indicates that BSE Ltd has levied a fine of ₹50,000/- on Machino Plastics Ltd as it did not appoint the woman director in time as required by the statutory requirements.
This noncompliance by the company despite having reputable shareholders like Maruti and Suzuki does not go well with the expected governance standards from the company.
2) Dispute with Caparo Maruti Ltd:
However, upon further reading of the annual report, the investor notices that the investment is being denied by Caparo Maruti Ltd, which has led to a dispute between the parties, which is currently under litigation. Apparently, Caparo Maruti Ltd has cancelled the shares, which Machino Plastics Ltd claims that it has subscribed to by making the investment of ₹1.25 cr. in the company. FY2016 annual report, page 85:
The company had made Investment of Face Value of Rs.12,500,000 in equity shares of Caparo Maruti Limited. The investee company has disputed the shareholding of the Company. The company has filed a petition to Hon’ble Company Law Board, who gave company an option to sell shares to majority shareholders after valuation to make an exit. The Company filed an appeal in the Hon’ble Delhi High Court which dismissing company’s appeal upheld Company Law Board order thereafter SLPs were preferred against the orders of the Hon’ble High Court of Delhi before the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India by both the parties. The Hon’ble Supreme Court of India vide its order dated 29th March 2016 dismissed both SLPs. However, it states that the order of dismissal is subject to the result of such case(s) as may be pending between the paties in respect of cancellation of the shares held by the petitioner. The matter is still sub-judice.
The dispute assumes significance from two aspects:
- the investee company is contesting the investment done by the investor. This is quite a strange situation and creates doubts about the recoverability of the money invested by Machino Plastics Ltd.
- the warring companies, Caparo Maruti Ltd and Machino Plastics Ltd share common shareholders in the form of Maruti Suzuki Ltd. However, despite the presence of Maruti Suzuki Ltd, the dispute is continuing and is being litigated in the courts.
The following section from the credit rating report by CARE for the company Caparo Maruti Ltd, published in April 2016 (page 1), clarifies the shareholding of Caparo Maruti Ltd.
Background: Caparo Maruti Ltd (CML), incorporated in 1994, is engaged in the manufacturing of auto components, viz, sheet metal components and weldments. CML is a 75:25 joint venture (JV) between a Caparo group company, namely, Caparo India Ltd, UK, and Maruti Suzuki India Limited (MSIL), respectively.
It seems strange that in the above case, Maruti Suzuki Ltd is fighting the dispute with itself. Maruti Suzuki first sits on the board of Caparo Maruti Ltd and decides about the steps to be taken by it in the legal dispute. Then, Maruti Suzuki Ltd sits on the board of Machino Plastics Ltd and decides about the countermeasures to be adopted against the steps taken by Caparo Maruti Ltd.
It is also to be noted that due to privileges of being a board member, Maruti Suzuki Ltd might be fully aware of the core facts about the disputed investment of ₹1.25 cr. but still, the matter is being fought out in the courts and is wasting time and resources of all the parties.
The above instance gives further credence to our belief that the presence of key shareholders like Maruti and Suzuki is not being a lot beneficial to Machino Plastics Ltd.
3) Submission of financial projections to stock exchanges:
Machino Plastics Ltd might be one of the few companies which submit financial projections to the stock exchange. In fact, it is the first company that we have come across, which is giving full financial targets to the public as a part of the company policy.
The company might be assuming this action as a step to increase transparency. However, worldwide, the experience has been that when managements declare business targets in public, then there is the very high probability that they would do anything, even taking shortcuts, to meet those targets.
Therefore, we believe that disclosure of financial projections/business targets by the company in public might not be beneficial for shareholders.
Further advised reading: Why We cannot always Trust What Management Claims
4) Management Remuneration:
Over the years, Machino Plastics Ltd has been paying its promoters a remuneration, which is higher than the statutory ceiling stipulated by the companies act. The auditors have highlighted the same in the audit report for FY2013 by way of a qualification in the report (page 32):
Basis for Qualified Opinion: Managerial remuneration paid during the year ended 31 march, 2013 to the Managing Director & Whole time Director exceeds the limit prescribed by the section 198 and 309 of companies act, 1956 by an amount of Rs.1800000. The company is in the process of filing an application with the central government seeking approval for the excess remuneration paid as above.
Since then, the company seems to have approached the central govt. and has stipulated in the AGM agenda that in case the profits of the company are inadequate, still, the managerial remuneration will not be reduced by the company.
These observations though assume significance, however, at the same time, if an investor notices the absolute level of remunerations, then it varies in the range of ₹40-70 lac for each of the promoter director.
Such level of remuneration though looking very high in percentage terms to the profits of the company does not look overtly high when one notices that in current markets MBA pass outs with 6-8 years of experience are able to earn this remuneration in the corporate world.
Therefore, we leave the interpretation of this parameter of remuneration at the hands of the investor.
Further advised reading: How to identify Promoters extracting Money via High Salaries
Margin of Safety in the market price of Machino Plastics Ltd:
Machino Plastics Ltd is currently available at a P/E ratio of about 43 based on last 12 months EPS, which does not offer any margin of safety as described by Benjamin Graham in his book The Intelligent Investor.
However, we recommend that an investor may read the following articles to assess the PE ratio to be paid for any stock, takes into account the strength of the business model of the company as well. The strength in the business model of any company is measured by way of its self-sustainable growth rate and the free cash flow generating the ability of the company.
In the absence of any strength in the business model of the company, a low PE ratio of the company’s stock may be signs of a value trap where instead of being a bargain; the low valuation of the stock price may represent the poor business dynamics of the company.
- 3 Principles to Decide the Ideal P/E Ratio of a Stock for Value Investors
- How to Earn High Returns at Low Risk – Invest in Low P/E Stocks
- Hidden Risk of Investing in High P/E Stocks
Overall, Machino Plastics Ltd seems to be a company, which has been growing at a moderate pace in the past and has been doing capex to show growth in future. However, the growth has not been associated with sustained profitability as its key stakeholders are doing related party transactions both at its customer end as well as supplier end. Related parties both at the customer end as well as supplier end to the company seem to have the contracts favouring them at the cost of Machino Plastics Ltd, which has resulted in fluctuating profit margins even leading to losses in recent past.
Machino Plastics Ltd has been able to manage its working capital well in the past and therefore, could meet its capex requirements primarily from internal accruals. However, in recent quarters the company seems to have been faltering on receivables collections and as a result of its capex now is being met through debt funding.
We believe that the governance standards at Machino Plastics Ltd and the group level leave a lot of scope of improvement as witnessed by the inability of the company to appoint woman director in time and the dispute among parties with common key shareholders.
We believe that the overt assumption that the key customers of Machino Plastics Ltd are also key shareholders of the company, is not proving out to be a lot beneficial for the company.
Also Read: Howto Monitor Stocks in your Portfolio
These are my views about Machino Plastics Ltd. However, you should do your own analysis before taking any investment related decision about Machino Plastics Ltd.
You may use the following steps to analyse the company: “How to do Detailed Analysis of a Company“
Hope it helps!
- To register for the “Peaceful Investing” workshop to be held in Mumbai on July 29, 2018: Click Here
- To know about the stocks in our portfolio, you may subscribe to the premium service: Follow My Portfolio with Latest Buy/Sell Transactions Updates
- To learn our stock investing approach “Peaceful Investing” by videos, you may subscribe to “Peaceful Investing” Workshop-on-Demand
- To download our customized stock analysis excel template: Click Here
- Learn about our stock analysis approach in the e-book: “Peaceful Investing – A Simple Guide to Hassle-free Stock Investing”
- Read more company analysis in the e-book series: Company Analyses
- The above discussion is only for educational purpose to help the readers improve their stock analysis skills. It is not a buy/sell/hold recommendation for the discussed stocks.
- I am registered with SEBI as an Investment Adviser under SEBI (Investment Advisers) Regulations, 2013.
- Currently, I do not own stocks of the companies mentioned above in my portfolio.