Estacio Participacoes SA: Brazilian For-Profit Education Provider

In the U.S. for-profit college operators such as Apollo Group Inc fell heavily last year after the Federal government clamped down on the sector. Most of these operators had become diplomas mills handing out degrees that carried very little value. Abusing the Federal student loan program the companies in this sector signed up thousands of students and made huge profits. They even recruited homeless people to take advantage of the student loan program. Similar to the subprime fraud in the housing industry, this is another example of how government intervention led to disaster.

I recently came across a fore-profit company that operates educational institutions in Brazil. Estacio Participacoes SA (ECPCY) is one of Brazil’s largest private-sector post-secondary educational provider based on student enrollment figures.

From the company’s website:

As of March 31, 2013, we had 334.2 thousand students in our distance learning and campus programs of our undergraduate and graduate courses. Our network consists of one university, four university centers, 33 colleges and 52 distance learning units recognized by the Ministry of Education (MEC), with nationwide coverage, represented by 76 campuses in the leading urban centers of 20 states, strategically located close to the homes and/or workplaces of our target public of middle- and lower middle-income workers. We have highly qualified professors, advanced teaching methodologies and well equipped facilities, offering around 78 traditional and technological undergraduate courses in Exact Sciences, Biological Sciences and the Humanities. We also offer quality post-graduate specialization (sensu lato) courses, master’s and doctorate degree courses as well as diverse extension courses at competitive prices to aid in the professional qualification of our students and enhance their employability.

As a developing country, the educational sector in Brazil has the potential to grow significantly. Some of the reasons for growth noted by Estacio Participacoes are listed below:

(i) Brazil’s economic growth; (ii) high demand for qualified manpower; (iii) tax and regulatory incentives from the Brazilian government; (iv) increase in the purchasing power of the population and the growing availability of educational loans, both from the federal government (FIES and PROUNI) and from private institutions; and (v) growth potential among the youth from the middle- and low middle-income groups.

The company went public in the Brazilian market in 2007. In June, 2011 it launched the level I ADR Program on the OTC market under the ticker ECPCY. Each ADR represents one common share.

The ADR opened at over $20.00 in January this year and reached as high as $30.08. On June 5th, the stock split in the ratio of 3:1. Yesterday it closed at $7.92.

Estacio announced strong earnings for the first quarter. It enrolled 117,000 students in its various programs and had a total 334,200 students at the end of the quarter.In terms of financial performance, EBITDA was more than 50% compared to Q1, 2012 and net income came to R$66.6 million representing an increase of over 66% relative to Q1, 2012.

For more information visit the corporate site here.

Disclosure: No Positions

Knowledge is Power: Oil Chart, Best Developed Market Banks, Phoney-Money Edition

What I learned about investing from Gandhi (MoneyWeek)

Are U.S. companies ‘state-owned enterprises’ ? (Canadian Business)

Colonisation, the phoney-money way (Business Line)

Brazil’s Middle-Class Anxiety (Bloomberg)

Chart of the week: a picture of world oil (beyondbrics)

World’s Best Developed Markets Banks 2013 (Global Finance)

Sector Distortions Can Be Costly in Passive Investing (Alliance Bernstein)

DSC00719

 

Niagara Falls, Canada

A Review of TSX Composite vs. S&P 500 Returns

The composition of U.S. and Canadian equity markets vary widely. As a natural resources-based economy the Canadian market is concentrated by energy, mining and financial companies. The U.S. on the other hand has a very diversified economy with companies operating in pretty much every sector from manufacturing to defense technology. Hence the U.S. equity market is made up of companies from many sectors.

In terms of equity market returns, the benchmark TSX Composite index has outperformed the S&P 500 from 2001 thru 2012 as shown in the chart below:

Click to enlarge

TSX-vs-SP5-since-2001

However in the past 5-year the S&P 500 has up by over 25.0% while the TSX Composite is down by over 16.0% since the global demand for all types of commodities fell heavily:

TSX-vs-SP5-5-Years

Source: Yahoo Finance

The following chart shows the performance of the two indices from 1970 thru 2015:

Click to enlarge

TSX Composite vs SP 500 Returns

Though Canadian stocks seem to track U.S. stocks consistently they have diverged widely in some years.

The table below lists the data used in the chart above:

Table Updated – Oct 4, 2020

YearTSX Composite IndexS&P 500 Index
1970-3.6%-2.5%
19718.0%13.2%
197227.4%18.2%
19730.3%-14.7%
1974-25.9%-26.8%
197518.5%40.7%
197611.0%23.0%
197710.7%0.7%
197829.7%15.5%
197944.8%16.8%
198030.1%35.5%
1981-10.2%-5.6%
19825.5%26.0%
198335.5%24.0%
1984-2.4%12.9%
198525.1%39.4%
19869.0%17.2%
19875.9%-0.9%
198811.1%7.0%
198921.4%27.8%
1990-14.8%-2.9%
199112.0%29.9%
1992-1.4%18.4%
199332.5%14.5%
1994-0.2%7.5%
199514.5%33.9%
199628.3%23.6%
199715.0%39.2%
1998-1.6%37.8%
199931.7%13.9%
20007.4%-5.6%
2001-12.6%-6.4%
2002-12.4%-22.8%
200326.7%5.8%
200414.5%2.8%
200524.1%1.5%
200617.3%16.0%
20079.8%-10.3%
2008-33.0%-22.6%
200935.1%9.1%
201017.6%8.9%
2011-8.7%4.4%
20127.2%13.5%
20139.55%29.6%
20147.42%11.3%
2015-11.09%-0.7%
201617.5%9.5%
20176.03%19.4%
2018-11.4%-6.2%
201919.1%28.8%
2020??????

Note: The TSX returns noted are in Canadian dollar terms.

Related ETFs:

  • SPDR S&P 500 (SPY)
  • iShares MSCI Canada Index (EWC)

Disclosure: No Positions

Related:

Long-Term Returns Should Be Used With Caution

Long-term returns quoted for an investment based on decades should not be taken at face value. This is because such returns can be skewed over many years due to various reasons including bull and bear markets, economic expansion and contraction, geo-political events and so forth. Hence when reviewing a long-term return investors have to take a deep dive and analyze the factors behind the return. For example, a 20-year equity return of a stock in a sector is totally meaningless today as much of the return could have been generated during the dot-com bubble mania which is unlikely to occur again.

The following two charts show how long-term real returns can easily mislead investors. Real returns are returns calculated accounting for inflation.

Click to enlarge

Long-Term-Returns-Page-1

Long-Term-Returns-Concentration-Page-2

Source: 

Rethinking Portfolio Construction and Risk Management, A Third Generation in Asset Allocation, January 2012, Bradley A. Jones, Ph.D, Macro Investment Strategist, Deutsche Bank

At first glance, a real return of 4% per year for a portfolio of 60% stocks and 40%  for over a century sounds reasonable. However the reality is much different. The second chart shows that most of the returns were earned in the best 4 decades each of which is a one-time event. Though World War III can be started by world powers anytime it highly unlikely to start anytime in the near future. So the possibility of an investor enjoying sky-high returns of a post-war recovery are almost nil. Similarly the high-tech revolution that occurred in the 1980s and 90s are once in a life-time events that are useless to a current investor. None of the hyped up new technologies such as renewable energy, nano-technology, social media, internet 2.0, etc. are going to start a technological revolution and earn fantastic returns for equity investors like in the 80s and 90s.

Why Wal-Mart Failed in Germany

no-walmart-logoThe American retail giant Wal-Mart Stores Inc (WMT) is the largest employer not only in the U.S. but in the world. In the U.S. the company’s thousands of huge stores can be called as the “Cathedrals of Capitalism” where millions of people shop every day.The lowest-prices offered by Wal-Mart is the key that keeps Americans attracted to this store. Though the company has been highly successful in replicating its success in many other countries, it has miserably failed in some countries such as Germany.

Recently I came across an interesting article on Amazon and other U.S. companies operating in Germany. From the article:

US Firms vs. German Labor Laws

Amazon is playing according to its own rules, and thus finds itself in the best of company with numerous other US corporations that have difficulty accepting Germany’s so-called “social partnership,” which is the traditional relationship that exists between employees and employers.

US technology giant Apple tried for months to prevent works councils — the powerful bodies that represent employees inside a company — from being established at the firm’s own sales outlets. And even after the works councils were set up, its members dared to make only anonymous statements in the public sphere.

US retail chain Wal-Mart failed in Germany in part because it misjudged German labor laws. Wal-Mart banned its employees from having romantic relationships, or even flirting with each other. They were also urged to wear a permanent smile, and the company didn’t understand why this was perceived as an infringement on their personal rights.

US conglomerate Honeywell put plans in place to close a plant in the eastern German city of Fürstenwalde — without consulting the works council or giving any thought to severance schemes, both of which are required by the Works Constitution Act, the legislation that governs the system of workplace labor relations in Germany.

Fashion chain Hollister, which is owned by Abercrombie & Fitch, used cameras to monitor its employees — and paid no attention to the issue of whether this was compatible with German data protection guidelines. After each shift, employees are frisked and their bags are checked as if they were potential shoplifters.

All of these companies have one thing in common: They have their problems with Germany’s particular brand of capitalism, known as theSoziale Marktwirtschaft, or social market economy. They view employee representatives with suspicion, and they see the worker participation enshrined in the Works Constitution Act as a hurdle that has to be sidestepped. Furthermore, they get around Germany’s dismissal protection laws by giving short-term contracts to as many workers as possible.

“In contrast to Germany’s old and well-established industry, many of these companies are relatively new to the market,” says Christoph Dörrenbächer, a professor for international business organization at the Berlin School of Economics and Law.

“It took Siemens 150 years before they conquered the international market, whereas Amazon and Apple did it in 15 years. They are not about to allow the side issue of worker participation to diminish their competitive edge,” says the researcher.

Source:  Cowboys on the Rhine: US Firms Flout German Labor Practices, Der Spiegel

My online research on the failure of Wal-Mart in Germany lead to an interesting research paper by Andreas Knorr and Andreas Arndt of Universität Bremen.

Here is the abstract:

Clearly dominating the US retail market, Wal-Mart expanded into Germany (and Europe) in late 1997. Wal-Mart’s attempt to apply the company’s proven US success formula in an unmodified manner to the German market, however, turned out to be nothing short of a fiasco. Upon closer inspection, the circumstances of the company’s failure to establish itself in Germany give reason to believe that it pursued a fundamentally flawed internationalization strategy due to an incredible degree of ignorance of the specific features of the extremely competitive German retail market. Moreover, instead of attracting consumers with an innovative approach to retailing, as it has done in the USA, in Germany the company does not seem to be able to offer customers any compelling value proposition in comparison with its local competitors. Wal-Mart Germany’s future looks bleak indeed.

The authors of this study note the following four reasons for the failure of Wal-Mart in Germany:

  • “a fundamentally flawed entry-by-acquisition strategy,
  • a management by “hubris and clash of cultures”-approach to labor relations,
  • a blatant failure to deliver on its legendary “we sell for less – always“, “everyday low prices” and “excellent service” value proposition, and
  • bad publicity due to its repeated infringement of some important German laws and regulations”

The whole paper is fascinating and is definitely worth a read. You can download the entire paper here.

Source: Why did Wal-Mart fail in Germany?, Andreas Knorr and Andreas Arndt, Universität Bremen

The moral of this debacle is that no matter how big a corporation is it can still fail if it is lead by stupid leaders and violates local customs and laws.

Disclosure: No Positions

You may also like:

  1. World’s Biggest Retailer Wal-Mart Closes Up Shop in Germany (DW)
  2. Wal-Mart pulls out of Germany (The Guardian)
  3. Success and Failure: Strategies to Improve Success (Boundless.com)
  4. This Is Not America. Why Wal-Mart left Germany (The Atlantic Times)
  5. Heading for the exit (The Economist)
  6. Why Did Walmart Leave Germany? (Huff Post)
  7. Wal-Mart Finds That Its Formula Doesn’t Fit Every Culture (NY Times)
  8. WAL-MART: WHY DID IT FAIL IN GERMANY? (PKWard)
  9. Walmart in Germany: Cultural Problems (kwintessential)
  10. Case, example of product failure: Wal-Mart in Germany, 1997 to 2006 (Open Text Books, HK)
  11. What Do Chinese Consumers Want? Walmart Can’t Figure It Out., WSJ, June 2022

Also checkout:

  1. Target learns Canadians aren’t like Americans, Marketwatch, Jan 15, 2015
  2. Target’s spectacular Canadian fail: A case study in what retailers shouldn’t do, Financial Post, Jan 15, 2015
  3. The Last Days of target – The untold tale of Target Canada’s difficult birth, tough life and brutal death, Canadian Business