- •Investment Case 11
- •Valuation summary 37
- •Investment case 53
- •Investment Case
- •Companies Compared Stock data
- •Key metrics
- •Per ha comparison
- •Management credibility
- •Market Overview Summary
- •Ukraine in global context Ukraine produces 2-3% of world soft commodities
- •Sunflower oil, corn, wheat, barley and rapeseed are Ukraine’s key soft commodities to export
- •Ukraine is 8th in arable land globally
- •Key inputs used in crop farming Ukraine`s climate favorable for low-cost agriculture
- •Soil fertility map
- •Machinery use far below developed countries
- •Land trade moratorium makes more benefits
- •Fertilizer use
- •Inputs prices: lease cost is Ukraine’s key cost advantage
- •Case study: Production costs in Ukraine vs. Brazil for corn and soybean
- •Farming Efficiency Ukrainian crop yields lag the eu and us, on par with Argentina and Brazil, above Russia’s
- •5Y average yields, t/ha and their respective 10y cagRs
- •Yields at a premium in Ukraine on the company level
- •Growth Growth should come from yield improvement, crop structure reshuffle and acreage increase
- •Crop structure is gradually shifting to more profitable cultures
- •Combined crop structure of listed companies
- •Ukraine`s 2012 harvest outlook
- •Valuation
- •Valuation summary
- •Valuation summary
- •Asset-based approach
- •Asset-based valuation
- •Valuation premium/discount summary
- •Location matters: Value of land by region
- •Yields efficiency comparing to benchmark region
- •Cost efficiency
- •Adding supplementary businesses
- •Valuation summary for other assets
- •Cost of equity assumptions
- •Model assumptions
- •Landbank growth capped at 30%
- •Crop structure
- •Biological revaluation (ias 41) excluded
- •Land ownership
- •Company Profiles Agroton a high cost producer
- •Investment case
- •Valuation
- •Operating assumptions
- •Financials
- •Income statement*, usd mln
- •Agroton in six charts
- •Operati
- •Industrial Milk Company Corn story
- •Investment case
- •A focus on the corn explains high margins
- •Location favourable for corn
- •Well on track with ipo proceeds
- •Weak ebitda margin in 2012 explained by non-cash items
- •Valuation
- •Valuation
- •Operating assumptions
- •Financials
- •Income statement*, usd mln
- •Ksg Agro On the road to space/Not ready to be public
- •Investment Case
- •A 5x yoy boost in total assets looks strange to us
- •Valuation
- •Operating assumptions
- •Financials
- •Income statement*, usd mln
- •Ksg Agro in six charts
- •Mcb Agricole Acquisition target with lack of positives for minorities
- •Investment Case
- •Inventories balance, usd mln
- •Overview of acquisitions of public farming companies in Ukraine
- •Valuation
- •Operating assumptions
- •Financials
- •Income statement, usd mln
- •Mcb Agricole in six charts
- •Mriya Too sweet to be true
- •Investment Case
- •Valuation
- •Operating assumptions
- •Financials
- •Income statement*, usd mln
- •Mriya in six charts
- •Sintal Agriculture
- •Investment Case
- •25% Yoy cost reduction in 2011 should improve margins
- •Irrigation is a growth option
- •Inventory balance, usd mln
- •Valuation
- •Valuation
- •Operating assumptions
- •Financials
- •Income statement*, usd mln
- •Sintal Agriculture in six charts
- •Astarta Sugar maker
- •Kernel Grain trader actively integrating upstream
- •Poultry producer
- •Appendices Land value
- •Current landowner income capitalization model
- •Farmer income capitalization model
- •Normative value
- •Biological asset revaluation
- •How do we adjust the income statement to be on a cost basis?
- •Ias 41 application summary
- •Appendix: Crop production schedule Crop schedule, based on 2012 harvesting year
- •Investment ratings
- •Contacts
Operating assumptions
Crops segment assumptions
|
2010 |
2011 |
2012E |
2013E |
2014E |
2015E |
2016E |
2017E |
2018E |
2019E |
2020E |
2021E |
Total landbank, ths ha |
42. |
57 |
84 |
90 |
90 |
90 |
90 |
90 |
90 |
90 |
90 |
90 |
Planted, ths ha |
29 |
33 |
67 |
86 |
86 |
86 |
86 |
86 |
86 |
86 |
86 |
86 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Acreage breakdown |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Wheat |
22% |
22% |
14% |
40% |
40% |
40% |
40% |
40% |
40% |
40% |
40% |
40% |
Corn |
47% |
48% |
54% |
30% |
30% |
30% |
30% |
30% |
30% |
30% |
30% |
30% |
Barley |
1% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rapeseed |
1% |
2% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Soy |
10% |
8% |
10% |
10% |
10% |
10% |
10% |
10% |
10% |
10% |
10% |
10% |
Sunflower |
14% |
17% |
20% |
17% |
17% |
17% |
17% |
17% |
17% |
17% |
17% |
17% |
Potatoes |
1% |
2% |
3% |
3% |
3% |
3% |
3% |
3% |
3% |
3% |
3% |
3% |
Other |
4% |
1% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Crop yields, t/ha |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Wheat |
2.9 |
4.2 |
4.0 |
4.1 |
4.2 |
4.2 |
4.3 |
4.4 |
4.5 |
4.6 |
4.7 |
4.8 |
Corn |
5.9 |
8.0 |
5.8 |
5.9 |
6.0 |
6.1 |
6.3 |
6.4 |
6.5 |
6.6 |
6.8 |
6.9 |
Barley |
2.1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rapeseed |
0.9 |
1.4 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Soy |
2.0 |
1.8 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sunflower |
2.0 |
2.6 |
2.3 |
2.3 |
2.4 |
2.4 |
2.5 |
2.5 |
2.6 |
2.6 |
2.7 |
2.7 |
Potatoes |
16 |
30 |
23 |
23 |
24 |
24 |
25 |
25 |
26 |
26 |
27 |
27 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Marketing year data |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Revenue, USD/ha |
895 |
1,312 |
1,115 |
1,093 |
1,137 |
1,183 |
1,231 |
1,280 |
1,332 |
1,386 |
1,442 |
1,500 |
Costs, USD/ha |
395 |
561 |
599 |
620 |
643 |
667 |
689 |
711 |
734 |
757 |
782 |
807 |
Gross profit, USD/ha |
500 |
751 |
516 |
472 |
494 |
515 |
542 |
570 |
598 |
629 |
660 |
693 |
Gross margin, MY |
56% |
57% |
46% |
43% |
43% |
44% |
44% |
44% |
45% |
45% |
46% |
46% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Calendar year figures, USD mln |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Revenue |
27.8 |
19.6 |
54.4 |
81.3 |
90.0 |
104.9 |
105.1 |
107.7 |
111.4 |
115.7 |
120.2 |
125.0 |
Gross profit |
0.0 |
11.1 |
28.9 |
36.8 |
39.0 |
45.6 |
46.0 |
47.6 |
49.7 |
52.1 |
54.7 |
57.5 |
Gross margin, % |
0% |
57% |
53% |
45% |
43% |
44% |
44% |
44% |
45% |
45% |
46% |
46% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Inventories balance, USD mln |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Agricultural produce at year start |
11.7 |
10.0 |
33.8 |
54.4 |
66.5 |
73.7 |
69.9 |
70.1 |
71.8 |
74.3 |
77.1 |
80.2 |
Value of harvest |
26.2 |
43.4 |
74.9 |
93.4 |
97.2 |
101.1 |
105.2 |
109.5 |
113.9 |
118.5 |
123.3 |
128.3 |
Sales |
27.8 |
19.6 |
54.4 |
81.3 |
90.0 |
104.9 |
105.1 |
107.7 |
111.4 |
115.7 |
120.2 |
125.0 |
old year sales |
42% |
51% |
62% |
67% |
74% |
70% |
67% |
65% |
64% |
64% |
64% |
64% |
new year sales |
58% |
49% |
38% |
33% |
26% |
30% |
33% |
35% |
36% |
36% |
36% |
36% |
Sales as % of supply |
74% |
37% |
50% |
55% |
55% |
60% |
60% |
60% |
60% |
60% |
60% |
60% |
Agricultural produce at year end |
10.0 |
33.8 |
54.4 |
66.5 |
73.7 |
69.9 |
70.1 |
71.8 |
74.3 |
77.1 |
80.2 |
83.4 |
Source: Company data, Concorde Capital estimates