Latest stories

Competition

C

Found this posting Victor Niederhoffer’s blog on competition. I agree competition is good for society / consumer , but bad for an investor. I would prefer a company which is close to a unregulated monopoly ( a toll bridge as buffett says )

Competition, by Victor Niederhoffer:
Competition in its many aspects — markets, trees, companies, old heartedness, protection of consumers, romance — is the main force responsible for our high standard of living. It brings out the best in us and provides the consumer with the price and quality he wants. James Lorie, along with Franklin Fisher, was one of the chief consultants for IBM in the antitrust action against it in the 1970s. I came across this quote by Fisher vis a vis the similarities to the Microsoft case:
Every practice that the government complained of had to due basically with the offering of better products or lower prices. The government did not understand that that is the way competition works.
He then goes on to show how IBM had developed a better and smaller disk and the government complained it was a predatory device.
If only the public were educated to realize that there is always someone waiting around to provide a product at a more attractive price or quality or time or convenience, then so much wasted envy and loss would be averted.

A new world economy

A

A new article on india and china. interesting to read

http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/05_34/b3948401.htm

some excerpts

Even more exhilarating is the pace of innovation, as tech hubs like Bangalore spawn companies producing their own chip designs, software, and pharmaceuticals. “I find Bangalore to be one of the most exciting places in the world,” says Dan Scheinman, Cisco Systems Inc.’s senior vice-president for corporate development. “It is Silicon Valley in 1999.” Beyond Bangalore, Indian companies are showing a flair for producing high-quality goods and services at ridiculously low prices, from $50 air flights and crystal-clear 2 cents-a-minute cell-phone service to $2,200 cars and cardiac operations by top surgeons at a fraction of U.S. costs. Some analysts see the beginnings of hypercompetitive multinationals. “Once they learn to sell at Indian prices with world quality, they can compete anywhere,” predicts University of Michigan management guru C.K. Prahalad. Adds A. T. Kearney high-tech consultant John Ciacchella: “I don’t think U.S. companies realize India is building next-generation service companies.”

Barring cataclysm, within three decades India should have vaulted over Germany as the world’s third-biggest economy. By mid-century, China should have overtaken the U.S. as No. 1. By then, China and India could account for half of global output. Indeed, the troika of China, India, and the U.S. — the only industrialized nation with significant population growth — by most projections will dwarf every other economy.

China also is hugely wasteful. Its 9.5% growth rate in 2004 is less impressive when you consider that $850 billion — half of GDP — was plowed into already-glutted sectors like crude steel, vehicles, and office buildings. Its factories burn fuel five times less efficiently than in the West, and more than 20% of bank loans are bad. Two-thirds of China’s 13,000 listed companies don’t earn back their true cost of capital, estimates Beijing National Accounting Institute President Chen Xiaoyue. “We build the roads and industrial parks, but we sacrifice a lot,” Chen says.India, by contrast, has had to develop with scarcity. It gets scant foreign investment, and has no room to waste fuel and materials like China. India also has Western legal institutions, a modern stock market, and private banks and corporations. As a result, it is far more capital-efficient. A BusinessWeek analysis of Standard & Poor’s (MHP ) Compustat data on 346 top listed companies in both nations shows Indian corporations have achieved higher returns on equity and invested capital in the past five years in industries from autos to food products. The average Indian company posted a 16.7% return on capital in 2004, vs. 12.8% in China.

The burning question is whether India can replicate China’s mass manufacturing achievement. India’s info-tech services industry, successful as it is, employs fewer than 1 million people. But 200 million Indians subsist on $1 a day or less. Export manufacturing is one of India’s best hopes of generating millions of new jobs.India has sophisticated manufacturing knowhow. Tata Steel is among the world’s most-efficient producers. The country boasts several top precision auto parts companies, such as Bharat Forge Ltd. The world’s biggest supplier of chassis parts to major auto makers, it employs 1,200 engineers at its heavily automated Pune plant. India’s forte is small-batch production of high-value goods requiring lots of engineering, such as power generators for Cummins Inc. (
CMI ) and core components for General Electric Co. (GE ) CAT scanners.

Measuring the moat – framework for evaluating competitive advantage

M

found this article on Michael Mauboussin’s website. Absolutely fantastic article. Extremely helpful in developing a framework for evaluating a companies competitive advantage.
http://www.capatcolumbia.com/Articles/measuringthemoat.pdf

In addition , micheal has published this new article on the legg mason website. A must read !!

http://www.leggmason.com/funds/knowledge/mauboussin/Aver_and_Aversion.pdf

Analysing the auto component industry

A

I have been studying the Indian auto component industry for the last few days. The industry appears to have a good future ahead (whether there are some good stocks at good valuation is something i need to check).
The auto industry has two main channel – OEM and After sales. The industry has been restricted mainly to the domestic industry in the past and was thus tied to the fortune of the domestic auto industry (which in turn is cyclical).


A few changes have happened which have opened up the export market to this industry
– Recognition of India for its technical manpower. This is crucial especially in auto which involves a lot of R&D and design for new components at the higher end of the value chain
– Low cost labor
– Opening up of the Auto sector by the Indian government, due to which the global majors such as ford, GM etc setup shop in India and started sourcing from local suppliers. This helped in improving the competitiveness of the Indian auto component makers
– increase in scale of the domestic auto component makers and foray into the export market
Industry landscape

Some of the key firms in the industry in terms of their size are
– Bharat forge
– MICO
– Motherson Sumi
– Exide
– Sundaram fastners

Porter’s 5 factor analysis
Barriers to entry
– Technology: several auto components have a high technology component and can be produced by only those companies which have access to the technology or have developed it themselves. As a result most of the auto makers specialize in specific components
– Economies of scale
– Brand is crucial, more so in the Spares market (and as a result a distribution network too)
– Customer relationship in the form of long term contracts
Rivalry among firms
Rivalry among firms would be high in Spares market, but lesser in the export markets wherein the norm is long term contract. In addition the industry has high technology component and hence the industry does not deal in completely commodity product. However competition could be from other firms from other countries in a similar product line
Supplier power should be low as the key raw material is steel which in itself is a commodity

Buyer power is high especially for the OEM market and with high competition between auto makers there should be a constant pricing pressure on the auto component makers going forward

I would consider the threat of substitute product as low

The key success factors for the industry going forward should
– Continued investment into technology/ process to build barriers to competition and provide a cost and quality advantage to the customer
– Pursuit of economies of scale to be cost competitive. It should be in both production and in R&D
– Developing strong customer relationship through quality and reliable supply

Key risks
– Pricing would remain under pressure going forward
– Inability to meet the supply schedules of the customer
– Development of alternative outsourcing locations

The industry is into a growth phase. However the market also seems to have recognized that and most of the companies seem to be fairly valued.

Subscription

Enter your email address if you would like to be notified when a new post is posted:

I agree to be emailed to confirm my subscription to this list

Recent Posts

Select category to filter posts

Archives