Apparently another bidder has emerged for the assets of CKE Restaurants.
For those following the saga, I’m putting my stamp on what I think is a fair price for the company. If I was a shareholder I would be extremely disappointed in THL Partners’ offer of $11.05 for CKR. A more appropriate price is closer to $15.
While a sum of the parts analysis is never an exact science, I believe my assumptions are very conservative in valuing the cash flows of the company’s two brands. I also believe that the company was mismanaged and there are a number of opportunities to make the company more profitable.
First, the current management team has an inflated view of what it is worth. For the last three years, the senior executives were some of the best paid in the industry running two of the smaller chains. That being said, there are a number of ways for the company to reduce G&A.
Second, we think there is an opportunity to enhance shareholder value by focusing on restaurant operations. While I appreciate the legacy issues surrounding the distribution business, the economics of the distribution model more than justify the company exiting the business. Today, running a franchise restaurant company has never been more challenging; the challenges are even more complicated when management’s time is consumed with managing a distribution business and a restaurant company at the same time. After analyzing other distribution companies, it would suggest that the economics of running the distribution business are under pressure and CKR could be well served by letting bigger, more efficient companies manage the business.
CKR has justified retaining its warehouse and distribution operations for its Carl’s Jr. system because it allows the company to more effectively manage its food costs, provide adequate quantities of food and supplies, generate revenues from franchisees, and provide better service to its restaurants in California and some adjacent states. Although these motives for keeping the business may all be true, we do not think they trump the potential cost savings that could be realized from outsourcing such operations.
Hardee’s distribution business is based primarily on equipment sales to franchisees and actually generated slightly negative profits over the past five years and this does not take into account the G&A expenses associated with operating the business.
It will be interesting to see where things shake out…..