National presto industries

“The Intelligent Investor” 時常用National presto industries作為解釋的例子﹐甚至在最後一篇“Margin of Safety”也引用它作為例子。

書中有關National presto industries的列表如下﹕

列表1)

Price, Dec 31 1968	38.62
Number of common share	1,478,000
Market value of common	$58,000,000
Book value of common	$26.30
Sale and revenue	$152,200,000
Net income	$8,206,000
Earned per share, 1968	$5.61
Earned per share, 1963	$1.03
Earned per share, 1958	$0.77
Current dividend rate	$0.80
Dividend since	1945
Ratio:
Price/earning	6.9x
Price/book value	142%
Dividend yield	2.40%
Net/sale	5.40%
Earnings/book value	21.40%
Current assets/liabilities	3.40x
working capital/debt	no debt
Growth in per-share earning
1968 vs 1963	+450%
1968 vs 1960	+630%

列表2)

Price Range	Decline	Decline
1936-1970	1961-1962	1968-69 to 1970
0.5~45	20.62~8.25	45~21.5

列表3)

1970 price	Net-current asset value per share	Book value per share	Earned per share 1970	current Dividend	High price Before 1970
21.5	27	31.7	6.15	1	45

~~~
“Margin of Safety”﹕

The margin of safety for bonds may be calculated, alternatively, by comparing the total value of the enterprise with the amount of debt. If the business owes $10 million and is fairly worth $30 million, there is room for a shrinkage of two-thirds in value(at least theoretically), before the bondholders will suffer loss. The amount of this extra value, or “cushion,” above the debt may be approximated by using the average market price of the junior stock issues over a period of years. Since average stock prices are generally related to average earning power, the margin of “enterprise value” over debt and the margin of earnings over charges will in most cases yield similar results. So much for the margin-of-safety concept as applied to “fixed-value investment.” Can it be carried over into the field of common stocks? Yes, but with some necessary modifications. There are instances where a common stock may be considered sound because it enjoys a margin of safety as large as that of a good bond. This will occur, for example, when a company has out-standing only common stock that under depression conditions is selling only for less than the amount of bonds that could safely be issued against its property and earning power. In such instances the investor can obtain the margin of safety associated with bond, plus all the chances of larger income and principal appreciation inherent in a common stock. Common stock bought under such circumstances will supply an ideal, though infrequent, combination of safety and profit opportunity. As a quite recent example of this condition, let us mention once more National presto industries stock, which sold for a total enterprising value of $43 millions in 1972, with its $16 millions of recent earning before taxes the company could easily have supported this amount of bonds.
~~~

我不明白之處﹕
There are instances where a common stock may be considered sound because it enjoys a margin of safety as large as that of a good bond. This will occur, for example, when a company has out-standing only common stock that under depression conditions is selling only for less than the amount of bonds that could safely be issued against its property and earning power. In such instances the investor can obtain the margin of safety associated with bond, plus all the chances of larger income and principal appreciation inherent in a common stock.


我在“證券分析”-債券篇看過margin of “enterprise value” over debt的例子﹐不過對于普通股﹐我還沒完全弄清楚。在enterprising篇的bargain issue﹐Graham 說是當市值少過流動淨值(net current assets)的現像﹐我相信兩者之間的關係密切。

我特別留意這一段﹐主因是bargain issue已經是“賤價”了﹐如果一切合乎標準的檢驗﹐那麼在“Margin of Safety”提到的有如債券般安全的境界﹐我怎麼能無動于衷﹖

我的了解程度﹕

市值/負債的比率是作為債券投資的補充

步驟1。 現確保所有的保障符合條件
步驟2。 市值/負債的比率是補充。如果保障符合條件﹐但市值/負債的比率卻不合格﹐可以假設(a)普通股的價格過低(b)債券不安全。

我的明白是﹐Mr.Graham的邏輯是黑/白﹐即是沒有灰色。步驟1先合格﹐步驟2若不合格﹐就免談這只債券。

如果
-普通股的價格過低是正確的﹐買股票比買債券好賺。
-普通股的價格過低是不正確的﹐買債券就有風險

聰明人應該會避開債券而選擇普通股。


但是﹐我還是認為以上的程度太膚淺了﹐我決定再看“證券分析”債券篇﹐盼望能解開心中的疑惑﹐而且我這次決定看1934年英文版本﹐向來閱讀的香港華文版本將用來補充。
(這是我第一次看英文版本﹐我的英文太爛了)