|
=================== |
||||||
|
Financial Performance & Scoring -- © 2007 Gaskins IPO Desktop/IPOdesktop |
||||||
|
Pre-IPO analysis, grading & scoring -- updated May 26 |
||||||
|
. Business Model Rating Criteria |
||||||
|
A = high growth market, potential leader; B = more competitive market; C= 'public venture capital' |
||||||
|
. Calculations |
||||||
|
. IPO Price to annualized Sales Ratio -- (Price / Sales) |
||||||
|
Numerator |
Denominator |
|||||
|
IPO market capitalization… |
Annualized Sales (based on recent results) |
|||||
|
(post-IPO # of shares times mid-point of IPO price range) |
||||||
|
. IPO Price to annualized Earnings (loss) -- (Price / Earnings) |
||||||
|
Numerator |
Denominator |
|||||
|
IPO market cap |
Annualized Earnings (loss) from the last quarter |
|||||
|
=================== |
||||||
|
SEARCH BY COMPANY |
In your browser use 'Edit/Find' to search for companies |
|||||
|
or ticker for analysis |
scheduled below |
|||||
|
=================== |
||||||
|
May 28wk week IPO schedule |
||||||
|
VALUATION RATIOS |
IPO Mrkt |
Price / |
Price / |
Price / |
Price / |
% offered |
|
Cap (mm) |
Sales |
Earnings |
BookValue |
TangibleBV |
in IPO |
|
|
Amicus Thera (FOLD) |
$333 |
n/a |
-8 |
2.6 |
2.6 |
23% |
|
Clinical-stage pharmaceutical: C, 6 |
Post-IPO shrs: 22m |
|||||
|
Jazz Pharma (JAZZ) |
$614 |
11.0 |
-8 |
2.9 |
5.5 |
24% |
|
neurological and psychiatric products: C, 6.5 |
Post-IPO shrs: 24.5m |
|||||
|
LDK Solar (LDK) |
$2,704 |
9.3 |
28 |
5.4 |
5.4 |
17% |
|
multicrystalline wafers for solar cells: B-, 8 |
Post-IPO shrs: 104m |
|||||
|
May 28wk financials, analysis, grading, scoring |
||||||
|
Amicus Therapeutics |
FOLD, C, 6 |
|||||
|
Clinical-stage pharmaceutical |
Post-IPO shrs: 22m |
|||||
|
Cranbury, NJ |
2004 |
2005 |
2006* |
March, 07* |
IPO Mkt |
|
|
Profit (loss) $mm |
-$9 |
-$21 |
-$47 |
-$10 |
Cap (mm) |
|
|
*quarter ending March 31 |
$333 |
|||||
|
@$15 |
||||||
|
VALUATION RATIOS |
IPO Mrkt |
Price / |
Price / |
Price / |
Price / |
% offered |
|
Cap (mm) |
Sales |
Earnings |
BookValue |
TangibleBV |
in IPO |
|
|
Amicus Thera (FOLD) |
$333 |
n/a |
-8 |
2.6 |
2.6 |
23% |
|
SCORECARD |
Mgt |
Market |
Market Do- |
Proprie- |
Total |
|
|
1-5, 5 is high |
Growth |
mination |
tary |
rating |
||
|
20 is perfect |
2 |
2 |
0 |
2 |
6 |
|
|
Note: very high cash burn rate, as inidcated by a P/E ration of -8 |
||||||
|
Business |
||||||
|
. Clinical-stage biopharmaceutical company focused on the discovery, development and commercialization |
||||||
|
of novel small molecule, orally-administered drugs, known as pharmacological chaperones, for the |
||||||
|
treatment of a range of human genetic diseases. |
||||||
|
. Certain human diseases result from mutations in specific genes that, in many cases, lead to the production |
||||||
|
of proteins with reduced stability. |
||||||
|
Misfolded proteins |
||||||
|
Proteins with such mutations may not fold into their correct three-dimensional shape and are generally |
||||||
|
referred to as misfolded proteins. |
||||||
|
. Misfolded proteins are often recognized by cells as having defects and, as a result, may be eliminated |
||||||
|
prior to reaching their intended location in the cell. |
||||||
|
. The reduced biological activity of these proteins leads to impaired cellular function and ultimately to |
||||||
|
disease. |
||||||
|
The FOLD approach |
||||||
|
. To the treatment of human genetic diseases consists of using pharmacological chaperones that selectively |
||||||
|
bind to the target protein, increasing the stability of the protein and helping it fold into the correct three |
||||||
|
dimensional shape. |
||||||
|
. This allows proper trafficking of the protein, thereby increasing protein activity, improving cellular |
||||||
|
function and potentially reducing cell stress. |
||||||
|
. Currently conducting Phase II clinical trials of Amigal for Fabry disease, Phase II clinical trials of Plicera |
||||||
|
for Gaucher disease, and Phase I clinical trials of AT2220 for Pompe disease. |
||||||
|
Competition |
||||||
|
FOLD is not aware that any currently working to develop products that would directly compete with |
||||||
|
FOLD's product pipeline. |
||||||
|
. Major competitors include pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies in the United States and abroad |
||||||
|
that have approved therapies or therapies in development for lysosomal storage disorders within FOLD's |
||||||
|
core programs. |
||||||
|
. Other competitors are pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies that have approved therapies or |
||||||
|
therapies in development for genetic diseases for which pharmacological chaperone technology may be |
||||||
|
applicable. |
||||||
|
. Additionally, FOLD ise aware of several early-stage, niche pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies |
||||||
|
whose core business revolves around protein misfolding |
||||||
|
. Specific competitors include Genzyme Corporation, Shire PLC, Actelion, Ltd. |
||||||
|
Use of $68mm in IPO proceeds |
||||||
|
o $20.0 million for clinical development of Amigal for the treatment of Fabry disease; |
||||||
|
o $20.0 million for clinical development of Plicera for the treatment of Gaucher disease; |
||||||
|
o $20.0 million for clinical development of AT2220 for the treatment of Pompe disease; |
||||||
|
o $5.0 million for research and development activities relating to additional preclinical programs |
||||||
|
o the balance, if any, to fund working capital and other general corporate purposes, |
||||||
|
=================== |
||||||
|
Jazz Pharmaceuticals |
JAZZ, C, 6.5 |
|||||
|
neurological and psychiatric products |
Post-IPO shrs: 24.5m |
|||||
|
Palo Alto, CA |
2004 |
2005 |
2006 |
March, 06* |
March, 07* |
IPO Mkt |
|
Rev ($mm) |
$21 |
$45 |
$10 |
$14 |
Cap (mm) |
|
|
Direct product cost % |
20% |
16% |
16% |
14% |
$614 |
|
|
Operating loss % |
-366% |
-174% |
-196% |
-139% |
@$26 |
|
|
Profit (loss) $mm |
-$25 |
-$85 |
-$59 |
-$22.4 |
-$19.5 |
|
|
Profit (loss) % |
-397.2% |
-131.4% |
-228.6% |
-139.3% |
||
|
*quarter ending March 31 |
||||||
|
VALUATION RATIOS |
IPO Mrkt |
Price / |
Price / |
Price / |
Price / |
% offered |
|
Cap (mm) |
Sales |
Earnings |
BookValue |
TangibleBV |
in IPO |
|
|
Jazz Pharma (JAZZ) |
$614 |
11.0 |
-8 |
2.9 |
5.5 |
24% |
|
SCORECARD |
Mgt |
Market |
Market Do- |
Proprie- |
Total |
|
|
1-5, 5 is high |
Growth |
mination |
tary |
rating |
||
|
20 is perfect |
2 |
2 |
1 |
1.5 |
6.5 |
|
|
Comments |
||||||
|
. Intellectual property position doesn't seem strong |
||||||
|
. 57% of IPOproceeds to market a product in the US acqired in January 2007 |
||||||
|
. Very high cash burn rate, as inidcated by a P/E ration of -8 |
||||||
|
. Very interesting product portfolio |
||||||
|
Business |
||||||
|
Specialty pharmaceutical company focused on identifying, developing and commercializing innovative |
||||||
|
products to meet unmet medical needs in neurology and psychiatry. |
||||||
|
Summary -- $115mm of $158mm in proceeds |
||||||
|
(most of remainder of IPO proceeds for R&D) |
||||||
|
Luvox CR -- $90mm of IPO proceeds allocated to Luvox CR |
||||||
|
> Acquired Luvox CR in January 2007 only in the U.S. |
||||||
|
. Obtained the exclusive rights to market and distribute Luvox CR in the United States from Solvay |
||||||
|
Pharmaceuticals, Inc., or Solvay, in January 2007. |
||||||
|
. Solvay retains the rights to market and distribute Luvox CR outside of the United States. Solvay submitted |
||||||
|
a new drug application, or NDA, to the FDA for Luvox CR in April 2006, and, in February 2007, the FDA |
||||||
|
issued an approvable letter. |
||||||
|
> JAZZ will need to demonstrate that the benefits of Luvox CR to patients justify the higher price of a |
||||||
|
branded product. |
||||||
|
> o Luvox CR (fluvoxamine maleate extended release capsules) is Luvox CR, an extended release |
||||||
|
formulation of fluvoxamine, a selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor, which has been developed for the |
||||||
|
treatment of obsessive compulsive disorder and social anxiety disorder. |
||||||
|
Phase III clinical trials -- $25mm of IPO proceeds |
||||||
|
. JAZZ's only product candidate currently in Phase III clinical trials is JZP-6 for the treatment of |
||||||
|
fibromyalgia syndrome. |
||||||
|
. ThePhase III clinical program for JZP-6 is costly, and JAZZ does not expect to complete the program |
||||||
|
until early 2009. |
||||||
|
Intellectual property - doesn't seem strong |
||||||
|
Has filed multiple U.S. patent applications and foreign counterparts |
||||||
|
Patent Risk: |
||||||
|
. The pharmaceutical and life sciences industry has produced a proliferation of patents, and it is not always |
||||||
|
clear to industry participants, including JAZZ, which patents cover various types of products or methods. |
||||||
|
. The coverage of patents is subject to interpretation by the courts, and the interpretation is not always |
||||||
|
uniform |
||||||
|
The existence of a patent will not necessarily prevent other companies from developing similar or
therapeutically equivalent products or protect us from claims of third parties that our products infringe their
issued patents, which may require licensing and the payment of significant fees or royalties.
Competitors may successfully challenge our patents, produce similar products that do not infringe our |
||||||
|
patents, or manufacture products in countries where we have not applied for patent protection or that do not |
||||||
|
respect our patents." |
||||||
|
Formulations applied to known drug compounds |
||||||
|
. Applies novel formulations and drug delivery technologies to known drug compounds, and compounds |
||||||
|
with the same mechanism of action or similar chemical structure as marketed products, to improve patient |
||||||
|
care by, among other things, improving efficacy, reducing adverse side effects or increasing patient |
||||||
|
compliance relative to existing therapies. |
||||||
|
. By working with these drug compounds, JAZZ believes that it can substantially mitigate the risks and |
||||||
|
reduce the costs and time associated with product development and commercialization of |
||||||
|
new therapies with significant market opportunities. |
||||||
|
Portfolio progress |
||||||
|
. Since inception in 2003, has built a commercial operation and assembled a portfolio of products and |
||||||
|
product candidates that currently includes |
||||||
|
. Two marketed products that generated net product sales of $41.9 million in 2006, |
||||||
|
. One product candidate for which an approvable letter has been issued by the U.S. Food and Drug |
||||||
|
Administration, or FDA, and |
||||||
|
. Five product candidates in various stages of clinical development. |
||||||
|
. Also has additional product candidates in earlier stages of development. |
||||||
|
. In March 2007, sold rights to a third marketed product that generated net product sales of $1.4 million |
||||||
|
in 2006 for cash consideration of $9.0 million. |
||||||
|
JAZZ's marketed products in 2006 were: |
||||||
|
o Xyrem (sodium oxybate) oral solution. Xyrem is the only product approved by the FDA for the |
||||||
|
treatment of both cataplexy and excessive daytime sleepiness in patients with narcolepsy. Net product sales |
||||||
|
of Xyrem were $29.0 million in 2006 and $8.6 million in the first quarter of 2007. We promote Xyrem in |
||||||
|
the United States to neurologists, psychiatrists, pulmonologists and sleep specialists through our 55 person |
||||||
|
specialty sales force. Xyrem is distributed in the United States by Express Scripts Specialty Distribution |
||||||
|
Services, or Express Scripts, a specialty pharmaceutical distribution company, which is our only customer |
||||||
|
for Xyrem. We have licensed the rights to commercialize Xyrem in 54 countries outside of the United |
||||||
|
States to UCB Pharma Limited, or UCB, and in Canada to Valeant Canada Limited, or Valeant. In October |
||||||
|
2005, the European Agency for the Evaluation of Medical Products approved Xyrem for the treatment of |
||||||
|
cataplexy associated with narcolepsy and in March 2007, the European Agency for the Evaluation of |
||||||
|
Medical Products approved the product for the treatment of narcolepsy with cataplexy in adult patients. |
||||||
|
UCB has commercially launched Xyrem in 12 countries. |
||||||
|
o Antizol (fomepizole). Antizol is the only FDA-approved antidote for suspected or confirmed ethylene |
||||||
|
glycol or methanol poisonings in humans. We market Antizol primarily to hospitals and emergency rooms. |
||||||
|
Net product sales of Antizol were $12.5 million in 2006 and $2.6 million in the first quarter of 2007. |
||||||
|
Antizol is distributed to wholesalers in the United States, and we retain the services of a third party to |
||||||
|
promote the product. Antizol is marketed by our distributors in Canada and Israel. We also market Antizol |
||||||
|
Vet, an injectable formulation of fomepizole approved as an antidote for suspected or confirmed ethylene |
||||||
|
glycol poisoning in dogs. Net product sales of Antizol-Vet in 2006 were $313,000. |
||||||
|
o Cystadane (betaine anhydrous). Cystadane is approved by the FDA for the treatment of homocystinuria, |
||||||
|
an inherited metabolic disease. Net product sales of Cystadane in 2006 were $1.4 million. In March 2007, |
||||||
|
sold our rights to Cystadane to an unrelated third party for cash consideration of $9.0 million. |
||||||
|
Late-stage product candidates |
||||||
|
o Luvox CR (fluvoxamine maleate extended release capsules). |
||||||
|
. Most advanced product candidate is Luvox CR, an extended release formulation of fluvoxamine, a |
||||||
|
selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor, which has been developed for the treatment of obsessive compulsive |
||||||
|
disorder and social anxiety disorder. |
||||||
|
. Obtained the exclusive rights to market and distribute Luvox CR in the United States from Solvay |
||||||
|
Pharmaceuticals, Inc., or Solvay, in January 2007. |
||||||
|
. Solvay retains the rights to market and distribute Luvox CR outside of the United States. Solvay submitted |
||||||
|
a new drug application, or NDA, to the FDA for Luvox CR in April 2006, and, in February 2007, the FDA |
||||||
|
issued an approvable letter. |
||||||
|
. Under the agreement with Solvay, Solvay has primary responsibility for the NDA for Luvox CR and |
||||||
|
communications with the FDA until after such time, if ever, as the FDA approves the NDA for Luvox CR |
||||||
|
. Subject to the satisfaction of the requirements set forth in an approvable letter issued by the FDA to |
||||||
|
Solvay and FDA approval, JAZZ expects to commence promotion of Luvox CR in the United States in the |
||||||
|
first quarter of 2008 through an expanded specialty sales force. |
||||||
|
. During 2007, expects to make significant expenditures relating to the planned launch and |
||||||
|
commercialization of Luvox CR, including milestone payments to Solvay, activities related to preparation |
||||||
|
for marketing and promotion, expansion of the specialty sales force and production of commercial |
||||||
|
quantities of Luvox CR. |
||||||
|
o JZP-6 (sodium oxybate). |
||||||
|
. Developing a liquid dosage form of sodium oxybate, the active pharmaceutical ingredient in Xyrem, for |
||||||
|
the treatment of fibromyalgia syndrome. |
||||||
|
. Has successfully completed a Phase II clinical trial of this product candidate for the treatment of |
||||||
|
fibromyalgia syndrome. |
||||||
|
. Currently conducting two pivotal Phase III clinical trials, and expects preliminary data from the first |
||||||
|
Phase III pivotal clinical trial in the second half of 2008. |
||||||
|
. Has granted to UCB the commercialization rights to JZP-6 in 54 countries outside of the United States. |
||||||
|
Clinical development pipeline |
||||||
|
In addition to product candidates in late-stage development, JAZZ's clinical development pipeline consists |
||||||
|
of the following product candidates: |
||||||
|
o JZP-4 (Type IIa sodium channel antagonist). |
||||||
|
. Subject to the results of a proof of concept clinical trial, formulation studies and long-term toxicology |
||||||
|
studies, plans to commence a Phase II clinical trial of JZP-4 for the treatment of epilepsy in the fourth |
||||||
|
quarter of 2007. |
||||||
|
. Also developing JZP-4 for the treatment of bipolar disorder. |
||||||
|
o JZP-8 (benzodiazepine) |
||||||
|
Plans to commence a Phase II clinical trial of JZP-8 for the treatment of acute repetitive seizure clusters in |
||||||
|
refractory epilepsy patients in the fourth quarter of 2007. |
||||||
|
o JZP-7 (dopamine agonist) |
||||||
|
Intends to conduct an additional pharmacokinetic study of JZP-7 in 2007 prior to commencing Phase II |
||||||
|
clinical trials for the treatment of restless legs syndrome. |
||||||
|
o JZP-2 (benzodiazepine) |
||||||
|
Has developed a target formulation for JZP-2 and plan to commence one or more clinical trials of JZP-2 for |
||||||
|
the acute treatment of panic attacks associated with panic disorder in 2007. |
||||||
|
Funding by category |
||||||
|
o Equity Financings. Preferred stock financings raised gross proceeds of $265.0 million. |
||||||
|
o Debt Financings. In connection with the acquisition of Orphan Medical, issued $80.0 million aggregate |
||||||
|
principal amount of senior secured notes and warrants to purchase 785,728 shares of Series BB convertible |
||||||
|
preferred stock. Additionally, in September 2006, entered into a one year line of credit agreement with a |
||||||
|
financial institution under which JAZZ may borrow up to 80% of eligible accounts receivable, up to a |
||||||
|
maximum borrowing limit of $5.0 million. |
||||||
|
o Development Financing. In August 2005, entered into an agreement with a third party under which the |
||||||
|
third party agreed to provide $30.0 million to fund a Phase III clinical trial of JZP-3, a product candidate |
||||||
|
then in development for the treatment of general anxiety disorder. Under that agreement, received $15.0 |
||||||
|
million in 2005 and $15.0 million in 2006. In June 2006, following analysis of the results of the Phase III |
||||||
|
clinical trial, notified the third party of our intention to discontinue development of the product candidate |
||||||
|
and not to seek product marketing approval from the FDA. As a result of our notification, is not obligated |
||||||
|
to make any payments to the third party that otherwise would have been made upon regulatory approval, |
||||||
|
launch and commercialization of JZP-3. |
||||||
|
o Collaboration. Under the terms of an agreement with UCB for Xyrem and JZP-6, received an upfront |
||||||
|
payment of $5.0 million and a $10.0 million payment upon election by UCB to exercise its rights to |
||||||
|
develop and commercialize JZP-6 for the treatment of fibromyalgia syndrome. Also entitled to additional |
||||||
|
development and commercialization milestone payments of up to $146.0 million and royalties on all |
||||||
|
commercial sales of Xyrem and JZP-6 by UCB. |
||||||
|
Financing history, chronology |
||||||
|
. In March 2003, incorporated in the State of California and began operations. |
||||||
|
. In April 2003, we entered into agreements with investors for a $15.0 million Series A preferred stock |
||||||
|
financing, the funds from which were received in 2003 and early 2004. |
||||||
|
. In January 2004, we reincorporated in the State of Delaware. In February 2004, entered into agreements |
||||||
|
with investors for a $250.0 million Series B preferred stock and Series B Prime preferred stock financing |
||||||
|
led by an affiliate of Kohlberg Kravis Roberts & Co., the funds from which were received in 2004, 2005 |
||||||
|
and 2006. |
||||||
|
. On June 24, 2005, acquired Orphan Medical, Inc., including its three marketed products, Xyrem, Antizol |
||||||
|
and Cystadane, in order to complement the development portfolio with marketed products and to build |
||||||
|
JAZZ's commercial organization. |
||||||
|
Competition |
||||||
|
Xyrem |
||||||
|
. As an alternative to Xyrem, cataplexy is often treated with tricyclic antidepressants and selective serotonin |
||||||
|
reuptake inhibitors, although none of these compounds has been approved by the FDA for the treatment of |
||||||
|
cataplexy. Tricyclic antidepressants are a class of antidepressant drugs first used in the 1950s. |
||||||
|
. The use of these drugs can often result in somnolence, which exacerbates excessive daytime sleepiness |
||||||
|
already experienced by all patients with narcolepsy. |
||||||
|
. Other treatments for excessive daytime sleepiness in patients with narcolepsy consist primarily of |
||||||
|
stimulants and wakefulness promoting agents, including Provigil (modafinil). Xyrem and Provigil are both |
||||||
|
approved for the treatment of excessive daytime sleepiness in patients with narcolepsy, but Xyrem is also |
||||||
|
approved for the treatment of cataplexy, the most well-recognized symptom of narcolepsy. |
||||||
|
. Provigil is also approved for the treatment of excessive daytime sleepiness in patients with obstructive |
||||||
|
sleep apnea/hypopnea syndrome and shift work sleep disorder, which may help make it more well-known |
||||||
|
to physicians and patients. |
||||||
|
Obsessive compulsive disorder |
||||||
|
. Although not FDA-approved for the treatment of obsessive compulsive disorder, based on data from the |
||||||
|
2006 Physicians Drug and Diagnosis Audit, JAZZ estimates that more than 15 additional products and their |
||||||
|
generic equivalents accounted for over 47% of total drug usage for the treatment of obsessive compulsive |
||||||
|
disorder in 2006 |
||||||
|
. Given the prevalence of generic products, in order to gain significant market acceptance, JAZZ will need |
||||||
|
to demonstrate that the benefits of Luvox CR to patients justify the higher price of a branded product. |
||||||
|
> Paxil, Zoloft, Prozac & Anafranil |
||||||
|
. Based on data from the 2006 Physicians Drug and Diagnosis Audit, JAZZ estimates that Paxil, Zoloft, |
||||||
|
Prozac and Anafranil (and each of their generic equivalents) and fluvoxamine accounted for 48% of the |
||||||
|
total drug usage for the treatment of obsessive compulsive disorder in 2006. |
||||||
|
. Four branded products are currently approved by the FDA for the treatment of obsessive compulsive |
||||||
|
disorder, including three selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors: Paxil (paroxetine HCl), which is marketed |
||||||
|
by GlaxoSmithKline, Zoloft (sertraline HCl), which is marketed by Pfizer, and Prozac (fluoxetine |
||||||
|
hydrochloride), which is marketed by Eli Lilly. Anafranil (clomipramine hydrochloride), the other branded |
||||||
|
product approved by the FDA for the treatment of obsessive compulsive disorder, is a tricyclic |
||||||
|
antidepressant marketed by Mallinckrodt in the United States. |
||||||
|
. The relative use of each of these products for the treatment of obsessive compulsive disorder has varied |
||||||
|
over the past ten years, and each currently has generic equivalents. |
||||||
|
. Generic products are generally sold at significantly lower prices than branded products, tending to both |
||||||
|
take market share away from branded products and put downward pricing pressure on branded products. |
||||||
|
Fluvoxamine, the generic equivalent of Luvox and a selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor, is the only other |
||||||
|
drug currently approved for the treatment of obsessive compulsive disorder. |
||||||
|
> Fluvoxamine |
||||||
|
Based on data from the 2006 Physicians Drug and Diagnosis Audit, JAZZ estimates that fluvoxamine use |
||||||
|
represented 11% of total drug usage for the treatment of obsessive compulsive disorder in 2006. |
||||||
|
. Prior to the introduction of generic fluvoxamine in 2000, Luvox was considered one of the preferred |
||||||
|
treatments of obsessive compulsive disorder. |
||||||
|
. Based on data from the 2005 Physicians Drug and Diagnosis Audit, JAZZ estimates that Luvox accounted |
||||||
|
for 21% of total drug usage for the treatment of obsessive compulsive disorder in 1999. |
||||||
|
Social anxiety disorder |
||||||
|
Based on limited data from the 2005 Physicians Drug and Diagnosis Audit, JAZZ estimates that Paxil CR |
||||||
|
use represented 5%, and Effexor XR use represented 9%, of total drug usage for the treatment of social |
||||||
|
anxiety disorder in 2006 |
||||||
|
. Four products are currently approved by the FDA for the treatment of social anxiety disorder, including |
||||||
|
three selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors: Zoloft, Paxil and Paxil CR, an extended release version of |
||||||
|
Paxil, and one serotonin-norepinephrine reuptake inhibitor, Effexor XR (venlafaxine HCl). Paxil CR and |
||||||
|
Effexor XR, developed and sold by GlaxoSmithKline and Wyeth, respectively, do not have generic |
||||||
|
equivalents, whereas Paxil and Zoloft have generic equivalents. |
||||||
|
. Paxil CR was approved for the treatment of social anxiety disorder in 2003 |
||||||
|
. Effexor XR was approved for the treatment of social anxiety disorder in 2003. |
||||||
|
As with obsessive compulsive disorder, in order to gain significant market acceptance, JAZZ will need to |
||||||
|
demonstrate that the benefits of Luvox CR to patients justify the higher price of a branded product. |
||||||
|
> Zoloft, Paxil, Paxil CR, Effexor XR |
||||||
|
. The presence in a particular patient of more than one psychiatric condition is an important consideration |
||||||
|
by physicians in the selection of drugs to treat social anxiety disorder. |
||||||
|
. For patients with multiple conditions, a selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor or a serotonin |
||||||
|
norepinephrine reuptake inhibitor with demonstrated efficacy in multiple indications is generally the |
||||||
|
preferred treatment option. Zoloft, Paxil, Paxil CR and Effexor XR are approved for additional psychiatric |
||||||
|
disorders, such as depression, in addition to social anxiety disorder, which may give them broader |
||||||
|
recognition by physicians and patients. |
||||||
|
. These products therefore may be more likely to be prescribed than Luvox CR which, if approved, would |
||||||
|
at most be indicated for the treatment of obsessive compulsive disorder and social anxiety disorder. |
||||||
|
Fibromyalgia |
||||||
|
Based on available market data, JAZZ estimates that more than 6.3 million total prescriptions were written |
||||||
|
to treat fibromyalgia syndrome symptoms in 2006, of which 32% were for antidepressants, 25% were for |
||||||
|
opioids and 30% were for muscle relaxants |
||||||
|
. There are currently no products approved by the FDA for the treatment of fibromyalgia syndrome. In |
||||||
|
clinical practice, a variety of drugs are often prescribed to address individual symptoms of fibromyalgia |
||||||
|
syndrome, including antidepressants, pain medications, muscle relaxants, hypnotics and anticonvulsants. |
||||||
|
. In addition to JZP-6 (from JAZZ), there are currently four programs that have completed or are in Phase |
||||||
|
III clinical development for the treatment of fibromyalgia syndrome. These include Lyrica (pregabalin), an |
||||||
|
anticonvulsant being developed by Pfizer, which has previously been approved by the FDA for the |
||||||
|
treatment of partial seizures, post herpetic neuralgia and diabetic peripheral neuropathy. |
||||||
|
. In December 2006, Pfizer submitted a supplemental NDA seeking FDA approval of Lyrica for the |
||||||
|
treatment of fibromyalgia syndrome, or certain symptoms associated with fibromyalgia syndrome. |
||||||
|
Epilepsy |
||||||
|
Seizures in epileptic patients are typically controlled by treatment with one or more antiepileptic drugs. |
||||||
|
. In 2006, there were 6.2 million prescriptions written for Lamictal. |
||||||
|
. While up to 70% of epilepsy patients respond to therapy and become seizure-free with chronic treatment |
||||||
|
with antiepileptic drugs, the remaining patients fail treatment either because the drugs do not stop their |
||||||
|
seizures or because they cannot tolerate the side effects. |
||||||
|
Bipolar Disorder |
||||||
|
Bipolar disorder is typically managed with drugs from a variety of different drug classes. |
||||||
|
. While treatment duration varies for each patient, treatment of an acute phase of the disease generally lasts |
||||||
|
three weeks, followed by a continuation phase of two months, and a maintenance phase of up to 18 |
||||||
|
months. |
||||||
|
. Generally, the treatment is chosen based on the mood episode a patient is experiencing at a particular time. |
||||||
|
. Treatment for patients in the acute mania phase includes a mood stabilizer, such as lithium or an |
||||||
|
antiepileptic drug, in addition to an atypical antipsychotic. Patients in the acute depression phase are |
||||||
|
initially treated with Lamictal, Symbyax (olanzapine and fluoxetine HCl capsules), a combination |
||||||
|
antidepressant and antipsychotic, or Seroquel (quetiapine), an antipsychotic. For long-term maintenance, |
||||||
|
the same medications that were effective for the acute episodes are typically continued at the same or lower |
||||||
|
doses. |
||||||
|
. Many of the drugs currently used in the treatment of bipolar disorder have adverse drug interactions |
||||||
|
affecting each drug's efficacy and safety as well as adverse tolerability and other negative side effects such |
||||||
|
as sedation, weight gain, involuntary movements, tremors, stiffness orthostatic hypotension and potentially |
||||||
|
life-threatening immune system reactions. |
||||||
|
. These side effects discourage compliance and may pose serious health risks. Antidepressants are also |
||||||
|
often prescribed to treat bipolar depression, even though they are not indicated for such treatment and there |
||||||
|
is a risk that such antidepressants can induce a bipolar patient to switch from depression to mania. |
||||||
|
Use of $158mm in IPO proceeds |
||||||
|
o $90.0 million to fund the planned U.S. launch and commercialization of Luvox CR, including $41.0 |
||||||
|
million for development and commercial milestone payments to Solvay in connection with the acquisition |
||||||
|
of U.S. rights to Luvox CR, $39.0 million for activities related to preparation for marketing, promotion and |
||||||
|
expansion of a specialty sales force and $10.0 million for production of initial commercial quantities of |
||||||
|
Luvox CR; |
||||||
|
o $25.0 million to fund Phase III pivotal clinical trials of JZP-6 through the completion of the first Phase III |
||||||
|
clinical trial, after which, if the trial is successful, would need an estimated $50.0 million to complete |
||||||
|
development and commercial launch of JZP-6; |
||||||
|
o remainder to fund continued development of and feasibility activities for the portfolio of clinical and |
||||||
|
early-stage product candidates during the next 12 to 18 months, as well as working capital, capital |
||||||
|
expenditures and other general corporate purposes |
||||||
|
=================== |
||||||
|
LDK Solar |
LDK, B-, 8 |
|||||
|
multicrystalline wafers for solar cells |
Post-IPO shrs: 104m |
|||||
|
Xinyu City, Jiangxi Province, China |
2006 |
March, 07* |
IPO Mkt |
|||
|
Rev ($mm) |
$105 |
$73 |
Cap (mm) |
|||
|
Gross profit % |
40% |
39% |
$2,704 |
|||
|
Operating income % |
35% |
35% |
@$26 |
|||
|
Profit (loss) |
$30 |
$24.5 |
||||
|
Profit (loss) % |
29% |
33% |
||||
|
Export sales |
*quarter ending March 31 |
|||||
|
% sales to China-based cos |
75% |
50% |
||||
|
% export sales |
25% |
50% |
||||
|
Quarterly progression |
June, 06 |
Sept 06 |
Dec 06 |
March 31, 07 |
||
|
Rev ($mm) |
$12 |
$32 |
$62 |
$73 |
||
|
Profit (loss) |
$1 |
$5.0 |
$24 |
$24.5 |
||
|
Profit (loss) % |
11% |
16% |
39% |
33% |
||
|
VALUATION RATIOS |
IPO Mrkt |
Price / |
Price / |
Price / |
Price / |
% offered |
|
Cap (mm) |
Sales |
Earnings |
BookValue |
TangibleBV |
in IPO |
|
|
LDK Solar (LDK) |
$2,704 |
9.3 |
28 |
5.4 |
5.4 |
17% |
|
SCORECARD |
Mgt |
Market |
Market Do- |
Proprie- |
Total |
|
|
1-5, 5 is high |
Growth |
mination |
tary |
rating |
||
|
20 is perfect |
2 |
3 |
2 |
1 |
8 |
|
|
Each American Depositary Shares represents one ordinary share |
||||||
|
Business |
||||||
|
.Produces and sell multicrystalline solar wafers to manufacturers of photovoltaic products, including solar |
||||||
|
cells and solar modules, both in and outside China. |
||||||
|
. Solar power has emerged as one of the primary distributed generation technologies. |
||||||
|
March quarter problems |
||||||
|
. Has experienced delays in fulfilling purchase orders from some customers due to shortages in supplies of |
||||||
|
polysilicon feedstock and constraints in production capacity. |
||||||
|
. For example, during the first quarter of 2007, production was interrupted because LDK temporarily shut |
||||||
|
down DSS furnaces to install safety kits provided by GT Solar, manufacturer of our DSS furnaces. |
||||||
|
. These safety kits are thermal blankets which are placed at the bottom of DSS furnaces to prevent molten |
||||||
|
silicon from breaching the furnaces. |
||||||
|
Market growth |
||||||
|
> 51.5% compound growth: global crystalline solar cells |
||||||
|
. According to Photon International global crystalline solar cell or module production will increase from 1.5 |
||||||
|
gigawatts in 2005 to 12.0 gigawatts in 2010 |
||||||
|
. Rrepresenting a compound annual growth rate of 51.6% |
||||||
|
. According to Solarbuzz, monocrystalline wafers in 2006 represented approximately 42% of the global |
||||||
|
photovoltaic cell production while multicrystalline wafers constituted approximately 49%. |
||||||
|
> 19% compound growth: global solar photovoltaic market installations |
||||||
|
. According to SolarBuzz, a research and consulting firm, global solar photovoltaic market installations |
||||||
|
reached a record high of 1,744MW in 2006 and are expected to grow to 4,177MW by 2011 |
||||||
|
. Representing a compound annual growth rate of 19.1%. |
||||||
|
. Germany, Japan and the United States presently comprise the majority of world market sales for solar |
||||||
|
power systems. Government policies in these countries, in the form of both regulation and incentives, have |
||||||
|
accelerated the adoption of solar technologies by businesses and consumers. |
||||||
|
LDK's short operating history |
||||||
|
. Incorporated on May 1, 2006 to acquire the operating subsidiary, Jiangxi LDK Solar, which was |
||||||
|
incorporated on July 5, 2005. |
||||||
|
. Commenced construction of the first manufacturing plant in Xinyu Hi-Tech Industrial Park of Jiangxi |
||||||
|
province in China in 2005. |
||||||
|
. Completed the installation of the first set of production equipment for trial runs in February 2006 and |
||||||
|
made the first commercial shipment of solar wafers in April 2006. |
||||||
|
Agreement to supply Suntech (NYSE: STP) |
||||||
|
STP has a market cap of $5.24bb and reported Dec 2006 quarter revenues of $218mm |
||||||
|
. LDK has entered into a cooperation agreement with Suntech, pursuant to which LDK has committed to |
||||||
|
supply to Suntech 100 MW of wafers in 2007 |
||||||
|
. And, in each year from 2008 to 2015, wafers equal to 40% to 60% of annual production. |
||||||
|
TAX RATES |
||||||
|
. Jiangxi LDK Solar is entitled to a two-year exemption from the national enterprise income tax for 2006 |
||||||
|
and 2007 and will be subject to a reduced national enterprise income tax rate of 15% from 2008 through |
||||||
|
2010 |
||||||
|
. Likewise, Jiangxi LDK Solar is entitled to a five-year exemption from the local enterprise income tax |
||||||
|
beginning in 2006 and will be subject to a reduced local enterprise income tax rate of 1.5% from 2011 |
||||||
|
through 2015. |
||||||
|
RISKS: |
||||||
|
. Accounting issues: LDK's independent registered public accounting firm, in the course of auditing |
||||||
|
consolidated financial statements for the year ended December 31, 2006, noted a significant deficiency and |
||||||
|
other weaknesses in LDK's internal control over financial reporting; |
||||||
|
. Fluctuations in exchange rates |
||||||
|
Capacity expansion |
||||||
|
. As of March 31, 2007, had an annual multicrystalline wafer production capacity of 215 MW. |
||||||
|
. According to the current expansion plan, intends to continue to increase annual production capacity, |
||||||
|
which is expected to reach 400 MW by the end of 2007 and 800 MW by the end of 2008. |
||||||
|
. Currently does not have contractual commitments for all the equipment necessary for the expansion of |
||||||
|
production capacity beyond 600 MW to approximately 800 MW by the end of 2008. |
||||||
|
Customers |
||||||
|
. Principal customers have included CSI, Chinalight, Solarfun, Solartech Energy, Solland Solar, Suntech, in |
||||||
|
terms of net sales during the 12-month period ended March 31, 2007. |
||||||
|
. Has sold wafers to Chinalight primarily pursuant to short-term sales contracts and monthly and quarterly |
||||||
|
purchase orders. |
||||||
|
. Historically, the majority of sales have been in China. |
||||||
|
. LDK is enhancing and broadening its revenue and customer base to target other leading global |
||||||
|
photovoltaic cell and module manufacturers. |
||||||
|
Customer concentration |
||||||
|
. LDK currentlys sell multicrystalline wafers to over 30 customers. |
||||||
|
. Mostly solar cell and module manufacturers, including CSI, Chinalight, Solarfun, Solartech Energy, |
||||||
|
Solland Solar and Suntech. |
||||||
|
. For the year ended December 31, 2006 and March 31, 2007, LDK's five largest customers collectively |
||||||
|
accounted for 70.2% and 56.8%, respectively, of net sales. |
||||||
|
. Suntech and Solarfun contributed 39.7% and 13.9% (total 54%), respectively, of net sales for the year |
||||||
|
ended December 31, 2006. |
||||||
|
. During the three months ended March 31, 2007, Suntech and Solarfun contributed 18.3% and 9.7% (28 |
||||||
|
total), respectively, of LDK's net sales. |
||||||
|
. Chinalight contributed 13.6% of net sales for the three-month period. LDK does, however, have long |
||||||
|
term contracts with Chinalight. |
||||||
|
Government subsidies drive the solar power market |
||||||
|
. At present, the cost of solar power substantially exceeds the cost of conventional power provided by |
||||||
|
electric utility grids in many locations around the world. |
||||||
|
. Growth of the solar power market, particularly for on-grid applications, depends largely on the availability |
||||||
|
and size of government subsidies and economic incentives. |
||||||
|
. Renewable energy policies are in place in the European Union, most notably Germany and Spain, certain |
||||||
|
countries in Asia, including China, Japan and South Korea, and many of the states in Australia and the |
||||||
|
United States |
||||||
|
Polysilicon feedstock |
||||||
|
. Solar-grade polysilicon feedstock is an essential raw material in manufacturing multicrystalline solar |
||||||
|
wafers. LDK's operations depend on its ability to procure sufficient quantities of solar-grade polysilicon on |
||||||
|
a timely basis and on commercially reasonable terms. |
||||||
|
. Polysilicon is also an essential raw material for the semiconductor industry, which requires polysilicon of |
||||||
|
higher purity than that for the solar industry. |
||||||
|
. The significant growth of the solar wafer industry and the competing demand and buying power of the |
||||||
|
semiconductor industry have resulted in an industry-wide shortage in solar-grade polysilicon and a |
||||||
|
significant increase in solar-grade polysilicon price over the past few years. |
||||||
|
. . According to Solarbuzz, the average price of virgin polysilicon under long-term supply contracts |
||||||
|
increased from approximately $35 to $40 per kilogram delivered in 2005 to $50 to $55 per kilogram |
||||||
|
delivered in 2006, and is estimated to further increase to $60 to $65 per kilogram delivered in 2007. |
||||||
|
Limited number of virgin polysilicon producers |
||||||
|
. According to Solarbuzz, the largest five virgin polysilicon producers had a combined production capacity |
||||||
|
of 86% of the global production capacity of polysilicon in 2006. |
||||||
|
. These virgin polysilicon producers not only provide silicon feedstock to the solar industry but are also the |
||||||
|
sources of polysilicon feedstock for the semiconductor industry. |
||||||
|
Polysilicon, pre-payments & supply issues |
||||||
|
> Some suppliers haven't delivered |
||||||
|
As of December 31, 2006, prepayments to polysilicon suppliers amounted to $37.7 million. |
||||||
|
. Some of LDK's suppliers have failed to meet their delivery schedule in the past. |
||||||
|
> Polysilicon is in short supply |
||||||
|
. In order to secure supplies of polysilicon, LDK has entered into substantial long-term contractual |
||||||
|
commitments to purchase polysilicon from various suppliers. |
||||||
|
. . As of March 31, 2007, polysilicon purchase commitments amounted to $897 million. Polysilicon |
||||||
|
purchase commitments are generally on a "take or pay" basis, so that LDK is required to purchase the |
||||||
|
contracted supplies of polysilicon even if it is unable to use them. |
||||||
|
RISK: If LDK's wafer production and sales and polysilicon requirements do not grow as expected, these |
||||||
|
purchase commitments could have a material adverse effect on LDK's financial condition |
||||||
|
> Polysilicon supply sources & cost |
||||||
|
. Despite the current industry-wide shortage of polysilicon, LDK believes that its polysilicon feedstock |
||||||
|
inventory and commitments from suppliers are sufficient to satisfy over 90% of estimated requirements for |
||||||
|
2007 and 50% of estimated requirements for 2008. |
||||||
|
. Many of the polysilicon supply agreements are subject to fluctuating market prices or price negotiations |
||||||
|
with suppliers. The majority of LDK's polysilicon feedstock consists of polysilicon scraps and recyclable |
||||||
|
polysilicon. Sources a portion of polysilicon feedstock from the spot market from time to time depending |
||||||
|
on the price and requirements. |
||||||
|
SUPPLY RISK: some competitors, including Evergreen Solar (ESLR) have polysilicon supply contracts |
||||||
|
running out to 2014. LDK's current supply contracts seem to have a short window. |
||||||
|
Intellectual Property Rights |
||||||
|
. LDK has developed various production process related know-how and technologies in-house. |
||||||
|
. In addition, we have embarked on a number of research and development programs, including a |
||||||
|
collaboration with Shanghai Jiaotong University, with a view to developing techniques and processes that |
||||||
|
will improve conversion efficiency and product quality. |
||||||
|
. Currently does not have any patents or patent applications pending in China or elsewhere. Relies on |
||||||
|
nondisclosure agreements, trade secrets and technical know-how to protect intellectual property and |
||||||
|
proprietary rights. |
||||||
|
. Because substantially all of LDK's business is currently conducted in China, LDK has not taken any |
||||||
|
action outside China to protect intellectual property. |
||||||
|
Competition |
||||||
|
> Trends |
||||||
|
. The multicrystalline wafer manufacturing industry is competitive. According to Photon Consulting, the |
||||||
|
five largest wafer manufacturers accounted for 60% of global production in 2005. |
||||||
|
. LDK believes that the supply of polysilicon feedstock will significantly increase in the next few years, |
||||||
|
thus easing supply constraints to solar wafer manufacturers. |
||||||
|
. Although LDK expects demand for solar wafers to grow in response to higher demand for photovoltaic |
||||||
|
cells and modules, the international solar wafer market will become more competitive. |
||||||
|
. Other solar wafer manufacturers are also engaged in aggressive expansion programs. In addition, new |
||||||
|
entrants are reported to be making significant investments in the industry. |
||||||
|
> Named competitors |
||||||
|
. International competitors include BP Solar, Deutsche Solar, Ersol, Evergreen Solar, Green Energy, JFE, |
||||||
|
Kyocera, M.SETEK, PV Crystalox, REC and MEMC, which has recently announced its plans to |
||||||
|
manufacture solar wafers. |
||||||
|
. China-based named competitors include Jinggong P-D, Shunda and Tianwei Yingli. |
||||||
|
> LDK is not competing in the manufacture of photovoltaic cells or modules |
||||||
|
. LDK currently have no plans to expand into the production of photovoltaic cell or modules and |
||||||
|
. Has entered into non-competition agreements with some customers, pursuant to which LDK has agreed |
||||||
|
not to engage in the production of solar cell or modules based on current wafer technology for the next 10 |
||||||
|
years |
||||||
|
> Within the crystalline wafer industry |
||||||
|
LDK alsos compete with monocrystalline wafer manufacturers. |
||||||
|
. According to Solarbuzz, monocrystalline wafers in 2006 represented approximately 42% of the global |
||||||
|
photovoltaic cell production while multicrystalline wafers constituted approximately 49%. |
||||||
|
. Certain monocrystalline wafer manufacturers have begun or intend to manufacture multicrystalline |
||||||
|
wafers, and they currently supply multicrystalline wafers to multicrystalline photovoltaic cell |
||||||
|
manufacturers, including some of LDK's customers. |
||||||
|
. Manufacturers of monocrystalline wafers that compete with LDK includes Ersol Solar Energy AG, or |
||||||
|
Ersol, M.SETEK, ReneSola Ltd., or Renesola, Sumitomo Mitsubishi Silicon Corporation, or SUMCO, and |
||||||
|
Sino-American Silicon Products Inc., or Sino-American Silicon, and Trina Solar Limited. |
||||||
|
Use of $323mm in IPO proceeds from sale of 13.4mm ADSs |
||||||
|
(shareholders intend to sell 4mm ADSs) |
||||||
|
o $160 million to expand production capacity (including the purchase of manufacturing equipment and the |
||||||
|
construction of additional production and ancillary facilities); |
||||||
|
o $120 million to purchase or prepay for polysilicon feedstock; and |
||||||
|
o $20 million to invest in research and development efforts. |
||||||
|
Balance for other general corporate purposes, including potential acquisitions. |
||||||
|
=================== |
||||||
|
Financial Performance & Scoring -- © 2007 Gaskins IPO Desktop/IPOdesktop |
||||||
|
Pre-IPO analysis, grading & scoring -- updated May 19 |
||||||
|
. Business Model Rating Criteria |
||||||
|
A = high growth market, potential leader; B = more competitive market; C= 'public venture capital' |
||||||
|
. Calculations |
||||||
|
. IPO Price to annualized Sales Ratio -- (Price / Sales) |
||||||
|
Numerator |
Denominator |
|||||
|
IPO market capitalization… |
Annualized Sales (based on recent results) |
|||||
|
(post-IPO # of shares times mid-point of IPO price range) |
||||||
|
. IPO Price to annualized Earnings (loss) -- (Price / Earnings) |
||||||
|
Numerator |
Denominator |
|||||
|
IPO market cap |
Annualized Earnings (loss) from the last quarter |
|||||
|
=================== |
||||||
|
SEARCH BY COMPANY |
In your browser use 'Edit/Find' to search for companies |
|||||
|
or ticker for analysis |
scheduled below |
|||||
|
=================== |
||||||
|
May 21wk week IPO schedule |
||||||
|
VALUATION RATIOS |
IPO Mrkt |
Price / |
Price / |
Price / |
Price / |
% offered |
|
Cap (mm) |
Sales |
Earnings |
BookValue |
TangibleBV |
in IPO |
|
|
B&G Foods (BGS) |
$455 |
1.1 |
28 |
2.9 |
-1.0 |
40% |
|
shelf-stable food products: C+, 7 |
Post-IPO shrs: 35m |
|||||
|
Clean Energy FuelsCLNE |
$668 |
6.0 |
-185 |
2.6 |
2.8 |
45% |
|
natural gas & alternative fuel for vehicles: C+, 7 |
Post-IPO shrs: 44.5m |
|||||
|
Greenlight Capital GLRE |
$530 |
20.4 |
-10 |
1.0 |
1.2 |
16% |
|
property & casualty reinsurance: C+, 7 |
Post-IPO shrs: 31m |
|||||
|
Helicos BioSci (HLCS) |
$287 |
n/a |
-9 |
3.2 |
3.2 |
26% |
|
genetic analysis technologies: C, 6 |
Post-IPO shrs: 20.5m |
|||||
|
RSC Holdings |
$2,476 |
1.5 |
25 |
-16.7 |
-2.3 |
20% |
|
equipment rentals: C+, 7 |
Post-IPO shrs: 103m |
|||||
|
Sirtris Pharma (SIRT) |
$268 |
n/a |
-12 |
2.3 |
2.3 |
19% |
|
biopharma: C, 6 |
Post-IPO shrs: 8.6m |
|||||
|
STARLIMS |
$125 |
5.8 |
28 |
3.2 |
3.3 |
24% |
|
lab info mgt systems" C+, 7 |
Post-IPO shrs: 8.6m |
|||||
|
=================== |
||||||
|
May 21wk financials, analysis, grading, scoring |
||||||
|
B&G Foods |
BGS, C+, 7 |
|||||
|
shelf-stable food products |
Post-IPO shrs: 35m |
|||||
|
Parsippany, NJ |
2005 |
2006* |
March, 07* |
IPO Mkt |
||
|
Rev ($mm) |
$380 |
$473 |
$104 |
Cap (mm) |
||
|
Gross profit % |
27% |
24% |
32% |
$455 |
||
|
Operating income % |
14% |
19% |
18% |
@$13 |
||
|
Interest % |
11% |
12% |
12% |
|||
|
Profit (loss) |
$8 |
$20 |
$4.1 |
|||
|
Profit (loss) % |
2.1% |
4.3% |
3.9% |
|||
|
*pro forma for recent acquisitions |
||||||
|
VALUATION RATIOS |
IPO Mrkt |
Price / |
Price / |
Price / |
Price / |
% offered |
|
Cap (mm) |
Sales |
Earnings |
BookValue |
TangibleBV |
in IPO |
|
|
B&G Foods (BGS) |
$455 |
1.1 |
28 |
2.9 |
-1.0 |
40% |
|
SCORECARD |
Mgt |
Market |
Market Do- |
Proprie- |
Total |
|
|
1-5, 5 is high |
Growth |
mination |
tary |
rating |
||
|
20 is perfect |
2 |
2 |
2 |
1 |
7 |
|
|
Dividend policy |
||||||
|
. Quarterly, $0.212 per share |
||||||
|
. 6.5% annual rate |
||||||
|
Business |
||||||
|
. Manufactures, sells and distributes a diverse portfolio of high quality, shelf-stable food products. . Many |
||||||
|
of BGS's branded food products hold either the number one or number two market position in |
||||||
|
their relevant markets. |
||||||
|
. Business is characterized by a stable and growing revenue base from our existing product |
||||||
|
portfolio and is augmented by acquisitions of highly attractive, shelf-stable brands. |
||||||
|
History |
||||||
|
B&G Foods, including subsidiaries and predecessors, has more than 100 years of experience in the |
||||||
|
marketplace. |
||||||
|
. Has developed and leveraged this infrastructure through our acquisition of 18 high quality food |
||||||
|
brands since 1996. |
||||||
|
. History includes a number of acquisitions of non-core brands from large, global packaged food |
||||||
|
companies, such as the B&M, Underwood, Ac'cent, Joan of Arc, Sa-són Ac'cent and Las Palmas brands |
||||||
|
from Pillsbury in 1999, the Ortega brand from Nestlé in 2003, the Grandma's Molasses brand from |
||||||
|
Cadbury Schweppes in January 2006 and the most recent acquisition of the Cream of Wheat and Cream of |
||||||
|
Rice brands from Kraft in February 2007 |
||||||
|
Competition |
||||||
|
. Most significant competitors for pickles and peppers products are Vlasic® and Mt. Olive® branded |
||||||
|
products. |
||||||
|
. The J.M. Smucker Company is the main competitor for fruit spread products marketed under the Polaner |
||||||
|
label. |
||||||
|
. BGS's Maple Grove Farms of Vermont pure maple syrup competes directly with the SpringTree® brand |
||||||
|
in the pure maple syrup category. |
||||||
|
. BGS's Vermont Maid syrup products also have a number of competitors in the general pancake syrup |
||||||
|
market, including Aunt Jemima®, Mrs. Butterworth's® and Log Cabin®. |
||||||
|
. BGS's B&M and Joan of Arc products compete primarily with Bush's® brand products. Ortega products |
||||||
|
compete primarily with the Old El Paso® and Taco Bell® brands. Cream of Wheat products compete |
||||||
|
primarily with the Quaker® hot cereal brand. |
||||||
|
Use of $182mm in IPO Proceeds |
||||||
|
. Repayment of term loan borrowings $85.3mm |
||||||
|
. Repurchase of Class B common stock $82.4mm |
||||||
|
. Fees and expenses $13.0mm |
||||||
|
=================== |
||||||
|
Clean Energy Fuels |
CLNE, C+, 7 |
|||||
|
natural gas & alternative fuel for vehicles |
Post-IPO shrs: 44.5m |
|||||
|
Seal Beach, CA |
2004 |
2005 |
2006 |
March, 06* |
March, 07* |
IPO Mkt |
|
Rev ($mm) |
$58 |
$78 |
$92 |
$21 |
$28 |
Cap (mm) |
|
Derivatives (gain) loss |
($11) |
($44) |
$79 |
$0 |
$28 |
$668 |
|
Profit (loss) |
$2 |
$17 |
-$78 |
-$3 |
-$0.9 |
@$15 |
|
Profit (loss) % |
3.6% |
22.2% |
-84.7% |
-14.3% |
-3.2% |
|
|
VALUATION RATIOS |
IPO Mrkt |
Price / |
Price / |
Price / |
Price / |
% offered |
|
Cap (mm) |
Sales |
Earnings |
BookValue |
TangibleBV |
in IPO |
|
|
Clean Energy FuelsCLNE |
$668 |
6.0 |
-185 |
2.6 |
2.8 |
45% |
|
SCORECARD |
Mgt |
Market |
Market Do- |
Proprie- |
Total |
|
|
1-5, 5 is high |
Growth |
mination |
tary |
rating |
||
|
20 is perfect |
2 |
2 |
2 |
1 |
7 |
|
|
Business |
||||||
|
. The leading provider of natural gas as an alternative fuel for vehicle fleets in the United States and |
||||||
|
Canada, having supplied natural gas fuels to customers since 1997. |
||||||
|
. Owns, operates or supplies 172 CNG and LNG fueling stations. Operates 140 CNG fueling stations |
||||||
|
. Generates revenues principally by selling Compressed Natural Gas (CNG) and Liquefied Natural Gas |
||||||
|
(LNG) to vehicle fleet customers. |
||||||
|
. For the three months ended March 31, 2007, CNG represented 62% and LNG represented 38% of natural |
||||||
|
gas sales (on a gasoline gallon equivalent basis). |
||||||
|
History |
||||||
|
. In the late 1980s, one of the founders, Boone Pickens, became convinced that natural gas had a number of |
||||||
|
advantages over gasoline and diesel as a vehicle fuel. Over the next decade and a half, Mr. Pickens and |
||||||
|
Andrew Littlefair, CLNE's CEO, were pioneers in developing this market, targeting vehicle fleets because |
||||||
|
they consume large amounts of fuel, refuel at centralized locations and are subject to increasingly stringent |
||||||
|
requirements to reduce emissions. Natural gas vehicle fuels include compressed natural gas (CNG) and |
||||||
|
liquefied natural gas (LNG). |
||||||
|
. In 2001, Clean Energy Fuels Corp. was formed to acquire the combined businesses of Pickens Fuel Corp. |
||||||
|
and BCG eFuels, Inc., an operator of natural gas fueling stations in Canada. |
||||||
|
. In 2002, we acquired Blue Energy & Technologies, L.L.C., an owner and operator of natural gas fueling |
||||||
|
station assets previously owned by the Public Service Company of Colorado and the TXU Gas Company |
||||||
|
. Since that time, through additional acquisitions and investment in fueling stations, has continued to |
||||||
|
expand geographically in the United States and Canada. |
||||||
|
Growth trends |
||||||
|
> Recently began focusing on the seaports market. |
||||||
|
. Already is building a natural gas fueling station, and plans to build additional natural gas fueling stations |
||||||
|
that service the Ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach. |
||||||
|
> Also anticipates expanding sales of CNG and LNG in the other markets in which CLNE operates, |
||||||
|
including public transit, refuse hauling and airport markets. |
||||||
|
Competition |
||||||
|
> The biggest competition for CNG, LNG and other alternative fuels is gasoline and diesel, the production, |
||||||
|
distribution and sale of which are dominated by large integrated oil companies. |
||||||
|
> Within the United States, the largest competitors for CNG sales are: |
||||||
|
. Trillium USA / Pinnacle CNG, a privately held provider of CNG fuel infrastructure and fueling services, |
||||||
|
which CLNE believes focuses primarily on transit fleets in California, Arizona and New York; and |
||||||
|
. Hanover Compressor Company, a large publicly-traded international provider of natural gas compressors |
||||||
|
and related equipment, which CLNE believes focuses its CNG vehicle fuel business primarily on transit |
||||||
|
fleets in California, Maryland, Massachusetts and Washington D.C. |
||||||
|
. These companies are significant competitors in the market for transit fleets. |
||||||
|
> Within the U.S. LNG market, the largest competitor is Earth Biofuels, Inc., a public company that |
||||||
|
distributes LNG in the western United States. CLNE has identified no significant competitors in Canada for |
||||||
|
CNG or LNG sales. |
||||||
|
-- Owns, operates or supplies 172 CNG and LNG fueling stations |
||||||
|
. Operates 140 CNG fueling stations which CLNE estimates is four times the number of CNG fueling |
||||||
|
stations as the next largest competitor. |
||||||
|
. CLNE furthers estimates that in 2005 it supplied twice the amount of natural gas for vehicular use as the |
||||||
|
next largest competitor. |
||||||
|
. In addition, CLNE believes it is the only company in the United States or Canada that provides both CNG |
||||||
|
and LNG on a significant scale, and CLNE operates in more states and provinces than any of our other |
||||||
|
competitors. |
||||||
|
> Potential entrants to the market for natural gas vehicle fuels include the large integrated oil companies, |
||||||
|
other retail gasoline marketers and natural gas utility companies. |
||||||
|
. The integrated oil companies produce and sell crude oil and natural gas, and they refine crude oil into |
||||||
|
gasoline and diesel. |
||||||
|
. They and other retail gasoline marketers own and franchise retail stations that sell gasoline and diesel fuel. |
||||||
|
In international markets, including to a limited extent in Canada, integrated oil companies and other |
||||||
|
established fueling companies sell CNG at a number of their vehicle fueling stations that sell gasoline and |
||||||
|
diesel. |
||||||
|
. Natural gas utility companies own and operate the local pipeline infrastructure that supplies natural gas to |
||||||
|
retail, commercial and industrial customers. |
||||||
|
Use of $137mm in IPO proceeds from sale of 10mm shares |
||||||
|
(shareholder intend to sell 10mm shares) |
||||||
|
o $50 to 55 million to build an LNG liquefaction plant in California, |
||||||
|
o $30 to 35 million to build CNG and LNG fueling stations, |
||||||
|
o $15 to 20 million to finance the purchase of natural gas vehicles by our customers, and |
||||||
|
o balance for general corporate purposes, including making deposits to support derivative activities, |
||||||
|
geographic expansion (domestically and perhaps internationally) and to expand our sales and marketing |
||||||
|
activities. |
||||||
|
=================== |
||||||
|
Greenlight Capital Re |
GLRE, C+, 7 |
|||||
|
property & casualty reinsurance |
Post-IPO shrs: 31m |
|||||
|
Grand Cayman, Cayman Islands |
2005 |
2006 |
March, 07 |
IPO Mkt |
||
|
Rev ($mm) |
$29 |
$86 |
$7 |
Cap (mm) |
||
|
Profit (loss) |
$26 |
$57 |
-$13.0 |
$589 |
||
|
Profit (loss) % |
90.7% |
66.3% |
-200.0% |
@$19 |
||
|
VALUATION RATIOS |
IPO Mrkt |
Price / |
Price / |
Price / |
Price / |
% offered |
|
Cap (mm) |
Sales |
Earnings |
BookValue |
TangibleBV |
in IPO |
|
|
Greenlight Capital GLRE |
$589 |
22.7 |
-11 |
1.2 |
1.2 |
33% |
|
SCORECARD |
Mgt |
Market |
Market Do- |
Proprie- |
Total |
|
|
1-5, 5 is high |
Growth |
mination |
tary |
rating |
||
|
20 is perfect |
2 |
2 |
2 |
1 |
7 |
|
|
UPDATED BASED ON GLRE TRADING |
||||||
|
VALUATION RATIOS |
IPO Mrkt |
Price / |
Price / |
Price / |
Price / |
Price |
|
Cap (mm) |
Sales |
Earnings |
BookValue |
TangibleBV |
May 24 |
|
|
Greenlight Capital GLRE |
$713 |
27.4 |
-14 |
1.3 |
1.5 |
$23.00 |
|
Flagstone Re (FSR) |
$1,120 |
1.4 |
7.9 |
1.1 |
1.1 |
$13.11 |
|
Castlepoint Holdings Ltd. (CPHL) |
$602 |
2.8 |
19.3 |
1.5 |
1.7 |
$15.75 |
|
A play on hedge fund manager David Einhorn |
||||||
|
Business |
||||||
|
. Cayman Islands-based specialty property and casualty reinsurer with a reinsurance and investment |
||||||
|
strategy that we believe differentiates us from our competitors. |
||||||
|
Combined ratio |
||||||
|
GLRE's combined ratio, which is the sum of our composite ratio and our internal expense ratio, for the |
||||||
|
three-month period ended March 31, 2007 and the year ended December 31, 2006 was 94.1% and 109.6%, |
||||||
|
respectively. |
||||||
|
. A combined ratio of 109.6% signifies a loss of $0.096 per dollar of premiums earned. |
||||||
|
. The reported combined ratio of 109.6% is high due to general and administrative expenses incurred in |
||||||
|
connection with the start-up of reinsurance operations. |
||||||
|
. GLRE expect's its internal expense ratio to decrease significantly as the company continues to expand its |
||||||
|
underwriting activities. |
||||||
|
Investment performance |
||||||
|
. The returns on GLRE's investment portfolio for the years ended December 31, 2005 and 2006 and the |
||||||
|
three months ended March 31, 2007 were 14.2%, 24.4% and (4.2)%, respectively. |
||||||
|
. DME Advisors is controlled by David Einhorn, the Chairman of our Board of Directors and the president |
||||||
|
of Greenlight Capital, Inc. |
||||||
|
. DME Advisors has the contractual right to manage substantially all of investable assets until December |
||||||
|
31, 2009, and is required to follow GLRE's investment guidelines and to act in a manner that is fair and |
||||||
|
equitable in allocating investment opportunities to us. |
||||||
|
Ratings |
||||||
|
Currently has an A- (Excellent) financial strength rating with a stable outlook from A.M. Best, which is the |
||||||
|
fourth highest of 15 ratings. |
||||||
|
Competition |
||||||
|
. Expects to compete with major reinsurers, most of which are well established, have significant operating |
||||||
|
histories and strong financial strength ratings and have developed long-standing client relationships. |
||||||
|
. Competitors are ACE Limited, General Re Corporation, Hannover Re Group, Munich Reinsurance |
||||||
|
Company, PartnerRe Ltd., Swiss Reinsurance Company, Transatlantic Reinsurance Company and XL |
||||||
|
Capital Ltd., which are dominant companies in the industry |
||||||
|
Use of $160mm in IPO proceeds |
||||||
|
(will also receive $50 million of proceeds from the sale of Class B Ordinary Shares in the concurrent |
||||||
|
private placement at a price per share equal to the initial public offering price) |
||||||
|
Intends to contribute substantially all of the net proceeds of this offering and the concurrent private |
||||||
|
placement to Greenlight Reinsurance, Ltd. to increase the underwriting capacity of its reinsurance |
||||||
|
operations. |
||||||
|
=================== |
||||||
|
Helicos BioSciences |
HLCS, C, 6 |
|||||
|
genetic analysis technologies |
Post-IPO shrs: 20.5m |
|||||
|
Cambridge, MA |
2004 |
2005 |
2006 |
March, 07 |
IPO Mkt |
|
|
Profit (loss) |
-$7 |
-$11 |
-$20 |
-$8 |
Cap (mm) |
|
|
$287 |
||||||
|
@$14 |
||||||
|
VALUATION RATIOS |
IPO Mrkt |
Price / |
Price / |
Price / |
Price / |
% offered |
|
Cap (mm) |
Sales |
Earnings |
BookValue |
TangibleBV |
in IPO |
|
|
Helicos BioSci (HLCS) |
$287 |
n/a |
-9 |
3.2 |
3.2 |
26% |
|
SCORECARD |
Mgt |
Market |
Market Do- |
Proprie- |
Total |
|
|
1-5, 5 is high |
Growth |
mination |
tary |
rating |
||
|
20 is perfect |
2 |
2 |
0 |
2 |
6 |
|
|
Business |
||||||
|
. Genetic analysis technologies for the research, drug discovery and clinical diagnostics markets. . Plans to |
||||||
|
launch the first commercial product, the HeliScope system, in the fourth quarter of 2007. |
||||||
|
. This system is based on HLCS's proprietary True Single Molecule Sequencing, or tSMS, technology |
||||||
|
which enables rapid analysis of large quantities of genetic material by directly sequencing single molecules |
||||||
|
of DNA or single DNA copies of RNA. |
||||||
|
Competitive advantage |
||||||
|
. HLCS's approach differs from current methods of sequencing DNA because it analyzes individual |
||||||
|
molecules of DNA directly instead of analyzing a large number of copies of the molecule produced through |
||||||
|
complex sample preparation techniques. |
||||||
|
. By enabling direct sequencing of single DNA molecules, HLCS believes that its tSMS technology |
||||||
|
represents a fundamental breakthrough in genetic analysis. |
||||||
|
Intellectual Property |
||||||
|
Ten issued patents and 89 pending patent applications which, in either case, HLCS either owns directly or |
||||||
|
has are the exclusive or semi-exclusive licensee. |
||||||
|
Competition |
||||||
|
. A number of companies offer DNA sequencing equipment or consumables, including the Applied |
||||||
|
Biosystems division of Applera Corporation, Beckman Coulter, Inc., the Amersham Biosciences business |
||||||
|
of General Electric Company, and Roche Applied Science in partnership with 454 Life Sciences, which |
||||||
|
Roche recently agreed to acquire. |
||||||
|
. Furthermore, a number of other companies and academic groups are in the process of developing or |
||||||
|
commercializing novel techniques for DNA sequencing. These companies include, among others, |
||||||
|
Agencourt Personal Genomics (which has been acquired by Applied Biosystems), Genizon BioSciences, |
||||||
|
Genovoxx, Solexa, Inc. (which was recently acquired by Illumina, Inc.), Intelligent Bio-Systems, LI-COR |
||||||
|
Biosciences, Lucigen, Microchip Biotechnologies, Pacific Biosciences, Perlegen Sciences, Shimadzu |
||||||
|
Biotech, VisiGen Biotechnologies and ZS Genetics. A number of companies offer equipment and supplies |
||||||
|
for gene expression and/or genotyping including Affymetrix, Inc., Agilent Technologies, Applera |
||||||
|
Corporation, Bio-Rad Laboratories and Illumina, Inc. |
||||||
|
Use of $68mm in IPO proceeds |
||||||
|
. $20 million to finance ongoing research and development in connection with the HeliScope system and |
||||||
|
our tSMS technology; |
||||||
|
. $10 million to fund the recruitment of our specialized sales, marketing and service force and marketing |
||||||
|
initiatives in connection with the initial product launch of the HeliScope system; |
||||||
|
. $10 million to fund the start-up manufacturing expenses associated with the commercial version of our |
||||||
|
HeliScope system, including assembly, testing and performance validation of the HeliScope system, as well |
||||||
|
as recruiting manufacturing personnel, purchasing tooling and building inventory for the product launch |
||||||
|
. Remainder for additional working capital and other general corporate purposes |
||||||
|
=================== |
||||||
|
RSC Holdings (RRR) |
RRR, C+, 7 |
|||||
|
equipment rentals |
Post-IPO shrs: 103m |
|||||
|
Scottsdale, AZ |
2004 |
2005 |
2006* |
March, 06 |
March, 07* |
IPO Mkt |
|
Rev ($mm) |
$1,329 |
$1,461 |
$1,663 |
$385 |
$406 |
Cap (mm) |
|
Gross profit % |
28% |
33% |
36% |
33% |
35% |
$2,476 |
|
Operating income % |
17% |
22% |
26% |
24% |
24% |
@$15 |
|
Interest exp % |
3% |
4% |
14% |
14% |
||
|
Profit (loss) |
$111 |
$164 |
$123 |
$24.6 |
||
|
Profit (loss) % |
8.4% |
11.2% |
7.4% |
6.1% |
||
|
*proforma assuming IPO reduces debt |
||||||
|
VALUATION RATIOS |
IPO Mrkt |
Price / |
Price / |
Price / |
Price / |
% offered |
|
Cap (mm) |
Sales |
Earnings |
BookValue |
TangibleBV |
in IPO |
|
|
RSC Holdings |
$2,476 |
1.5 |
25 |
-16.7 |
-2.3 |
20% |
|
SCORECARD |
Mgt |
Market |
Market Do- |
Proprie- |
Total |
|
|
1-5, 5 is high |
Growth |
mination |
tary |
rating |
||
|
20 is perfect |
2 |
2 |
2 |
1 |
7 |
|
|
Compare & contrast |
||||||
|
VALUATION RATIOS |
IPO Mrkt |
Price / |
Price / |
Price / |
Price / |
Price |
|
Cap (mm) |
Sales |
Earnings |
BookValue |
TangibleBV |
May 21 |
|
|
United Rentals, Inc. (URI) |
$2,810 |
0.8 |
23 |
1.8 |
14.3 |
$34.76 |
|
RSC Holdings |
$2,476 |
1.5 |
25 |
-16.7 |
-2.3 |
20% |
|
UPDATED BASED ON INITIAL TRADING |
||||||
|
VALUATION RATIOS |
IPO Mrkt |
Price / |
Price / |
Price / |
Price / |
Price |
|
Cap (mm) |
Sales |
Earnings |
BookValue |
TangibleBV |
May 23 |
|
|
United Rentals, Inc. (URI) |
$2,810 |
0.8 |
23.4 |
1.8 |
14.3 |
$34.40 |
|
RSC Holdings |
$2,331 |
1.4 |
23.7 |
-15.8 |
-2.3 |
$22.60 |
|
Business |
||||||
|
. One of the largest equipment rental providers in North America. |
||||||
|
. Operates through a network of 459 rental locations across 10 regions in 39 U.S. states and four Canadian |
||||||
|
provinces. |
||||||
|
. RRR believes it is the largest or second largest equipment rental provider in the majority of the regions in |
||||||
|
which it operates. |
||||||
|
. Rents a broad selection of equipment ranging from large equipment such as backhoes, forklifts, air |
||||||
|
compressors, scissor lifts, booms and skid-steer loaders to smaller items such as pumps, generators, welders |
||||||
|
and electric hand tools. |
||||||
|
. Also sells used equipment, parts, merchandise and supplies for maintenance, repair and operations. |
||||||
|
Competition |
||||||
|
. Other national-scale industry participants are United Rentals, Inc., Hertz Equipment Rental Corporation |
||||||
|
and Sunbelt Rentals. |
||||||
|
. Certain key regional competitors are Neff Rental, Inc., Ahern Rentals, Inc. and Sunstate Equipment Co. |
||||||
|
. A number of individual Caterpillar dealers also participate in the equipment rental market in the United |
||||||
|
States and Canada. |
||||||
|
Employees |
||||||
|
As of March 31, 2007, had 5,214 employees |
||||||
|
Shareholders |
||||||
|
94% owned by institutions pre-IPO |
||||||
|
Use of $279mm in IPO proceeds from sale of 21mm shares |
||||||
|
(shareholders intend to sell 8.3mm shares) |
||||||
|
. (i) repay $253.7 million of the Senior Term Facility, |
||||||
|
. (ii) pay a $5.1 million prepayment penalty related to our $253.7 million repayment under the Senior Term |
||||||
|
Facility and |
||||||
|
. (iii) pay a termination fee of $20.0 million related to the termination of the monitoring agreement |
||||||
|
. (iv) remainder of the proceeds, if any, to be used for general corporate purposes |
||||||
|
=================== |
||||||
|
Sirtris Pharmaceuticals |
SIRT, C, 6 |
|||||
|
biopharma |
Post-IPO shrs: 27m |
|||||
|
Cambridge, MA |
2004 |
2005 |
2006 |
March, 07* |
IPO Mkt |
|
|
Profit (loss) |
-$2 |
-$10 |
-$17 |
-$6 |
Cap (mm) |
|
|
$268 |
||||||
|
@$10 |
||||||
|
VALUATION RATIOS |
IPO Mrkt |
Price / |
Price / |
Price / |
Price / |
% offered |
|
Cap (mm) |
Sales |
Earnings |
BookValue |
TangibleBV |
in IPO |
|
|
Sirtris Pharma (SIRT) |
$268 |
n/a |
-12 |
2.3 |
2.3 |
19% |
|
SCORECARD |
Mgt |
Market |
Market Do- |
Proprie- |
Total |
|
|
1-5, 5 is high |
Growth |
mination |
2 |
rating |
||
|
20 is perfect |
2 |
2 |
0 |
1 |
5 |
|
|
Business |
||||||
|
. Biopharmaceutical company focused on discovering and developing proprietary, orally available, small |
||||||
|
molecule drugs with the potential to treat diseases associated with aging, including metabolic diseases such |
||||||
|
as Type 2 Diabetes. |
||||||
|
. Goal is to successfully develop therapeutics for diseases of aging by modulating sirtuins, a recently |
||||||
|
discovered class of enzymes, and their related pathways. |
||||||
|
. Calorie Restriction. The link between diet and aging in mammals was established nearly 70 years ago |
||||||
|
when researchers at Cornell University discovered that restricting calorie intake in rats could significantly |
||||||
|
extend lifespan. |
||||||
|
Overview |
||||||
|
SIRT believes it is the leading company focused on discovering and developing drug candidates that target |
||||||
|
sirtuins, and, in particular, drug candidates that mimic certain beneficial effects of calorie restriction by |
||||||
|
activating SIRT. |
||||||
|
. However, neither SIRT nor any other company has received regulatory approval to market products that |
||||||
|
target sirtuins. |
||||||
|
. SIRT's scientific founder and members of its scientific advisory board include many of the leading |
||||||
|
researchers in the sirtuin field. |
||||||
|
. SIRT owns or exclusively licenses over 100 patent applications pertaining to sirtuins and their role in |
||||||
|
diseases of aging. |
||||||
|
. Members of the management have previously advanced more than 20 small molecule drugs into clinical |
||||||
|
trials and played key roles in developing several FDA-approved drugs. |
||||||
|
Clinical trials |
||||||
|
Started phase 1a and phase 1b trials |
||||||
|
Competition |
||||||
|
There are many pharmaceutical companies, biotechnology companies, public and private universities and |
||||||
|
research organizations actively engaged in the research and development of products that may be similar to |
||||||
|
SIRT's products. |
||||||
|
. A number of multinational pharmaceutical companies, including Abbott, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Bristol |
||||||
|
Myers Squibb, GlaxoSmithKline, Johnson & Johnson, Lilly, Merck, Novartis, Novo Nordisk, Pfizer, |
||||||
|
Roche, Sanofi-Aventis, Takeda and Wyeth, |
||||||
|
. As well as large and small biotechnology companies such as Amgen, Amylin, Genentech and MannKind |
||||||
|
. Are pursuing the development or marketing of pharmaceuticals that target diabetes or other diseases that |
||||||
|
SIRT is targeting |
||||||
|
Use of $45mm in IPO proceeds |
||||||
|
o to continue the clinical development into Phase 2 of SRT501 for diabetes, MELAS and, potentially, other |
||||||
|
indications (approximately $13.5 million); |
||||||
|
o to advance and expand preclinical studies and potentially initiate clinical development of additional |
||||||
|
product candidates targeting SIRT1 (approximately $14.4 million); |
||||||
|
o to expand research and preclinical development programs targeting other sirtuins and related pathways |
||||||
|
(approximately $9.0 million); |
||||||
|
o to repay existing debt facilities pursuant to their existing terms, including interest (approximately $6.9 |
||||||
|
million); and |
||||||
|
oto apply the remaining funds for general corporate purposes, |
||||||
|
=================== |
||||||
|
STARLIMS (LIMS) |
CAP, C+, 7 |
|||||
|
lab info mgt systems |
Post-IPO shrs: 8.6m |
|||||
|
Tel Aviv, Israel |
2004 |
2005 |
2006 |
March, 06* |
March, 07* |
IPO Mkt |
|
Rev ($mm) |
$10 |
$16 |
$20 |
$3 |
$5 |
Cap (mm) |
|
Gross profit % |
79% |
79% |
72% |
70% |
67% |
$125 |
|
Profit (loss) |
$2 |
$4 |
$4 |
$0.2 |
$1.1 |
@$14.5 |
|
Profit (loss) % |
21.9% |
22.2% |
19.2% |
5.5% |
20.6% |
|
|
*March quarter |
||||||
|
VALUATION RATIOS |
IPO Mrkt |
Price / |
Price / |
Price / |
Price / |
% offered |
|
Cap (mm) |
Sales |
Earnings |
BookValue |
TangibleBV |
in IPO |
|
|
STARLIMS |
$125 |
5.8 |
28 |
3.2 |
3.3 |
24% |
|
SCORECARD |
Mgt |
Market |
Market Do- |
Proprie- |
Total |
|
|
1-5, 5 is high |
Growth |
mination |
tary |
rating |
||
|
20 is perfect |
2 |
2 |
2 |
1 |
7 |
|
|
Traded on the Tel Aviv stock exchange |
||||||
|
. LIMS's ordinary shares have traded on the Tel Aviv tock Exchange) (TASE) since November 1993. No |
||||||
|
market currently exists for the ordinary shares in the United States. |
||||||
|
. On May 3, 2007, the last reported closing price of LIMS's ordinary shares on the TASE was NIS $13.70, |
||||||
|
per share. |
||||||
|
Business |
||||||
|
. A leading provider of laboratory information management systems, or LIMS, and have over 20 years |
||||||
|
experience in the LIMS market. |
||||||
|
. Develops, markets and sells configurable off-the-shelf LIMS software solutions trade-named STARLIMS®. |
||||||
|
. STARLIMS manages the collection, processing, storage, retrieval and analysis of information generated |
||||||
|
in laboratories. Our software improves the reliability of sampling processes, supports compliance with |
||||||
|
domestic and international regulations and industry standards, and provides comprehensive reporting, |
||||||
|
monitoring and analysis capabilities. |
||||||
|
. One of the first LIMS vendors to offer a true web-based, configurable off-the-shelf, LIMS solution, which |
||||||
|
enables customers to manage their globally distributed laboratories more efficiently and effectively. |
||||||
|
STARLIMS solution |
||||||
|
. Used by more than 500 laboratories in over 40 countries around the world |
||||||
|
. Strongest presence is in North America. |
||||||
|
. The adaptable nature of the software allows LIMS to offer solutions to customers in a wide range of |
||||||
|
industries and in multiple disciplines, primarily quality assurance and control, testing and monitoring, and |
||||||
|
research and development. |
||||||
|
. Primary users of STARLIMS are government, manufacturing and life sciences organizations. |
||||||
|
STARLIMS Verion 1.0 |
||||||
|
. Release in March 2006 and unlike many traditional LIMS that were augmented by web-enabled |
||||||
|
capabilities, STARLIMS Version 10 was developed from inception as a true web-based product. |
||||||
|
. Requires no client-side installation or maintenance and enables LIMS to offer a solution that facilitates |
||||||
|
global deployment and centralized management. |
||||||
|
. LIMS was among the first in the LIMS industry to offer such capabilities and since its release, we have |
||||||
|
experienced increased interest in STARLIMS Version 10, primarily from global organizations with |
||||||
|
multiple, widely distributed laboratories. |
||||||
|
Scientific document management system |
||||||
|
. In July 2006, entered into an agreement with EMC Corporation, or EMC, a leading provider of enterprise |
||||||
|
content management, under which LIMS has embedded EMC's Documentum software into STARLIMS |
||||||
|
. This allows users to manage structured and unstructured data within a single repository. |
||||||
|
. Intends to continue this initiative and develop a LIMS solution that provides the functionalities of an |
||||||
|
electronic laboratory notebook, or ELN, and a scientific document management system, or SDMS. |
||||||
|
. Expects to release the first LIMS solution providing SDMS functionalities during the fourth quarter of |
||||||
|
2007 and to release the first LIMS solution providing ELN functionalities during 2008. |
||||||
|
Competition |
||||||
|
The LIMS market is highly competitive and gradually consolidating and is not dominated by any one LIMS |
||||||
|
provider. According, to the Frost & Sullivan report, the top five LIMS suppliers accounted for 53% of the |
||||||
|
global LIMS market in 2006 and the report ranks LIMS third among such suppliers based on market share. |
||||||
|
. Principal competitors are the LIMS divisions of multi-national laboratory equipment companies, such as |
||||||
|
Thermo Fisher Scientific Inc. and Applied Biosystems, as well as independent LIMS companies. |
||||||
|
Use of $26mm in IPO proceeds |
||||||
|
General corporate purposes, including working capital and capital expenditures |
||||||
|
=================== |
||||||
|
=================== |
||||||
|
Financial Performance & Scoring -- © 2007 Gaskins IPO Desktop/IPOdesktop |
||||||
|
Pre-IPO analysis, grading & scoring -- updated May 12 |
||||||
|
. Business Model Rating Criteria |
||||||
|
A = high growth market, potential leader; B = more competitive market; C= 'public venture capital' |
||||||
|
. Calculations |
||||||
|
. IPO Price to annualized Sales Ratio -- (Price / Sales) |
||||||
|
Numerator |
Denominator |
|||||
|
IPO market capitalization… |
Annualized Sales (based on recent results) |
|||||
|
(post-IPO # of shares times mid-point of IPO price range) |
||||||
|
. IPO Price to annualized Earnings (loss) -- (Price / Earnings) |
||||||
|
Numerator |
Denominator |
|||||
|
IPO market cap |
Annualized Earnings (loss) from the last quarter |
|||||
|
=================== |
||||||
|
SEARCH BY COMPANY |
In your browser use 'Edit/Find' to search for companies |
|||||
|
or ticker for analysis |
scheduled below |
|||||
|
=================== |
||||||
|
May 14wk week IPO schedule |
||||||
|
VALUATION RATIOS |
IPO Mrkt |
Price / |
Price / |
Price / |
Price / |
% offered |
|
Cap (mm) |
Sales |
Earnings |
BookValue |
TangibleBV |
in IPO |
|
|
CAI International (CAP) |
$257 |
4.5 |
18 |
2.2 |
4.5 |
34% |
|
container freight leasing/mgt: C+, 7 |
Post-IPO shrs: 17m |
|||||
|
China Sunergy (CSUN) |
$345 |
2.3 |
29 |
2.3 |
2.7 |
22% |
|
solar cell products, China: C+, 7 |
Post-IPO shrs: 38m |
|||||
|
Continental Res (CLR) |
$2,856 |
5.9 |
11 |
6.0 |
6.0 |
18% |
|
oil/gas production & exploration: C+, 7 |
Post-IPO shrs: 37m |
|||||
|
EnerNOC (ENOC) |
$383 |
9.6 |
-25 |
4.6 |
5.0 |
22% |
|
manages & reduces electricity consump: C+< 7 |
Post-IPO shrs: 17.4m |
|||||
|
Eurand NV (EURX) |
$785 |
7.2 |
-119 |
6.1 |
6.1 |
16% |
|
specialty pharma: C 7 |
Post-IPO shrs: 44m |
|||||
|
Insulet Corp (PODD) |
$369 |
99.7 |
-10 |
3.4 |
3.4 |
27% |
|
insulin infusion system for diabetics: C, 7 |
Post-IPO shrs: 34.5m |
|||||
|
Skilled Health (SKH) |
$561 |
0.9 |
22 |
1.6 |
-5.6 |
45% |
|
long-term healthcare services: B-, 7 |
Post-IPO shrs: 37m |
|||||
|
TechTarget (TTGT) |
$507 |
6.9 |
423 |
3.4 |
4.8 |
20% |
|
IT buyer/seller websites: C+ ,7 |
Post-IPO shrs: 39m |
|||||
|
TriMas (TRS) |
$382 |
0.3 |
11 |
1.1 |
-0.9 |
66% |
|
global mfg conglomerate" C+, 7 |
Post-IPO shrs: 32m |
|||||
|
Total new market cap |
$6,443 |
|||||
|
May 14wk financials, analysis, grading, scoring |
||||||
|
CAI International |
CAP, C+, 7 |
|||||
|
container freight leasing/mgt |
Post-IPO shrs: 17m |
|||||
|
San Francisco, CA |
2004 |
2005 |
2006 |
March, 06* |
March, 07* |
IPO Mkt |
|
Rev ($mm) |
$67 |
$62 |
$61 |
$13 |
$14 |
Cap (mm) |
|
Marketing, G&A Exp % |
18% |
20% |
20% |
26% |
23% |
$257 |
|
Profit (loss) |
$9 |
$10 |
$16 |
$2 |
$3.6 |
@$15 |
|
Profit (loss) % |
13.8% |
16.2% |
25.6% |
17.1% |
25.2% |
|
|
Adjusted EBITDA % |
57.9% |
63.3% |
73.9% |
65.1% |
77.6% |
|
|
*March quarter |
||||||
|
VALUATION RATIOS |
IPO Mrkt |
Price / |
Price / |
Price / |
Price / |
% offered |
|
Cap (mm) |
Sales |
Earnings |
BookValue |
TangibleBV |
in IPO |
|
|
CAI International (CAP) |
$257 |
4.5 |
18 |
2.2 |
4.5 |
34% |
|
SCORECARD |
Mgt |
Market |
Market Do- |
Proprie- |
Total |
|
|
1-5, 5 is high |
Growth |
mination |
tary |
rating |
||
|
20 is perfect |
2 |
2 |
2 |
1 |
7 |
|
|
Business |
||||||
|
. Leading container leasing and management company |
||||||
|
. CAP believes that its share of the worldwide leased container fleet, as measured in TEUs, increased from |
||||||
|
4.3% as of mid-1998 to 6.3% as of mid-2006, representing the seventh largest fleet of leased containers in |
||||||
|
the world. |
||||||
|
Two segments |
||||||
|
> Container leasing |
||||||
|
. Purchases new containers, leases them to container shipping lines and either retain them as part of CAP's |
||||||
|
owned fleet or sells them to container investors for whom CAP then provides management services. |
||||||
|
> Container management. |
||||||
|
. In operating the fleet, CAP leases, re-leases and disposes of containers and contracts for the repair, |
||||||
|
4repositioning and storage of containers. |
||||||
|
. As of March 31, 2007, the fleet comprised 684,000 TEUs, 74.7% of which represented CAP's managed |
||||||
|
fleet and 25.3% of which represented CAP's owned fleet. |
||||||
|
> For the three months ended March 31, 2006 and 2007, CAPs container leasing segment generated income |
||||||
|
before income taxes of $1.4 million and $2.0 million, respectively, and CAP's container management |
||||||
|
segment generated income before income taxes of $2.0 million and $3.8 million, respectively. |
||||||
|
Growth plan |
||||||
|
. Plans to increase both the number of owned containers as well as the number of managed containers |
||||||
|
. As a result of IPO offering and the resulting incremental borrowing capacity under the senior secured |
||||||
|
credit facility, CAP expects to purchase $150.0 million to $200.0 million of new containers in 2007. |
||||||
|
. During the three months ended March 31, 2007, paid $37.2 million to purchase new containers |
||||||
|
Industry trends |
||||||
|
According to Drewry Shipping Consultants Limited, The Drewry Annual Container Market Review and |
||||||
|
Forecast 2006/2007, |
||||||
|
. Worldwide containerized cargo volume grew each year from 1980 through 2005, attaining a compounded |
||||||
|
annual growth rate of 9.8% during that period. |
||||||
|
. Drewry estimates that 2006 container cargo volume grew 10.3% over the prior year. |
||||||
|
. Drewry forecasts that cargo volume will continue to grow at 9.0% annually through 2011. |
||||||
|
> CAP believes that this projected growth is due to several factors, including the continuing |
||||||
|
. Shift in global manufacturing capacity to lower labor cost regions such as China and India |
||||||
|
. Integration of developing high-growth economies into global trade patterns |
||||||
|
. Conversion of cargo from bulk shipping into container shipping |
||||||
|
. And the growing liberalization and integration of world trade. |
||||||
|
Shift in strategic focus |
||||||
|
. The shift in strategic focus to managing containers for container investors has enabled CAP to grow its |
||||||
|
total fleet while reducing debt and operating lease commitments. |
||||||
|
. On October 1, 2006, repurchased 50.0% of then-outstanding common stock from Interpool. |
||||||
|
. In connection with this repurchase of our common stock, we incurred $77.5 million of incremental |
||||||
|
indebtedness, which caused debt, capital lease obligations and equipment operating lease commitments to |
||||||
|
increase to $155.4 million as of December 31, 2006. |
||||||
|
. Will use the net proceeds from this offering to repay this incremental indebtedness. |
||||||
|
Competiton |
||||||
|
. According to Containerisation International, Market Analysis: Container Leasing Market 2006, CAP |
||||||
|
competes as part of the top ten container leasing companies, which were estimated to account for 84.3% of |
||||||
|
the TEUs available in the container leasing market at mid-2006. |
||||||
|
Use of $78mm in IPO proceeds |
||||||
|
o $37.5 million to repay the convertible subordinated note issued to Interpool; |
||||||
|
o $17.5 million to repay the outstanding term loan under senior secured credit facility; |
||||||
|
o remainder to repay a portion of the amount outstanding under the revolving line of credit under the senior |
||||||
|
secured credit facility. |
||||||
|
> As a result of these transactions, Hiromitsu Ogawa's (executive chairman) ownership of common stock |
||||||
|
=================== |
||||||
|
China Sunergy |
CSUN, C+, 7 |
|||||
|
solar cell products, China |
Post-IPO shrs: 38m |
|||||
|
Nanjing, Jiangsu, China |
2005 |
2006 |
IPO Mkt |
|||
|
Rev ($mm) |
$14 |
$150 |
Cap (mm) |
|||
|
Gross profit % |
14% |
18% |
$345 |
|||
|
Profit (loss) |
$0 |
$12 |
@$9 |
|||
|
Profit (loss) % |
-2.2% |
7.9% |
||||
|
VALUATION RATIOS |
IPO Mrkt |
Price / |
Price / |
Price / |
Price / |
% offered |
|
Cap (mm) |
Sales |
Earnings |
BookValue |
TangibleBV |
in IPO |
|
|
China Sunergy (CSUN) |
$345 |
2.3 |
29 |
2.3 |
2.7 |
22% |
|
SCORECARD |
Mgt |
Market |
Market Do- |
Proprie- |
Total |
|
|
1-5, 5 is high |
Growth |
mination |
tary |
rating |
||
|
20 is perfect |
2 |
2 |
2 |
1 |
7 |
|
|
American depositary shares, or ADSs. Each ADS represents six ordinary shares |
||||||
|
Tax issues |
||||||
|
CSUN's business benefits from certain PRC preferential tax treatments. Expiration of, or changes to, these |
||||||
|
incentives could have a material adverse effect on operating results. |
||||||
|
. As a foreign-invested enterprise engaged in manufacturing businesses, Nanjing PV is entitled to a two |
||||||
|
year exemption from the enterprise income tax for its first two profitable years of operation and to a 50% |
||||||
|
reduction of its applicable income tax rate for the succeeding three years |
||||||
|
Decrease in March 2007 quarter revenues |
||||||
|
. Experienced a significant decrease in revenues in the first quarter of 2007 primarily due to the seasonality |
||||||
|
of demand for solar power products and the decreases of the demand for solar cells and market prices of |
||||||
|
solar cells after the solar cell market prices reached, in the third quarter of 2006, a peak over recent years |
||||||
|
Industry demand decreased in the December 2006 quarter |
||||||
|
. Although the industry demand for solar power products decreased in the fourth quarter of 2006, CSUN's |
||||||
|
revenues increased significantly because during that period, CSUN's fourth to sixth manufacturing lines |
||||||
|
achieved full-scale manufacturing capacity and CSUN sold a substantial portion of solar cells under sales |
||||||
|
contracts concluded before September 2006 with pre-agreed prices. |
||||||
|
Business |
||||||
|
. A leading manufacturer of solar cell products in China as measured by production capacity. |
||||||
|
. Sells solar cell products mostly to module manufacturers and, to a lesser extent, to system integrators, who |
||||||
|
assemble cells into solar modules and solar power systems for use in various markets. |
||||||
|
. Commenced business operations in August 2004 through Nanjing PV, a limited liability company |
||||||
|
established in China |
||||||
|
Capacity |
||||||
|
. As of December 2006, had six solar cell manufacturing lines with an aggregate production capacity of 192 |
||||||
|
MW per year, assuming the use of 156-millimeter monocrystalline silicon wafers. |
||||||
|
. Plan to increase aggregate production capacity of solar cells to 390 MW per year by the second quarter of |
||||||
|
'2008, with twelve manufacturing lines in total, four of which will be capable of producing both P-type and |
||||||
|
N-type solar cells. |
||||||
|
Product enhancement |
||||||
|
. Currently os developing selective emitter cells, an improved version of the P-type solar cells that most |
||||||
|
solar cell manufacturers produce. |
||||||
|
. Using an experimental manufacturing line, has manufactured selective emitter cells with an average |
||||||
|
conversion efficiency rate of 17.6% on a trial basis, and expects to commence commercial production in |
||||||
|
'2007. |
||||||
|
. In addition, is focusing on the development of advanced process technologies for manufacturing new |
||||||
|
products, such as N-type solar cells, which generally have higher conversion efficiencies than those of P |
||||||
|
type solar cells. |
||||||
|
. Also plans to develop passivated emitter and rear cells in the future. |
||||||
|
Industry Background |
||||||
|
. According to Solarbuzz LLC, or Solarbuzz, an independent solar energy research firm, the global solar |
||||||
|
power market, as measured by annual solar power system installed capacities, increased from 427 MW in |
||||||
|
2002 to 1,744 MW in 2006, representing a compound annual growth rate, or CAGR, of 42%. |
||||||
|
. Under the lowest of three different projections, Solarbuzz expects annual solar power system installed |
||||||
|
capacities to further increase to 4,177 MW in 2011. |
||||||
|
. Solar power industry revenue is expected to increase from $10.6 billion in 2006 to $18.6 billion in 2011, |
||||||
|
representing a CAGR of 12%. |
||||||
|
> Solar technology |
||||||
|
. Currently, the majority of installed solar systems employ crystalline silicon technology. |
||||||
|
. Most solar cell manufacturers apply crystalline silicon technology to manufacture P-type solar cells, while |
||||||
|
only a few manufacturers produce, on a commercial scale, N-type solar cells, which generally have higher |
||||||
|
conversion efficiencies than P-type solar cells. |
||||||
|
. The solar cell production industry is currently dominated by a small number of manufacturers. According |
||||||
|
to Solarbuzz, the top 10 solar cell manufacturers together accounted for 75% of the solar cell production |
||||||
|
worldwide in 2006. |
||||||
|
Competition |
||||||
|
. Includes solar power divisions of large conglomerates such as BP Solar, Kyocera, Sanyo and Sharp |
||||||
|
Corporation |
||||||
|
. As well as specialized cell manufacturers such as Motech Industries Inc. Q-Cells AG, Suntech Power |
||||||
|
Holdings Co., Ltd., Solarfun Power Holdings Co. Ltd. and JA Solar Holdings Co., Ltd. |
||||||
|
. Some competitors have also become vertically integrated, from upstream polysilicon manufacturing to |
||||||
|
solar power system integration, such as Renewable Energy Corporation ASA. |
||||||
|
Use of $66mm in IPO proceeds |
||||||
|
o $60.0 million to expand our solar cell manufacturing facilities; and |
||||||
|
o remaining amount to purchase or prepay for raw material |
||||||
|
=================== |
||||||
|
Continental Resources |
CLR, C+, 7 |
|||||
|
oil/gas production & exploration |
Post-IPO shrs: 37m |
|||||
|
Enid, OK |
2004 |
2006 |
2006 |
March, 06* |
March, 07* |
IPO Mkt |
|
Rev ($mm) |
$419 |
$376 |
$484 |
$564 |
$150 |
Cap (mm) |
|
Gross profit % |
8% |
8% |
8% |
8% |
7% |
$2,856 |
|
Profit (loss) |
$28 |
$194 |
$253 |
$22 |
$6.4 |
@$17 |
|
Profit (loss) % |
6.7% |
51.6% |
52.3% |
3.8% |
4.3% |
|
|
Adjusted EBITDA % |
27.7% |
75.8% |
76.9% |
15.7% |
15.7% |
|
|
*March quarter |
||||||
|
VALUATION RATIOS |
IPO Mrkt |
Price / |
Price / |
Price / |
Price / |
% offered |
|
Cap (mm) |
Sales |
Earnings |
BookValue |
TangibleBV |
in IPO |
|
|
Continental Res (CLR) |
$2,856 |
5.9 |
11 |
6.0 |
6.0 |
18% |
|
SCORECARD |
Mgt |
Market |
Market Do- |
Proprie- |
Total |
|
|
1-5, 5 is high |
Growth |
mination |
tary |
rating |
||
|
20 is perfect |
2 |
2 |
2 |
1 |
7 |
|
|
Business |
||||||
|
. An independent oil and natural gas exploration and production company with operations in the Rocky |
||||||
|
Mountain, Mid-Continent and Gulf Coast regions of the United States. |
||||||
|
. Focuses exploration activities in large new or developing plays that provide us the opportunity to acquire |
||||||
|
undeveloped acreage positions for future drilling operations. |
||||||
|
. Has been successful in targeting large repeatable resource plays where horizontal drilling, advanced |
||||||
|
4fracture stimulation and enhanced recovery technologies provide the means to economically develop and |
||||||
|
produce oil and natural gas reserves from unconventional formations. |
||||||
|
. As a result of these efforts, has grown substantially through the drillbit, adding 96.2 MMBoe of |
||||||
|
proved oil and natural gas reserves through extensions and discoveries from January 1, 2001 through |
||||||
|
December 31, 2006 compared to 5.1 MMBoe added through proved reserve purchases during that same |
||||||
|
period. |
||||||
|
December 31, 2007, CLR had |
||||||
|
. Estimated net proved reserves of approximately 118 billion Boe (barrels of energy, an "equivalent" |
||||||
|
measure) |
||||||
|
. With a pre-tax PV-10 value of $1.6 billion |
||||||
|
. Pre-tax PV10% Value is computed on the same basis as the standardized measure of discounted |
||||||
|
future net cash flows but without deducting income taxes. |
||||||
|
Proved reserves & production |
||||||
|
> As of December 31, 2006, estimated proved reserves were 118.3 MMBoe, with estimated proved |
||||||
|
developed reserves of 87.1 MMBoe, or 74% of total estimated proved reserves. |
||||||
|
. Crude oil comprised 83% of total estimated proved reserves. |
||||||
|
. At December 31, 2006, had 1,772 scheduled drilling locations on the 1,775,000 gross (1,071,000 net) |
||||||
|
acres that we held |
||||||
|
> For the first quarter of 2007, daily production averaged 28,000 Boe per day. |
||||||
|
Competition |
||||||
|
. Operates in a highly competitive environment for acquiring properties, marketing oil and natural gas and |
||||||
|
securing trained personnel. |
||||||
|
. Competitors vary within the regions and some competitors may possess and employ financial, |
||||||
|
technical and personnel resources substantially greater than CLR's |
||||||
|
. There is substantial competition for capital available for investment in the oil and natural gas industry. |
||||||
|
Shareholders |
||||||
|
100%: Harold G. Hamm (Chairman, Chief Executive Officer and Director) and his children's trusts |
||||||
|
Use of $140mm in IPO proceeds from sale of 8.85mm shares |
||||||
|
(the selling shareholder expects to receive $330mm from sale of 20.65mm shares0 |
||||||
|
. Repay a portion of the borrowings outstanding under the credit facility incurred in connection with recent |
||||||
|
capital expenditures and cash dividends to current shareholders |
||||||
|
. As of May 8, 2007, total borrowings under the credit facility was $252.5 million |
||||||
|
=================== |
||||||
|
EnerNOC |
ENOC, C+, 7 |
|||||
|
manages & reduces electricity consump |
Post-IPO shrs: 17.4m |
|||||
|
Boston, MA |
2004 |
2006 |
2006 |
March, 06* |
March, 07* |
IPO Mkt |
|
Rev ($mm) |
$1 |
$10 |
$26 |
$5 |
$10 |
Cap (mm) |
|
Gross profit % |
55% |
57% |
36% |
14% |
29% |
$383 |
|
Profit (loss) |
-$2 |
-$2 |
-$6 |
-$2 |
-$3.8 |
@$12 |
|
Profit (loss) % |
-231.7% |
-17.3% |
-22.3% |
-39.2% |
-38.0% |
|
|
Adjusted EBITDA % |
15.7% |
15.7% |
15.7% |
15.7% |
15.7% |
|
|
*March quarter |
||||||
|
VALUATION RATIOS |
IPO Mrkt |
Price / |
Price / |
Price / |
Price / |
% offered |
|
Cap (mm) |
Sales |
Earnings |
BookValue |
TangibleBV |
in IPO |
|
|
EnerNOC (ENOC) |
$383 |
9.6 |
-25 |
4.6 |
5.0 |
22% |
|
SCORECARD |
Mgt |
Market |
Market Do- |
Proprie- |
Total |
|
|
1-5, 5 is high |
Growth |
mination |
tary |
rating |
||
|
20 is perfect |
2 |
2 |
2 |
1 |
7 |
|
|
Compare & contrast |
||||||
|
VALUATION RATIOS |
IPO Mrkt |
Price / |
Price / |
Price / |
Price / |
Price |
|
Cap (mm) |
Sales |
Earnings |
BookValue |
TangibleBV |
May 11 |
|
|
EnerNOC (ENOC) |
$383 |
9.6 |
-25 |
4.6 |
5.0 |
|
|
Comverge (COMV) |
$387 |
11.4 |
-65 |
5.1 |
5.0 |
$22 |
|
Business |
||||||
|
. A leading developer and provider of clean and intelligent power solutions. |
||||||
|
. Uses a Network Operations Center, or NOC, to remotely manage and reduce electricity consumption |
||||||
|
across a network of commercial, institutional and industrial customer sites to enable a more information |
||||||
|
based and responsive, or intelligent, electric power grid. |
||||||
|
. Grid operators and utilities pay ENOC a stream of recurring cash flows for managing demand response |
||||||
|
capacity that ENOC shares with participating end-use customers. |
||||||
|
Customers & need |
||||||
|
. Customers are electric power grid operators and utilities, as well as commercial, institutional and |
||||||
|
industrial end-users of electricity. |
||||||
|
. In order to avoid service disruptions, such as brownouts and blackouts, during periods of peak electricity |
||||||
|
demand, grid operators and utilities have traditionally increased supply-side capacity by building additional |
||||||
|
power plants and transmission lines. |
||||||
|
. As an alternative, ENOC offers demand response solutions, whereby ENOC monitors electricity |
||||||
|
consumption and alerts end-use customers to reduce their usage during these same peak periods. |
||||||
|
. This helps optimize the balance of electric supply and demand and creates a significantly lower cost and |
||||||
|
more environmentally sound, or clean, alternative to building additional power plants and transmission |
||||||
|
lines. |
||||||
|
Managed demand response capacity |
||||||
|
. Grid operators and utilities pay ENOC a stream of recurring revenues for managing this demand response |
||||||
|
capacity. |
||||||
|
. With over 1,308 customer sites and 579 megawatts, or MW, of demand response capacity under |
||||||
|
management as of April 15, 2007, ENOC believes that it is one of the largest national demand response |
||||||
|
solutions provider focused on the commercial, institutional and industrial market |
||||||
|
History & growth |
||||||
|
. Began providing demand response solutions in one state in 2003 and expanded nationally to over 20 states |
||||||
|
in five regions by the end of 2006. |
||||||
|
. From a start in one open market in 2003 to the current 17 contracts and open market programs with grid |
||||||
|
operators and utilities, ENOC has increased demand response capacity under management with |
||||||
|
commercial, institutional and industrial customers to 137 MW at the end of 2005 and to 579 MW as of |
||||||
|
April 15, 2007. |
||||||
|
. In addition, in the first quarter of 2007, ENOC entered into three new utility contracts which are subject to |
||||||
|
regulatory approval and would enable ENOC to enroll up to an additional 110 MW of demand response |
||||||
|
capacity. |
||||||
|
Three acquisitions |
||||||
|
Made three acquisitions through December 31, 2006. |
||||||
|
. In June 2005, acquired Pinpoint Power DR, the demand response business of Pinpoint Power LLC. This |
||||||
|
acquisition increased the base of end-use customers and capacity under management in the New England |
||||||
|
region. |
||||||
|
. To further strengthen ENOC's technology platform, ENOC acquired certain assets and obligations of |
||||||
|
eBidenergy, Inc. from Trillium Capital Partners LLC in February 2006. |
||||||
|
. In May 2006, acquired substantially all of the assets of Celerity Energy Partners LLC, a demand response |
||||||
|
provider for grid operators and utilities, including all of the membership interests in Celerity Energy |
||||||
|
Partners San Diego LLC. This acquisition increased the base of end-use customers and capacity under |
||||||
|
management in California. |
||||||
|
Competition |
||||||
|
. Other clean and intelligent power solutions providers, advanced metering infrastructure service providers, |
||||||
|
as well as utilities and competitive electricity suppliers who offer their own demand response and energy |
||||||
|
management solutions. |
||||||
|
. Also competes with traditional supply-side resources, such as peaking power plants. |
||||||
|
. The clean and intelligent power solutions sector is fragmented. |
||||||
|
. In the demand response sector, ENOC competes with various providers on a regional basis. |
||||||
|
Use of $68mm in IPO proceeds |
||||||
|
To fund the expansion of the business into new regions and expand our customer base, to finance research |
||||||
|
and development, to fund cash consideration for future acquisitions and for other general corporate |
||||||
|
purposes. |
||||||
|
=================== |
||||||
|
Eurand NV |
EURX, C, 7 |
|||||
|
specialty pharma |
<=======Eurodollars====> |
Dollars |
Post-IPO shrs: 44m |
|||
|
Amsterdam, Netherlands |
2004 |
2006 |
2006 |
2006 |
IPO Mkt |
|
|
Rev ($mm) |
$81 |
$72 |
$83 |
$109 |
Cap (mm) |
|
|
Cost of goods % |
60% |
61% |
58% |
58% |
$785 |
|
|
Profit (loss) |
-$17 |
-$8 |
-$5 |
-$7 |
@$18 |
|
|
Profit (loss) % |
-21.0% |
-11.5% |
-6.0% |
-6.1% |
||
|
VALUATION RATIOS |
IPO Mrkt |
Price / |
Price / |
Price / |
Price / |
% offered |
|
Cap (mm) |
Sales |
Earnings |
BookValue |
TangibleBV |
in IPO |
|
|
Eurand NV (EURX) |
$785 |
7.2 |
-119 |
6.1 |
6.1 |
16% |
|
SCORECARD |
Mgt |
Market |
Market Do- |
Proprie- |
Total |
|
|
1-5, 5 is high |
Growth |
mination |
tary |
rating |
||
|
20 is perfect |
2 |
2 |
2 |
1 |
7 |
|
|
Current operations |
||||||
|
. Engaged in the development of new products, both independently and in cooperation with collaboration |
||||||
|
partners, including many of the leading pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies. |
||||||
|
. Currently, licensees market over 40 different products utilizing EURX's technologies worldwide, |
||||||
|
including in the United States, Europe, Japan and China. |
||||||
|
. Generally seek to retain exclusive manufacturing rights for products developed. |
||||||
|
. Since January 2005, we have signed 18 new co-development agreements. |
||||||
|
Lead Product Candidate-EUR-1008 |
||||||
|
. EUR-1008 is a new porcine-derived proprietary enzyme replacement product for the treatment of exocrine |
||||||
|
pancreatic insufficiency, a deficiency of digestive enzymes normally produced by the pancreas that can |
||||||
|
result from a number of diseases, including cystic fibrosis and chronic pancreatitis. |
||||||
|
. This deficiency of enzymes results in poor digestion and reduced absorption of nutrients and, if left |
||||||
|
untreated, causes malnutrition, which can lead to impaired growth, impaired immune response and |
||||||
|
shortened life expectancy. |
||||||
|
Recent development |
||||||
|
. Subject to review of EURX's protocol by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, or FDA, EURX |
||||||
|
expects to commence in the summer of 2007 a bioavailability study required for the submission of a new |
||||||
|
drug application, or NDA, for EUR-1008. |
||||||
|
. Expects the bioavailability study to take 6 months to complete and to include 12 subjects. |
||||||
|
. Assuming EURX commences the study in the summer of 2007, expects results from the study to be |
||||||
|
available in December 2007 or early in 2008. |
||||||
|
FDA & Pancreatic Enzyme Products (PEP) |
||||||
|
> Patients with exocrine pancreatic insufficiency are treated with Porcine-Derived Pancreatic enzyme |
||||||
|
products, or PEPs. |
||||||
|
. PEPs have been utilized since before the enactment of the U.S. Federal Food Drug and Cosmetic Act, or |
||||||
|
FDCA, in 1938, and, consequently, none of the currently available products are marketed under a new drug |
||||||
|
application, or NDA, approved by the FDA. |
||||||
|
. In April 2004, the FDA mandated that all manufacturers of EPI drug products file a NDA and receive |
||||||
|
approval for their products by April 2008 or be subject to regulatory action. |
||||||
|
> PEP market size |
||||||
|
. According to IMS Health Incorporated, or IMS, PEPs generated $720 million in worldwide sales in 2005. |
||||||
|
. The enzyme profile of porcine-derived PEPs closely mimics that of normal human pancreatic secretions |
||||||
|
. EURX believes this similarity has led to the long clinical use of these products in treating EPI. |
||||||
|
EUR-1008 designed to FDA requirements |
||||||
|
. EUR-1008 is a highly stable formulation containing eight key porcine-derived enzymes and a number of |
||||||
|
coenzymes and cofactors that EUIRXe believes are necessary for proper digestion. |
||||||
|
. EURX believes that due to its novel formulation EUR-1008 will have advantages over the current EPI |
||||||
|
products |
||||||
|
History |
||||||
|
. Prior to 1999, the business represented the drug delivery division of American Home Products |
||||||
|
Corporation, now Wyeth. |
||||||
|
. During 1999, affiliates of Warburg Pincus LLC and Gearóid Faherty, Chief Executive Officer, acquired |
||||||
|
from Wyeth EURX's operating subsidiaries in a series of related transactions. |
||||||
|
. The transactions were financed by sales of equity to, and loans from, Warburg Pincus and Mr. Faherty. |
||||||
|
. Since separation from Wyeth in 1999, EURX acquired several businesses and technologies for an |
||||||
|
aggregate amount of €21.6 million |
||||||
|
Competition |
||||||
|
> New products may compete with collaborator's products |
||||||
|
. Currently, does not market any products directly to the consumer, but relies our collaborators to |
||||||
|
commercialize products. |
||||||
|
. If EURX's proprietary clinical-stage product candidates are approved, they will compete with currently |
||||||
|
marketed drugs and potentially with product candidates in development for the same indications, including |
||||||
|
those marketed by collaboration partners. |
||||||
|
. In the event EURX's products compete with existing collaborators' products, EURX may lose those |
||||||
|
collaborators or experience decreased sales of existing products with no corresponding increase in |
||||||
|
revenues. |
||||||
|
> Basic business |
||||||
|
. EURX is one of the largest manufacturers and suppliers of currently marketed PEPs in the United States |
||||||
|
and the exclusive supplier of coated PEPs to Axcan and Impax in the United States. |
||||||
|
. Although EURX anticipates, based on the FDA's announced position, a significant reduction in the |
||||||
|
number of PEPs on the market, this decline in competition may not occur. |
||||||
|
. The fact that PEPs are life-saving drugs may influence the FDA's action, particularly if it would result in |
||||||
|
two or fewer PEPs on the market, |
||||||
|
> EUR-1008 |
||||||
|
. The level of competition that EUR-1008, if approved, will face from these products in the United States |
||||||
|
will depend on whether the manufacturers of these products obtain approval for their NDAs by the deadline |
||||||
|
set by the FDA and, if they are unable to do so, whether the FDA takes regulatory action against these |
||||||
|
manufacturers and the nature of any such action. |
||||||
|
. If approved, EUR-1008 will compete with currently marketed porcine-derived PEPs from Axcan Pharma, |
||||||
|
Johnson & Johnson, Solvay Pharmaceuticals, KV Pharmaceuticals and IMPAX Laboratories. |
||||||