Monday, January 7, 2008

BNT: An Example in Expectations

Over on AnCapEx, Brautigan & Tuck holdings has published their quarterly (ok, four-month) financial statements. To quote the announcement,
...while our profits are nothing to boast about, we were able to post nearly 27% growth in NAV despite a downturn in real estate asset values. NAV is now L$ 0.76, above the L$ 0.60 value BNT was at after we restructured our shares and eliminated 67 million of the CEOs personal shares in the largest voluntary elimination of personal wealth in SL history.

The growth in our NAV is confirmation that BNT's long term strategy of no dividends, focusing on growth, has been the right one. Despite an in-world depression, banking crash, and downturn in the capital markets as well as real estate markets, BNT continues to grow, and by growing is returning value to the shareholder the old fashioned way. This share value is not short term gimmickry like those CEOs who fake up big dividends that mostly winds up in their own pockets. This is real value in a real company.

Well, this is an interesting situation. As of this writing, the price of a share of BNT stock is L$0.24, and it has been around that level for some time. If the NAV of this stock is L$0.72 as claimed, why aren't market forces pushing it up to that level?

In my economics classes, we learned about some of the common market forces which affect demand curves, such as income, tastes and preferences, price of compliments/substitutes, and (most mysteriously to me) expectations.

In my finance classes, we learned about why investors choose to invest in a given security or project. We learned that investors prefer more money to less money, money sooner to money later, and less risk to more risk. The interplay of these preferences creates the wonderful stock charts we all know and love from First Life and Second Life.

I think that within these simple concepts lies the heart of the situation above. Despite having assets at three times the share price, investors simply don't expect to get anything from them. To be honest, BNT hasn't given them much to hope for: to my recollection, there has only been one dividend and no buybacks (although Intlibber did eliminate a large swath of his own holdings, this had little effect on the market price since it didn't affect the floating shares) to speak of. The most faithful shareholders of BNT, those that purchased the stock at its IPO on the World Stock Exchange, have lost 76% on their L$1.00 per share investment.

So is it any wonder that the price flutters with the whims of the day traders instead of reaching its NAV? With no history of dividends, buybacks, and little hope of actually getting L$0.72 per share for your BNT, the market seems perfectly justified (to me) in withholding its Lindens from purchasing anything but a token amount of BNT, and so it seems to have progressed.

There has been some comparison of BNT to Microsoft (NYSE:MSFT) in the past. I can't link to it because I don't think it has been explicitly written down before, but trust me on this one. However, the differences are beginning to show between the technological juggernaut and BNT holdings:
  • Microsoft has split nine (!!!) times in its history. BNT has split zero times.
  • MSFT increased its stock price 273% (!!!) in its first year out of IPO. BNT has lost 76% to date (true, it hasn't been out a year yet, but at 3/4 of the way through the year, MSFT was still up about 160%).
  • MSFT made no theories or announcements about how people were out to get them in their first year of operations (to my knowledge). BNT has made a few.
Let me make myself clear here: I think IntLibber Brautigan has a lot of good traits. He's a dynamic speaker, and incredibly persuasive at that. He's a visionary and has built a tremendous empire. I've had quite a few nice conversations with him, and he's always answered my questions patiently. I just think Brautigan could do a better job listening to his investors and rewarding them for holding BNT stock. Until then, the boasting announcements are uncalled for, as there is not much to celebrate for a faithful BNT shareholder.

1 comments:

Samantha Goldflake said...

What's "long term" in a virtual world? In real life, I'm expected to be around for several years. 60 (sixty!) years from now I may still be alive.

Can you imagine looking at someone's profile in SL and see a join date dating back to 60 years ago? But even 50, down to 10. Can you?

When a SL company does never distribute a dividend, when the share price isn't going to raise noticeably, what's the benefit I have as an investor? A warm, fuzzy feeling? Anything else?

Not to mention the people who invested during the IPO.

SL "long term" should be measured in months, not in years.

Google