$PRI

PRI相对于其强劲的现金流和增长被显著低估;当前的私有化收购报价并不充分,但通过修订后的交易或估值重估,该股具备较高的上行潜力。

看涨他说的是几个月内
Zack Buckley on $PRTH's take private
Yet Another Value Podcast发布 2026-09-10 · 34 段内容
12:41/ 打开原视频

逐段跳播

34 段内容
12:4137:53

归咎于不同的原因,但你读了二季度电话会议,他们说的是,我们要上调营收指引,或者说我们会落在营收指引的高端,但我们会落在 EBITDA 指引的低端。然后你继续往下读,他们谈到,我们有很多业务的增长速度比整体业务更快,但很多业务的利润率更低,或者有一些其它情况。

这在某种程度上影响了营收和利润率。他们有一些业务是记录支付方而非商户,所以入账的毛利率要低得多。

blame different things, but you read the Q2 call, right? And they say, "Hey, we're raising our revenue guide or we're going to come in at the high end of our revenue guide, but we're going to come in at the low end of our EBITDA guide." And then as you keep reading it, they're talking about, hey, we've got all these businesses that are growing quicker than our overall business, but a lot of a lot of the businesses are lower margins or they've got some things. Now, this is partly influencing the revenue and margin. They've got some things where they're the payment of record versus a merchant. So, they're booking it at a much lower gross margin.

我认为这项业务的表现完全没有问题。Treasury 业务同比仍然增长得非常好,这显然很重要。再次强调,Treasury 是我最关注的业务,它仍在持续增长。总的来说,我对目前的进展感到满意。

I mean, I think the business is performing completely fine. You know, I think you still have Treasury growing very nicely on a year-over-year basis, which obviously I think is important. Again, I think treasury is the business I'm the most focused on and you know that continues to grow. Um, and so I I guess generally speaking, I'm I'm happy with how things are going.

我认为一切都要相对来看。当你以四到五倍自由现金流的价格买入,而谈论的是一家每股自由现金流仍在以 10% 以上增长的公司时,它的定价却像是要倒闭的企业,而实际上它在产生大量现金。

净债务实际上也确实下降了不少。所以他们每个季度都在偿还债务。

you know, I think again everything's relative, right? When you're paying four to five times free cash flow and you're talking about out of business that's still growing free cash flow per share at 10% plus, you know, I it's it's priced for a business that's going out of business when in reality it's actually generating a ton of cash. you know, net debt even does come down actually quite a bit. So, they're paying down debt every single quarter.

所以我认为这项业务做得相当不错,尤其是考虑到当前的整体环境和估值。我会说他们的财务结构与其它同行非常相似。如果你纵观整个支付领域,无论是 Fiserve 还是 Shift for Global Payments,它们的净债务水平都相对相似。

鉴于这些都是收入高度经常性、可预测性非常高的业务,它们能够承受一定的债务负担。这实际上是多年来最低的杠杆水平。所以如果说有什么不同,我会说今天比过去更安全。你也可以看到债务正在以季度为单位非常快速地下降。

所以现在它是 3.8 倍,但也在非常迅速地下降。

So yeah, I I think the business is doing quite well, especially given um sort of the overall environment and valuation today. Yeah, I mean I would say their financial profile is very similar to other peers. So if you kind of look across the payment space, whether it's Fiserve or shift for global payments, they're all at relatively similar net debt deep levels. So given these are highly recurring revenue businesses with a very high degree of predictability, like they're comfortable carrying a certain debt load. This [snorts] is actually the lowest leverage that it's had since like in years. And so if anything, I would say it's safer today than it was in the past. And you can also see that debt is coming down very quickly on a quarterly basis. So again, it's at 3.8 eight times now, but it's also coming down very rapidly.

你之所以来,我之所以这么感兴趣,是因为在 11 月,CEO——我想他持有公司 56% 的股份,我可能记错了,但他持有这里的大部分股票——他提出以 6 到 615 美元将公司私有化,我想是这个数字。

相对于前一天的收盘价,这是一个巨大的溢价。但我认为 Steamboat 出来说,这个报价是不可接受的。

the reason you're coming on, the reason I'm so interested is in November, the CEO, who owns I think 56% of the company, I could be off, but he owns the majority of the stock here. He offers to take the company private for $6 to 615, I think, is the number. And that is a huge premium to the prior day closing price. But you I think Steamboat comes out and says, "Hey, this offer is unacceptable."

所以,说清楚一点,他给出的价格相对于前一天股价是溢价,但相对于那之前 5 天的股价并不是溢价。是的。股价下跌了超过 50%。我的猜测是——我并不确定——但我想他对股价表现感到沮丧,这我可以理解。

我也对股价表现感到沮丧,于是决定提出一个高于当前股价的报价。但我认为那不是一个公平的报价。再说一次,报价是 6 到 615。我在公开信里写了,分部估值大约每股 17 美元。更简单的倍数分析给我的结果大约是每股 19 美元,而且我在分部估值中对 Treasury Solutions 使用了非常保守的倍数。

所以,他提出的报价相对于一个严重错位的股价是溢价。所以我并不认为高于前一天股价的那个百分比能反映内在价值。

So, just to be clear, he made a premium to the stock price like the day before, but it wasn't a premium to the stock price 5 days prior to that. Uh, yeah. So, you know, the stock was down over 50%. And I think my suspicion is, and I I don't know this for sure, but I would imagine he was frustrated by the share price performance, which I can understand. I was also frustrated by the share price performance and decided to make an offer above where the current share price was. But I don't think that is a fair offer. Again, 6 to 615 was the offer. You know, I wrote publicly in my letter some of the parts around 17 a share. Like a more simplistic multiple analysis gets me to around 19 a share, you know, and I was using a very conservative multiple for Treasury Solutions in that some of the parts analysis. So I You know, again, he he made an offer to a premium or to a stock price that was significantly dislocated. So, I don't really think the percentage above where the stock was the day before is anywhere near reflective of intrinsic value.

所以,情况是这样的,我想强调这是一只小盘电子烟股。董事长持有公司 56% 的股份,董事会内部人士另外持有 2% 到 3%。所以公司 60% 由董事会和内部人士持有。他们在 11 月 5 日左右发布财报。

尽管我认为财报还不错,但我不是支付领域的专家。财报发布后股价暴跌,如果我说错了你可以纠正我。它从 9 跌到 5 左右。7 左右跌到 5。是的,

So, what happens is, again, I want to emphasize this is a small eliquid stock. The chairman owns 56% of the company and board insiders own another 2 or 3%. Right? So 60% of the company is owned by board and insiders. They report earnings on November 5th or something, right? And the earnings despite I thought they were fine, but you know, I'm not a payments expert. The the stock craters on the earnings, you know, you can correct me if I'm wrong. It goes from 9 to five or something, right? Sevenish to five. Yeah,

差不多是这样。第二天,也就是两天后,在股价为 5 的时候,董事长通过 13D 提出收购公司,报价区间是 6 到 615。所以如果你只看 24 小时,也许我们都是按市值计价,你可以说这是一个大溢价。

如果你看得更长一点,你会说这是一个折价。我不认为这里发生的是这种情况,因为财报让我重新思考。我见过公司把业绩做差然后进行私有化,你知道这是一只电子烟股。但在我看来,这有点像——你可能是对的,可能是对股价趋势的沮丧——但它看起来非常明显是对一只几乎因为一份财报而下跌的电子烟股的非常机会主义的出价。

something like that. And the next day, two days later, the chairman with the stock trading at five, the chairman puts in an offer to buy the company through a 13D to buy the company for 6 to 615 is the range he puts in. So if you, you know, if you had a 24-hour view and maybe we're all mark tomarket, you could say, "Hey, this is a big premium." If you had any longer view, you would say, "Hey, this is a discount." And you know, I don't think this is what happened here because again, the earnings refine me. I have seen companies kitchen sink and then do a take private or you know this is an eliquid stock. But to me it looks a little bit like and you might be right it might be frustration with the stock price trend but it seems very clearly a very opportunistic bid on an eliquid stock that was down on almost basically one print.

是的,关于交易动态本身没什么可说的,但我想说,当我们写公开信时,我们要求特别委员会对战略替代方案进行独立而稳健的审查,并关注业务的内在价值,而不是仅仅关注相对于股价的溢价。此后,特别委员会聘请了 Barclays 作为财务顾问,我认为这是一家非常强的财务顾问,以及 Paul Weiss 作为独立法律顾问。

所以我认为特别委员会非常认真地对待这件事,我认为这些是重要的保护措施,我认为公允价值很可能会实现。

Yeah, nothing on the trading dynamics itself, but I would just say like when we wrote our public letter, we asked the special committee to conduct an independent and robust review of strategic alternatives and to focus on the intrinsic value of the businesses rather than simply a premium to the stock price. You know, since then the special committee retained Barclays as a financial adviser, which I think very strong financial adviser and Paul Weiss as independent legal. So I think I think the special committee is taking this very seriously and you know I think those are important protections and I think fair value is likely to be realized.

那么我再讲几点别的。这个要约是在11月发出的,我其实没法告诉你我关于这个要约的笔记有多长、事情是怎么发展的,但我觉得听众首先听到的可能是:好吧,这个要约是在2025年11月发出的。

我想特别委员会是在2025年12月聘请了他们的顾问。你在11月发出一封信。而现在是2025年9月。已经过去9到10个月了。这确实是一个漫长的过程。所以,关于这件事我有很多笔记,但我就想问你:一个拖了这么久的过程,到底是怎么回事?

So let me go to a few other things. So the offer is made in November and I've actually I can't tell you how long my notes on this offer and everything goes but I think the first thing a listener might hear is okay the offer was made in November of 2025. I think the special committee hires uh the special committee hires their retainers in December of 2025. You publish a letter in November. We're in September of 2025. It's been 9 to 10 months. Like this is a long process. Uh so again, I've got lots of notes on this, but I would just ask you like what is going on with a process that runs this long?

是的,我认为可能有各种各样的情况在发生。进行推测时总是要小心。我想说的是,我希望他们是在寻找并推进一个让第三方来收购的程序,因为归根结底我认为那会带来最高的内在价值。我认为第二种可能发生的情况是,特别委员会与Tom之间在进行谈判,看他是否想提高报价。

我认为那里可能正在进行谈判。此外,还有一些我们不知道的幕后发生的事情。

Yeah, I think there's a variety of things that could be happening. uh always have to be careful in speculating. I'll say my hope is that they're looking for and running a process for third parties to buy it because ultimately I think that would lead to the highest intrinsic value. I think the second thing that could be happening is a negotiation between the special committee and Tom the extent that he wants to raise a bid. I think there could be a negotiation going on there. And then also there's just things that happen behind the scenes that we don't know.

所以,我想指出的细微之处,以及为什么我认为Payoneer理应被折价,是因为它的股权激励费用、资本开支和资本化软件都高得多,而有机增长的差距却非常小。所以Priority的EBITA到自由现金流的转化率明显优于Payoneer。

因此,如果说有什么的话,我认为很明显Priority理应相对Payoneer享有溢价。而且,如果我们只用Payoneer的价格,今天就是每股12美元。鉴于转化率明显更好,我认为它理应享有显著的溢价。

所以人们可以说,在那笔交易之前我们没有任何近期的参照。现在我们有了一个非常近期的参照,指向高得多的股价。我认为这给了特别委员会重大的谈判筹码,基本上就是去谈判。

Um so just I think the nuance that I would point out and why I think pay pain payer deserves a haircut uh is because it has much higher stockbased comp capex and capitalized software [snorts] with a very small difference in organic growth. So the IBITA to free cash flow conversion that priority has is significantly better than Payaneer. And so if anything I think it's pretty clear to me that priority deserves a premium to payer. And again, if it we were just using the payer price, it would be $12 a share today. I think it deserves a significant premium given significantly better conversion. And so people could say we don't have anything recent until that transaction. Now we have something very recent that points to a much higher stock price. And I think that gives significant negotiating leverage for the special committee uh basically to to negotiate.

这是个很好的观点。我之前没想到,你知道,当它在6月发生时,那个支付标记。所以那我们就姑且说是报价之后6个月,你知道,那是你认为事情真正会……我之前没想到那可能如何改变了谈判的动态,或者导致所有人重新调整之类的。

You know, that's a great point. I I hadn't thought of how a paying mark, you know, when it happens in June. So that's let's just call it 6 months after the bid when you know that's when you think things are going to really I hadn't thought how that might have changed the negotiating dynamics or caused everyone to reset or something.

你提到的第一件事是第三方报价,而这里另一件有趣的事——这里有很多有趣的事——是董事长在姑且说是11月10日抛出了他的首次报价,然后大约一个月后,我想其实是12月17日,但大约一个月后,他提交了一份更新的13D。

这大约是在特别委员会聘请其财务顾问5天之后,那份文件说:“嘿,特别委员会问了,我让他们知道,我没有兴趣把公司卖给第三方。”这在私有化要约中并不罕见,但我非常讨厌它,因为它会产生实实在在的寒蝉效应。

那么,你怎么看——你提到的第一件事是第三方。鉴于持有这家公司60%股份的董事长已经说了“我不想把它交给第三方”,你怎么看这件事?

The first thing you mentioned was a third party bid and the other interesting thing here and there's a lot of interesting things here is the chairman lobs in his first bid in let's call it November 10th uh and then about a month later I think it's actually December 17th but about a month later he files an updated 13D. This is about 5 days after the special committee hires their financial advisors that says, "Hey, the special committee asks and I'm letting them know I have no interest in selling to a third party." Now, this is not uncommon and take private offers, but I absolutely hate it because it it has a real chilling effect. So, how do you think about the, you know, the first thing you mentioned was a third party. How do you think about that in light of the chairman who owns 60% of this has said, "I don't want to throw it to a third party."

是的,我认为幕后可能有各种各样的情况在发生。我想在推测时保持谨慎,但我要说的是,我认为从措辞的方式来看,第三方收购少数股东的股份、同时董事长保留其所有权并将其转入一个私人载体,这当然是可能的。

所以,我认为按照我对这段措辞的解读,我当然认为少数股东有可能得到完整补偿,你知道,以公平的估值,而董事长在某种程度上仍能保留其所有权股份,只要他想。

Yeah, I think there's a a variety of things that could be happening behind the scenes. Um, I want to be careful in speculating, but what I would say is I think the way the language was worded, it's certainly possible for a third party to buy the minority shareholders and still for the chairman to maintain his ownership and roll it into a private vehicle. So I think the way that I read the language, I certainly think there's a possibility of minority shareholders being made whole, you know, with a fair valuation and the chairman still getting to maintain his ownership stake to the extent that he wants to.

公司做了一次二次发行。我想那主要是出售股份的股东,而不是公司,但公司在2025年1月做了一次,我认为那已经成为许多股东关注的一个有趣的数据点。你想谈谈那次发行的定价是多少,以及围绕那笔交易的措辞是什么吗?

The company did a secondary offering. Uh I I think it was largely uh selling stockholders, not the company, but the company did one in January of 2025, and I think that's become an interesting data point for a lot of shareholders. Do you want to kind of talk about what that priced at and kind of what the language around that transaction was?

嗯,我猜你的意思是,他们在25年初以大约两倍于拟议私有化价格的水平卖出股票,而且当时Tom在那次发行中没有卖出任何股份,你知道,意思是,他通过不卖出任何股票,隐含地表示这只股票大概比我们卖出的价格更值钱。我猜你指的就是这个。还是说还有别的你想指出的?

Well, I'm assuming your point is that they were selling stock in early 25 at, you know, more than or roughly double sort of the proposed take private price and that at that point Tom didn't sell any shares in that offering, you know, meaning, you know, he kind of thought it was worth, you know, implicitly through not selling any stock, he was kind of saying it's probably worth more than than where we're selling shares. I'm assuming that's what you're referring to. Or is there anything else you want to point out?

所以,如果我说错了你可以纠正我,2025年1月有过一次二次发行,一群股东以775的价格卖出股票,我想那是最初出来的价格。而我听到的措辞,我想其中一封信提到了这一点,是公司说:“嘿,我们让出售股份的股东,包括卖了一点点的董事长,有机会卖出更多。”

而他们说:“不,这个价格太荒谬了。它把我们严重低估了。我们不会卖出超过我们必须卖出的量,超过我们眼下必须卖出的量,因为这个价格太疯狂了,我们认为公司的价值远不止于此。”你知道,那是被传达出来的,不是写在……

但我认为这在很多层面上都很有意思。我的意思是,他们以775做了一次二次发行,现在却试图以610或6什么的价格把公司私有化,而且他们当时在传达他们认为这严重低估了公司。

So, this was, and you can correct me if I'm wrong, there was a a secondary offering in January of 2025 where a bunch of shareholders sold stock at it was 775, I think was the price that came out. And the language that I heard, and I think one of the letters mentioned this, was uh the company said, "Hey, we had the the selling stockholders, which includes the chairman who sells a little bit, had the opportunity to sell more." And they're like, "No, this price is ridiculous. It undervalues us like crazy. we're not going to sell any more than we have to uh than we have to right now because the price is crazy and we think the company's worth much more than that which you know that was something that was communicated not like put in a but I thought that was interesting on a host of levels I mean they they did a secondary at 775 and now they're trying to take the company private for 610 or six or whatever it is and they were communicating that they thought it massively undervalued the company.

是的,这说得通。是的,抱歉,我刚才在想当时股价实际交易在哪里。嗯,是的,我认为那是真的。我认为毫无疑问这只股票被大幅低估了。我认为问题只是战略程序中将发生什么。我认为那归根结底是我们正在等待的。

但我想对第一次看到这件事的听众说的是,你有一个极好的风险回报比,因为在最坏的情况下,理论上你看到的是每股6到615美元,你知道,大约比当前有10%的上涨空间。在最可能的情况下,你看到的是——我的意思是,公允价值肯定比当前高出远超过100%。

我很难说一笔交易会带来什么结果,但我们就假设一笔交易带来公允价值。你有可能在未来几个月赚到100%。你知道,你已经深深处于这个过程中了。如果你今天买入,我想你在低端会得到未来3个月10%的回报,在高端会得到未来几个月100%以上的回报。

所以,我认为鉴于这种动态,这是一个非常有吸引力的风险。

Yeah, it makes sense. Yeah, sorry I was thinking about where the stock was actually trading at the time. Um yeah, I mean I think that's true. I think I I don't think there's any doubt that this stock is dramatically undervalued. I think it's just what will happen in the strategic process. I think that is ultimately what we're waiting for. But I think my point to you know people listening to this looking at it for the first time is you [snorts] have an incredible riskreward because in the very worst case scenario theoretically you're looking at 6 to 615 a share which is you know roughly 10% upside from here. In a most likely scenario, you're looking at I mean, fair value is certainly well north of 100% from here. It's hard for me to say what a transaction results in, but let's just assume a transaction results in fair value. You're potentially going to make 100% over the next few months. You know, you're already very deep in this process. If you're buying today, you're getting on the low side, I suppose, a 10% return over the next 3 months and on the high side 100% plus return over the next few months. So, I think it's just a very attractive risk given that dynamic.

还有好几件别的事,但我认为人们看到这里会说:“哦,没有任何更新。”我待会儿要谈谈“没有更新”。没有任何更新。什么都没发生。我认为没有什么比这更偏离事实了。我认为确实有真正的谈判和真正的工作在推进。

如果我可以再啰嗦一会儿,我想指出,你知道,他们调整后的EBITDA数字。他们把特别委员会的法律费用加回去,而在第二季度,加回去的金额大约是300万美元,如果你看同比的变化,大约300万美元,对于一个才3个月、还没有……

的过程来说,你作为银行或成功费一般会拿到报酬,300万美元是一个很大很大的增长。我想说,如果他们开出这么大的账单,谈判大概是相当激烈和密集的。

There's been several others, but I think people look here and say, "Oh, there's been no update." And I want to talk about no update in a second. There's been no update. Nothing's happening. I I don't think anything could be further from the truth. Like I I think there's real negotiations and real work getting done. And if I can ramble for more a second, I would point to, you know, their adjusted EBA number. they add back the legal costs of the special committee and in Q2 it was like three million bucks was the ad back if you look at the delta year-over-year like three million bucks for a process in 3 months that hasn't like you generally get paid as a bank or a success fee 3 million bucks is a big big increase like I would suggest that the negotiations are kind of hot and heavy if they're running that big bill

是的,我认为,就像我之前说的,拖了这么长时间,最可能的原因或许是类似Payaneer那笔交易刚刚制造了一个非常近期的可比案例,从而引发了进一步的谈判。我认为另一件事是,他们只是在走一个严谨的流程,而严谨的流程有时确实要花相当长的时间。

所以我不认为这……我认为这属于典型流程中偏长的一端,但我绝不认为这有什么不寻常。

yeah I think like I said before I The most likely reason for taking this long is potentially something like the payaneer transaction just creating a very recent comp and that leading to further negotiations. I think the other thing is they're just running a robust process and sometimes robust processes take a fair amount of time. So I I don't think this is I think this is on the long side of a typical process, but I don't think it's by any means unusual

你认为Priority对一家战略投资者来说会是一个有吸引力的战略收购标的吗?绝对会。是的。对任何人来说,我真的认为,对一家私募股权公司、对一家战略投资者来说,我都会喜欢……那个资金管理解决方案业务是一块瑰宝,那是一门了不起的生意。

Do you think priority would be an attractive uh an attractive strategic acquisition target to a strategic? Absolutely. Yeah. I for I mean for anyone really think of I mean for a private equity firm for a strategic I mean I would like that treasury solutions business is a gem like that is an incredible business.

所以我同意私募股权公司这一点,但我之所以提到战略投资者,是因为我能看到一种情形发生:CEO说我不卖给任何人。公司走了一个完整而公平的流程,他们坐在那里,CEO说,让我们……让我们进入我们的狂热状态,James,CEO把他的报价提高到8,而有一个战略投资者出价12、15,随便你选哪个数字,对吧。

而紧张之处在于,特别委员会,我的意思是,没有CEO的祝福他们就不能卖,对吧,但特别委员会说,嘿,我们收到了这个巨额的溢价报价,你需要把你的报价提上来,比如如果你出11我们可以卖给你,但如果有战略投资者出12,而你说我们不会……

你不会对其他人这么做,如果你出9,那我们不能这么做,而且你也需要照照镜子问自己,嘿,当有一个战略投资者应该出最高价12的时候,我为什么想以9把公司私有化,我难道不应该直接去和战略投资者接触然后卖掉吗。

所以我能看到类似的事情在这里发生,只是因为我和你看法一致,我认为这是一个非常具有战略意义的资产,而支付行业的历史表明,总会有三个战略买家想收购你,砍掉你的SG&A,然后实现巨大的协同效应,因为这类交易的协同效应是巨大的。

I so I I agree on private equity firm but I I mentioned strategic because I could see one scenario happening where the CEO says I'm not selling to anyone. The company runs a full and fair process and they're sitting there and the CEO let's get let's go in our fever James the CEO's bumped his bid up to eight and there's a strategic at 12 15 whatever number you want to choose right and the the tension is the special committee I mean they can't sell without the CEO's ble blessing right but the special committee going hey we've got this massive premium bid you need to get your you need to get your bid up like we could sell to you at 11 if there's a strategic at 12 but you say we won't we you won't do to anyone else if you're at nine like we can't do that and you also need to look yourself in the mirror and say hey why do I want to take this private for nine when there's a strategic who should pay the highest bid at 12 like shouldn't I just go engage with the strategic and sell so I could see something like that uh happening here just cuz I agree with you I think this is a very strategic asset and the history of payments suggests there's always three strategic biders who want to buy you rip out your SGNA and just realize huge synergies because the synergies to deals are massive.

是的。我的意思是,有大量的可比案例,我的意思是,在支付SAS大灾难之前,你知道,通常是13到15倍的NTMA。现在,我们说的是8到N倍,而我们仍然获得巨大的上行空间。所以我认为8到N倍大概是这笔交易应该发生的下限。

而我能轻易看到它以高得多的价格成交。而且,你知道,8到9倍就是12美元的股价或更高。

Yeah. I mean, there are a ton of comps for I mean, prior to kind of the payment SAS apocalypse, it used to be, you know, 13 to 15 times NTMA. Now, we're talking 8 to N times and we're still getting huge upside. So, um I think 8 to N times is probably the floor of where a transaction should occur for this. And I could easily see it happening much higher. Um, and again, you know, eight to nine times is a $12 stock or higher.

另一件有趣的事是,我跟踪过很多这类案例,它们大多数会召开财报电话会议,对吧?它们会说,嘿,我们知道大家都想了解战略流程的最新进展。我们无法更新。你知道,如果是CEO想搞私有化,他们会说这掌握在特别委员会手中。

如果只是一家宣布了战略评估的普通公司,他们会说,嘿,我们不会分享任何消息。而这家公司甚至都没有承认过战略流程。你知道,已经开了三次财报电话会议,Q4、Q1、Q2,而他们在任何一次电话会议中都没有提到战略流程,除了说,嘿,战略流程带来了增加的加回项。

而最近一次财报电话会议的最后一个问题来自一位分析师。我记不清是哪家银行的了,但他说,嘿,所有投资者真正关心的就是战略……就是这个特别委员会,而你们已经九个月没谈过了。比如,我们能得到最新进展吗?

你们能做点什么吗?他们没有打断他,但也没有回应,然后就结束了电话会议。所以,我不知道。比如,你怎么看……你怎么看这件事?这对我来说就是非常奇怪。

You The other interesting thing here is I followed a lot of these and most of them will open up their earnings calls, right? And they'll say, "Hey, we know everybody wants an update on the strategic process. We can't update it." You know, if it's a CEO trying to do a take private, they'll say it's in the hands of a special committee. If it's just a general company that's announced the strategic review, they'll say, "Hey, we we won't share any news." The company hasn't even acknowledged the strategic process. you know, there's been three earnings calls, Q4, Q1, Q2, and they haven't even mentioned the strategic process in any of the calls except to say, hey, there was increased adbacks from the strategic process. And the very last question in the most recent earnings call was an analyst. I can't remember what bank it was from, but he was saying, "Hey, all investors really care about is the strategic is this special committee, and you guys haven't talked about in nine months. Like, can we get an update? Can you guys do something?" and they didn't cut him off, but they didn't respond and they ended the call after that. So, I don't know. Like, what do you make they What do you make of that? It's just very weird to me.

是的。听着,我认为这是恰当的做法。我认为这让人不舒服,我理解为什么人们不喜欢这样,但我认为幕后绝对有一个严谨的流程在进行。我的意思是,你要么什么都不说,要么接起电话说我们无法对战略评估置评。

我认为两者之间并没有太大区别。要么是我们无法置评,要么就是你干脆什么都不说。而无论哪种方式,都是在什么都不说。所以我认为从法律角度讲,他们做的事情是对的。我欣赏他们仍然召开电话会议这一事实。

有些公司在战略评估流程期间不召开电话会议,正是出于这个原因。所以我实际上欣赏他们至少在战略评估期间还召开电话会议。我尊重他们的理由和他们的思路,即不予置评。尽管我也能理解股东群体的沮丧,他们想听到一些消息,但一旦他们有了最终确定、可以沟通的事情,我相信他们会与我们沟通,到那时我们就能评估他们所做的决定。

Yeah. I look, I think it's the appropriate thing to do. I I think it's uncomfortable and I understand why people don't like it, but I think there is absolutely a robust process happening behind the scenes. And I mean, you can either say nothing or you can get on and say we can't comment on the, you know, the strategic review. And I there's not really a big difference between the two. It's it's either we can't comment or you just say nothing. And either way, it's saying nothing. So I think from a legal standpoint, they're doing the right things. I appreciate the fact that they're still holding conference calls. Some some companies don't hold conference calls during strategic review processes for that exact reason. So I actually appreciate the fact that they are at least holding conference calls during the strategic review. and I respect their reasoning and their thought process and not commenting. Even though I can also empathize with the shareholder base that's frustrated and wants to hear something, but as soon as they have something that's finalized and they can communicate, I'm sure they'll be communicating with us and at that point we'll get to evaluate what they've decided.

不,你说了一些很好的观点,因为我同意你。比如,一件很糟糕的事是,当一家公司进入战略评估然后就封锁消息,你会想,嘿,我是股东,而这不是一门容易理解的生意。有很多数字,很多变动的部分。

比如,如果你不给我任何评论,你有点把这变成了一只黑箱,现在我不知道,比如,如果你来宣布以8成交,按市值计价我大概会高兴,但到那时我不知道这到底是低估还是高估了公司,对吧?所以我认为你说得对,他们继续开电话会议是件好事。

而且你大概也说对了,什么都不说就是最好的做法,因为我告诉你,我以前做过这些,当你在特别……当你在特别委员会里时,你说的每一个字都会被审查。比如我记得有一次,有一家公司,他们在每次财报电话会议结束时都会说,我们迫不及待想在下个季度和你交流,而他们当时处于战略评估中,他们没有说那句话,我有几个朋友就说,天哪,交易要来了,他们在向我们眨眼暗示有交易要来了,而交易并没有来,但一切都会被解读。

你知道,这里另一件有趣的事是,我总是担心,这也是很多公司取消财报电话会议的原因之一,尤其是当CEO竞购公司时,你总是担心他们会开始把坏消息一次性倒出来,对吧?这样股东就会乐于摆脱这门生意。

No, you make some great points because I am with you. Like one of the things that sucks is when a company goes into a strategic review and then they black out and you're like, "Hey, I'm a shareholder and this is not an easy business to understand. There's a lot of numbers, a lot of moving parts. Like if you're not giving any commentary to me, you've kind of turned this into a black box and now I don't know like if you came and announced the deal at 8, I'd probably be happy on a markettomarket basis, but I don't know if like that undervalues or overvalues the company at that point, right? So I think you're right, it's nice that they continue doing calls. And you're probably right that just saying nothing is the best thing because I will tell you, I've done these before and every word that you say when you're in a special when you're in a special committee gets reviewed. Like I remember one time uh one company they had ended every earnings call saying like we can't wait to talk to you next quarter and they were in a strategic review and they didn't say that and I had a few friends who were like oh my god the deal is coming like this they're they're winking to us that there's a a deal coming and the deal did not come but everything gets read you know the other interesting thing here is I always worry and this is one of the reasons a lot of companies do take uh earnings calls off especially when the CEO bids for the company you always worry that they're they're going to start kitchen sinking things, right? So that shareholders are kind of happy to give the get rid of the business.

而如果你回顾他们的财报幻灯片,看看他们的盈利在流程之前到流程之后是如何演变的,这很有意思。所以这将是Q325,是他们在提出报价之前的最后一次财报。

And it is interesting if you review their earning slides, how their earnings have evolved from before the process to after the process. So this would be Q325 is the last earnings they do before they make the bid.

你知道,他们去掉了几张幻灯片。确实感觉他们在稍微淡化这件事。我只想指出,他们过去会做一张近期业务赢单更新的幻灯片。自从他们宣布那次财报电话会议以来,他们就没再做过了。他们过去会强调这个,说,嘿,我们正继续向更高价值的细分市场转移,对吧?

还有他们的资金管理业务,他们会谈论业务如何向那边转移。所以,是在获得更好的业务、更好的利润率。他们把那去掉了,他们过去还有一张财务指引幻灯片,说,嘿,这是我们的财务指引,并把它拆解开来。

他们把那也去掉了。他们仍然给出指引,但我只是觉得有趣的是,他们开始撤下很多关键绩效指标。我不知道那里是否有火。我不知道那里是否有烟,但我只是觉得这值得注意。

You know, they have taken away a few slides. Like it does feel like they're talking it down a little bit. And I would just point out they used to do a recent business wins update slide. They haven't done that since they announced their earnings call. They used to highlight uh this thing that said, "Hey, we're continuing to shift to the higher value segments, right?" And they treasury and they would talk about how their business is moving over there. So, it's getting better business, better margin. That they dropped that and they used to have a financial guidance slide that said, "Hey, here's that our financial guidance and break it down." And they dropped that. They still guide, but I just thought it was interesting that they started pulling down a lot of the KPIs. I don't know if there's any I don't know if there's any fire there. I don't know if there's any smoke there, but I just thought it was worth noting.

是的。我想再次强调,对于我根本不知道的事情,我希望能谨慎地不去猜测。我想再次重申的是,我对于特别委员会中有独立董事感到非常放心和有信心,这些独立董事得到了非常优秀的财务顾问的建议,这些顾问曾为其他类似的支付交易提供过建议,他们非常了解这个行业、这个领域以及估值。

而且我有信心,这项业务有大量的可比案例。并不是只有一两个可比案例,而是有很多近期的可比案例,过去10年里也有很多可比案例,它们都指向相对于该股当前价格的大幅溢价。所以我认为,从我的角度来看,对于任何第一次关注这件事的人来说,机会在于:在低端,有一个目前我认为与内在价值完全脱节的报价,但仍比该股当前价格高出10%;而在高端,有一个潜在的收购,可能较当前水平高出100%以上。

然后从理论上讲,如果这家公司继续保持上市,那么你面对的是一只极度错位的股票,随着人们开始更多地关注这个故事并真正深入思考其业务分部,它可能会在相对较短的时间内翻倍,因为它理应达到内在价值。

Yeah. I mean, again, I I want to be careful to speculate on things that I just don't know. I I think again, what I would reiterate is I feel very comfortable and confident that there are independent director directors on the special committee that are being advised by very good financial adviserss that have advised [clears throat] on other similar payments transactions that know the industry and the space and valuations very well. And then I'm confident there are just a ton of comps for this business. It's not like there's one or two comps. I mean, there's a lot of recent comps. There's a lot of comps over the past 10 years and they just all point to, you know, sort of massive premiums to where the stock is today. And so I think again the opportunity from my perspective for anyone looking at this for the first time [snorts] is again on the low end you have a bid that's currently uh I think completely disconnected from intrinsic value but still 10% higher than where the stock is today and then at the high end you have a perspective takeout that could be north of 100% from here. And then theoretically, if this were to stay public, you know, you have a stock that is extremely dislocated and probably doubles in a relatively short period of time as it should reach intrinsic value as people start to follow the story more and really think through the segmentation.

是的。另一件有意思的事是,我又对事件进程过于着迷了,但公司基本上一切照常,对吧?他们最近宣布了一笔小型的补强式收购。当你拥有这样一家支付公司时,战略买家喜欢收购这类公司的原因在于,SG&A和协同效应都非常巨大。

他们刚刚做了一笔小小的补强式收购。在我看来,这项业务表现良好。我的意思是,你已经看过了,但你知道,它在增长,在产生大量现金。随着他们等待特别委员会的战略流程完成,现金正在资产负债表上积累。

但如果他们没能达成交易,这也是一项表现良好的业务,那么他们今年迄今产生的约5000万美元现金,就可以直接用来偿还债务,或者进行股票回购。他们过去做过非常小规模的股票回购。所以我认为,鉴于这项业务目前的表现,后端有很多可选性。

Yeah. And the other interesting is I mean again I get all obsessed with the the event process, but it has been kind of business as usual for the company, right? They recently announced a small little tuckin acquisition. And when you've when you've got a payments company like this, again, the reason strategics love to buy these is the SGNA and the synergies are just massive. They just did a little tuck in acquisition. The business has performed well to my eyes. I I I mean, you went through it, but you know, it's growing. It's generating a lot of cash. The cash is kind of building up on the balance sheet as they wait for the special committee strategic process to get done. But if they if they don't reach a deal like this is a business that is performing well all of a sudden the 50 million or so so of cash that they've generated so far this year they can just go pay down debt or they could do a share repurchase. They have done very tiny share repurchase in the past. So I I think there's a lot of optionality on the back end just given how the business is performing here.

是的。是的,我的意思是,你看,我真的不认为市场上还有哪项业务能让我指出,它拥有高经常性收入、高进入壁垒、强劲增长,而市盈率却低于自由现金流的五倍——是真正的自由现金流,不是那种包含大量股权激励的调整后数字,而是实际的真实自由现金流数字。

我认为这在公开市场和私募市场都极其罕见。我认为这里是一笔不可思议的交易,而且我认为它无论如何都会实现,无论是通过私有化交易,还是股票继续保持上市。

Yeah. Yeah, I mean, look, I just don't think there's any business out there I can point to where you have, you know, high recurring revenue, high barriers to entry, you know, strong growth, and it's trading at, you know, less than five times free cash flow, like true free cash flow, not like a adjusted number with a lot of stockbased comp, like an actual true free cash flow number. I I think it's just extremely rare in the public and the private markets. I think it's an incredible deal here and I think that will get realized one way or the other whether it's through a private transaction or whether it's the stock staying public.

太好了。你知道,我希望它是通过私有化交易实现。我希望它尽早实现,而且我希望它是以大幅溢价实现,因为说实话,如果是10,我会——我的意思是,我一直在想这件事,但即便是10,我认为他们也是捡了个大便宜,而这比当前价格高出太多,简直可笑。

但这是一家表现良好的杠杆实体。将其私有化存在协同效应,你知道,现在价格是10,市值大概是6亿到7亿美元左右,也许我有点偏差,但你大概能省下400万到500万美元的上市公司成本,而CEO已经拥有这家公司60%的股份,所以你说,嘿,我开一张2亿到3亿美元的支票,就能以一个非常有意思的倍数拥有整个业务,而且顺便说一句,我每年还能省下400万美元的上市公司成本,在2亿的基础上省下400万,这从一开始就是相当不错的回报。

所以,是的,总之,关于优先事项,我们还有什么应该谈论或考虑的吗?

Perfect. Well, you know, I I hope it is through a private transaction. I hope it is through one sooner than later and I hope it is at a massive premium because honestly, if it was 10, I would pro I mean, I I always think of it, but even 10, I think they would be getting a steal at and that's just so far above the current price, it's laughable. But this is a lever entity that's performing well. There are synergies to taking this private you know this is what it's at 10 it's what a 600 million 700 million market cap something like that maybe I'm a little off but you probably save four to5 million in public company cost and the CEO already owns 60% of this so you say hey I write a 200 $300 million check I own this whole business at a really interesting multiple and by the way I say four million in public company costs per year like4 million on a 200 that's a pretty pretty solid return right off the bat so yeah anyway anything we should be talking about or thinking about with priorities.

再次,我真的想鼓励大家去看看这项业务的各个分部。真正花时间去了解Treasury Solutions,因为我认为那真的是一项不可思议的业务。你知道,花时间研究所有不同的并购交易。

我的意思是,你有很多近期的案例。World Pay、Avid Exchange、Nuvi、Payaneer,有大量不同的例子。我认为,如果你只是花时间看看这项业务的质量、市场上存在的大量私募可比案例,我想你就能真正放心,这里有着不可思议的风险回报比,我认为在长期内下行空间非常有限,而上行空间非常显著,而且你可能会在非常近的将来就实现这一点。

所以我认为,从今天的风险回报角度来看,这真的令人兴奋,而且极具吸引力。

Again, I would I would really just encourage people to go look at the various segments of the business. Really spend time to understand Treasury Solutions because that is just a really I think incredible business. You know, spend time looking through all the different M&A transactions. I mean, you have a lot of recent ones. Um, you know, World Pay, Avid Exchange, uh, Nuvi, you know, Payaneer, there's a ton of different examples. [snorts] And I think if you just spend time looking at the quality of the business, the amount of private comps that are out there, I think you can get really comfortable that this is just an incredible riskreward here and I think very limited downside over a long period of time and a really sign significant upside and potentially you're going to realize that in the very near term. So I think it's really exciting uh from a riskreward standpoint today and super attractive.

他说在等什么

特别委员会战略评估流程的结果
更接近公允价值的修订报价(例如每股12至19美元),或第三方收购
未来几个月公司公告/SEC文件
若实现则支持看涨论点;若公司维持上市状态而未解决估值差距,或报价仍处于低位,则削弱该论点

这个频道对 $PRI 的历次判断

Yet Another Value Podcast 在这只股票上只有这一条判断。

2026-09-10看涨本条
归咎于不同的原因,但你读了二季度电话会议,他们说的是,我们要上调营收指引,或者说我们会落在营收指引的高端,但我们会落在 EBITDA 指引的低端。然后你继续往下读,他们谈到,我们有很多业务的增长速度比整体业务更快,但很多业务的利润率更低,或者有一些其它情况。这在某种程度上影响了营收和利润率。他们有一些业务是记录支付方而非商户,所以入账的毛利率要低得多。
看完整历史 ›
美股听风