A possible tie-up with Amazon is hugely exciting and traders have been quick to price in a value. Analyst Edmond Jackson gives his opinion and current rating for the popular shares.
Might a film and TV deal offer substance to reinforce a new bull trend for this fantasy miniature war games manufacturer?
The FTSE 250 index is generally seen as bearish territory at the moment as domestic businesses face potentially a tough long recession.
Yet last Friday, Games Workshop (LSE:GAW) rose 16% to 8,480p and continued to edge up yesterday to 8,550p. The catalyst is an “Agreement in principle” for Amazon (NASDAQ:AMZN), to develop film and TV for the UK company’s intellectual property (IP).
Warhammer, a table-top war game, would be made into film/TV starring ex-Superman actor Henry Cavill, who will also produce the adaptation.
‘Something new’ is required on a grand scale
Games Workshop’s licensing income has otherwise consolidated, possibly to around £17 million annually relative to £200 million or so revenue from games. Profit growth needs a new angle after Covid lockdowns boosted online sales.
Otherwise, the stock has looked exposed on a growth-type price/earnings (PE) multiple versus a broadly flat earnings scenario for the May 2023 and 2024 years. There is a respectable dividend record, but consensus for a circa 3% prospective yield at the current share price assumes a 54% hike in the total pay-out, with earnings cover reducing from 2.4x near 1.5x.
Hedge fund GLG Partners raised a short position from the 0.5% disclosure threshold last spring to 0.75% by end-September – a not immaterial bet against a circa £2.5 billion company. GLG fortunately reduced this to 0.4% as of 7 December.
Amazon has declared: “This is the first deal of its kind for Amazon Studios for IP of this scale, allowing use of the Warhammer title across its entertainment businesses...We are excited to work with Games Workshop...for our global customers to experience for years to come.”
Potential step change for public awareness of Warhammer products
A 17% re-rating implies the market values this deal at around £400 million, which prices in plenty before any terms are declared.
But, if successful, it could also be a marketing coup, raising global awareness of Warhammer and boosts sales of games.
The announcement was, however, ambiguous as to “granting Amazon associated merchandising rights”: does that imply the T-shirt, so to speak, or products as well?
The latter could be a good thing if terms are fair on Games Workshop and Amazon flexes its marketing muscle; but where powerful American firms are concerned, you need to beware of exploitation.
- The part of the UK stock market the pros are tipping as a big winner in 2023
- 10 high-yield mid-cap income shares for dividend investors
Amazon already sells Warhammer sets on behalf of Games Workshop so it would not be surprising if this retailer wants to leverage product sales as a result of its film/TV initiative.
Interest rate and company-specific issues drive this stock
Apart from this latest re-rate, macro factors have appeared to prevail – specifically, changes in interest rate expectations as they affect growth stocks. Have we come to the end of an era since 2008, when “growth” was greatly preferred over “value” amid ultra-low rates?
When I examined Games Workshop last March at 7,150p, it had de-rated over 40% from a September 2021 all-time high of 12,220p, similar to many other growth stocks as markets anticipated higher interest rates.
Theoretically, this reduces long-term returns from higher-growth companies when discounted to a net present value. Yet Baillie Gifford, the Scottish fund manager, had doubled its stake in Games Workshop to 10%.
Earnings per share (EPS) growth forecasts were low-single-digit percent versus an 18x PE multiple and a price/sales ratio was over 6x. How much of this gets excused by an operating margin of around 40%?
Games Workshop Group - financial summary
Year end 29 May
|Turnover (£ million)||119||118||158||221||257||270||353||387|
|Operating margin (%)||13.8||14.3||24.2||33.6||31.6||33.4||43.0||40.6|
|Operating profit (£m)||16.5||16.9||38.3||74.3||81.2||90.0||152||157|
|Net profit (£m)||12.3||13.5||30.5||59.5||65.8||71.3||122||128|
|Reported EPS (p)||38.3||42.0||94.5||182||201||218||371||391|
|Normalised EPS (p)||41.9||43.5||93.4||182||204||219||374||395|
|Earnings per share growth (%)||3.3||3.8||114||95.4||11.5||7.6||70.9||5.5|
|Operating cashflow/share (p)||72.7||75.4||136||214||221||319||403||370|
|Free cashflow/share (p)||34.1||36.0||96.3||148||152||244||312||271|
|Dividend per share (p)||52.0||20.0||80.0||120||120||135||185||160|
|Covered by earnings (x)||0.7||2.1||1.2||1.5||1.7||1.6||2.0||2.4|
|Net debt (£m)||-12.6||-11.8||-17.9||-28.5||-29.4||-20.8||-38.2||-22.5|
|Net assets/share (p)||161||166||196||272||328||409||599||715|
Source: historic company REFS and company accounts
As a fundamentals-driven analyst, I concluded that buying around 7,150p was more an act of faith that the drop on the chart would mean-revert. Stagflation could compromise toy sales and also raise manufacturing input costs.
The stock had fallen to 6,000p by mid-June then re-bounded to over 7,500p, but had fallen again to below 5,700p by late September.
This second low occurred in the wake of a 21 September update that cited trading for the three months to 28 August “in line” with expectations, despite like-for-like pre-tax profit down 13% to £39 million on revenue up 8% to £106 million.
The stock then re-rated 33% to over 7,500p despite no company-specific news. It appeared chiefly sentiment recovering after the UK’s disastrous mini-budget that saw the chancellor and prime minister changed, and also (misplaced?) optimism that US inflation and interest rates would fall in 2023.
A 7 December update ahead of 10 January interim results estimated a 10% decline in core revenue, and licensing revenue down 30% to £14 million. With core operating profit near flat at around £70 million, the element from licensing is down 31% to £13 million – hence pre-tax profit expected to be down around 6% to £83 million.
The stock bumped along indifferently, as macro issues prevailed.
Distinguishing Games Workshop over next two years
Its re-rate may also reflect sensitivity – desperation even – for positive stories, when so much else involves “wait-and-see” for numbers and narratives to worsen. If the Amazon deal proves transformative, this stock is likely to enjoy some premium for scarcity.
The company has also shown that its games cult following meant a resilient performance over the last major recession: revenue slipped in the May 2010 year only in constant currency terms, by 3% to £122 million (versus £419 million consensus for the May 2023 year) and pre-tax profit actually leapt 115% to £16 million.
- Richard Beddard: why I rate this market leader with a winning culture
- Professional investor poll: biggest risks and market forecasts for 2023
The CEO’s narrative back then explained this by way of “making the best war-gaming miniatures” for global customers, also a “hobby centre” marketing approach becoming part of communities.
In the last financial year, the UK constituted just 22% of revenue, hence Games Workshop should not be seen as a domestic stock. Brexit has not impaired continental European revenue, which rose from 23% to 25% of total. The US remained dominant, rising from 41% to 44% - it is unclear whether government cash-hand-outs during Covid lockdowns helped, and that US revenue may temper.
This re-rate appears likely to ease
Ascribing circa £400 million of value to the effects of this deal seems highly speculative until more proof is seen, and I am not surprised that the stock has eased 2% to 8,385p today.
Last January’s interim results provided no insights as to Christmas period trading, leaving the stock subject to influences of wider retail numbers.
It is hard to see what can provide another catalyst in the near term unless substance of the Amazon deal proves especially good.
Meanwhile, I am wary on the macro front, of how investors may not appreciate that interest rates will have to stay higher for longer if inflation is to be tackled.
Holders can take some encouragement, however, that GLG may seek to further reduce its short position now the bear case is disrupted and potentially offers a long-term bull era. As a trade, it appears to have breached the notion of a trailing stop loss on the upside.
I missed a buying opportunity last autumn and think Baillie Gifford deserves a hat-tip for making its own luck, doubling its stake last spring. Even so, I do not currently upgrade my stance. Hold.
Edmond Jackson is a freelance contributor and not a direct employee of interactive investor.
These articles are provided for information purposes only. Occasionally, an opinion about whether to buy or sell a specific investment may be provided by third parties. The content is not intended to be a personal recommendation to buy or sell any financial instrument or product, or to adopt any investment strategy as it is not provided based on an assessment of your investing knowledge and experience, your financial situation or your investment objectives. The value of your investments, and the income derived from them, may go down as well as up. You may not get back all the money that you invest. The investments referred to in this article may not be suitable for all investors, and if in doubt, an investor should seek advice from a qualified investment adviser.
Full performance can be found on the company or index summary page on the interactive investor website. Simply click on the company's or index name highlighted in the article.
We use a combination of fundamental and technical analysis in forming our view as to the valuation and prospects of an investment. Where relevant we have set out those particular matters we think are important in the above article, but further detail can be found here.
Please note that our article on this investment should not be considered to be a regular publication.
Details of all recommendations issued by ii during the previous 12-month period can be found here.
ii adheres to a strict code of conduct. Contributors may hold shares or have other interests in companies included in these portfolios, which could create a conflict of interests. Contributors intending to write about any financial instruments in which they have an interest are required to disclose such interest to ii and in the article itself. ii will at all times consider whether such interest impairs the objectivity of the recommendation.
In addition, individuals involved in the production of investment articles are subject to a personal account dealing restriction, which prevents them from placing a transaction in the specified instrument(s) for a period before and for five working days after such publication. This is to avoid personal interests conflicting with the interests of the recipients of those investment articles.