Tuesday, April 28, 2015

'The Commoditization of the Starbucks Experience'

In 2007, Starbucks Founder Howard Schultz wrote a memo to key executives at SBUX entitled "The Commoditization of the Starbucks Experience." Here is a reprint of that memo, with emphasis added on my part in bold:

"As you prepare for the FY 08 strategic planning process, I want to share some of my thoughts with you.

Over the past ten years, in order to achieve the growth, development, and scale necessary to go from less than 1,000 stores to 13,000 stores and beyond, we have had to make a series of decisions that, in retrospect, have lead to the watering down of the Starbucks experience, and, what some might call the commoditization of our brand.

Many of these decisions were probably right at the time, and on their own merit would not have created the dilution of the experience; but in this case, the sum is much greater and, unfortunately, much more damaging than the individual pieces. For example, when we went to automatic espresso machines, we solved a major problem in terms of speed of service and efficiency. At the same time, we overlooked the fact that we would remove much of the romance and theatre that was in play with the use of the La Marzocca machines. This specific decision became even more damaging when the height of the machines, which are now in thousands of stores, blocked the visual sight line the customer previously had to watch the drink being made, and for the intimate experience with the barista. This, coupled with the need for fresh roasted coffee in every North America city and every international market, moved us toward the decision and the need for flavor locked packaging. Again, the right decision at the right time, and once again I believe we overlooked the cause and the affect of flavor lock in our stores. We achieved fresh roasted bagged coffee, but at what cost? The loss of aroma -- perhaps the most powerful non-verbal signal we had in our stores; the loss of our people scooping fresh coffee from the bins and grinding it fresh in front of the custome! r, and once again stripping the store of tradition and our heritage?

Then we moved to store design. Clearly we have had to streamline store design to gain efficiencies of scale and to make sure we had the ROI on sales to investment ratios that would satisfy the financial side of our business. However, one of the results has been stores that no longer have the soul of the past and reflect a chain of stores vs. the warm feeling of a neighborhood store. Some people even call our stores sterile, cookie cutter, no longer reflecting the passion our partners feel about our coffee. In fact, I am not sure people today even know we are roasting coffee. You certainly can't get the message from being in our stores. The merchandise, more art than science, is far removed from being the merchant that I believe we can be and certainly at a minimum should support the foundation of our coffee heritage. Some stores don't have coffee grinders, French presses from Bodum, or even coffee filters.

Now that I have provided you with a list of some of the underlying issues that I believe we need to solve, let me say at the outset that we have all been part of these decisions. I take full responsibility myself, but we desperately need to look into the mirror and realize it's time to get back to the core and make the changes necessary to evoke the heritage, the tradition, and the passion that we all have for the true Starbucks experience. While the current state of affairs for the most part is self induced, that has lead to competitors of all kinds, small and large coffee companies, fast food operators, and mom and pops, to position themselves in a way that creates awareness, trial and loyalty of people who previously have been Starbucks customers. This must be eradicated.

I have said for 20 years that our success is not an entitlement and now it's proving to be a reality. Let's be smarter about how we are spending our time, money and resources. Let's get back to the core. Push for innovation and do the things nec! essary to! once again differentiate Starbucks from all others. We source and buy the highest quality coffee. We have built the most trusted brand in coffee in the world, and we have an enormous responsibility to both the people who have come before us and the 150,000 partners and their families who are relying on our stewardship.

Finally, I would like to acknowledge all that you do for Starbucks. Without your passion and commitment, we would not be where we are today.

Onward…"

For me, this memo is instructive, and reveals a plethora of gems about business development and sustainability that investors might find fruitful; some insights I took away include:

1) The Importance of Brand Identity – As you listen to Mr. Schultz discuss Starbucks, you can sense that he is coming from a position of personal connection, rather than a purely financial perspective. His emphasis is centered on what makes a Starbucks different, and how that has been lost in the search for efficiency; ironically, it was the rush to short-term profitability and growth that led to the impending commoditization of the Starbucks brand.

2) The Street's Misguided Guidance – As Howard notes in the first paragraph, the company sacrificed on the experience in order to achieve the growth, development, and scale necessary to go from less than 1,000 stores to 13,000 stores in just 10 years (that's an average of more than three new stores each and every day for a decade). A lot of this was in hopes of satisfying the street, which led to decisions focused on short-term growth rather than long-term sustainability. Unfortunately, the commoditization of the cookie cutter model destroys brand equity, and leads to price competition; considering that a cup of black coffee at Starbuck's is more than twice the cost of a black coffee at McDonald's (MCD), it appears that management made the right decision in rethinking the brand experience and moving back towards the core: differentiation.

3) Balancing the Qualitativ! e and the! Quantitative – It's important to recognize that Mr. Schultz isn't oblivious to the financials; as he notes, for example, the store design the company was using at the time was chosen to gain efficiencies of scale and to make sure the ROI would satisfy the financial side of our business. But this cannot be looked at in a vacuum, particularly for someone like SBUX that isn't looking to compete purely on price. Some of the costs may not seem entirely economical in a spreadsheet, but can add intangibles to the experience or the brand that can be explained in an anecdotal sense – for example, the ability to draw in captive customers who willingly pay more than twice for your product despite the availability of convenient and comparable alternatives.

CONCLUSION

When this memo was written, Mr. Schultz had spent the previous seven years as chairman of the board after having stepped down from the CEO role at the turn of the century; as discussed in his book, "Onward," the initial reaction to the memo was a mixture of skepticism and sloth, with few/no serious changes made in the following six months. By the beginning of 2008, the stock had fallen by more than half from its peak in 2006, and Mr. Schultz stepped in to redirect the company from an obsession with growth towards a focus on brand integrity.

While the stock bottomed along with the market in the early months of 2009, it has ballooned more than 7x ever since; since Mr. Schultz returned to the helm, the stock is up more than 175%, while the DJIA and the S&P 500 are both in the red.

To this day, the company finds themselves under constant pressure from McDonald's, which has continually attempted to replicate their product offerings but at a lower price point; considering the strong business results Starbucks has continually delivered, it's safe to say that the brand has escaped commoditization as was once feared.

Newmont Posts 2Q Prelim Operational Update - Analyst Blog

Gold mining giant Newmont Mining Corporation (NEM) has declared its preliminary gold and copper production for the second quarter of 2013. The company has also reaffirmed its outlook for 2013.

Newmont's attributable gold production for second-quarter 2013 amounted to 1.167 million ounces compared with 1.182 million ounces registered in second-quarter 2012 and 1.165 million ounces in first-quarter 2013. Attributable copper production for second-quarter 2013 was 34 million pounds compared with 38 million pounds in both second-quarter 2012 and first-quarter 2013.

Attributable gold sales were 1.213 million ounces for second-quarter 2013 compared with 1.140 million ounces in both second-quarter 2012 and in first-quarter 2013. Attributable copper sales were 37 million pounds for second-quarter 2013 compared with 28 million pounds for second-quarter 2012 and 31 million pounds for first-quarter 2013.

Newmont also maintained its outlook for 2013 and anticipates attributable gold and copper production to be roughly 4.8 million to 5.1 million ounces and 150 million to 170 million pounds, respectively.

Newmont's revenues and profit declined by double digits in first-quarter 2013 hurt by lower grade and shipping delays. Adjusted earnings and sales missed the Zacks Consensus Estimates.

Attributable gold production fell due to lower production across North and South America. Weaker gold and copper pricing affected the results. Newmont may continue to face headwinds due to increasing mining and non-mining costs.

Newmont is focused on reviewing the potential opportunities to improve its cash flow and preserve financial flexibility under the dominant volatile metal price environment. It is slated to release its second-quarter 2013 results after the market closes on Jul 25.

Newmont currently carries a Zacks Rank #4 (Sell).

Other companies in the mining industry with favorable Zacks Rank are NovaGold Resources Inc. (NG), Pretium Resources Inc. (PVG) and Lak! e Shore Gold Corp. (LSG). All of them retain a Zacks Rank #2 (Buy).


Monday, April 20, 2015

Netflix Has a Plan That Can't Miss

Netflix (NASDAQ: NFLX  ) isn't just eyeing TV shows in its push for original streaming content. In a world where it's starting to bid against Amazon.com (NASDAQ: AMZN  ) and now a reinvigorated Hulu for proprietary content, Netflix is looking beyond the serialized dramas and cult sitcom revivals that have proved magnetic to both audiences and Emmy nominations.

"We will be expanding our Originals initiative to include broadly appealing feature documentaries and stand-up comedy specials," the video service revealed during its poorly received quarterly report on Monday. "Netflix has become a big destination for fans of these much loved and often under-distributed genres."

It's a no-brainer, really. Netflix has the necessary girth to bankroll documentaries and one-shot comedian performances. It closed out the second quarter with 29.8 million domestic streaming subscribers and another 7.8 accounts overseas.

Yes, let's not dismiss the overseas potential. Many stand-up routines won't resonate or stand well abroad, but documentaries are pretty universal. They can also be seamlessly dubbed into different languages.

The downside to all of these documentaries and comic shows that are coming is that they aren't the multi-episode shows that have fed into the binge viewing culture that Netflix is using to bludgeon traditional TV programming. A documentary is a one-time feature that's typically the length of a movie. A stand-up special is even shorter. 

However, these media forms are also cheap enough to produce that Netflix can do more than just pay up for first-run licensing rights. It can actually own them. 

Wedbush Securities analyst Michael Pachter -- a notorious bear who's been burned with his $65 price target on Netflix that he recently raised to $80 -- argued on Yahoo!'s Breakout last week that Netflix isn't a fitting rival to Time Warner's (NYSE: TWX  ) HBO because it doesn't own its original programming the way HBO does with Game of Thrones or The Sopranos.

This is something that became abundantly clear when Amazon.com began selling House of Cards on DVD this summer.

Pachter is wrong, of course. No one argues that cable companies and radio stations are worthless if they don't own production studios. However, there's a point to be made about actually owning the content to make it permanently exclusive or to cash in on syndication rights and DVD distribution, if you decide to go that route.

Netflix should be able to afford to own a lot of its future content as it moves beyond serialized dramas and lavish television shows. It's a good plan, especially since Netflix is the only company with a large enough audience to go this route.

There's always something good on TV
The television landscape is changing quickly, with new entrants such as Netflix and Amazon.com disrupting traditional networks. The Motley Fool's new free report "Who Will Own the Future of Television?" details the risks and opportunities in TV. Click here to read the full report!

Wednesday, April 15, 2015

1 Thing to Watch at Foot Locker

Although business headlines still tout earnings numbers, many investors have moved past net earnings as a measure of a company's economic output. That's because earnings are very often less trustworthy than cash flow, since earnings are more open to manipulation based on dubious judgment calls.

Earnings' unreliability is one of the reasons Foolish investors often flip straight past the income statement to check the cash flow statement. In general, by taking a close look at the cash moving in and out of the business, you can better understand whether the last batch of earnings brought money into the company, or merely disguised a cash gusher with a pretty headline.

Calling all cash flows
When you are trying to buy the market's best stocks, it's worth checking up on your companies' free cash flow once a quarter or so, to see whether it bears any relationship to the net income in the headlines. That's what we do with this series. Today, we're checking in on Foot Locker (NYSE: FL  ) , whose recent revenue and earnings are plotted below.

Source: S&P Capital IQ. Data is current as of last fully reported fiscal quarter. Dollar values in millions. FCF = free cash flow. FY = fiscal year. TTM = trailing 12 months.

Over the past 12 months, Foot Locker generated $360.0 million cash while it booked net income of $407.0 million. That means it turned 5.8% of its revenue into FCF. That sounds OK. However, FCF is less than net income. Ideally, we'd like to see the opposite.

All cash is not equal
Unfortunately, the cash flow statement isn't immune from nonsense, either. That's why it pays to take a close look at the components of cash flow from operations, to make sure that the cash flows are of high quality. What does that mean? To me, it means they need to be real and replicable in the upcoming quarters, rather than being offset by continual cash outflows that don't appear on the income statement (such as major capital expenditures).

For instance, cash flow based on cash net income and adjustments for non-cash income-statement expenses (like depreciation) is generally favorable. An increase in cash flow based on stiffing your suppliers (by increasing accounts payable for the short term) or shortchanging Uncle Sam on taxes will come back to bite investors later. The same goes for decreasing accounts receivable; this is good to see, but it's ordinary in recessionary times, and you can only increase collections so much. Finally, adding stock-based compensation expense back to cash flows is questionable when a company hands out a lot of equity to employees and uses cash in later periods to buy back those shares.

So how does the cash flow at Foot Locker look? Take a peek at the chart below, which flags questionable cash flow sources with a red bar.

Source: S&P Capital IQ. Data is current as of last fully reported fiscal quarter. Dollar values in millions. TTM = trailing 12 months.

When I say "questionable cash flow sources," I mean items such as changes in taxes payable, tax benefits from stock options, and asset sales, among others. That's not to say that companies booking these as sources of cash flow are weak, or are engaging in any sort of wrongdoing, or that everything that comes up questionable in my graph is automatically bad news. But whenever a company is getting more than, say, 10% of its cash from operations from these dubious sources, investors ought to make sure to refer to the filings and dig in.

With questionable cash flows amounting to only 7.1% of operating cash flow, Foot Locker's cash flows look clean. Within the questionable cash flow figure plotted in the TTM period above, stock-based compensation and related tax benefits provided the biggest boost, at 6.0% of cash flow from operations. Overall, the biggest drag on FCF came from capital expenditures, which consumed 32.6% of cash from operations.

A Foolish final thought
Most investors don't keep tabs on their companies' cash flow. I think that's a mistake. If you take the time to read past the headlines and crack a filing now and then, you're in a much better position to spot potential trouble early. Better yet, you'll improve your odds of finding the underappreciated home-run stocks that provide the market's best returns.

Can your retirement portfolio provide you with enough income to last? You'll need more than Foot Locker. Learn about crafting a smarter retirement plan in "The Shocking Can't-Miss Truth About Your Retirement." Click here for instant access to this free report.

We can help you keep tabs on your companies with My Watchlist, our free, personalized stock tracking service.

Add Foot Locker to My Watchlist.

Sunday, April 5, 2015

Ford's SUVs Fuel Growth Overseas


Ford began producing the Explorer in Russia earlier this year. It's now adding more SUVs to its Russian lineup. Photo credit: Ford Motor Co.

Ford (NYSE: F  ) has lost a ton of money in Europe recently, and could lose as much as $2 billion more this year. The problem is that recessions have caused new-car sales to take a nosedive, and they're not expected to recover for several years.

Ford's plan for recovery takes that into account, and one of the Blue Oval's strategies includes a slew of new products – including several of its acclaimed SUVs. In this video, Fool.com contributor John Rosevear looks at Ford's latest efforts to boost its SUVs in Europe, starting in an unlikely place – Russia.

China is already the world's largest auto market – and it's set to grow even bigger in coming years. A recent Motley Fool report, "2 Automakers to Buy for a Surging Chinese Market", names two global giants poised to reap big gains that could drive big rewards for investors. You can read this report right now for free – just click here for instant access.