Skullcandy Is Ripe for a Takeover

 | Jun 22, 2016 | 12:00 PM EDT
  • Comment
  • Print Print
  • Print
Stock quotes in this article:






It's inevitable that some of the names that hit my deep-value radar will become acquisition targets. This is not all that surprising, especially within the ponds I typically fish for value: Companies sometimes become "stupid cheap," and ripe for the picking.

So far this year, two "double-net" stocks (trading at between 1x and 2x net current asset value) that I've followed, Ingram Micro (IM) and Rofin-Sinar Technologies (RSTI), have agreed to takeovers, and it appears as though a third name may be headed that way, as well. 

When I wrote about headphone distributor Skullcandy (SKUL), in late January, it was a net/net company -- or a company trading below net current asset value (current assets minus all liabilities). The stock had been hammered over the previous year, falling from the $11.50 range in March 2015 to $3 the following January. While profitable, lowered earnings guidance scared investors away, and sent the stock plummeting.

When a company's market capitalization falls below net current asset value, as in this case, you have a potentially interesting situation at the extremes: Either it is ridiculously cheap, and the market is mispricing it, or it is headed for the scrap heap.

In Skullcandy's case, despite declining profitability, it was still in decent shape, with no debt and a moderate amount of cash on the books. Better-than-expected fourth-quarter earnings, and perhaps the realization by investors that a $3 share price represented an excessive punishment that did not fit SKUL's crimes, pushed shares to about $4.00 by early June.

Then, on Jun. 8, shares jumped another 16% when it was announced that company founder Richard Alden, who controls 12.7% of the company, was potentially interested in taking the company private. 

It will be interesting to see what the takeover price will be, if this potential bid develops. SKUL ended its first quarter with $46 million, or $1.60 a share, in cash and no debt. Even with the recent price jump, it still trades below tangible book value per share -- and sits at just 1.08x net current asset value (which puts it within my definition of a double-net stock). With those metrics in mind, as well as the fact that it is trading at 14x next year's consensus earnings per share, you'd expect that any bid should include a decent premium to the current price.

We shall see. 

With value-land being so barren the past few years, devoid of much opportunity, this type of activity at least helps keep things interesting. It also strengthens the drive to identify other potential takeover candidates.

Columnist Conversations

When the whole world sells off everybody wants to assign a reason for the action. Today's suggestions: 1...
For the first time since early February the down volume as a percentage of total volume on the NYSE is over 90...
So far in 2018, the U.S. stock market has experienced more volatility than it has in all of 2017 and with the ...



News Breaks

Powered by
Except as otherwise indicated, quotes are delayed. Quotes delayed at least 20 minutes for all exchanges. Market Data & Company fundamental data provided by FactSet. Earnings and ratings provided by Zacks. Mutual fund data provided by Valueline. ETF data provided by Lipper. Powered and implemented by FactSet Digital Solutions Group.

TheStreet Ratings updates stock ratings daily. However, if no rating change occurs, the data on this page does not update. The data does update after 90 days if no rating change occurs within that time period.

FactSet calculates the Market Cap for the basic symbol to include common shares only. Year-to-date mutual fund returns are calculated on a monthly basis by Value Line and posted mid-month.