Hubris

Author: Danyaal Munshi

Hubris

Hubris

Investors are faced with a multitude of risks in any investment decision that they take. With the recent results from Famous Brands, Mediclinic, Taste Holdings and also not so recently Woolies and Old Mutual; one can’t help wondering if executive hubris* is not one of the bigger risks that investors face.

 

Offshore Expansion

In the name of offshore expansion, too many South African companies have lost significant shareholder value:

  • Woolies was forced to write off R6.7bn after their disastrous acquisition of the David Jones business in Australia;
  • Old Mutual finally through in the towel in their London listing and foreign acquisition spree that began in the mid-1990’s. They significantly overpaid for foreign acquisitions. Just compare Old Mutual and Sanlam since they demutualised: shareholders who re-invested their dividends would have received a 553% gain if they invested in Old Mutual versus a 2,822% gain if they invested in Sanlam**. Old Mutual went on an aggressive international expansion, somewhat neglecting its home market; whereas Sanlam stayed at home built its base and cautiously expanded into niche overseas markets;
  • Famous Brands, once a darling of investors is now struggling with its acquisition of UK’s Gourmet Burger Kitchen and closing some of the brands that it acquired offshore;
  • Taste Holdings, similarly is in a dire financial position as result largely for over-paying to bring big-name franchise brands like Starbucks into South Africa.

 

It is not only South African companies venturing offshore that get it wrong:

  • Massmart has struggled since it was acquired by the giant Walmart group. So much for bringing international best practice and significant buying power to a previously well-performing business.

 

The list can go on and on. Too often expansion plans don’t pan out how management paint the picture. Some records also show that most acquisitions don’t meet the original return criteria. One has to question why management do those deals in the first place. Does management overrate their own importance, or do they want to have their names emblazoned on iconic deals, or are they driven by perverse incentive schemes? Executive hubris?

 

Beware the trophy head office

Hubris takes another form in fancy new head offices. I’m certain there is a study somewhere that shows companies beginning to underperform after they move into fancy new head offices.

In the name of productivity, attracting top human capital, or branding; substantial amounts of money is spent building or leasing new offices, but it is never clear that the required return on investment is actually achieved.

It must be a great kick and boost to self-importance to drive into the fanciest offices in town.

 

Should we paint all with the same brush?

We know however that not all acquisitions or expansions are bad and that it does make economic sense at times to upgrade to newer, more efficient business premises. We argue that investors should be sceptical of acquisitions, international forays and trophy business premises. Too often, these in fact tell you more about executive hubris than about business strategy.

A good indicator of money well invested is Return on Capital Invested (ROIC) and ultimately also Return on Equity (ROE). Businesses that are able to allocate capital efficiently significantly outperform those that follow some grand footprint or flag planting strategy over time. We gave the example of Sanlam versus Old Mutual earlier. Another great example is FirstRand versus Standard Bank.  FirstRand has been much better at capital allocation than Standard Bank and this is reflected in their comparative share price performance over the long-term.

Both Sanlam and FirstRand have also acquired businesses, expanded offshore and moved into new buildings. Arguably, they have been more selective and disciplined about the investments that they made and how much they paid for them. Their shareholders have benefitted substantially more than those invested in their  competitors, and who may have not been as selective and disciplined in their investment decisions.

 

Beware executive hubris!

 

* hubris = excessive pride or self-confidence; arrogance; feeling of superiority

** Source: Business Day 18 March 2018; https://www.businesslive.co.za/bd/companies/2018-03-16-returning-old-mutual-will-find-sanlam-ahead/

Share article

Latest Posts

CrowdStrike’s latest quarterly results reflect a business that continues to scale at an impressive rate, while also illustrating some of the tensions between growth, profitability, and valuation that increasingly define the cybersecurity sector. The company reported total quarterly revenue of $1.39 billion, up 26% year-on-year, reinforcing its position as one of the fastest-growing large-cap cybersecurity platforms. Growth was supported by strong demand across its Falcon platform, with net new annual recurring revenue (ARR) of $256 million, up 32%. This brought total ending ARR to $5.51 billion, a 24% increase, highlighting the durability of its subscription-based model and the continued expansion of its installed base. Despite this top-line momentum, profitability remains work in progress. CrowdStrike reported a GAAP operating loss of $30.6 million, a meaningful improvement from the $108.7 million loss recorded in the prior period, but still indicative of a business investing heavily in growth. While the trajectory is clearly improving, the pace of margin expansion remains a key area of focus for investors, particularly as the business scales. A central theme in management’s commentary was the growing intersection between artificial intelligence and cybersecurity. The company pointed to what it described as an inflection point, where AI is not only enhancing defensive capabilities but is increasingly being weaponised by attackers. The proliferation of AI-driven threats raises the complexity and frequency of cyberattacks, reinforcing the need for advanced, real-time protection. In this context, CrowdStrike’s access to leading AI models through partnerships with firms such as OpenAI and Anthropic stands out as an important competitive advantage. These relationships, alongside collaborations with Microsoft and IBM, position CrowdStrike at the centre of an evolving ecosystem where cybersecurity, cloud infrastructure, and AI capabilities are becoming deeply interconnected. Stock-based compensation still remains elevated and continues to weigh on the company’s path to sustained profitability. While common across high-growth technology businesses, it represents a real economic cost to shareholders and, at current levels, raises questions about long-term margin structure. Valuation is another important consideration. CrowdStrike continues to trade at a premium relative to its revenue base, reflecting both its growth profile and its perceived strategic importance in the cybersecurity landscape. However, this also leaves less room for execution missteps. Notably, while revenues grew by 26%, this fell short of some market expectations, suggesting that the bar remains high and that incremental disappointments can have an outsized impact on sentiment.
Crowding out the Competition
Cybersecurity for the AI era
How do you compare Walmart to Amazon
Brick and E-commerce
How do you compare Walmart to Amazon
Nvidia - Taking on the "Wannabes"
Nvidia – Taking on the “Wannabes”
What does the chief beneficiary of AI's results tell us about the broader market. 

Lunar Capital
on Eastwave Radio

Every Wednesday, at 07h45, Sabir chats with Nazia from Eastwave Radio (92.2 fm, live stream on
www.eastwave.co.za) on investing and the markets.

eastwave-radio