Tesla, Subsidized Tech & Healthcare Distress
|Sep 5, 2018||Public post|
Disruption from the Vantage Point of the Disrupted
Freemium Briefing - 9/5/18
Read Time = 5 a$$-kicking minutes
We hope everyone had a safe and fun Labor Day Weekend. We’re not going to belabor the point from previous briefings: prices are going up from $162/year to $299/year later this week. Email us to get your firm signed up: email@example.com. Or, if you’re an individual, click on this nifty blue link ⬇︎.
🗞News of the Week (3 Reads)🗞
1. Electric Vehicles (Short Musk-Related Noise; Long Technology)
This is not a fangirl ode to Elon Musk. We’ll leave that to the Twittersphere. The trials and tribulations of everyone’s favorite Marvel-character-inspiring eccentric billionaire may be distracting from developments far bigger and far badder than Tesla’s ($TSLA) balance sheet: the advancement of electric vehicles.
Last week, California’s state legislature approved a bill that requires the state — subject to Governor Jerry Brown’s signature — to get 100% of its electricity from carbon-free sources by 2045. Yes, 2045 — 27 years from now. Sure, it might be hard for you to be impressed or to care. If PETITION is even still around by then it will likely be written by artificial intelligence bots. So, we get it.
Still, California ALREADY gets 29% of its electricity from zero-carbon wind, solar, biomass and geothermal energy — in part to dramatically reduce greenhouse gas emissions and in part, no doubt, to flick off the President of the United States. Indeed, greenhouse gas emission levels have decreased such that they now rival those of the 1990s.
Yet, emission levels related to transportation in California have barely moved. Nevertheless, consistent with what we wrote previously about advancements in the auto space, Nathanial Bullard notes that that appears primed to change. In a piece entitled “Electric Vehicles’ Day Will Come, and It Might Come Suddenly,” he wrote:
In the first half of the year, vehicles with a battery were more than 10 percent of new vehicle sales in California. The model mix includes hybrids like the Toyota Prius that have no electric charging plugs, as well as plug-in hybrids and pure electric cars with no combustion engine at all.
The data reveal three trends. The first is the steady erosion of hybrid market share, which is down from seven percent of new sales in 2013 to four percent in the first half of 2018. That’s noteworthy, and so is the fact that battery electric vehicles are now more popular than plug-in hybrids.
In 2017, the plug-in electric car market is now more than six percent of new car sales in California. It’s not a big number — but it will get bigger, and it’s worth asking, “how much bigger?”
Looking at Norway, Bullard posits that it can get substantially bigger. He notes that:
It took Norway about a decade to reach six percent electric vehicle sales but then only five years to go from 6 percent to 47 percent.
Is 6% some sort of magical inflection point for electric vehicles? Debatable. Norway is super-progressive when it comes to the environment; it also offers extensive incentives to encourage EV adoption. But with a statewide push towards zero-carbon electricity, a push towards zero-emission electric cars may not be far behind. Californian car sales are pushing towards 2 million in 2018. And selection is about to improve: everyone from Audi to BMW to Porsche are coming out with all-electric models in the next several years. Tremendous growth may not be too far off. The OEMs — Tesla’s competitors — are making sure of it.
Speaking of technological advancement in auto (and auto distress), we find Andreesen Horowitz’s Benedict Evans’ musings on the topic to be thoughtful and thought-provoking. We previously wrote about him WAY back in January 2017 when he wrote about mobile eating the world. The piece is worth revisiting.
Last week, he released a new piece with questions right up our alley. He asked:
…what happens when ‘software eats the world’ in general, and when tech moves into new industries. How do we think about whether something is disruptive? If it is, who exactly gets disrupted? And does that disruption…mean one company wins in the new world? Which one?
He seems to conclude the following: not Tesla.
One narrative surrounding Tesla in the post-Solar City acquisition world is that it more than just a car company: it’s a battery play. Musk’s powerwall feeds this narrative. SolarCity, to some degree, feeds this narrative. But Evans begs to differ; he thinks the battery — as well as EV components, generally — will become commodities. Commodities that spawn victims along the way. He notes:
It’s probably useful here to compare batteries in particular with the capacitive multitouch screens in a smartphone. Apple was the first to popularise these screens, and arguably still implements them best, and these screens fundamentally changed how you made a phone, but the whole industry adopted them. There are better and worse versions, but everyone can buy these screens now, and making a multitouch phone by itself is not a competitive advantage.
It’s pretty clear that electric disrupts the internal combustion engine, and everything associated with it. It’s not just that you replace the internal combustion engine with electric motors and the fuel tank with batteries - rather, you remove the whole drive train and replace it with sometime with 5 to 10 times fewer moving or breakable parts. You rip the spine out of the car. This is very disruptive to anyone in the engine business - it disrupts machine tools, and many of the suppliers of these components to the OEMs. A lot of the supplier base will change.
This is not the same as disrupting the OEMs themselves. If the OEMs can buy the components of an electric car as easily as anyone else, then the advantage in efficient scale manufacturing goes to the people who already have a lead in efficient scale manufacturing, since they’re doing essentially the same thing. In other words, it’s the same business, with some different suppliers, and electric per se looks a lot more like sustaining innovation. (emphasis added)
Likewise, he highlights how Tesla’s (i) software, (ii) data aggregation and (iii) efforts with autonomous driving may be leading now but they may not be as disruptive, in the truest sense of the term, to competitor OEMs as some might believe. That is, many OEMs are making progress of their own in those areas. The lead is not that wide. Tesla’s moat is not vast. Read the piece: he raises some interesting points — too many to note here.
…the history of the tech industry is full of companies where having a lovely product, or being the first to see or build the future, were not enough. Indeed, the car industry is the same - a great, innovative car and a great car company are not the same thing. Tesla owners love their cars. I loved my Palm V, and my Nokia Lumia, and my father loved his Saab 9000. But being first isn’t enough and having a great product isn’t enough - you have to try to think about how this fits into all the broader systems.
Indeed. Many companies — many of which seem wildly successful today — will falter as that system develops.
2. Millennials Benefit from Venture Capital, Feel Guilty (Long Subsidies)
Oh man. THIS. Is. Precious. Herein a Wall Street Journal writer feels guilty about the secondary effects of his penchant for cheap home food delivery, two-day shipping, unlimited movies for $9.99/month and 100-day mattress trials. He asks:
These “Where’s the catch?” deals are practically everywhere now, each causing me a similar dilemma:
*I take Uber Pools home at night, knowing even if nobody else gets in the car the ride’s still going to be cheaper. Are we stiffing drivers?
*I demand two-day shipping for everything I buy on Amazon. Am I destroying the Earth, one cardboard box at a time?
*I use the Blue Apron free trial, cancel it and switch to HelloFresh , then rinse and repeat with Sun Basket and Plated. Can decent, easy food delivery survive?
We almost mistook this for an Onion article.
Here are some answers.
Yes. Probably. Yes. No. These answers are pretty self-evident.
The very same people that the writer is concerned about affecting is riding Uber in his off time, ordering the free Blue Apron trial, and taking advantage of 2-day shipping. So, nothing to worry about there.
As for it being a “deal”? We’re giving away our data every single time we eat a subsidized meal, take a subsidized ride, or recycle an extra cardboard box. Isn’t that information valuable? Isn’t there a whole world of people hacking away trying to obtain it? If you’re not paying for the product, you are the product. Not sure that’s such a great deal, in the end.
So, with that said, we’re now going to do this:
New lifehack: instead of going to La Colombe everyday, perhaps we'll get desks at The Yard for $20/month. We'll save approximately $130/month/individual on coffee. @WorkAtTheYard https://t.co/PhWCOsOwPt pic.twitter.com/PRnqAolTZwSeptember 4, 2018
3. Another Hospital System Goes Bankrupt (Short Hedge Fund Powered Healthcare)
Pardon us as this week-old news but ICYMI, we figured we’d include it here anyway. We want to make sure that those of you who predicted a rash of healthcare bankruptcy activity feel a little validated/vindicated…
Verity Health System of California Inc. ("VHS"), a California nonprofit public benefit corporation that operates six acute care hospitals, filed for bankruptcy today. The system suffered from decades of operating losses and too much debt. Unfortunately, it also appears to have suffered from a lack of vision, admittedly continually maintaining the status quo in the face of robust headwinds.
In 2015, BlueMountain Capital Management LLC purchased the system for $100mm while also arranging for $160mm in loans (subject to a variety of conditions imposed by the California Attorney General). The health system, however, did not turn around. In 2017, NantWorks LLC acquired a controlling stake in the system's management company, Integrity, from BlueMountain and loaned the company an additional $148mm. Did this do the trick?
Of course not. We wouldn't be writing about it if it did.
Per the company:
Despite the infusion of capital and new management, it became apparent that the problems facing the Verity Health System were too large to solve without a formal court supervised restructuring. Thus, despite VHS’ great efforts to revitalize its Hospitals and improvements in performance and cash flow, the legacy burden of more than a billion dollars of bond debt and unfunded pension liabilities, an inability to renegotiate collective bargaining agreements or payor contracts, the continuing need for significant capital expenditures for seismic obligations and aging infrastructure, and the general headwinds facing the hospital industry, make success impossible. Losses continue to amount to approximately $175 million annually on a cash flow basis.
Indeed, the company cites the following factors for its fall into bankruptcy: (i) below-market Medicare reimbursement rates (~20-43% below market), (ii) an approximate 5% increase in labor rates annually, (iii) underfunded pension plans and ongoing pension funding requirements in the millions of dollars, (iv) the need for tens of millions of dollars in IT investment, (v) millions of dollars of expenditures required under the conditions imposed by the California state AG and (vi) needed medical equipment expenditures.
Accordingly, to confront its debt and preserve the value of the system as a going concern, the system filed for bankruptcy to pursue a sale to new ownership/leadership.
📚Recommendation: RESET by Ellen Pao📚
We have compiled a$$-kicking resources on the topics of restructuring, tech, finance, investing, and disruption. 💥You can find it here💥.
One of us finally got to “Reset” by former Kleiner Perkins investor, Ellen Pao over the holiday weekend. Here’s the review:
Though repetitive at times, Pao’s pre-#MeToo account describes her efforts to sue Kleiner Perkins for workplace discrimination. She paints an unfortunate picture of what life was like for her in the bigboy club of venture capital — one that many professional women in male-dominated industries will likely relate to quite well. She also highlights actions and behaviors that, whether men realize it or not, create a hostile and uneven working environment for their female peers. Pao was a lawyer before getting her MBA and going into venture; her third chapter recounts her experience working for Cravath. Similar to books from other now-famous former biglaw attorneys like Peter Thiel and Megan Kelly, it is not a ringing endorsement for the firm or for biglaw, generally.
💥To the reader who answered our survey as follows…
…we triple-down on the recommendation that you read this book.💥😕
SSG Capital Advisors, LLC (“SSG”) is an independent boutique investment bank that specializes in mergers and acquisitions, financial advisory, restructurings, private placements and valuations for middle-market companies and their stakeholders. It is looking for an Investment Banking Analyst or Associate to join its suburban Philadelphia office. For more information or to submit your resume and contact information, please email SSG at firstname.lastname@example.org.
PETITION is looking for a unicorn who wants to help build something from scratch. We are a revenue generating startup with a lot of vision for what comes next. If you have a background in finance, law, or consulting and want to be a utility player helping us build out our content, sales/marketing infrastructure, partnerships, ops, and whatever else we conjure up in our big domes, ping us. All inquiries will be handled on a strictly confidentialbasis. Preference will be given to MEMBERS. How else can you be educated about what we’re doing and how we’re doing it if you’re only seeing part of the picture?!
If your firm has job opportunities, please email us at email@example.com.
Nothing in this email is intended to serve as financial or legal advice. Do your own research, you lazy rascals.