Q: Hi
I am looking at Home Capital. The market cap is ± $1.5 billion dollars. The balance sheet indicates that Home capital has $1.2 billion in cash, $535 million available for sale securities and $2.6 billion in senior debt. I calculate the enterprise value at ± $2.365 billion.
The net income for the past twelve months stands at $247 million. The net income for the quarter ending December 31st was $50 million or $200 on an annual basis. Income and cash flow provided by operating activities for the year ending in 2016 were respectively $789 and $561 million. The cash flow looks unreasonably high. Is Home capital really generating that much cash ? If Home capital can earn $200 million in net income and $500 in cash flow for the current fiscal year, would you say that the company is selling at a discount?
Also, I am aware there is a cloud over the unexplained departure of the CEO, the alleged mortgage fraud and the mortgage rles have changed. Why is it that a publicly traded company do not have the obligation to explain why the CEO was fired?
I am looking at Home Capital. The market cap is ± $1.5 billion dollars. The balance sheet indicates that Home capital has $1.2 billion in cash, $535 million available for sale securities and $2.6 billion in senior debt. I calculate the enterprise value at ± $2.365 billion.
The net income for the past twelve months stands at $247 million. The net income for the quarter ending December 31st was $50 million or $200 on an annual basis. Income and cash flow provided by operating activities for the year ending in 2016 were respectively $789 and $561 million. The cash flow looks unreasonably high. Is Home capital really generating that much cash ? If Home capital can earn $200 million in net income and $500 in cash flow for the current fiscal year, would you say that the company is selling at a discount?
Also, I am aware there is a cloud over the unexplained departure of the CEO, the alleged mortgage fraud and the mortgage rles have changed. Why is it that a publicly traded company do not have the obligation to explain why the CEO was fired?