RE: Robustness of capxx patents25 Aug 2020 09:01
I think this is where we can agree to disagree T-man. As I wrote in an email to a fellow investor in CPX yday, this patent lawsuit malarkey is just gravy. They have to protect their IP and have been awarded a substantial win against Ioxus which they may or may not receive subject to whether the new owner can be found to have continued to have infringed the patent. The investment case here remains, for the rather less excitable, whether CPX has been able to buy, re-assemble and start to sell Murata engineered products to Murata's existing clients at a fraction of the costs it would have cost CPX had they chosen to go down this route. The Murata production facility would have cost c $50mm, so to pick it up for less than 2% of that was good business. Murata's orderbook was c $14mm with an operating margin of over 60%. The production facility comes with Murata engineers who have, as part of the agreement, been hired to retrain CPX's engineers. The production facility will also increase CPX's prodcutivity so that we can expect an improved margin on CPX's own production. Win, win and more win. So for a company with a market cap of £20mm at c-o-b yesterday, it should make £3-4m post tax in 2021. Which puts it on a p/e of - back of an envelope style - 5x.
To answer pepe-martinez, a new investor's question of last night, therefore I would say ignore all the IP chatter. If Tesla lose and we get a decent pay out that's brilliant news but should not be the basis for your investment. AK has repeatedly said the IP defense is key to CPX but he would much rather get tesla to sign up and pay the royalties like TDK and all the others who have lost the lawsuits before them. The real story is the long game.