Shares of Neutral Tandem Inc. (TNDM) have been under pressure this year as the company struggles to maintain patent protection and fend off a significant competitor. On March 30, Oppenheimer downgraded the stock to neutral after the United States Patent and Trademark Office agreed to reexamine a key patent which is been challenged by Peerless Network.
If the patent is overturned and Peerless is able to more directly compete with Neutral Tandem, the end result would likely cut into margins and pressure what has been a long history of sustained revenue and earnings growth. Since Neutral Tandem began generating a profit in 2006, the company has grown earnings from 15 cents per share to an estimated $1.30 this year – quite an impressive feat for a period wrought with financial and business risk.
One of the reasons the company has performed so well is that management has approached the business from a fiscally conservative foundation. The company currently has no debt and at the end of the fourth quarter boasted $161 million in cash. As part of the fourth quarter earnings press release, the company announced a $25 million share repurchase program which, if traded correctly, could have reduced the share count significantly as the stock traded sharply lower during the first quarter.
TNDM announces earnings on May 5, before the market opens. In addition to hearing information on the patent issue, I am curious to hear how much the company spent on repurchasing shares and how many shares they were actually able to retire. I would love to see that the company acquired the shares at an average price between $15 and $16 although that may be a bit too aggressive. The company did not set an expected period of time in which these shares would be repurchased, but one would think the opportunity in February and early March would allow the company to spend a large portion of the $25 million.
Last quarter, management guided 2010 revenue to be between $185 million and $200 million. I can only assume that these levels will be decreased after the patent reconsideration, but the big question is whether the market has already priced in the disappointment. The current earnings consensus (which should include adjustments made after the patent news was announced) still has the company earning $1.30 this year – representing 7% growth over last year.
With a stock price of $17.36, investors are only paying a bit more than 13 times forward earnings. If you back out the roughly $4.80 per share in cash, the multiple would actually be below 10 – one of the most attractive prices investors have been able to buy TNDM at for since the stock started trading in late 2007.
Today’s market has been rewarding small-cap growth companies regardless of valuation risk. Neutral Tandem certainly has its share of risk, but at the same time that risk appears to be fully calculated into the market price. At this point, any unexpectedly positive announcement out of the patent office could have a significant effect on the stock. If it turns out that TNDM has to compete more directly with Peerless, that will not likely be a huge negative for the stock because analysts already expect this to happen.
Following the announcement, TNDM shares have begun to rebound, and today’s trading puts TNDM above the 50 day average and back in line with where the stock was trading before the March 30 downgrade. I expect the risk to be muted in the stock, and the current positive momentum could be the result of a significant rebound. Even if the stock recoups just half of the loss from $34.56 to a low of $14.50, it would represent a rebound to near $25 – a healthy return for investors today.
So as we wait for the earnings announcement on May 5, I would recommend picking up a starter position in the stock and potentially adding more shares if the announcement is well received. TNDM is a strong growth company with a talented management team. Regardless of the patent issue, the company should be able to grow earnings and continue innovation, strong customer service, and maintain a healthy and growing customer base.
FD: Author does not have a position in any stocks mentioned in this article.
Enjoy this article? Sign up for the ZachStocks Newsletter,
Your source for Sound Market Commentary, Growth Stock Analysis and Successful Investment Strategies
April 27th, 2010 at 2:18 pm
Peerless is barely a competitor even if the patents don’t hold up on reevaluation. TNDM cast a large shadow and has a ton more patents and experience that can’t be taken away. The patents given up simply says they allow a competition, but nothing proprietary.
April 27th, 2010 at 2:18 pm
I’m not concerned about the patent issue. This is a well managed company with no debt and a low PE. They will compete effectively patents or no patents.
What they should do with some of that cash is declare a dividend. Imagine what that would do for the PPS.
April 29th, 2010 at 11:43 am
Agree 100% with El Loco Uno. Based on TNDM’s cash on hand and cash flow, they could pay out $0.18 per quarter, which would be a 4% dividend at today’s price.
April 29th, 2010 at 11:44 am
I find your conclusion that TNDM’s 2010 revenue guidance will be revised downward due to the recent court decision a huge leap and arguably indefensible so would love to hear your supporting evidence. We know a few things about this dispute:
1) This dispute dates back to around 2004
2) Neutral Tandem has filed suit against Peerless for patent infringement and that case is not scheduled to be heard until later this fall.
3) The ruling you refer to does not in fact overturn the patent issued to TNDM but rather rules against their effort for injunctive relief which would stopped a reexamination of the existing patent. I’m not aware of an expected timetable for said reexamination.
So for your conclusion to pan out it would mean:
1) The US Patent office would have to finish it’s rexamination of the existing patent;
2) The finding in the reexamination would have to go against TNDM;
3) There would have to be no appeal process with this decision being immediately effective;
4) The lawsuit between the parties would have to be dismissed;
5) All of the above would result in either:
a) A change in Peerless product/service offering to customers that would allow them to gain market share at TNDM’s expense, or
b) Customers perception of TNDM turned negative because they felt Peerless gave them a better price or service and/or were better capitalized to provide comfort for the future.
I find not evidence for the majority of the above occuring much less in the timeframe you would need to cause TNDM to reduce their 2010 revenue guidance.
Please let us know how you came to that conclusion.
thanks