A couple thoughts on applying PEG ratios. A big consideration, IMO, is the quality of the earnings - that is, how predictable and reliable are the earnings, and are the earnings cyclical. I believe it was Kyle Bass who once asked whose earnings you would rather own, Flextronics or Eli Lilly. Bass's argument was he'd rather own Ely Lilly's, because they have strong IP, and do not operating in a commodity business with slim margins.

 

Being as how Orbite is pre-revenue and pre-profitabily, and has no operating history of the consistency and predictability of its revenue/profits, I believe Mr. Market is going to have a difficult time valuing Orbite at this point on a P/E basis.

 

OTOH, it is interesting to think about what would happen if Orbite is able to generate a consistent annual run rate of $100 million plus in its HPA business, with net profits of $50 million or greater. IMO, that would put an immediate and significant floor under the share price of $5 for the HPA business alone (conservatively valued at 10x earnings). If Orbite is successful in capturing a significant market share of the overall HPA industry (say 20%), and if the demand is there for a second HPA plant, then there could be significant upside to a $5 valuation (for the HPA business only, excluding third-party REE separation). Furthermore, as Luisa Moreno speculated in the Euro Pacific research report from September, if Orbite is successful, there's a very good chance a GE or Philips would be interested in acquiring Orbite for a long-term supply of HPA, and potentially pay a premium for it.

 

Same on the SGA and licensing side, projected revenues and earnings are just that, "projected". Once Orbite secures lead customers, secures financing, and has a couple years of consistent earnings under its belt, THEN I'd look for the market to value Orbite on a P/E basis, and the PEG ratio would become a better valuation metric IMO.

 

JM2C on the matter.

 

glenn