Luxury throughout
Transcription
Luxury throughout
28th May 2013 PPHE (PPH.L) Luxury throughout Despite delivering strong earnings growth (EBIT 27% CAGR FY07-FY12), an asset strong balance sheet and increasingly growing brand, the shares are trading on an 42% discount to the reported NAV per share and an 57% discount to the true NAV per share. Price: 323p 12m High 12 m Low Mkt cap 323p 200p £136m €159m 42m Leisure London (Main) Investec www.pphe.com Shares Sector Market Broker Website Description: PPHE owns, co-owns, leases, franchises and manages a portfolio of 4* hotels with 8,300 rooms in Europe, with a strong emphasis on Central London. Net asser value per share is considerably in excess of the share price. Strategy: PPHE has pursued an asset heavy strategy, increasingly wholly owning the assets it manages. Whilst this depresses the potential RoIC (relative to an asset-light managed only strategy), it enables management to drive the long term value of the hotel portfolio. High levels of customer satisfaction: High service levels are reflected in strong customer satisfaction. All of the branded hotels managed by the Group receive high scores on TripAdviser. For example, the six London hotels have an average TripAdviser score of 4.3. Our analysis shows, that this is higher than any other portfolio of four-star London branded hotels, which largely explains why PPHE has been outperforming its peers in this key hotel market. Projects adding value: The successful launch of Park Plaza Westminster Bridge demonstrates management’s ability to deliver new projects. Moreover the renovation of numerous existing hotels highlights their commitment to enhancing the long term value of the estate. Over the next few years, existing projects are scheduled to add 510 rooms to the portfolio (11% uplift on consolidated rooms). Net debt: Financial leverage has been a concern for equity investors. However, net debt to EBITDA has fallen from 9.9x in FY10 to 5.4x in FY12. Given recent deal flow and the pipeline of projects the ratio is likely to move above 6.0x in FY13 before falling once more. Only a small proportion of loan facilities (€48.3m, less than 10% of total) are maturing before Dec-14. Late in FY15 there are repayments of €178m (€203m nominal, 37% of total facilities). December Year End Sales (€m) FY12 FY13E FY14E 139.8 202.4 242.1 236.6 238.1 37.6 65.1 85.6 81.1 82.2 Operating profit (€m) 22.9 44.1 63.8 57.1 57.7 4.4 13.6 26.6 19.9 21.7 EPS (c) 10.8 32.7 63.3 47.4 51.7 DPS (c) - 6.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 (460.2) (492.9) (479.0) Net (debt)/cash (€m) Net debt/EBITDA (x) P/E (x) The company has reviewed a draft of this research note and factual changes have been made FY11 EBITDA (€m) PBT (€m) Adrian Kearsey +44 (0)20 7148 0541 [email protected] FY10 EV/Sales (x) (373.7) (387.3) 9.9 6.0 5.4 6.1 5.8 34.9 11.6 6.0 8.0 7.3 3.8 2.7 2.6 2.8 2.7 EV/EBITDA (x) 14.1 8.4 7.2 8.0 7.8 NAV per share (€ cents) 498 483 619 654 691 Dividend Yield (%) - 1.6 3.2 3.2 3.2 28th May 13 Key data Occupancy RevPAR (€) 84% 120 82% 100 80 80% 60 78% 40 76% FY12 FY13 FY14 FY12 FY13 FY14 FY11 FY10 FY09 FY07 FY14 FY13 FY12 FY11 FY10 FY09 FY08 FY07 74% FY08 20 0 RevPAR Occupancy Average Room Rate (€) Total revenues (€m) 140 120 100 80 60 40 20 0 300 250 200 150 100 50 Ave Room Rate Net debt (€m), net debt:EBITDA (x) EBITDA mgn Net debt FY14 FY13 FY12 FY14 FY13 FY12 FY11 0 FY10 0 FY09 0 FY08 20 FY11 0 40 FY10 0 60 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 FY09 80 600 500 400 300 200 100 0 FY08 0 FY07 100 FY07 FY11 Total revneue EBITDA (€m), EBITDA mgn (%) EBITDA FY10 FY09 FY08 FY07 FY14 FY13 FY12 FY11 FY10 FY09 FY08 FY07 0 Net debt:EBITDA Source: Company data, Hardman & Co 2 28th May 13 Key financials Revenues driven by additional rooms and buy-out of JV stakes December Year End FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13E FY14E P&L (€m) 139.8 202.4 242.1 236.6 238.1 EBITDAR 46.4 75.0 96.8 92.4 93.5 EBITDA 37.6 65.1 85.6 81.1 82.2 Operating profit 22.9 44.1 63.8 57.1 57.7 PBT 4.4 13.6 26.6 19.9 21.7 EPS 10.8 32.7 63.3 47.4 51.7 DPS - 6.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 Operating cash flow 22.1 43.8 80.4 79.0 80.1 Interest & tax Sales Cashflow (£m) Operational cash is inherently strong (21.8) (30.5) (38.1) (37.2) (36.0) Capex / Acquisitions 3.1 (5.2) (46.4) (69.0) (24.0) Dividends - - (6.1) (5.5) (6.3) Equity - - - - - Other items 23.6 (21.7) (62.7) - - Change in net debt 27.0 (13.5) (72.9) (32.7) 13.8 (373.7) (387.3) (460.2) (492.9) (479.0) Closing net debt Balance sheet (£m) 203.2 201.2 259.9 274.3 289.8 NAV per share (€c) 498 483 619 654 691 Key metrics FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13E FY14E Sales nm 44.7 19.6 (2.3) 0.6 EBITDAR nm 61.5 29.0 (4.6) 1.3 EBITDA nm 72.9 31.5 (5.2) 1.4 Operating profit nm nm 44.9 (10.5) 1.1 EPS nm nm 93.7 (25.1) 9.2 DPS - - nm 16.7 14.3 EBITDAR margins 33.2 37.1 40.0 39.0 39.3 EBITDA margins 26.9 32.1 35.3 34.3 34.5 Operating margins 16.4 21.8 26.4 24.1 24.3 - 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 183.9 192.5 177.1 179.7 165.3 Net debt/EBITDA (x) 9.9 6.0 5.4 6.1 5.8 Interest cover (x) 1.2 1.5 1.7 1.6 1.7 5.4 5.3 3.4 3.2 Net assets Growth (%) Operating ratios (%) Underlying gearing coming down Effective tax rate Leverage + Returns RoIC (%) Gearing (%) EPS/DPS (x) Source: Company data, Hardman & Co 3 28th May 13 Key considerations Metropolitan hotels, focused on affordable luxury PPHE has a focused strategy: developing, owning and managing four star hotels. It does so under one of two brands: Park Plaza and art’otel. These have very distinct brand identities. Park Plaza hotels are positioned in the mid to upscale segment of the hotel market, with appeal to both the business and city breaks element of the tourist market. The art’otel brand is built on the concept of individually themed hotels, each focusing on a particular artist. The brand is aimed at a sophisticated clientele with an interest in art and culture. The Group’s current portfolio comprises of 38 properties, with over 8,300 rooms (including 2,830 rooms owned via an associate investment in Arenaturist, a Croatian hotelier). Food and beverage revenues represent 25% of total (FY12), driven by both room guests and conferencing. Hotels are mainly located in gateway cities such as London (28% of total rooms, >50% of consolidated rooms), Amsterdam (9% of total rooms, 17% consolidated) and Berlin (8% and 15%). Flexible ownership model PPHE contract mix UK Netherlands Germany + Hungary Other Total Wholly owned 6 5 - - 11 Partly owned 1 - - 14 15 Operating lease - - 8 - 8 Franchise/Managed 2 - 1 1 4 Operational hotels 9 5 9 15 38 Projects 2 1 1 - 4 11 6 10 15 42 Note: PPHE is in the process of acquiring the freeholds to two of the German hotels. st Completion is expected by 31 May. Source: Company data, Hardman & Co In terms of hotel ownership PPHE has a flexible approach. Eleven of the 38 operational hotels are wholly owned. Six of these are in the UK, five are in the Netherlands. Fifteen are partly owned. All but one of these hotels is part of the Arenaturist associate investment, the other is in London (i.e. Park Plaza Westminster Bridge). The remainder are a mixture of operating lease, franchise and managed hotels. This flexible approach enables the management team to leverage and enhance the brand. That said, there has been a tendency for PPHE to increasingly adopt an asset heavy model and the number of hotels under full ownership has increased in recent years. For example, in March 2012 PPHE acquired the 50% interests it did not already own in three of the Dutch hotels, purchasing them from its long term JV partner Elbit Imaging. PPHE is currently in the process of acquiring the freeholds to two of the German hotels (cost €17.5m). These are currently are operating lease units. In addition, PPHE is in the process of acquiring Hercules House in London. 4 28th May 13 This property will be wholly owned and is currently an office property. PPHE is reviewing options for the site. Completion for these transactions is expected to be late May/early June 2013. Service levels driving strong customer scoring on TripAdviser The advent of social media is transforming the landscape of every industry. Within the hotel space TripAdvisor is the largest and most dominant travel site, with more than 60m traveller reviews (source: travel trade journal). PPHE scores extremely well on Tripadvisor. The UK hotels have an average score of 4.3 (out of a maximum of five). Westminster Bridge is currently scoring 4.4, County Hall 4.4 and Cardiff 4.3. Six out of the eight hotels are scoring above 4.0. The German and Hungarian hotels have an average score of 4.1, with five out of the nine hotels scoring 4.0 or above. At 3.8, the Netherlands has a lowest average score within the core portfolio. That said, this performance is still a respectable one, with two out of the five hotels scoring 4.0 or above. TripAdvisor scoring (selected four star London hotels) 4.4 4.2 4.0 3.8 3.6 3.4 3.2 PPHE (5) Crowne (5) Thistle (7) Radisson (10) Marriott (5) Hilton (11) Millennium (6) Mercure (5) Holiday Inn (7) Best Western (7) 3.0 Source: Company data, Hardman & Co Consumer scores in isolation are rather meaningless. Instead they need to be compared to scores by similar hotels. Our analysis shows that PPHE is outperforming its peers in the four-star London hotel market. PPHE London hotels scored 4.315 on TripAdvisor. The nearest two brands were Crowne Plaza (4.291) and Thistle (4.184), which have five and seven central London hotels respectively. The average TripAdvisor score by the chains of four-star branded hotels in central London is 3.918. The lowest two scores were by Best Western (3.473) and Holiday Inn (3.750). Clearly PPHE is doing something right, which is being reflected in the operational performance of the group. 5 28th May 13 Operational performance High levels of customer satisfaction in London are being reflected in material operational outperformance. All of the group’s London hotels, except one, outperformed their peers during 2012 in terms of RevPAR (source: STR Global, Dec-12). In sterling terms the UK average room rate increased from £126.7 in FY11 to £137.1 in FY12, with occupancy broadly flat, RevPAR increased from £104.0 to £112.0. Outside of the UK RevPAR is broadly trending with local markets (e.g. Germany + Hungary RevPAR increased 5.1% in FY12, Netherlands RevAR reduced 3.9% in FY12). Operational efficiencies and the benefits of scale are driving EBITDA margins higher. In FY09 EBITDA margins were 20.2%. Since then they have expanded each year and had reached 35.3% in FY12. Carlson relationship In 2002 the Park Plaza brand was sold to Carlson, the global hotel chain. Later that year the agreement was extended and PPHE entered into a strategic marketing and reservations license with Carlson. This provides the group with access to a large-scale and effective distribution network. Bookings via the Carlson system account for approximately 40% of group revenues and approximately 30% of room occupancy. In recent years the number of members of the Club Carlson system has increased. However, we suspect that many of these are lower spending individuals/smaller corporates and so the uplift in membership numbers will have a proportionally smaller impact on revenues. That said, it cannot be understated how important the Carlson relationship is to PPHE. Club Carlson Membership 12.0 45% 40% 10.0 35% 8.0 30% 25% 6.0 20% 4.0 15% 10% 2.0 5% 0.0 0% FY05 FY06 FY07 FY08 Club Carlson membership FY09 FY10 FY11 FY12 Revenue contribution (RHS) Contribution to occupancy (RHS) Source: Company data, Hardman & Co 6 28th May 13 Building the portfolio, enhancing the portfolio Since coming to the market in 2007, PPHE has systematically expanded the portfolio. Including the Arenaturist portfolio of Croatian hotels, it has increased the number of hotels by 14 (net gain) and the number of rooms by over 4,000 (net gain). Although the size of the new hotels has varied (range: 165 to 1,019), the company has focused on its two brands (Park Plaza and art’otel). Moreover, it is firmly committed to the four star “affordable” luxury segment of the market. During the period a few franchise and managed hotels have exited the portfolio (e.g. Park Plaza Astrid, 229 rooms, managed and Park Plaza Belfast, 106 rooms, franchised). Club Carlson Membership 9000 40 8000 35 7000 30 6000 25 5000 20 4000 15 3000 10 1000 5 0 0 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2000 Hotels Rooms Source: Company data, Hardman & Co As with any well run hotel chain, PPHE has a rolling programme of hotel improvements (over and above normal repair and maintenance, which is typically 2%-4% of revenue). However, the long term focus of management means that they will consider projects with longer pay back periods. For example, within the Arenaturist segment of the portfolio (held as an associate investment), PPHE is re-modelling and re-branding a number of the hotels. Hotel Palma, which has 127 rooms and is located next to the Park Plaza Histria Pula, has been temporarily closed for renovation. Upon completion (expected pre summer 2013) it will be integrated into the neighbouring closed Park Plaza Histria Pula. 7 28th May 13 Pipeline of new projects and renovation of existing sites Rooms Location Progress Western Avenue 158 London Two acre site adjucent adjacent to A40, planning permission received 2012, completion due 2014/2015 art’otel hoxton 352 London London’s first art’otel, completion due 2014/2015 New projects Park Plaza Nuremberg Hercules House Fourth Park Plaza branded hotel in Germany, due for completion 2014. tbc London Apr-13 acquired office block on a 1.09 acre site, management looking tonto possible options for the site Renovation work Hotel Palma art’otel budapest 127 Croatia Hungary Located next to re-branded Park Plaza Histri, Hotel Palma will be re-branded and integrated into its sister hotel. Completion due pre summer season. A few floors and public areas Source: Company data, Hardman & Co Trading environment: mixed but stable Difficult trading conditions during the recession meant that earnings fell. EBITDA margins contracted from 29.2% (FY07, pro forma) to 20.2% (FY09). However, the management team have traded through the recession, occupancy and RevPAR have grown and earnings have rebounded. Given the macro outlook we anticipate occupancy trends and average rates per room remain broadly flat. That said, with additional room capacity coming on stream towards the end of 2013 and some more coming through in 2014 we expect revenues will show positive growth FY14 vs FY12. During 1Q13 total revenues increased 4.1% to €48.6m. The increase was principally driven by the increased ownership in three Dutch hotels (where PPHE bought out its 50% JV partner in March 2012). This represents a 6.3% uplift to consolidated room numbers. On a like for like basis, revenues decreased 2.9%, reflecting “a soft trading environment” across a number of the regions, notably in the Netherlands. The last IMS update from InterContinental Hotels Group shows a mixed trading update. During Q1: group RevPAR was up 3.1% driven by +4.1% in the Americas, negative 2.2% (in part due to the shift in Easter), Asia/Middle East/Africa +5.5%. In April trends improved: group RevPAR was up 6.2%, Americas +7.9%, Europe +3.3% and Asia/Middle East/Africa +7.1%. 8 28th May 13 Gearing has been a concern but is moving lower Financial leverage has been a concern for equity investors. However, net debt to EBITDA has fallen from 9.9x in FY10 to 5.4x in FY12. Given recent deal flow and the pipeline of projects the ratio is likely to move above 6.0x in FY13 before falling once more. Debt maturity profile (€m) Net debt Net debt:EBITDA 250 200 150 100 50 >FY20 FY20 FY19 FY18 FY17 FY16 FY15 0 FY14 FY14 FY13 FY12 FY11 FY10 FY09 FY08 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 FY07 600 500 400 300 200 100 0 FY13 Net debt : EBITDA (x) Debt: maturity profile Source: Company data, Hardman & Co Only a small proportion of loan facilities (€48.3m, less than 10% of total) are maturing before Dec-14. Late in FY15 there are repayments of €178m (€203m nominal, 37% of total facilities). We expect management will be looking to re-finance approximately one-third of their total facilities (by value) next year. Based on the market values of the hotel portfolio (€878m) we estimate the loan to value is 58% (gross debt basis), 53% (net debt). The 2015 maturing facilities have loan to gross debt covenants of sub-68% (see note 17 in the FY12 report and accounts) and the company is operating within these facilities. PPHE is in compliance with all of its banking facilities, other than the debt to service ratio test for the €21.0m facility borrowed against the Parkvondel. This loan, which represents only 3.6% of total facilities, was taken out in 2008 and is set to mature in September 2013 (see note 17 in the FY12 report and accounts). The lender has waived this test until maturity. 9 28th May 13 Trading on a material discount to NAV Over the last 12 months the shares have appreciated nearly 50%, reflecting positive news flow from the London hotels, value enhancing deal flow and earnings upgrades. That said, the current value looks undemanding on both an earnings multiple and share price to NAV basis. We calculate the true asset value of the company to be 877 cents per share (751 pence), mainly driven by prime freehold properties in central London. The main assumptions are: hotel estate value of €870m (based on asset valuations), prospective net debt (including derivative liabilities) of €550m, carrying value of intangible fixed assets of €38m, carrying value of the working capital adjustment of €18m. Note that in our calculation we have assumed that Hercules House is worth £23.5m (i.e. the price paid) but the since there will be an equal and opposite outflow of cash the net impact on NAV will be zero. A similar position will exists for the two German properties which are currently being acquired. Clearly the shares are trading on a substantial (57%) discount to the true net asset value of the business. Net assets (€m) NAV per share analysis Hotel valuation 870.1 Number of shares 42 Intangible assets 38.2 NAV per share (€ cents) 877 Investment in associate 21.6 NAV per share (pence) 751 Working capital (17.9) Current share price (€ cents) 377 Net debt (FY12) (505.1) Current share price (pence) 323 Restricted cash (FY12) 6.6 Cash movement (1H13) (45.0) True net asset value 368.4 Discount to true NAV 57% Source: Company data, Hardman & Co Management and shareholdings PPHE has an extremely experienced management team. For example, the Chairman, CEO and CFO have over 70 years collective hotelier experience between them. Park Plaza was formed in 1989 by combining the hotel management expertise of the PPHE Group, with certain hotel assets of the Red Sea Group (a privately held Israeli real estate company). PPHE was founded by CEO Boris Ivesha (owns/controls 18% of PPHE Group shares). Red Sea was founded by Chairman Eli Papouchado (owns/controls 44% of PPHE Group shares). Therefore, together these individuals control 62% of the shares in PPHE. Whilst this creates a very small free float and impacts on liquidity it ensures that managements interest are closely aligned with the other shareholders. 10 28th May 13 Background Strategy PPHE owns and manages a portfolio of 4* European hotels, with a metropolitan focus. The hotels can be characterised as offering “affordable luxury”, mainly situated in prime City locations. The Group has the exclusive rights to utilise the “Park Plaza” brand in 56 countries in the EMEA region. This is through a territorial license agreement with Carlson, a leading US hospitality company. In addition to the brand itself, PPHE’s relation with Carlson allows it to benefit from Carlson’s global brand infrastructure, reservation system and sales and marketing platform. The Group also owns the “art’otel” brand (with certain minor conditions, limitations and exclusions) on a global basis. Business and operations PPHE Group Brand Park Plaza art'otel Typical size: 150-500 rooms 100-200 rooms Concept: Fresh, design-led properties offering a blend of modernity and comfort Fusion of travel, architecture and contemporary art Target customers: Busisness and leisure Discerning traveller, with a focus on creative and artful design Location: Key European leisure and business destinations European leisure and business destinations Facilities: State-of-the-art facilities throughourt public areas and in all guest rooms Excellent conference facilities "art rageous" service (open and friendly) Collection of design and origonal artwork Comment: Service led destinations, with impecable levels of dedications, driving superior levels of consumer satisfaction Destinations in their own right, attracting discerning consumers for the design of the hotels Source: Compa ny da ta, Ha rdma n & Co 11 28th May 13 A brief history The current PPHE group was created in 2007 by the combination of the hotel management and operating interests of PPHE and certain hotel assets of the Red Sea Group. Collaboration between these two business dates back to 1989, with the Mandarin Park Plaza in Eindhoven (The Netherlands), which was acquired by Red sea Group and managed by PPHE. In 1994, the PPHE Group obtained the rights to use the Park Plaza brand in the Benelux countries, the UK and Israel from its creator and then owner. In 2000 it entered into a territorial licence agreement to operate the brand in a further 56 countries and took over the management of a number of hotel in Germany and Hungary. These were then run (and still are) under an operating lease arrangement. Later that year the territorial licence agreement was renegotiated and the PPHE Group entered into a strategic alliance with Carlson. Since coming to market has continued to expand the portfolio of hotels. The most significant hotel project has been the opening of the Park Plaza Westminster Bridge hotel in September 2010. This 1,019 room hotel (12.2% of group total) has been well received by guests, who have given the hotel a TripAdvisor score of 4.41 (out of a maximum of 5.00). PPHE has also taken a 20% stake in Arenaturist, a Croatian leisure focused hotel and holiday resort business. This has added 2,830 rooms, eight campsites and 52 food and beverage outlets to the portfolio. PPHE portfolio 9000 40 8000 35 7000 30 6000 25 5000 20 4000 15 3000 10 1000 5 0 0 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2000 Hotels Rooms Source: Company data, Hardman & Co 12 28th May 13 Park Plaza Hotels & Resorts The Park Plaza Hotels & Resorts brand is positioned in the upscale segment of full-service hotels. The hotels are typically located in the heart of business and tourist centres, and are easily accessible to central railway stations, airports and major ring roads. A cornerstone of the Park Plaza & Resorts brand is to offer high quality standard rooms at attractive rates. These properties usually have 100-400 rooms with state-of-the art facilities and are targeted at both business and leisure travellers. The Group’ rights to the Park Plaza Hotels & Resorts brand stem from the “Territorial Licence Agreement” with Carlson. Under this agreement, the Group has the exclusive right to use the Park Plaza & Resorts trademark in 56 countries with the EMEA region. The rights granted under the agreement are in perpetuity (or for the maximum period allowed by the laws of the relevant jurisdiction). The agreement also allows the Group to use and to others to sub-license the Carlson Reservations, marketing, training and advertising system. Outside these territories Carlson has the right to own/manage hotels under the Park Plaza brand. Carlson has continued to open new Park Plaza hotel. For example, in FY12 it opened new hotels in Bangkok and Delhi. This expansion programme is strengthening the brand and expanding crossmarketing and sales opportunities. art’otel The art’otel brand is built on the concept of individually themed hotels, each focused on contemporary artists. The art’otel brand seeks to appeal to a sophisticated clientele with an interest in art and culture. As with Park Plaza, the hotels operate in the four-star price category and aim to provide excellent value for money with a unique blend of service and design. The art’otel branded hotels is usually smaller that the Park Plaza Hotels & Resorts branded hotels with typically 100-200 rooms. They tend to be located close to main shopping streets or tourist attractions. The art’otel hotels also benefit from the Carlson Central Reservation System on broadly similar terms. The Group owns the art’otel brand worldwide. 13 28th May 13 Ownership models A flexible approach to ownership PPHE has a flexible approach to ownership and has entered into a range of different ownership models. As a consequence, it owns, co-owns, leases, franchises and manages 38 four-star deluxe and boutique hotels with 8,300 rooms in key gateway cities in Europe and the Middle East. A further four hotels with 510 rooms are due to open during the next few years. Flexible ownership model PPHE contract mix UK Netherlands Germany + Hungary Wholly owned 6 5 Partly owned 1 - Operating lease - - Franchise/Managed 2 - Operational hotels 9 5 2 1 1 - 4 11 6 10 15 42 Projects Other Total - - 11 - 14 15 8 - 8 1 1 4 9 15 38 Note: PPHE is in the process of acquiring the freeholds to two of the German hotels. Completion is expected late May/early June. Source: Company data, Hardman & Co Wholly owned and co-owned PPHE has 11 wholly / owned hotels (2,378 rooms) and has 15 co-owned hotels (3,849 rooms). With wholly owned hotels management in full control of the business and receives 100% of the upside of the value being created. However, this model is capital intensive, which depresses RoIC during the early roll-out phase of the group. Co-owned hotels require less capital outlay from PPHE, with the acquisition jointly financed with the partner. JV partners can also bring skills and expertise which benefit the performance of the hotel. However, the model requires a high degree of co-operation with the JV partner. Disagreements over strategy can result in under investment and impact on operational performance of the hotel. That said, PPHE has demonstrated very capable of working with its partners to deliver both new hotel projects and healthy operational performance. Management services are provided to most of the hotels in the group’s owned/co-owned portfolio charged on a percentage of room/total revenues plus an incentive fee typically based on gross operating profit. The precise percentages will vary between management contracts. A reimbursement fee of up to 3% of gross operating profit to cover central overheads is also payable. Where a hotel is wholly owned, the management fee is eliminated in the group’s consolidated accounts. With co-owned hotels, management fee income is reported in the Management and Franchise division equal to the group’s percentage ownership. In terms of the profit and loss account, PPHE recognises 100% of the revenues and costs attributable to its wholly owned hotels and only the percentage ownership share of revenues and costs for co-owned hotels. 14 28th May 13 In terms of the balance sheet, PPHE does not routinely revalue its owned and co-owned hotels. Consequently, both wholly owned and co-owned hotels are included in the balance sheet at depreciated cost, with co-owned hotels included in the balance sheet equal to the group’s percentage ownership. The balance sheet, therefore, considerably underestimates the true value of the group’s assets. Operating Leases PPHE has 8 hotels run under operating leases (1,273 rooms). With these hotels PPHE essentially rents the hotel from the owner of the property. At present all of these hotel types are located within the German-Hungarian division. PPHE is currently in the process of acquiring the freeholds to two of the German hotels (cost €17.5m). Completion is expected to be late May / early June 2013. Whilst this model requires little capital outlay, is does result in a lower achievable EBITDA margin. Operating lease arrangement typically last between 15-25 years. Monthly rental payments to third party property owners are based either on a minimum percentage of operating revenues or a minimum percentage of gross operating profit. PPHE manages all of the hotels in its leased portfolio and receives a fixed base fee and an incentive fee typically based on profit. As with the owned/co-owned hotels, these management fees are eliminated in the group’s consolidated accounts. Hotels operated under operating leases are not included in the group’s balance sheet. Managed Hotels PPHE has one managed hotels (County Hall, 398 rooms). Managed hotels are classified as hotels owned by third parties but managed by PPHE and operated under the Park Plaza or art’otel brand. The managed hotel model enables PPHE to extend the brand (whether Park Plaza or art’otel) without the cost of acquiring the property. However, management contracts can be lost to competitors due to price. That said, if the hotel is being run well, pricing becomes less of an issue. With managed hotels contract terms vary. In broad terms there will be a fixed base fee and a variable incentive fee. The hotel owner is responsible for all operating costs including the funding of expansion/maintenance capex. Management hotel contracts are terminable on six months’ notice plus payment of an additional payment equivalent to 12 months fees. Franchised Hotels PPHE neither owns, leases nor manages any of its franchised hotels. Instead, these hotels are both owned and operated by a third party hotel operators who pay a basic franchise fee (calculated are a percentage of hotel revenues) to operate under the Park Plaza or art’otel brand in return for a fixed period licence (typically ten years). On entering a franchise agreement, PPHE will also typically receive a one-off fee. This is calculated on a per room basis (starting from US$100 in MENA and up to €200 in Europe). Three of the Group’s hotels are subject to franchise arrangements. 15 28th May 13 Business Models Full ownership Joint ventures Management contracts Operating Leases Franchise arrangements PPHE fully owns and manages the hotel. Enables management to be in full cotrol of the operational performance of the hotel. PPHE jointly owns the hotel with external investors. In these instances, PPHE acts as manager of the hotel. The hotel is owned by third parties but managed by PPHE and operated under the Park Plaza or art’otel brand. PPHE essentially rents the hotel from the owner of the property. PPHE neither owns, leases nor manages any of its franchised hotels. These hotels are both owned and operated by a third party hotel operators. Will typically be able to leverage ownership. Historic debt facilities have been for 68%-75% of loan to value. PPHE receives a basic fee (typically 2% of room revenues); a further fee of gross operating profit (up to 7%) and a reimbursement fee (up to 3%) to cover centrla admin costs. PPHE receives a basic fee (typically 2% of room revenues); a further fee of gross operating profit (up to 7%) and a reimbursement fee (up to 3%) to cover centrla admin costs. PPH manages all of the hotels in its leased portfolio and receives a basic fee of up to 3% and an incentive fee of up to 10% of profit. These are eliminated on consolidation. The hotel operator pays a basic franchise (typically 3.5% of hotel revenues) to operate under the Park Plaza or art’otel brand. Contracts typically = 10 year fixed licence. Benefits to PPHE: Management in full control of the business and receives 100% of the upside of the value being created. Benefits to PPHE: Jointly finance the acquisition of the hotel. JV partners can also bring skills and expertise which benefit the performance of the hotel. Benefits to PPHE: Able to extend the brand, without the cost of acquiring the property. Benefits to PPHE: Very little capital outlay. Benefits to PPHE: Leverages the brand. Disadvantage to PPHE: Capital intensive, which depresses RoIC during the early roll-out phase of the group. Disadvantage to PPHE: Requires a high degree of cooperation with the JV partner. Disagreements over strategy can result in under investment and impact on operational performance of the hotel. Disadvantage to PPHE: Management contracts can be lost to competitors. That said, if the hotel is being run well, pricing becomes less of an issue. Disadvantage to PPHE: Rental costs reduces EBITDA margins. Disadvantage to PPHE: Lack of control. 16 28th May 13 Sales and marketing Multiple sales channels PPHE utilises a number of sales channels to drive occupancy. Firstly, its relationship with Carlson provides it with access to Carlson’s large-scale and effective reservation and distribution system. This provides both global reach and access to lucrative major corporate accounts. PPHE also sells through tour operators (for both business and tourist guests). It also has increasingly developed its in-house marketing team, which utilises many routes to market including the internet. Club Carlson In a global market where major corporates are consolidating their supplier relationships, being part of a global marketing and reservation network is crucial. Participation ensures that the Group’s hotels remain within the corporate travel programmes and improves the Group’s positioning with global travel consortia. Since 2007 the Group has participated in Carlson’s guest loyalty programme, which has a marketing database of over 10m customers worldwide. The Carlson network has a cross-selling strategy at all customer touch points for the different brands within the Carlson family. This include reservation call centres, global distribution system point of sale, the brand websites managed by Carlson, the network of on-property sales staff and Carlson’s own global sales force. One third of all hotel room bookings worldwide currently take place through corporate booking systems. Intercontinental Hotels (IHG.L) estimates that this will rise to 50%. Therefore, being a member of a group loyalty scheme run by one of the multinational hotel brands is critical to a hotel. Club Carlson Membership 12.0 45% 40% 10.0 35% 8.0 30% 25% 6.0 20% 4.0 15% 10% 2.0 5% 0.0 0% FY05 FY06 FY07 FY08 Club Carlson membership FY09 FY10 FY11 FY12 Revenue contribution (RHS) Contribution to occupancy (RHS) Source: Company data, Hardman & Co The steady growth in the importance of these schemes explains why the hotels with access to one of these booking engines are consistently able to operate with higher occupancy levels than the independents which rely on their own 17 28th May 13 means of marketing. Hotels that are members of central booking systems may take between 60% and 80% of their booking through their group reservation systems. Cost effective marketing: The loyalty schemes are the cheapest and most effective method of marketing available. The fees paid to the brand owner will be more than compensated for by the extra letting, and food and beverage income. Greater access to corporate accounts: Booking systems also extend access to significant corporate accounts. The brand operators will each year negotiate with corporate customers, offering rate reductions and other deals in exchange for becoming a preferred supplier. Whilst these deals will usually non-exclusive, they provide access to clients, whom otherwise would be taking their business elsewhere. Bankability: A hotel developer or franchisee will gain considerable security and bankability by joining a corporate booking network. Minimum standards required: The hotel operator will need to maintain certain standards in order to be able to use the brand, but a professional operator would be expect to do this anyway. Internet bookings All hotel operators use sites such as lateroom.com, Expedia and lastminute.com to fill rooms. Whilst these provide fast and effective sales generation and allow easy and rapid comparison of room rates between hotels, they cause a drift among those important corporate users away from loyalty schemes. Room rates and discounts offered have always changed during the course of the day. These decisions used to be exclusively the preserve of the hotel manager. Now, these decisions have largely been taken out of the hands of the hotel managers and place in centralised departments which have the computer power and manpower to continually monitor competitor rates on line and the flow of traffic through the outside booking systems. This further advantages the individual operator. In house sales and marketing In addition to the Group’s access to the Carlson reservation staff, the Group has an experienced in-house sales and marketing team with over 50 employees. Each member of the team focuses on particular areas of the Group’s business or target customer group and team members receive regular training to improve their selling skills. The in house team has been responsible for driving social media recognition. The group mow has a social media “fan base” of over 100,000 members, which is helping drive incremental occupancy. 18 28th May 13 Sources of revenues More than just beds Whilst room revenue represents 69% of total revenues (FY12), other sources of income are hugely important to the group. Indeed certain sources of revenues have a cross-sell effect. For example, food and beverage activities (24.9% of FY12 total), includes a conference, events and banqueting activities, with events guests often choosing to stay in the hotel the day/night of the event. Sources of revenue (FY12) Rooms Food & beverage Other Source: Company data, Hardman & Co Room Revenue The Group’s customer base is a mixture of business and leisure customers. Although business customers tend to pay higher room rates than leisure customers, management seeks to retain a balance between the two. Leisure customers tend to occupy rooms at times when business customers do not (e.g. at weekends and on public holidays), thereby maximising occupancy rates and revenues. The Group seeks to negotiate preferential rates with major corporate customers and currently has a number of such arrangements in place with major multinational companies. PPHE has in place arrangements with a number of tour operators. Although room rates under such arrangements tend to be lower than for other customers, these arrangements provide a cornerstone for occupancy rates. Food and beverage The conference facilities offered by the Group’s hotels produce substantial revenue (24.9% FY12). Over the last few years, conferencing and banqueting facilities have been materially extended. For example, Park Plaza Westminster Bridge has a 1,200m sq ballroom. To put this into context: The Great Room at the Grosvenor = 1,779m sq; the Ballroom at the Hilton = 1,062m sq; and The Ballroom at the InterContinental Park Lane 840m sq. If conference and banqueting facilities at Park Plaza Westminster Bridge London are at full capacity, the Group can host additional guests at the nearby Park Plaza County Hall London and the Park Plaza Riverbank London (including Plaza on the River) thereby maximising from large events. 19 28th May 13 Customer satisfaction Happy customers = building the brand, driving repeat business The advent of social media and consumer opinion sites is transforming the landscape of every industry. Within the hotel space TripAdvisor is the largest and most dominant travel site, with more than 60m traveller reviews (source: travel trade journal). Given the scale of TripAdvisor we consider its review system to be as important as Google and the Carlson marketing relationship. It also serves as an objective (and independent) yardstick by which to judge the level of customer satisfaction. In some ways these sites threaten the power of brands, since the reviews cannot be directly influenced by the brand owners/managers. However, as long as a brand is effectively run, the reviews can serve as an important promotional tool, enabling consumers to make informed purchasing decisions and supporting the brand manager. Therefore, TripAdvisor can provide an positive feedback loop for hotel owners driving incremental business across the portfolio. TripAdvisor® score (by geography) 4.4 4.2 4.0 3.8 3.6 3.4 3.2 Croatia (rebranded) UK + Ireland Germany + Hungary The Netherlands Croatia (all hotels) 3.0 Source: Company data, Hardman & Co PPHE scores extremely well on Tripadvisor. The UK hotels have an average score of 4.3 (out of a maximum of five). Westminster Bridge is currently scoring 4.4, County Hall 4.4 and Cardiff 4.3. Six out of the eight hotels are scoring above 4.0. The German and Hungarian hotels have an average score of 4.1, with five out of the nine hotels scoring 4.0 or above. At 3.8, the Netherlands has a lowest average score within the core portfolio. That said, this performance is still a respectable one, with two out of the five hotels scoring 4.0 or above. Within the portfolio, Croatia has the lowest average score at 3.3. However, the rebranded hotels (Park Plaza Histria Pula and Park Plaza Medulin) have 20 28th May 13 an average TripAdvisor score of 4.3. This is comparable to the flagship hotels in London. Putting the scores into context Consumer scores in isolation are rather meaningless. Instead they need to be compared to scores by similar hotels. Therefore, in order to provide some market context for the TripAdvisor scores, we analysed the scores being generated by PPHE’s competition within the London market. We created a universe of 69 four star hotels. Each of these trades under well-known brands and form part of a wider portfolio of hotel assets. As at the time of analysis (4th May) TripAdvisor had received 61,528 reviews on the selected universe of stocks, with an even distribution of scores across all of the hotels analysed. Therefore, we consider the analysis to be statistically significant. TripAdvisor scoring (selected four star London hotels) 4.4 4.2 4.0 3.8 3.6 3.4 3.2 PPHE (7) Crowne (5) Thistle (7) Radisson (10) Marriott (5) Hilton (11) Millennium (6) Mercure (5) Holiday Inn (7) Best Western (7) 3.0 Source: Company data, Hardman & Co The analysis shows that PPHE is outperforming its peers in the four star London hotel market. TripAdvisor shows the nearest two brands were Crowne Plaza and Thistle, which have five and seven central London hotels respectively. In terms of scoring PPHE’s London hotels have a score of 4.291, Crowne has 4.184 and Thistle 3.985. The average four star branded hotel portfolio has a TripAdviser score of 3.918. The lowest two scores were by Best Western (3.473) and Holiday Inn (3.750). Clearly PPHE is doing something right, which is being reflected in the operational performance of the Group. 21 28th May 13 Valuation Valuation considerations Over the last 12 months the shares have appreciated nearly 50%, reflecting positive news flow from the London hotels, value enhancing deal flow and earnings upgrades. That said, the current value looks undemanding on both an earnings multiple and share price to NAV basis. Implied fair value Implied value Methodoly Implied upside Comments Net Asset Value 751p UK quoted hotel chains (PER basis) 726p Stocks considered: InterContinental, Millenium & Copthorne (PER = 17.9x CY13) Int’l quoted hotel chains (EV basis) 614p Stocks considered: Accor, Marriot, Sol Melia, Starwood + Wyndham (EV/EBITDA = 9.8x CY13) Implied fair value 697p 116% Note: PER basis for UK hotel comparison = cheapest valuation, EV/EBITDA much more expensive EV/EBITDA basis for international hotel comparison = cheapest valuation Source: Company data, Hardman & Co Trading on a ~60% discount to NAV We calculate the true asset value of the company to be 877 cents per share (751 pence), mainly driven by prime freehold properties in central London. The main assumptions are: hotel estate value of €870m (based on asset valuations); prospective net debt (including derivative liabilities) of €505m; carrying value of intangible fixed assets of €38m; carrying value of the working capital adjustment of €18m. Clearly the shares are trading on a substantial (57%) discount to the true net asset value of the business. For a detailed discussion on our NAV calculation please see below. Net assets (€m) NAV per share analysis Hotel valuation 870.1 Number of shares 42 Intangible assets 38.2 NAV per share (€ cents) 877 Investment in associate 21.6 NAV per share (pence) 751 Working capital (17.9) Current share price (€ cents) 377 Net debt (FY12) (505.1) Current share price (pence) 323 Restricted cash (FY12) 6.6 Cash movement (1H13) (45.0) True net asset value 374.4 Discount to true NAV 57% Source: Company data, Hardman & Co Selected quoted hotel companies 22 28th May 13 Calendarised Year end Sales (m) Dec-11 Dec-12 Dec-13E Dec-14E Ticker ACCP.PA Dec-11 Price (€) 27.30 Dec-12 Mkt cap (€m) 6,210 Dec-13E EV (€m) 6,531 Dec-14E EV/ EV/ Sales EBITDA (x) (x) Net Divi debt/ yield EBITDA (%) (x) EBITDA (m) PBT (m) EPS DPS Net cash (m) Cal. Year PER (x) 202.4 242.1 236.6 238.1 65.1 85.6 81.1 82.2 13.6 26.6 19.9 21.7 32.7 63.3 47.4 51.7 6.0 12.0 14.0 16.0 (387) (460) (493) (479) CY11 CY12 CY13 CY14 11.5 6.0 8.0 7.3 2.7 2.6 2.8 2.7 8.4 7.2 8.0 7.8 1.6 3.2 3.7 4.2 5.9 5.4 6.1 5.8 5,568 5,649 5,467 5,323 767 794 950 1,016 515 526 682 748 437 239 395 461 1.5 0.8 1.4 1.6 (226) (421) (321) (221) CY11 CY12 CY13 CY14 17.8 32.5 19.6 16.9 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 8.4 8.4 6.9 6.3 2.4 2.8 3.7 4.3 0.3 0.5 0.3 0.2 Dec-11 Dec-12 Dec-13E Dec-14E 3,698 3,949 4,166 4,482 458 512 601 661 96 89 178 238 0.42 0.39 0.77 1.03 (831) (954) (954) (954) CY11 CY12 CY13 CY14 100.1 108.0 54.1 40.4 2.0 1.9 1.8 1.7 16.5 15.0 12.8 11.6 Dec-11 Dec-12 Dec-13E Dec-14E 1,768 1,835 1,901 1,976 658 708 789 851 497 560 624 673 127 139 155 167 55 64 71 77 (538) (1,074) (924) (774) CY11 CY12 CY13 CY14 22.9 21.0 18.9 17.5 7.2 7.3 6.9 6.6 19.4 18.8 16.7 15.3 1.9 2.2 2.4 2.6 0.8 1.5 1.2 0.9 Dec-11 Dec-12 Dec-13E Dec-14E 12,317 11,814 12,730 13,628 992 1,146 1,304 1,477 356 849 1,007 1,180 55 172 204 239 39 49 58 68 (2,069) (2,847) (2,647) (2,447) CY10 CY11 CY12 CY13 36.0 79.3 25.4 21.4 1.3 1.4 1.3 1.2 15.6 14.2 12.3 10.7 0.9 1.1 1.3 1.6 2.1 2.5 2.0 1.7 Dec-11 Dec-12 Dec-13E Dec-14E 821 768 800 859 235 198 164 178 182 158 124 137 51.0 42.0 33.0 36.6 13 14 14 15 (100) 52 75 100 CY11 CY12 CY13 CY14 11.0 13.3 17.0 15.3 2.3 2.3 2.2 2.0 8.2 9.0 10.7 9.7 2.2 2.4 2.5 2.6 0.4 nm nm nm Ticker MEL.MC Dec-11 Price (c) 5.67 Dec-12 Mkt cap (€m) 1,048 Dec-13E EV (€m) 1,998 Dec-14E 1,335 1,362 1,371 1,449 246 250 241 276 51.1 59.0 50.2 85.6 0.23 0.20 0.17 0.29 (1,003) (985) (950) (925) CY11 CY12 CY13 CY14 24.7 28.4 33.4 19.6 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.4 8.3 8.1 8.3 7.1 PPHE Ticker PPHE.L Price (p) 323.00 Mkt cap (£m) 136 EV (£m) 629 Accor Hyatt Ticker Price ($) Mkt cap ($m) EV ($m) H.N 42 6,726 7,680 1.8 1.9 1.6 1.4 Inter- continental Ticker Price (p) Mkt cap (£m) EV ($m) IHG 1,945 8,150 13,171 Marriott Ticker MAR.N Price ($) 43.62 Mkt cap ($m) 13,397 EV (4m) 16,044 M&C Ticker Price (p) Mkt cap (£m) EV (£m) MLC.L 560 1,826 1,751 Sol Melia 4.1 3.9 3.9 3.4 Starwood Ticker Price ($) Mkt cap ($m) EV ($m) HOT.N 69.22 13,467 14,556 Dec-11 Dec-12 Dec-13E Dec-14E 5,624 6,321 6,135 6,258 895 1,163 1,274 1,308 425 618 729 763 257 239 282 295 50 125 147 154 (2,041) (1,339) (1,089) (839) CY11 CY12 CY13 CY14 26.9 29.0 24.5 23.5 2.8 2.3 2.4 2.3 17.3 12.7 11.4 10.9 0.7 1.8 2.1 2.2 WYN.N 63 8,594 12,861 Dec-11 Dec-12 Dec-13E Dec-14E 4,254 4,534 4,956 5,253 945 1,037 1,256 1,364 650 628 847 955 251 275 371 418 60 92 124 140 (3,873) (4,367) (4,267) (4,167) CY10 CY11 CY12 CY13 25.2 23.0 17.0 15.1 2.9 2.9 2.6 2.4 13.2 12.5 10.2 9.4 0.9 1.5 2.0 2.2 Wyndham Ticker Price ($) Mkt cap ($m) EV ($m) 4.1 4.2 3.4 3.1 Source: Various sources, Hardman & Co 23 28th May 13 Quoted hotel valuations PPHE is trading on a CY13 PER of 8.0x (falling to 7.3x CY14). This compares with 26.2x for CY13 and 21.2x for CY14 for its international peers (simple average). Excluding Hyatt (which trading on 54.1x CY13 and 40.4x CY14), the peer group is trading on 22.3x and 18.5x (again, simple average). Whichever way you look at it, PPHE is trading on a material discount to the peer group. This partly reflects scale and partly financial leverage. However, given the focused strategy of the group and the positive news flow coming through there is scope for the discount to narrow. The two larger UK quoted hotel chains (InterContinental and Millennium & Copthorne) are trading on prospective PERs of 18.9x (CY13) and 17.0x (CY13) respectively. Simple average = 17.9x (CY13) and 16.4x (CY14). The internationally quoted hotel chains (excluding Hyatt) are trading on prospective PERs of 24.0x (CY13) and 19.3x (CY14), again simple average. PER (prospective CY13) 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 Hyatt Sol Melia Marriott Starwood Accor IHG Wyndham M&C PPHE 0 Source: Various (based on consensus estimates), Hardman & Co In terms of EV/EBITDA PPHE also appears good value. The peer group is trading on 11.2x (CY13) and 10.1x (CY14). PPHE is trading on 8.0x (CY13) and 7.8x (CY14). EV/EBITDA (prospective CY13) 20 15 10 5 IHG Hyatt M&C Marriott Starwood Wyndham Sol Melia PPHE Accor 0 Source: Various (based on consensus estimates), Hardman & Co 24 28th May 13 The Mint Hotels Comparison In July 2011, Blackstone acquired Mint Hotels for £575m. The deal valued the portfolio at £207,000 per room. Mint Hotels is a chain of four star hotels (2,783 rooms), with a reasonable comparison to Park Plaza Hotels. Mint hotels, which have now been rebranded DoubleTree, owns eight freehold hotels. Two of these (37% of rooms) are located in London: one near the Tower of London and one in Westminster. Most of the hotels in the portfolio are relatively new build. One of the hotels is in Amsterdam and is located almost directly opposite one the of the key Park Plaza properties. The remaining five hotels are in British provincial City locations (including Leeds). Mint Hotels had over-extended itself and its disposal by Lloyds Bank had elements of a forced sale. Prior to this deal, there had been few transaction in this segment of the marketplace. As a consequence the valuing agents Colliers and Savills appeared to rely quite extensively on DCF methodology in their valuations. Of course this makes no allowance for the revenue flow from the investor rooms at Westminster Bridge, the managed and franchised hotels (which are valuable and very profitable). InterContinental Park Lane InterContinental has just sold (May-13) its flagship Park Lane hotel for £302m (gross), £287m (net). The hotel was acquired by Constellation Hotel, a Middle East private investment firm. IHG will continue to manage the hotel. Direct comparisons with PPHE’s Central London hotels need to be made with caution, especially since the average room rate for the Park Lane is considerably higher than for the PPHE hotels. That said, the transaction highlights there is interest in city centre hotels at full valuations. Key metrics: 447 rooms, historic revenue £57m ($89m), EBITDA £25m ($39m), EBIT £21m ($33m). Valuation metrics: EV per room £642k ($998k), EV/Sales 5.0x, EV/EBITDA 11.4x. 25 28th May 13 Calculating the true NAV Since PPHE does not regularly re-value the assets it owns, the carrying value of the assets on the balance sheet fail to reflect their marketable value. The FY12 balance sheet = NAV per share of 619p (731 cents). We estimate the true NAV per share to be more like 751p (877 cents). In order to estimate the true NAV per share we have undertaken a bottom up exercise looking at the assets and cash liabilities of the business. True Net Asset Value (€m) Hotel valuations 870.1 Intangible assets 38.2 Investment in associate 21.6 Working capital (broadly defined) (17.9) Net debt (FY12) (505.1) Restricted cash 6.6 Cash movement (1H13) (45.0) True NAV 368.4 See table below See table below Including derivative instruments and loans from third parties Some relates to Aprt-Hotel deposits, some cash put into escrow re banking Hardman forecast Source: Company data, Hardman & Co When the company moved from AIM to the Main List, the company appointed Colliers and Savills to undertake an assessment of the hotel portfolio. Colliers undertook the majority of the assessments, with Savills being appointed to value Park Plaza Westminster Bridge. Comparative valuations are fully supportive of a high valuation for the central London hotels. Mid-market hotel per room valuations are falling within the range £200,000 to £500,000 range. Though admittedly the number of completed transactions is relatively low. 26 28th May 13 Hotel valuations (€m) Hotel / property Value Comments United Kingdom Properties Sherlock Holmes Park Plaza 19.7 Victoria Park Plaza, London 121.0 Riverbank Park Plaza 170.4 art'otel Hoxton (50% owned) 17.5 Park Plaza Leeds 19.7 Park Plaza Nottingham 17.5 Park Plaza 1 Westminster Bridge 216.2 Excludes value of sold units - Property sold & leased back Western Avenue Hercules House Includes small retail portfolio, value €2m 27.5 See note to the table European Properties Mandarin Park Plaza, Eindhoven 16.3 Utrecht Park Plaza 22.5 Vondel Park Plaza, Amsterdam 26.8 Victoria Park Plaza, Amsterdam 100.0 art'otel Amsterdam (vacant) 19.3 Park Plaza Amsterdam Airport 34.4 Park Plaza Nuremberg (site) 6.3 art'otel berlin mitte 17.5 art'otel berlin kudamm FV adjustment to European hotels 17.6 Total See Note 3 FY12 report and accounts 870.1 Note: Hercules House transaction expected to complete May/June 2013. We have adjusted the net debt figure, so the net impact to NAV is zero. Source: Colliers, Savills, Company data, Hardman & Co Working capital items (broadly defined) Inventories under construction 16.4 Other non-current financial assets 1.5 Inventories 1.3 Trade receivables Other receivables and pre payments Exludes loans from third parties 19.8 5.9 Trade payables (10.9) Other payables (54.2) Add back: Other loans from third parties 9.6 Add back: Derivative instruments 6.4 Deferred consideration (3.8) See note 19 FY12 accounts Other (9.7) See note 19 FY12 accounts Total (17.9) Source: Company data, Hardman & Co 27 28th May 13 Valuation charts EV/Sales (12 month prospective) 6.0 5.0 4.0 3.0 2.0 1.0 Apr-13 Dec-12 Apr-12 Aug-12 Dec-11 Apr-11 Aug-11 Dec-10 Apr-10 Aug-10 Dec-09 Apr-09 Aug-09 Dec-08 Apr-08 Aug-08 Dec-07 Aug-07 0.0 Since coming to the market, the EV/Sales multiples has been de-rated. This initially reflected concerns how the recession would impact earnings. Admittedly, EBIT margins did contract (7.4% in FY09 vs 19.6% in FY07). However, margins now exceed pre-recession levels (26.4% in FY12) and we expect the EV/Sales multiple has scope to move higher once more. EV/EBITDA (12 month prospective) 30.0 Over the last 12 months the share price has jumped >40%, reflecting positive news flow from the London hotels, value enhancing deal flow and earnings upgrades. That said, the EV/EBITDA multiple has remained within a relatively tight trading range (7x-8x). 25.0 20.0 15.0 10.0 5.0 Apr-13 Dec-12 Aug-12 Apr-12 Dec-11 Aug-11 Apr-11 Dec-10 Aug-10 Apr-10 Dec-09 Apr-09 Aug-09 Dec-08 Aug-08 Apr-08 Dec-07 Aug-07 0.0 PER (12 month prospective) 12.0 10.0 8.0 6.0 4.0 Whilst the EV/EBITDA multiple has been range bound, the 12 month perspective multiple has begun to move higher. However, the multiple has merely moved from 4.0x to 7.6x. This compares with 19x (FY13) for InterContinental Hotels Group. 2.0 Apr-13 Dec-12 Aug-12 Apr-12 Dec-11 Apr-11 Aug-11 Dec-10 Aug-10 Apr-10 Dec-09 Apr-09 Aug-09 Dec-08 Aug-08 Apr-08 Dec-07 Aug-07 0.0 Source: Company data, Hardman & Co 28 28th May 13 United Kingdom London Calling Six of the nine UK hotels are located in London, representing 73% of UK rooms. The units performed well in FY12 benefiting from the Olympics and all but one out-performed its direct competition during the period (source: STR Global). Whilst the trading environment in 2013 is likely to be subdued and reported revenues depressed by the falling value of sterling (relative to the Euro), high levels of customer satisfaction is likely to help revPAR. Our analysis shows that PPHE has the highest TripAdvisor scores in the London four-star branded hotel market. United Kingdom hotel portfolio Number of rooms Tripadvisor Score Plaza on the River – London part of Riverbank 4.69 Park Plaza Victoria London 299 4.19 Park Plaza Leeds 185 4.16 Park Plaza Riverbank London 460 4.09 Park Plaza Sherlock Holmes London 119 3.93 Park Plaza Nottingham 178 3.58 1,019 4.41 398 4.41 129 4.33 Total UK portfolio 2,789 4.28 London portfolio 2,295 4.32 Wholly owned hotels Part owned hotel Park Plaza Westminster Bridge London (535 rooms sold to external investors) Managed hotel Park Plaza Country Hall London Franchised hotel Park Plaza Cardiff Total number of rooms/average score Source: Company data, Hardman & Co London centric portfolio of hotels There are nine hotels in the UK portfolio (2,789 rooms), six trophy hotels in London (2,295 rooms) and three provincial hotels in Cardiff, Nottingham and Leeds (494 rooms). In terms of ownership PPHE wholly owns six of the hotels. Westminster Bridge, the largest purpose built hotel in the UK with 1,019, is partly owned. PPHE sold 535 rooms to external investors during the preconstruction and construction phase of the development. Following the successful opening of Westminster Bridge, PPHE gained the management contract of County Hall. Finally, PPHE has a single franchise hotel, which is located in Cardiff. 29 28th May 13 TripAdvisor scores The UK hotels in the portfolio have a TripAdvisor score of 4.32 (out of a possible 5.00). Within the estate of nine hotels, Plaza on the River had the highest score registering 4.69. Park Plaza Westminster Bridge and Park Plaza both scored 4.41. Only two hotels scored below 4.00 (Park Plaza Sherlock Holmes 3.93 and Park Plaza Nottingham 3.58). Across the portfolio of UK hotels 84% of votes were either very good or excellent. TripAdvisor scores: branded four star Central London hotels 4.4 4.2 4.0 3.8 3.6 3.4 3.2 PPHE (7) Crowne (5) Thistle (7) Radisson (10) Marriott (5) Hilton (11) Millennium (6) Mercure (5) Holiday Inn (7) Best Western (7) 3.0 Source: Company data, Hardman & Co We created a universe of 69 four star hotels. Each of these trades under well-known brands and form part of a wider portfolio of hotel assets. As at the time of analysis (4th May) TripAdvisor had received 61,528 reviews on the selected universe of stocks, with an even distribution of scores across all of the hotels analysed. Therefore, we consider the analysis to be statistically significant. The analysis shows that PPHE is outperforming its peers in the four star London hotel market. TripAdvisor shows the nearest two brands were Crowne Plaza and Thistle, which have five and seven central London hotels respectively. In terms of scoring PPHE’s London hotels have a score of 4.291, Crowne has 4.184 and Thistle 3.985. The average is 3.918. The lowest two scores were by Best Western (3.473) and Holiday Inn (3.750). Clearly PPHE is doing something right, which is being reflected in the operational performance of the Group. 30 28th May 13 Recent/Current trading United Kingdom: key metrics Occupancy Average Room Rate RevPAR Total Revenue EBITDAR EBITDA FY09 81.8% 129.2 109.6 29.0 11.4 FY10 81.8% 137.9 112.8 81.6 25.6 24.5 FY11 82.1% 145.6 119.5 140.0 48.9 47.5 FY12 81.7% 169.2 138.2 161.1 60.7 59.5 FY13E 81.7% 159.0 129.9 151.4 57.0 55.8 FY14E 81.7% 159.0 129.9 151.4 57.1 55.9 Source: Company data, Hardman & Co FY12, a record year: Over the last few years, occupancy rates within the UK portfolio have been relatively stable and have been out-performing the wider marketplace. Between FY10 and FY13 occupancy rates have averaged 81.9%. This compares with 72.5% for the wider UK hotel market. PPHE has driven RevPAR higher, increasing the sterling value from £96.5 in FY10 to £112.0 in FY12. Part of this increase will have been driven by opening by the opening of the Westminster Bridge hotel. The average room rate has similarly increased from £96.5 in FY10 to £137.1 in FY12. During FY12 Park Plaza increased occupancy by 2.8%, average room rate by 25.0% and RevPAR by 28.5%. With RevPAR increasing 7.7% (CFX) in FY12, total revenues increased 7.2% to £130.5m. EBITDA margins increased from 33.9% (FY11) to 36.9% (FY12) and EBITDA increased from €47.5m (£41.3m) to €59.5m (£48.2m). Current trading: During 1Q13 total revenues increased 4.1% to €48.6m. The increase was principally driven by the increased ownership in three Dutch hotels (where PPHE bought out its 50% JV partner in March 2012). This represents a 8.3% uplift to room numbers. On a like for like basis, revenues decreased 2.9%, reflecting “a soft trading environment” across a number of the regions, notably in the Netherlands. Given the current macro environment we are not surprised revenue trends are weak and in the coming quarters we are looking for a flat performance (no change from before). Crucially, the company is actively managing room yields. Whilst competition is pushing average room rates lower (€114.1 during 1Q13 vs €122.4 during 1Q12), occupancy rates have moved higher (70.5% vs 68.0%). The net result has been a 3.2% contraction in RevPAR (€80.4 vs €83.2). Renovation works and new projects Leeds and Nottingham renovation: Over the last few years Park Plaza Leeds and Park Plaza Nottingham have enjoyed extensive renovation work, with rooms and public areas being improved. Whilst these investments are expected to deliver improved financial performance, softness in the provincial hotel market is holding back the growth. art’otel hoxton: In February 2010 PPHE received planning permission to build the UK first art’otel, to be located in Hoxton (Hackney London). The hotel will have 352 state-of-the-art guest rooms. Public areas will include a top-floor restaurant and bar, spa facilities, an arts centre and artist/photographic studios. The hotel is scheduled to open during 2H14. Western Avenue: On 18th June 2012 PPHE acquired and simultaneously completed a sale-and-leaseback of a two acre development site in West London. 31 28th May 13 Planning permission for a 158 room hotel was granted in 2012. In addition, there will be a lounge and bar, several meeting rooms and spa facilities. Again, the hotel is scheduled to open during 2H14. Hercules House: On 25th May 2013 PPHE announced it was acquiring Hercules House, a prime site near Waterloo station in Central London (£23.5m cash). The office building on the 1.09 acre site has nine floors plus a basement. It is currently occupied by Department of Communities and Local Government but is scheduled to vacate the property by the 28th September 2013. The company is considering a number of possible uses for the property, including the possibility of a new hotel being developed on all or part the site. This must be the preferred option but it will take time. Completion is expected late May/early June. UK hotel market In 2012 the wider UK hotel market delivered revPAR growth of 1.4% to £58.33. This was driven by a 1.5% decrease in occupancy to 72.5% and a 2.9% increase in average room rate (source: STR Global, Dec-12). The London market was particularly strong, enjoying its third consecutive year of growth. London RevPAR increased 3.4% to £112.39, driven by a 3.7% increase in average room rates to £138.50. Occupancy was flat. A dip in the summer of 2013 can be expected, because the London hotel market will be without the Olympics or any comparable draw. That said, the Central London hotel market has remained particularly since the Olympics and trading could well surprise on the upside. In terms of new build, the UK is currently fourth country in the European league table. That said, the level of new build activity, relative to existing supply is small and not much of this new capacity is being added in the Centre. Competing Central London hotel projects, within the afford luxury segment of the market include: the Westminster Intercontinental and the 202 room Shangri-La in Shard. Much of the UK capacity expansion is coming at the no-service and limited service end of the market (e.g. Premier Inns). That said, there a number of projects on the London periphery (such as Docklands, which has 17 new hotel projects notified to the planning authorities). There are approximately 1,000 hotels in London, so absorbing new capacity is not a major issue. 32 28th May 13 The Netherlands Tulips from Amsterdam PPHE wholly owns five Dutch hotels all trading under the Park Plaza brand. On a like for like basis total revenues declined 1.3% in FY12. However, reported revenues jumped 52.5%, driven by the increased ownership of three hotels. Soft trading has continued into the current financial year, which negative revenue like for likes. The Dutch hotel portfolio Number of rooms Tripadvisor Score Park Plaza Mandarin Eindhoven 102 4.09 Park Plaza Victoria Amsterdam 306 3.97 Park Plaza Utrecht 120 3.69 Park Plaza Amsterdam Airport 342 3.67 Park Plaza Vondelpark Amsterdam 138 3.65 1,010 3.82 All are wholly owned hotels Total number of rooms/average score Source: Company data, Hardman & Co Five 4* hotels There are five hotels in the Dutch portfolio; three are in Amsterdam, one in Utrecht and one in Eindhoven. All five trade under the Park Plaza brand. As of March 2012, PPHE wholly owns all of the hotels. Prior to then PPHE owned three of the hotels jointly with Elbit Imaging Limited. TripAdvisor scores The five Park Plaza hotels have an average Tripadvisor score of 3.82. The highest scoring hotel is the Park Plaza Mandarin Eindhoven scoring 4.09. The lowest scoring hotel is Park Plaza Vondelpark Amsterdam scoring 3.65. These are respectable scores but have scope to be moved higher. Across the portfolio of German and Hungarian hotels 70% of votes were either very good or excellent. Current trading and prospects The Netherlands: key financials Occupancy Average Room Rate RevPAR Total Revenue EBITDAR EBITDA FY09 84.1% 108.7 91.4 19.8 6.5 FY10 77.9% 102.2 79.6 22.8 7.6 7.6 FY11 75.0% 109.4 82.0 24.8 7.8 7.8 FY12 72.6% 108.5 78.8 37.8 12.4 12.3 FY13E 72.6% 120.5 87.5 42.0 13.5 13.4 FY14E 72.6% 122.9 89.3 42.8 13.9 13.8 Source: Company data, Hardman & Co Over the last few years occupancy rates in the Netherlands have softened, reflecting macro-economic conditions across most of Continental Europe. 33 28th May 13 Average room rates and RevPAR have similarly moved lower. That said, in FY12 average room rates stabilised (€108.5 vs €109.4). With occupancy 2.3% lower in FY12, revPAR fell 3.9% to €78.8. The outlook for the Amsterdam hotel market in 2013 is subdued and we expect the uplift in revenues and earnings in FY13 is essentially driven by a full year effect of the JV transaction and the opening of art’otel amsterdam late in 2013. Renovation works and new projects During 2012 an extensive renovation project was completed at the Park Plaza Amsterdam Airport. The ground floor was remodelled and several new facilities were introduced including: a new restaurant, bar, board room, executive lounge and spa centre. The company has been looking to re-model Park Plaza Vondelpark Amsterdam which is spread across three modest sized buildings. The hotel is located in an attractive part of Amsterdam and gaining planning permission is likely to be a protracted exercise. Construction of the 107 room art’otel amsterdam is progressing well and on target to be completed late in 2013. The hotel will have lounge, restaurant and entertainment facilities. It will also have a 10,000 sq foot art gallery. The Amsterdam hotel market Unstable macro-economic conditions across most of Europe are impacting on the Amsterdam hotel market. During 2012 occupancy rates marginally moved higher (78.9% vs 77.7%). However, this was at the expense of average room rates which declined 0.8% (source: TRI Hospitality HotStats, Dec-12). The recent IMS confirmed that whilst trading was in-line with market expectations, the Dutch hotels had experienced a soft trading in the first quarter. That said, this is the quietest period of trading in the year and we have seen an uptick in trading in the broad hotel sector in recent weeks and we have left our forecasts unchanged. 34 28th May 13 Germany and Hungary Consistent delivery The German and Hungarian hotel portfolio is dominated by leased hotels (eight out of nine hotels). As a consequence, the EBITDA margins are lower than with the UK and The Netherlands. Crucially TripAdviser scores highlight consistent (and high) service levels, which bode well for future earnings. The German/Hungarian portfolio Number of rooms Tripadvisor Score 165 4.31 art'otel berlin city west 91 3.92 art'otel berlin kudamm 174 3.83 art'otel berlin mitte 109 3.95 art'otel cologne 218 4.03 art’otel dresden 174 3.94 Park Plaza Prenzlauer Berg Berlin 155 3.83 Park Plaza Wallstreet Berlin 167 4.24 150 4.11 Leased hotels art'otel budapest Franchised hotel Park Plaza Trier Total number of rooms/average score 1,423 4.09 Source: Company data, Hardman & Co A leased and franchised portfolio of hotels There are nine hotels in the German and Hungarian portfolio. Six of the hotels are art’otel branded venues; the other three are Park Plaza. In contrast to the UK and the Netherlands, PPHE does not own any of the German/Hungarian hotels. Eight are leased; the ninth is franchised. As a consequence, the EBITDA margins being generated are lower than in the UK or the Netherlands. In FY12 German/Hungarian margins were -1.5%. This compares with 36.9% in the UK and 32.5% in the Netherlands. The margin differential partly reflects a higher level of rental expense in the division. In FY12 rental expense = €9.3m in Germany/Hungary (28.5% of total revenues) vs €1.2m (0.7% of total revenues) in the UK and €0.1m in the Netherlands (0.2% of total revenues). Tripadviser ratings Tripadviser ratings for the German and Hungarian hotels show incredible consistency. The average scores for the nine hotels was 4.09 (out of a possible 5.00). There were no outlying scores (i.e. few low scores). art’otel budapest has an impressive Tripadviser score of 4.3 out of 5.0. Across the portfolio of German and Hungarian hotels 80% of votes were either very good or excellent. 35 28th May 13 Current trading Germany/Hungary: key financials Occupancy Average Room Rate RevPAR Total Revenue EBITDAR EBITDA FY09 71.4% 60.2 43.0 23.5 (3.7) FY10 70.3% 68.8 48.4 27.7 6.7 (0.3) FY11 71.8% 70.9 50.9 30.2 7.5 (1.0) FY12 73.5% 72.7 53.4 32.6 8.8 (0.5) FY13E 73.5% 72.7 53.4 32.6 9.4 (0.6) FY14E 73.5% 74.2 54.5 33.3 9.6 (0.4) Source: Company data, Hardman & Co In terms of occupancy, average room rates and RevPAR the German and Hungarian hotels traded broadly in-line with the wider hotel market. Occupancy improved from 71.75 to 73.5; average room rates grew 2.5% to €72.7 and RevPAR improved 5.1% to €53.4. Total revenues increased 7.9% to €32.6m. EBITDAR margins improved from 24.8% to 27.0%. As a consequence, the EBITDA loss narrowed from €1.0m to €0.5m. The German economy is gradually improving, albeit at a painfully slow pace. The German services PMI is fluctuating around the 50 level, indicating modest growth. As a consequence, divisional revenues should be relatively stable. We are forecasting revenues are broadly stable in FY13, moving to +2.0% growth in FY14. Pipeline During FY12 PPHE completed the extension of art’otel berlin city centre west. This hotel has Andy Warhol as its signature artist. The renovation/extension work added 61 new rooms, two meeting rooms, new leisure facilities and a new bar/lounge area. Also during the period, 75 rooms at the art’otel budapest were renovated and a new restaurant created. PPHE is currently constructing the fourth German Park Plaza. Located in Nuremberg, it has 177 rooms and is on target to open in 2014. Finally, PPHE is currently in the process of acquiring the freeholds to two of the German hotels (cost €17.5m). These are currently are operating lease units. Completion for these transactions is expected to be late May/early June 2013. The German and Hungarian hotel markets The German hotel market is on an improving trend. During 2012 occupancy increased by 2.2% to 66.3% ad average room rates increased 3.4% to €94.0. As a consequence, RevPAR increased €62.4 (source: STR Global, Dec-12). In term of individual Cities, Berlin performed well. RevPAR increased by 8.5% to €63.8, driven by 4.6% occupancy growth (to 72.5%) and by a 3.7% increase average room rates (to €88.0). By contrast, Cologne experienced a “flat” 2012. revPAR fell 0.2% to €67.6. Whist occupancy improved 1.2% to 67.7%, average room rates fell 1.4% to €100.0 (source: STR Global, Dec-12). 36 28th May 13 Croatia Extending the Park Plaza brand PPHE has a (20%) minority interest in a portfolio of Croatian hotels, owned by Arenaturist. Three of these hotels have been significantly renovated and rebranded under the Park Plaza brand and are delivering best in breed TripAdviser scores. In aggregate there are 2,830 rooms in the Croatian portfolio, which are principally targeted at the tourist market. Arenaturist: the Croatian hotel portfolio Number of rooms Tripadvisor Score Associate investment Park Plaza Histria Pula 4.28 Park Plaza Medulin 4.31 Park Plaza Verudela Pula 3.64 Guest House Riveria 2.29 Hotel Belvedere 2.16 Hotel Bironi 3.05 Hotel Holiday 3.36 Total number of rooms/average score 2,830 4.09 Source: Company data, Hardman & Co Associate investment in Arenaturist In 2008 PPHE acquired a 20% stake in WH/DMREF Bora BV, the holding company of the Arenaturist Group. Arenaturist is listed on the Zagreb Stock Exchange, with a current market cap of 322m HKR (€42.5m). Arenaturist assets are principally located on the Istria Peninsula. These include: eight hotels, six holiday apartment complexes, eight campsites and 52 food and beverage outlets. The book value of the Bora stake in the Park Plaza accounts is €21.6m. The equity stake is included at a negative valuation, because Park Plaza has a loan of €26m outstanding to Bora that bears an interest rate of 8.9% a year. This loan yields €2.3m a year in interest income to Park Plaza, matures 2020. Park Plaza also receives over €1.2m of management fee income from Arenaturist each year. Tripadviser ratings Tripadviser ratings show how that consumers like the hotel assets which have been redeveloped and rebranded by PPHE. For example, the Park Plaza Histria Pula has a Tripadviser score of 4.5, receiving the same rating as Westminster Bridge. However, a number of the other hotels have received scores within the 2.0-3.5 range. Many of the critical comments focus on service and food quality. 37 28th May 13 Developing the Arenaturst portfolio During 2012 PPHE completed the renovation and rebranding of three of the holiday resorts. The Hotel Histria was rebranded the Park Plaza Histria Pula, which occupies a prime coastal location and offers upscale hotel facilities. PPHE plan to continue to redevelop the Arenaturist portfolio, continue with staff training and improve the service offering. Hotel Palma, which has 127 rooms and is located next to the Park Plaza Histria Pula, has been temporarily closed for renovation. Upon completion (expected pre summer 2013) it will be integrated into the neighbouring closed Park Plaza Histria Pula. Further renovation and re-branding projects across the remaining Croation portfolio are “being considered”. Current trading and prospects The Croatian tourist industry continued to grow in 2012, albeit at a slower pace than in 2011. Given that almost one third of tourist to the region are from Germany, we believe there prospects for the near terms trends are relatively stable. Looking further ahead the prospects are quite exciting with scope for tourist spend moving from other (more expensive) areas of Europe, such as France, Italy and Spain. Istria: Arrivals (m) Istria tourists (by nationality) 3.2 Germany 3.0 Slovenia 2.8 Austria 2.6 Italy Netherlands 2.4 2010 2011 2012 Other Arrivals (m) Source: Company data, Hardman & Co 38 28th May 13 Management operations Licensing expertise As an owner/operator, a significant proportion of the portfolio is internally managed. However, a proportion of the portfolio is owned by third parties and PPHE receives income in return for managing the hotel. Current trading After consolidation and the elimination of intra-group revenue, reported revenues increased 47.7% to €10.6m. A significant proportion of this increase was driven by the recognition of an incentive fee which was based on a cumulative three year performance plan. This has now has switched to an annual incentive plan. EBITDA increased from €10.8m (FY11) to €14.2m (FY12). 39 28th May 13 Project pipeline, asset acquisitions and disposals Building a world class portfolio PPHE portfolio 9000 40 8000 35 7000 30 6000 25 5000 20 4000 15 3000 10 1000 5 0 0 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2000 Hotels Rooms Source: Company data, Hardman & Co Art’otel Hoxton. In February 2010 PPHE received planning permission to build the UK first art’otel, to be located in Hoxton (Hackney London). PPHE has been working on this project since 2008. The hotel will have 352 state-of-the-art guest rooms. Public areas will include a top-floor restaurant and bar, spa facilities, an arts centre and artist/photographic studios. The hotel is scheduled to open during 2H14. West London Hotel On 18th June 2012 PPHE acquired and simultaneously completed a sale-andleaseback of a two acre development site in West London. Planning permission for a 158 room hotel was granted in 2012. In addition, there will be a lounge and bar, several meeting rooms and spa facilities. Again, the hotel is scheduled to open during 2H14. Hercules House On 25th May 2013 PPHE announced it was acquiring Hercules House, a prime site near Waterloo station in Central London (£23.5m cash). The office building on the 1.09 acre site has nine floors plus a basement. It is currently occupied by Department of Communities and Local Government but is scheduled to vacate the property by the 28th September 2013. The company is considering a number of possible uses for the property, including the possibility of a new hotel being developed on all or part the site. This must be the preferred option but it will take time. Completion is expected late May/early June. 40 28th May 13 Other projects In addition to these committed projects, management has a further 10 unsigned projects in its sights. In London and potentially Paris, the high cost of prime hotel assets means management is keener on new build opportunities as opposed to acquisitions. Elsewhere, in Europe acquisitions particularly distressed sales are on option. Expansion of the portfolio via management contracts and franchise agreements which soak up lower capital remain a distinct possibility and are obviously lower risk. 41 28th May 13 Profit & Loss Key operating and financial metrics Occupancy: FY12 occupancy rates were broadly maintained at 77.4% (vs 77.4% in FY10 and 7.77% in FY11). During the seasonally quiet first quarter PPHE actively managed room yields, with management pushing occupancy up from 68.0% (1Q12) to 70.5% (1Q13). Average room rate: After increasing 7.6% in FY11, room rates continued to move high in FY12, jumping 9.8% to €130.9. During the first quarter of FY13 competition, especially in the tough Dutch market, resulted in average room rates falling from €122.4m (1H12) to €114.1 (1Q13). This partly reflects the active management of room yield and should not be taken as a significant negative signal. RevPAR: Stable room occupancy and higher average room rates, translated in positive RevPAR trends in FY12. During the period, RevPAR increased 9.4% to €101.3. During the first quarter of FY13 RevPAR fell 3.2%. On a like for like basis they were down 2.9% (this excludes FX movements). Room revenue: Reported room revenue jumped 17.6% to €166.2m in FY12. This follows a 48.9% increase in FY11. These gains were driven by a significant increase in room ownership (e.g. buying out the joint venture partner in the Netherlands). That said, on a like for like basis room revenue still grew by 12.9%. Total revenues: During FY12 total revenues increased 19.6% to €242.1m, mainly due to the aforementioned increase in ownership of hotels in the Netherlands. On a like for like basis total revenues increased 13.0%. During the first quarter of FY13 total revenues increased 4.1% to €48.6m. On a like for like basis they fell 2.9%. EBITDA margins: Hotel operators need to balance the conflicting demands of service levels and profit margins. It is possible to run an incredibly successful hotel, with very happy guests, but fail to look at the bottom-line. However, drive margins too high and guest satisfaction flies out of the window. In addition, being an owner/operator of hotel is a highly operationally geared business. As a consequence, when the recession PPHE EBITDA margins fell from 29.2% (FY07) to 20.2% (FY09). However, the company has successfully re-built margins and they are now higher than pre-recession levels. In FY12 they nudged a little higher, moving from 34.3% (FY11) to 34.5% (FY12). Note that due to the seasonal nature of the hotels there is a 1H-2H differential in terms EBITDA margins. For example, in 1H12 EBITDA margins were 32.9% and in 2H12 they were 37.4%. Profit before tax: The jump in EBITDA (€85.6m FY12 vs €65.1m FY11), resulted in operating profits moving from €44.1m to €63.8m and pre-tax profits from €13.6m to €26.6m. Earnings per share: Driven by higher earnings, EPS trends have been very strong. Indeed between FY10 and FY12 EPS jumped from 10.8c to 63.3c. The EPS is helped in part by the absence of any material tax charge, which stems from the historic losses (value >€100m). Given the company is some way off from paying tax we believe a nil tax charge rate in calculating normalised EPS is appropriate. 42 28th May 13 Balance Sheet Property Valuations Properties are the largest single item in the Park Plaza Hotels balance sheet, at €762.9m. These are included at a mixture of cost (after depreciation) and DCF valuation. However, through a number of sources, it is possible to come to a more accurate valuation of the portfolio. For example, when the company moved from AIM to the Main List, the hotels were valued by Colliers and Savills. Certain transactions have occurred since and it is necessary to adjust the NAV for these transactions. We estimate the market value of the hotel estate to be €870.2m (i.e. 14% higher than the balance sheet carrying value). Market value of the hotel estate London properties Sherl ock Hol mes Pa rk Pl a za Vi ctori a Pa rk Pl a za , London Vi ctori a Retai l Uni t, London Ri verba nk Pa rk Pl a za a rt'otel Hoxton (50% owned) Pa rk Pl a za Leeds Pa rk Pl a za Notti ngha m 1 Wes tmi ns ter Bri dge (ex s ol d uni ts ) Wes tern Avenue Hercul es Hous e European properties Ma nda ri n Pa rk Pl a za , Ei ndhoven Utrecht Pa rk Pl a za Vondel Pa rk Pl a za , Ams terda m Vi ctori a Pa rk Pl a za , Ams terda m a rt'otel Ams terda m (va ca nt) Pa rk Pl a za Ams terda m Ai rport Pa rk Pl a za Nuremberg (s i te) a rt'otel berl i n mi tte a rt'otel berl i n kuda mm FV a djus tment to Europea n hotel s Aggregate value Value (€m) Value (£m) No. of rooms Value per room (€ '000) 19.7 118.8 2.2 170.4 17.5 19.7 17.5 216.2 16.9 101.7 1.9 145.8 15.0 16.9 15.0 185.0 119 299 166 397 460 352 185 178 484 370 50 107 98 447 104 120 138 306 105 342 175 157 188 194 327 183 100 - - 27.5 23.5 16.3 22.5 26.8 100.0 19.3 34.4 6.3 17.5 17.6 870.2 Source: Company data, Hardman & Co 43 28th May 13 Gearing has been a concern but is moving lower Financial leverage has been a concern for equity investors. However, net debt to EBITDA has fallen from 9.9x in FY10 to 5.4x in FY12. Given recent deal flow and the pipeline of projects the ratio is likely to move above 6.0x in FY13 before falling once more. Debt maturity profile (€m) Net debt Net debt:EBITDA 250 200 150 100 50 >FY20 FY20 FY19 FY18 FY17 FY16 FY15 0 FY14 FY14 FY13 FY12 FY11 FY10 FY09 FY08 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 FY07 600 500 400 300 200 100 0 FY13 Net debt (€m), Net debt : EBITDA (x) Debt: maturity profile Source: Company data, Hardman & Co Only a small proportion of loan facilities (€50.7m, 8.7% of total) are maturing by Dec-14. There are €215m (37%) worth of facilities maturing in FY15. That said, given that there are €215m of facilities in FY15, we expect management will be looking to re-finance approximately one-third of their total facilities (by value) next year. Based on the market values of the hotel portfolio (€878m) we estimate the loan to value is 58% (gross debt basis), 53% (net debt). The 2015 maturing facilities have loan to gross debt covenants of sub-68% (see note 17 in the FY12 report and accounts) and the company is operating within these facilities. PPHE is in compliance with all of its banking facilities, other than the debt to service ratio test for the €21.0m facility borrowed against the Parkvondel. This loan, which represents only 3.6% of total facilities, was taken out in 2008 and is set to mature in September 2013 (see note 17 in the FY12 report and accounts). The lender has waived this test until maturity. Management have entered into a string of interest rate swaps. The majority of these mature over the next few years and PPHE may well see its effective interest rate charge move higher. 44 28th May 13 Swaps: maturity profile (€m) 8.0 4.0 >FY20 FY20 FY19 FY18 FY17 FY16 FY15 FY14 FY13 - Swaps: maturity profile Source: Company data, Hardman & Co Apart-hotel Units Apart-hotel units under management at Westminster Bridge are the second largest item in the balance sheet, at €175m. The payments received for these are held as a balancing item on the Liabilities side of the balance sheet. The reason these units are still in the accounts, despite being sold, is that Westminster Bridge is owned by a subsidiary company in which the unit purchasers each hold one non-voting share. This share expires once the 5-year, 6% p.a. rent guarantee has expired, which will probably be early 2016. At this stage it is unclear how these units (assets + liabilities) will be treated once the guarantee period runs out. Hardman view: it would be more sensible to exclude these units from the balance sheet, especially since these units are legally owned by outside investors. Intangible Assets The Intangible Assets represent the acquisition cost of the management and franchise rights of the Park Plaza hotels and resorts, and to much a lesser extent, the art’otel rights. The Park Plaza rights are included on the balance sheet at €35.1m (FY12) and the art’otel rights at €2.1m. Both are being amortised over 20 years from their fair value at date of acquisition. The outstanding amortisation period is 14.5 years. Whilst the terms of certain Park Plaza management contracts are limited, the rights to the use of the Park Plaza brand in the Europe, the Middle East and Africa, are in perpetuity. More importantly, the strength of the Park Plaza brand is growing. Therefore, we believe the value of the intangible fixed assets on the balance sheet under values the cash flows being driven by the brand. Restricted Deposits and Cash There is €16m in the balance sheet under this heading. Approximately 60% is related to the sale of rooms at the Westminster Bridge Park Plaza to outside buy-to-let investors. Some of these investors defaulted on the purchase, and forfeited their deposits. These deposits are held in a separate category because some investors have threatened legal action. 45 28th May 13 Profit & Loss FY09 FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13E FY14E Revenue 80.3 139.8 202.4 242.1 236.6 238.1 EBITDAR EBITDA EBITA EBIT 26.1 16.2 7.2 7.2 46.4 37.6 25.2 25.2 75.0 65.1 46.6 46.6 96.8 85.6 66.3 66.3 92.4 81.1 59.1 59.1 93.5 82.2 59.7 59.7 As s oci a tes + JV Other i tems (1.2) - (2.4) 60.4 (2.5) 1.7 (2.4) 43.0 (2.0) - (2.0) - Operating profit Normalised Reported 6.0 6.0 22.9 83.2 44.1 45.8 63.8 106.8 57.1 57.1 57.7 57.7 Financing items Norma l i s ed Reported (13.1) (13.1) (18.5) (22.7) (30.4) (35.1) (37.3) (36.7) (37.2) (37.2) (36.0) (36.0) Pre tax profit Normalised Reported (7.2) (7.2) 4.4 60.5 13.6 10.6 26.6 70.1 19.9 19.9 21.7 21.7 Ta xa ti on (0.3) 1.4 4.6 0.4 Pre tax profit Norma l i s ed Reported (7.2) (7.4) 4.4 61.9 13.6 15.3 26.6 70.5 19.9 19.9 21.7 21.7 (17.3) 10.8 32.7 63.3 47.4 51.7 -14.0% -27.1% -34.1% -58.9% 74.1% 77.7% 131.7% 282.1% 44.7% 61.5% 72.9% 92.7% >100% >100% 19.6% 29.0% 31.5% 44.9% 95.2% 93.7% -2.3% -4.6% -5.2% -10.5% -25.1% -25.1% 0.6% 1.3% 1.4% 1.1% 9.2% 9.2% 32.5% 20.2% 7.4% 33.2% 26.9% 16.4% 37.1% 32.1% 21.8% 40.0% 35.3% 26.4% 39.0% 34.3% 24.1% 39.3% 34.5% 24.3% Ea rni ngs per s ha re Norma l i s ed Reported Growth analysis Revenue EBITDAR EBITDA Opera ti ng profi t PBT EPS Margin analysis EBITDAR EBITDA Opera ti ng ma rgi n - - Source: Company data, Hardman & Co 46 28th May 13 Cash Flow Operational cash flow Opera ting pft Depn + a mort Cha nge i n i nves tment (undercons truction) Cha nge s tocks Cha nge debtors Cha nge credi tors Cha nge provi s i ons Other Strong operational cash flow FY09 FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13E FY14E 6.0 9.1 22.9 12.4 44.1 18.5 63.8 19.3 57.1 22.0 57.7 22.5 (81.0) (0.0) (2.4) 5.7 - (5.0) 0.0 (2.4) (5.7) - (6.5) 0.1 0.1 (12.4) - (8.5) 0.1 1.6 4.0 - 0.1 0.1 (0.3) - (0.0) (0.2) 0.1 - - - - - - - Interes t Ta xa tion (11.9) (0.1) (21.9) 0.1 (30.4) (0.1) (38.0) (0.1) (37.2) - (36.0) - Operational cash flow (74.6) 0.3 13.4 42.3 41.8 44.1 Ca pi tal expendi ture Adv pa yments etc Acqui s i tions /Di s pos a l s Di vi dends Equi ty Other (3.3) (8.0) (0.7) (31.8) (23.1) 36.7 (10.5) 23.6 (12.0) 6.3 0.5 (21.7) (23.4) (1.6) (21.4) (6.1) (62.7) (24.0) (45.0) (5.5) - (24.0) (6.3) - (118.5) (282.3) (400.8) 27.0 (400.8) (373.7) (13.5) (373.7) (387.3) (72.9) (387.3) (460.2) (32.7) (460.2) (492.9) 13.8 (492.9) (479.0) Movement in cash Open net cash Close net cash Note: Cash movements within “Other” mainly relate to project finance and related items and so are classified below the “Operational cash flow” line Source: Company data, Hardman & Co 47 28th May 13 Balance sheet Fixed assets IFA (other) TFA TFA (under mgt) Tra de recei va bl es Ta x a s s et Fi na nci a l a s s ets Fi n'l a s s ets (other) Retirement benefi t a s s et Other NAV building, but fails to reflect true value of the estate Current assets Inventori es Tra de a nd other rec'a bl es Ta x a s s et Fi na nci a l a s s ets Fi n'l a s s ets (other) Other Current liabilities Non-fi na nci a l Fi na nci a l Fi na nci a l (other) Deferred cons i dera tion Ta x pa ya bl e Other Current net assets TALCL Non current liabilities Fi na nci a l Fi na nci a l (other) Retirement Deferred cons i dera tion Ta x pa ya bl e Other Net assets FY09 FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13E FY14E 44.9 188.6 0.3 35.3 22.5 291.5 42.3 605.2 160.6 0.2 27.4 22.1 857.9 40.7 610.9 168.6 0.2 42.9 21.5 884.9 38.2 762.9 172.8 0.5 18.1 21.6 1,014.1 38.2 809.9 172.8 0.5 18.1 21.6 1,061.1 38.2 811.4 172.8 0.5 18.1 21.6 1,062.6 0.5 19.5 49.0 66.5 304.8 440.3 1.4 26.7 27.3 22.0 77.4 1.3 26.0 31.0 3.6 7.9 69.7 1.3 25.6 46.2 6.0 16.4 95.5 1.2 25.6 50.0 6.0 16.4 99.1 1.2 25.7 50.0 6.0 16.4 99.3 (18.0) (277.9) (63.8) (359.6) (25.0) (139.3) (18.2) (37.4) (219.9) (14.2) (6.9) (36.0) (57.2) (10.9) (32.4) (54.2) (97.6) (10.6) (54.2) (64.9) (10.7) (215.0) (54.2) (279.9) 731.9 372.3 935.3 715.4 954.6 897.4 1,109.6 1,012.0 1,160.2 1,095.3 1,161.8 881.9 (171.9) (51.0) (9.7) (232.5) (261.6) (241.8) (8.8) (512.1) (411.2) (280.8) (4.1) (696.2) (474.4) (264.8) (12.9) (752.1) (542.9) (264.8) (12.9) (820.5) (314.0) (264.8) (12.9) (591.7) 139.7 203.2 201.2 259.9 274.8 290.2 Source: Company data, Hardman & Co 48 28th May 13 Key financials December Year End FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13E FY14E P&L (€m) 139.8 202.4 242.1 236.6 238.1 EBITDAR 46.4 75.0 96.8 92.4 93.5 EBITDA 37.6 65.1 85.6 81.1 82.2 Operating profit 22.9 44.1 63.8 57.1 57.7 PBT 4.4 13.6 26.6 19.9 21.7 EPS 10.8 32.7 63.3 47.4 51.7 DPS - 6.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 Operating cash flow 22.1 43.8 80.4 79.0 80.1 Interest & tax Sales Cashflow (£m) (21.8) (30.5) (38.1) (37.2) (36.0) Capex / Acquisitions 3.1 (5.2) (46.4) (69.0) (24.0) Dividends - - (6.1) (5.5) (6.3) Equity - - - - - Other items 23.6 (21.7) (62.7) - - Change in net debt 27.0 (13.5) (72.9) (32.7) 13.8 (373.7) (387.3) (460.2) (492.9) (479.0) Closing net debt Balance sheet (£m) 203.2 201.2 259.9 274.3 289.8 NAV per share (€c) 498 483 619 654 691 Key metrics FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13E FY14E Sales nm 44.7 19.6 (2.3) 0.6 EBITDAR nm 61.5 29.0 (4.6) 1.3 EBITDA nm 72.9 31.5 (5.2) 1.4 Operating profit nm nm 44.9 (10.5) 1.1 EPS nm nm 93.7 (25.1) 9.2 DPS - - nm 16.7 14.3 EBITDAR margins 33.2 37.1 40.0 39.0 39.3 EBITDA margins 26.9 32.1 35.3 34.3 34.5 Operating margins 16.4 21.8 26.4 24.1 24.3 - 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 183.9 192.5 177.1 179.7 165.3 Net debt/EBITDA (x) 9.9 6.0 5.4 6.1 5.8 Interest cover (x) 1.2 1.5 1.7 1.6 1.7 5.4 5.3 3.4 3.2 Net assets Growth (%) Operating ratios (%) Effective tax rate Leverage + Returns RoIC (%) Gearing (%) EPS/DPS (x) Source: Company data, Hardman & Co 49 28th May 13 Management team Board of directors Eli Papouchado (Non-exec Chairman, 75) Boris Ivesha (President and CEO, 67) Chen Moravsky (Chief Financial Officier, 42) Kevin McAuliffe (Senior Non Exec Director, 55) Elisha Flax (Non Exec Director, 51) Nigel Jones (Non Exec Director, 51) Eli is the founder of the Red Sea Group and has previously acted as the Chairman of the board for ten years. He has been involved in the design, construction and management of hotels, including Park Plaza Westminster Bridge, Park Plaza Riverbank and Park Plaza Victoria. He has also been involved in the development of hundreds of thousands of square metres of retail space across North America, Europe and the Middle East. Previously he was the Chairman of the Israel Hotel Association. Boris has been the President of PPHE since 1991. In 1972 he was appointed General Manager of the Royal Horseguards Hotel in London. In 1979 he became an MD for the Carlton Hotel in Israel. Then in 1984 he established the Yamit Hotel in 1984 and subsequently buying the Park Plaza brand to the group in 1994 (in collaboration with the Red Sea Group). Boris has been one of the major drivers behind the expansion of the Group’s portfolio of hotels. Chen joined PPHE in 2005. Previously he was the Finance Director of the Red Sea Group, which he joined in 2001. It was at the Red Sea Group where he gained his expertise in the hotel/leisure business. Chen was previously an audit manager at Deloitte. He is a Certified Public Accountant and holds an MBA from the University of Manchester and a Business degree from the Tel Aviv College of Management. Kevin joined PPHE as a non-executive director in 2007. He is currently the Executive Chairman of Carey Group (having joined as CEO in 1999). Previously has was Head of Advisory Services for Paribas Private Banking; the MD for Paribas Suisse in Guernsey and the FD of the Ansbacher offshore banking group. He is a Member of the Society of Trust and Estate Practitioners and director of various regulated investment companies. Elisha joined PPHE as a non-executive director in 2007. He is a real estate entrepreneur, engaged in a various territories in Eastern Europe. He has served as a non-executive director of Delek Global Estate plc, an AiM-listed real estate company until 2010. Previously he was a solicitor at the London offices of Chadbourne & Parke and Akin, Gump, Strauss, Hauer & Feld. He was also general counsel at PlaneStation. He holds an LLB degree from Keo University (Tokyo) and is qualified solicitor in England and Wales. Nigel joined PPHE as a non-executive director in 2007. Between 2001 and 2007 he was CEO of aim-list property company ComProp. During that he period he was responsible for major office developments including: Fortis, Kleinwort Benson and Generali. Previously he was at Humberts (Southampton), where he was responsible the management of certain coastal land belonging to the Crown estate. He has been a member of the Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors since 1989. 50 28th May 13 Shareholder analysis Disclosable interests As at 19th February 2013 Red Sea Group 18,522,714 44.7% Molteno Limited 7,990,027 19.3% Aroundtown Property Holdings 3,762,000 9.1% Elbit Medical Imaging 1,707,640 4.1% Habrok Capital Management 1,589,047 3.8% Shares held in Treasury 1,862,000 Number of issued shares 43,377,292 Source: Company data, Hardman & Co 51 28th May 13 Recent history of the Group The current PPHE group was created in 2007 by the combination of the hotel management and operating interests of PPHE and certain hotel assets of the Red Sea Group. Collaboration between these two business dates back to 1989, with the Mandarin Park Plaza in Eindhoven (The Netherlands), which was acquired by Red sea Group and managed by PPHE. 1994: Obtaining rights to the Park Plaza brand In 1994, the PPHE Group obtained the rights to use the Park Plaza brand in the Benelux countries, the UK and Israel from its creator and then owner. In 2000 it entered into a territorial licence agreement to operate the brand in a further 51 countries and took over the management of a number of hotel in Germany and Hungary. These were then run (and still are) under an operating lease arrangement. 1994: Strategic alliance with Carlson Later that year the territorial licence agreement was renegotiated and the PPHE Group entered into a strategic alliance with Carlson. PPHE portfolio 9000 40 8000 35 7000 30 6000 25 5000 20 4000 15 3000 10 1000 5 0 0 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2000 Hotels Rooms Source: Company data, Hardman & Co Feb-08: Central London Expansion The 398 room Park Plaza Hall London was opened on London’s South Bank. The group operates this hotel under a management agreement with no ownership interest. The Group acquired the 66.7 per cent of Marlbray which it did not already own. As a result, the Group attained control of the prestigious Park Plaza Westminster Bridge London, which opened in 2010. The hotel has a total of 1.019 rooms (of which 535 have been sold to third party investors), making it 52 28th May 13 one of the largest hotels in London, and also has state-of the-art conferencing facilities. Mar-08: art’otel hoxton joint venture The Group entered into a joint venture with Aldersgate Investments Limited to develop a new (352 room) hotel under to art’otel brand. The hotel will be located in Hoxton, a fashionable area on the edge of the City of London, and will offer guests several hundred rooms and suites, as well as a choice of restaurants and bars. Planning permission was granted in February 2010. The hotel is scheduled to open during 2H14. Apr-08: Arenaturist stake The Group acquired a 20 per cent interest in Bora, which owns 74 per cent of Arenaturist, a Croatian public company, and 100 per cent of three Croatian private companies. These companies together own eight hotels and five apartment complexes and have ownership interests in eight campsites in Istria, Croatia. May-08: Park Plaza Eindhoven re-launched Park Plaza Eindhoven was re-launched, following extensive refurbishment and modernisation. Jul-09: art’otel amsterdam The Group engaged in a project to build art’otel amsterdam, situated opposite Amsterdam’s central train station. The hotel will have lounge, restaurant and entertainment facilities. It will also have a 10,000 sq foot art gallery. Construction of the 107 room art’otel amsterdam is progressing well and on target to be completed late in 2013. Mar-10: Soft-opening of Park Plaza Westminster Bridge Park Plaza Westminster Bridge London, the Group’s flagship hotel located on London’s South Bank had its soft-opening, followed by a full opening in September 2010. Apr-10: Park Plaza Vondelpark re-launched, Amsterdam hotel acquired Park Plaza Vondelpark (Amsterdam) was re-launched following three months of renovation and styling. The Group entered into a joint venture with Elbit to acquire a large conference hotel in the Netherlands, located near Amsterdam Schiphol Airport. The hotel, re-branded as Park Plaza Amsterdam Airport, offers 342 contemporary rooms and over 1,800 square metres of flexible meeting space. Aug-10: Acquires UK regional hotel assets The Group acquired the companies which own the freehold and long leaseholds of Park Plaza Leeds and Park Plaza Nottingham. Previously these were owned by the Red Sea Group and had been operated by PPHE since 2003. 53 28th May 13 Dec-10: Acquires remaining stake in three UK hotels The Group acquired from Elbit the remaining interests in Park Plaza Sherlock Holmes London,(45 per cent) Park Plaza Victoria London (50 per cent) and Park Plaza Riverbank London (including Plaza on the River) (45 per cent) giving the Group complete ownership of these hotels. Apr-11: Park Plaza Victoria Amsterdam renovation The renovation of 164 rooms in Park Plaza Victoria Amsterdam was completed. Jun-11: Move from AiM to Main List The Group announced in May 2011 its intension to move from AiM to the Official List as an attempt to improve liquidity in the shares. Jul-11: Acquires 628 Western Avenue site The Group acquired and simultaneously completed a sale-and-leaseback of a two acre development site in West London. Planning permission for a 158 room hotel was granted in 2012. In addition, there will be a lounge and bar, meeting rooms and spa facilities. Again, the hotel is scheduled to open during 2H14. Jul-11: Thai Joint Venture The Group entered into a joint-venture with Kitaria Holdings, to acquire and develop a site located in Pattaya Bay, Thailand. The aim was to develop a 40,000m sq complex, including a 100 room upscale hotel. The project has progressed well, however, PPHE has recently (Jan-13) sold its interest in the project. That said, it still retains the right to manage the resort when it opens. Mar-12: Acquires remaining stake in four Dutch hotels The Group acquired the remaining 50% interests in Park Plaza Amsterdam Airport, Park Plaza Victoria Amsterdam, Park Plaza Utrecht and art'otel amsterdam project from a subsidiary of Elbit Imaging Limited ("Elbit"), for a consideration of €26.5m. As part of the deal PPHE assumes related debt. Mar-12: Acquires prime site near London Waterloo Station The Group acquires Hercules House, a prime site near Waterloo station in Central London (£23.5m cash). The office building on the 1.09 acre site has nine floors plus a basement. It is currently occupied by Department of Communities and Local Government but is scheduled to vacate the property by the 28 th September 2013. The company is considering a number of possible uses for the property, including the possibility of a new hotel being developed on all or part the site. This must be the preferred option but it will take time. Apr-13: Acquires remaining stake in two Berlin hotels The Group entered into an agreement to acquire the freehold interests in two hotels in Berlin which it currently leases and manages, namely art'otel berlin mitte and art'otel berlin kudamm respectively for a consideration of €17.5m net of any applicable VAT. Completion of the Acquisition will be subject to receiving local authority consent and cannot occur prior to 31 May 2013. 54 28th May 13 Park Plaza Westminster Bridge A case study in project management and operational excellence The new Park Plaza Westminster Bridge Hotel was opened to paying customers in 2010. This flagship hotel accounts for approximately >20% of consolidated hotel rooms, one-third of revenues and EBITDA. The project clearly demonstrates the capabilities of management to deliver large scale hotel projects. Moreover, the level of customer satisfaction is high and key operational metrics (such as occupancy) are trending higher. Contemporary design The hotel is owned freehold. It contains 1,019 rooms, has 68,500 m2 of floor space and cost €162m in terms of land purchase and build-out cost. The construction, undertaken by Gear Construction was described by the industry journal New Civil Engineer at the time as “a modern contemporary masterpiece”. Construction began in September 2007 and was completed in time for a ‘soft opening’ in March 2010. It involved an extensive use of off-site ‘pod’ construction of individual room units, reducing both man-hours on site by a third. Its 1,200 m2 ballroom can accommodate 1,500 people at a formal event; making it we believe, the fourth largest in London (the larges is Grosvenor House Hotel in Park Lane, which can accommodate 2000). Project finance The construction was partially financed by the sale of “off plan” rooms and apartments to private investors with a guaranteed yield of 6% p.a. (for the first five years). Initially 860 apartments offered for sale were purchased. Unit holders put down a 25% deposit. The remainder of the cost was financed by loan finance, since replaced in a favourable refinancing deal in June 2010 by a seven year facility from Bank Haopolim. As a consequence of the banking crisis a number of unit holders withdrew and only 536 of the investor rooms and apartments were taken up. A number of would be purchasers who were unable to complete the purchase are currently taking legal action against PPHE for the return of their deposits, an action which the company is contesting. There is currently £7.9m of forfeited deposits on the balance sheet, held as restricted cash, pending the legal proceedings. Since PPHE controls the “sold” units and is currently obliged to pay a fixed income to the unit holders, IFRS has required the assets under management to be held on balance sheet. These are recorded as “Apart-hotel units under management” and had a carrying value of €172.8m (Dec-12). There is an almost equal liability on the balance sheet recorded as “Advance payments from apart-hotel unit holders” equalling €186.6m (Dec-12). 55 28th May 13 After 2015 the unit holders will continue to own the rooms and will receive a variable income from the rooms based on occupancy and room rates. PPHE (via a special managing company) will receive a management fee based on this variable income. This equates to 2%-3% of revenue and a fixed percentage of gross operating profit. At that stage it is unclear what accounting treatment IFRS will require. It is possible the units will be taken off balance sheet. Though given the asset and liability is similar the impact on reported NAV is likely to be single digit € millions. Operational performance The launch was more successful than even management had expected. After a six month soft-opening period, the hotel was fully opened in September 2010. Helped both ay a buoyant London hotel market and the Carlson International reservation system, it quickly reached 80% occupancy by the end of the year, on an average achieved room rate approximately £10 higher than the original budget. Positive trading continued into FY12, with occupancy increasing 2.8%, average room rate by 25.0% and RevPAR by 28.5%. 56 28th May 13 Risks Renewing operating leases If the Group was unable to extend or renew any or all of its operating leases after the relevant expiry date, this could have an adverse effect on the Group’s business, financial condition and results of operation. Renewing franchise agreements Four of the Group’s hotels are operated pursuant to franchise agreements which typically run for periods of five to ten years (subject in one case to automatic renewal provisions). Two of these agreements include early termination provisions allowing the franchisee to renegotiate or terminate the agreement prior to the end of the term. The terms of these agreements are influenced by terms offered by the Group’s competitors at the time such agreements are entered into. Accordingly, the Group may not be able to renew hotel contracts on acceptable terms when they expire or fall to be renegotiated or on terms that are as favourable to the Group as those under the existing agreements. IF the Group were to lose any or all the franchised hotels, it could have an adverse effect on the Group’s business, financial condition and results of operations. Minority stake in Arenaturist The Group only has a 20 per cent stake in Bora, the holding company of the Arenaturist Group and has no ownership interest in Park Plaza County Hall London. The Group has operational control over the properties owned by the Arenaturist Group and Park Plaza county Hall London by virtue of the management agreements it has entered into with the relevant owners. However, the degree of influence it has over key decisions in relation to such properties (such as whether or not to carry out renovations and/or make other investments) is much lower than were it to own or jointly control such properties. As a result, there can be no assurance the properties owned by the Arenaturist Group or Park Plaza County Hall London will meet the same standards as the hotels in which the Group has a greater ownership interest. These factors could have a material adverse effect on the Group’s plans for future growth and, as a result, its business condition and results of operation. That said, the recent redevelopment of three Arenaturist hotels demonstrates positive collaboration. Carlson relationship The Group relies to a significant extent on its relationship with Carlson. The Group’s rights to the Park Plaza Hotels and Resorts brand stems from a Territorial Licence Agreement with Carlsdon pursuant to which the Group has the exclusive right to use (and to sub-licence others to use) the Park Plaza Hotels and Resorts trademark in 56 Countries in Europe and the MENA region. This agreement also allows the Group’s to use Carlson’s Central Reservation System which, during 2010 accounted for approximately 40 per cent of the Group’s room revenues. However, if in the unlikely event that the relationship with Carlson was to end or be damaged, it would have a highly material adverse effect on the Group’s business, financial condition and results of operations. 57 28th May 13 Reputational risks The Groups’ operating results depend on the reputation and awareness of the brands it operates under. The Group believes that brand awareness, image and loyalty are critical to its ability to achieve and maintain high average occupancy and room rates and also for its growth/expansion plans. The reputation and awareness of the Group’s brands are affected by a number of factors, including factors outside the Group’s control such as changes in customer preferences and customer perception. An event that materially damages the reputation or awareness of either of the Group’s brands and/or a material failure to sustain the appeal of either brand to the Group’s customers would have a material adverse effect on the value of those brands and subsequent revenues therefrom. The Group does not own any of the trademarks relating to the Park Plaza Hotels and Resorts brand. The Group relies on Carlson to maintain and protect such trademarks against infringement or misappropriation and any failure by Carlson to do so as a result of which the reputation of the brands suffered, could have a material adverse effect on the Group’s business, financial condition and results of operations. In addition, although the Park Plaza and Resorts brand does have trademark protection in each country in with the Group currently uses that brand, not every country covered by the Territorial Licence Agreement has such protection. Accordingly, were the Group to seek to open hotels in certain of the markets covered by the Territorial Licence Agreement, the Group cannot control the standard of the hotels operating under its name. art’otel brand driven by design and displaying art work The Group does not own the original artwork displayed in its art’otel branded hotels A key marketing tool of the Groups art’otel branded properties is the fact that each such property displays original works of art by a famous often local artist. None of this artwork is owned by the Group. Some of it is owned by the relevant artist or other third parties. In the case of certain of the Group’s art’otel brand or his family or related trusts and the rest is owned by the relevant artist or other third parties. In the case of certain of the Group’s art-otel branded hotels, formal arrangements have been entered into with the owners of the artwork pursuant to which the artwork is loaned to the Group for the duration of the operating lease. However, in a number of cases, no such formal arrangements have been entered into and the Group does not therefore have any legally enforceable right to display such art. Operationally geared business A significant portion of the Group’s operating expenses are fixed, which may impede the Group from reacting quickly to changes in its revenue. A significant portion of the Group’s personnel costs are fixed, and not linked to the performance of its hotels, and certain of the Group’s other operating expenses, including heating, information technology, telecommunications and similar expenses, are also to a large extent fixed. As such, the Group’s operating results are vulnerable to short-term changes in its revenues. The Group has guaranteed owners of units in Park Plaza Westminster Bridge London a 5 or 6 per cent annual return (with the exception of two units in 58 28th May 13 respect of which the guaranteed annual return is less than 5 per cent) on their investment for five years. Information technology The Group is reliant on certain technologies and systems for the operations of its business. Any system failures, data viruses, computer ‘hackers’ or other causes may result in operational problems with the Group’s information systems. For the year ended 31 December 2010, approximately 40 per cent of the Groups room revenues were generated from bookings through the Carlson Central Reservation System, including the website of the Park Plaza hotels which is operated through Carlson’s online platform. 59 28th May 13 Disclaimer Hardman Research Ltd, trading as Hardman & Co, is an appointed representative of Capital Markets Strategy Ltd which is authorised and regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority under registration number 600843. Hardman Research Ltd is registered at Companies House with number 8256259. Hardman & Co provides professional independent research services and the company covered in this note pays us a set fee in order for this research to be made available. The conclusions and opinions expressed in this report reflect the views of the analysts named on the front page. Whilst every reasonable effort has been made to ensure that the information in the research is correct, this cannot be guaranteed. The report is intended to be clear, fair and not misleading. Hardman & Co has a personal dealing policy which debars staff and consultants from dealing in shares, bonds or other related instruments of companies which pay Hardman for any services, including research. They may be allowed to hold such securities if they were owned prior to joining Hardman or if they were held before the company appointed Hardman. In such cases sales will only be allowed in limited circumstances, generally in the two weeks following publication of figures. Hardman & Co does not buy or sell shares, either for its own account or for other parties and neither does it undertake investment business. We may provide investment banking services to corporate clients. Hardman & Co does not make recommendations. Accordingly we do not publish records of our past recommendations. Where a Fair Value price is given in a research note this is the theoretical result of a study of a range of possible outcomes, and not a forecast of a likely share price. Hardman & Co may publish further notes on these securities/companies but has no scheduled commitment and may cease to follow these securities/companies without notice. This research is provided for the use of the professional investment community, market counterparties and sophisticated and high net worth investors as defined in the rules of the regulatory bodies. It is not intended to be made available to unsophisticated or retail investors. Anyone who is unsure of their categorisation should consult their professional advisors. This research is neither an offer, nor a solicitation, to buy or sell any security. Past performance of a security is not necessarily a guide to the future and the price of shares and bonds, and the income derived from them, may fall as well as rise and the amount realised may be less than the original sum invested. Shares quoted on the Alternative Investment Market (AIM) are subject to a lighter regulatory regime than those on the main market and may, thus, be subject to more risk. Furthermore AIM shares may not be as marketable as those on the main market. In some cases research is only issued electronically, whilst in other cases printed research will be received by those on our distribution lists later than those subscribing to research electronically. This report may not be reproduced in whole or in part without prior permission from Hardman &Co. Follow us on Twitter @HardmanandCo Hardman & Co 11/12 Tokenhouse Yard London EC2R 7AS United Kingdom Tel: +44(0)20 7929 3399 Fax: +44(0)20 7929 3377 www.hardmanandco.com 60