Incorporated in 2001
Fresh Issue of 165crs (50 for capex | 48 for Working capital | 20 for debt payment) + OFS of 237crs (Partially by promoter & PE Tano selling out as the fund tenure is up)
~ Total raise of 402crs
Windlas Biotech IPO notes 💊
'What's in a name? that which we call a rose by any other name would smell as sweet' ~Shakespeare
Hit the 'retweet' & help us educate more investors
A thread 🧵👇
#IPOwithJST
Incorporated in 2001
Fresh Issue of 165crs (50 for capex | 48 for Working capital | 20 for debt payment) + OFS of 237crs (Partially by promoter & PE Tano selling out as the fund tenure is up)
~ Total raise of 402crs
A Contract manufacturer for formulation cos. (204 in total) for Indian markets & a small domestic OTC biz
3279 products, 4 plants with 700cr tablets/capsules capacity
Emphasis on chronic (60% of rev) & complex generics (70% of rev)
Revenues:
FY11 - 100cr 👉 FY14 - 200cr 👉 FY21 - 400cr
Growth is similar to the Indian pharmaceutical sector, not gaining any market share even after increasing products.
Customers include Pfizer, Sanofi India, Eris, Cadila, etc.
400+ organized & 15000 unorganized players in the same space: 2% market share
Some of the things that can drive consolidation: Customers preferring better compliance
However, a single customer usually has 35-40 contract manufacturers for products.
Scale: Players much larger also show a lack of any improvement in metrics.
Remains a low margin & high asset turnover business.
Top customer accounts for 11% of rev & Top 10 account for 58%
Interestingly, ramped up number of customers from 97 to 204 in the last 2yrs, however, the concentration remains constant.
3-4crs spends: at 1% of sales, Increased complex portfolio to 934
Complex generic products have technical complexity in (i) manufacturing or handling of the API; or (ii) formulation; or (iii) route of delivery; or (iv) pairing with a device to make a drug-device combo.
Utilization at 35-40% currently, can go up to 60-65% before they would have to increase capacity again.
- Will look for inorganic growth
- Industry to grow at 1.25-1.5x GDP: Increased capacities inline
- To invest 50crs in Injectables facility
- Increase customer base
- Scale-up Domestic OTC & trade generics business
- Bad Cashflow conversion (20-30% EBITDA) due to huge WC investments
- Low margin business (4-5% net & 10-12% EBITDA & 35% gross margins)
- WC days to stay at 65-75 days
- Asset turnover at 4-5x & can take it to 6-7x
- Rev scaleup needs to be monitored
- Dependence on their customers doing well: 90% in B2B business
- Highly competitive, no moat & gruesome business
- Shady dealings with a promoter owned subsidiary: Windlas Healthcare
- No geographical diversification wrt plants.
- Formulations players backwardly integrating their operations: Eris doing the same as it helps them maintain consistent quality & achieve higher margins
- API prices going up (No long term contract with supplier)
- Litigations 👇
- Loss-making Subsidiaries.
At valuations of 2.3x P/S, 19x P/EBITDA & 65x PE, this is valued much higher than most Indian branded formulations are; leaving little to nothing on the table for the investors.
End of Thread.
More from ᴀɴɪsʜ ᴍᴏᴏɴᴋᴀ
You May Also Like
The entire discussion around Facebook’s disclosures of what happened in 2016 is very frustrating. No exec stopped any investigations, but there were a lot of heated discussions about what to publish and when.
In the spring and summer of 2016, as reported by the Times, activity we traced to GRU was reported to the FBI. This was the standard model of interaction companies used for nation-state attacks against likely US targeted.
In the Spring of 2017, after a deep dive into the Fake News phenomena, the security team wanted to publish an update that covered what we had learned. At this point, we didn’t have any advertising content or the big IRA cluster, but we did know about the GRU model.
This report when through dozens of edits as different equities were represented. I did not have any meetings with Sheryl on the paper, but I can’t speak to whether she was in the loop with my higher-ups.
In the end, the difficult question of attribution was settled by us pointing to the DNI report instead of saying Russia or GRU directly. In my pre-briefs with members of Congress, I made it clear that we believed this action was GRU.
The story doesn\u2019t say you were told not to... it says you did so without approval and they tried to obfuscate what you found. Is that true?
— Sarah Frier (@sarahfrier) November 15, 2018
In the spring and summer of 2016, as reported by the Times, activity we traced to GRU was reported to the FBI. This was the standard model of interaction companies used for nation-state attacks against likely US targeted.
In the Spring of 2017, after a deep dive into the Fake News phenomena, the security team wanted to publish an update that covered what we had learned. At this point, we didn’t have any advertising content or the big IRA cluster, but we did know about the GRU model.
This report when through dozens of edits as different equities were represented. I did not have any meetings with Sheryl on the paper, but I can’t speak to whether she was in the loop with my higher-ups.
In the end, the difficult question of attribution was settled by us pointing to the DNI report instead of saying Russia or GRU directly. In my pre-briefs with members of Congress, I made it clear that we believed this action was GRU.
