Forum Topics ALC ALC Q3 FY23 4C Report

Pinned straw:

Last edited 2 years ago

Straw significantly edited as there were some errors in the earlier cash flow figures, now corrected.

Text also updated following the presentation Q&A and some observations added. Apologies for what is now a very messy straw ... but accuracy is important!

Figure 3 added to show the quarterly new sales from the presentation.

@Valueinvestor0909 has picked out the key issues.

Based on Q2 FY23 report we were all expecting at least $2m (edited from $3m) of the cash receipts (** see below comment) to be due to the late payments in the previous quarter. So the reported receipts of $10.446m are really only c. $8.5m (edited from $7m) from the quarter, so meh.

Also, Q3 Sales are unimpressive, - the graph wasn't in the 4C release, but is included in the presentation. (Edited out my earlier comment, throwing shade at Kate for not reporting this metric!) I've included it in Figure 3, below.

Taking a step back, I've updated my usual 4C Cashflow plot (Figure 1). And because $ALC is lumpy from Q to Q, I have plotted the same data in a trailing 12 months (TTM) format.

Basically, $ALC is running hard to stand still - there being no significant trend now in OpCF since the Silverlink acquisition.

I'm hanging on because Kate appears to be controlling costs well, and the UK implementations are providing reference sites. It should be expected for these implementations to take time, given the long sales cycle. So I am holding for now, but I think another year or so, and the strategy needs to start delivering operating cash flow growth.

** Comment:

During the Q&A today, one investor asked about the "late $5.6m receipt", to which the CFO (correctly) replied that the questionner was mistaken. He then clarified that there was a late payment of $2m in Q2 and, because some payments in Q3 were also received late, that Q3 receipts could be considered "normal" (swings and roundabouts argument). This confused me, because if this is true, why did they make a song and dance about it in Q2. Doesn't it just mean that a portion of payments falling due towards the end of the Q will always risk falling into the next Q?

CFO was adamant that Q4 will be the strongest receipts of the year. This is also in the release, so that indicates to me that >$13m Q4 receipt is in the bag. Given that the cost base is stable and investments are dialed right back, this means they will likely have a final Q that is OpCF and FCF positive.... provided they get paid ;-)

Key Takeaway

Management are trying very hard to get the most out of each quarterly report, for example, to achieve the (now abandoned) promise of being EBITDA positive this year. Personally, I think they are trying too hard to put a positive gloss on their communications. Now I don't believe Kate and her team would mis-state the facts, but they need to be careful with the spin, as it is easy to trip yourself up over time. For example, it is fine to talk about NHS staff shortages and strikes. But we all watch the news, and that is a characteristic of the market they are playing in. It is a fair headwind countering the tailwind of the drive to digitally emable the NHS.

I am observing a pattern in several tech holdings that, when sales and receipts in the quarter fall off the growth trend, there is a tendancy to talk about timing of payments, slow sales cycles, delays in renewals, and the strength/growth/record nature of the pipeline. (Examples from $3DP, $EVS and $ALC). As investors, we only have to wait 13 weeks to see if the story plays out so, thank goodness for the 4C and quarterly reporting! Equally, it is important to recognise that 13 weeks is a short period of time and the lumpiness from quarter to quarter can be very significant, as Figure 1 shows. It is as important not to over-react to one bad quarter as it is to over-react to one good quarter. Whatever the fair value of $ALC, I don't believe that today's result warrants a 10% markdown. Of course, using a cricket analogy, for every over that you don't hit the target run rate, it means more boundaries are needed in subsequent overs to stay on target overall.


Figure 1

d48a825bffbd186313b5a636f89a7011d30db6.png

Figure 2

d580930d762122adc7b5b4288d4f0d46e46e81.png

Figure 3

8e1debb684fd61f9b07b581167ff7bf2c22fec.png


Disc: Held IRL and SM



Solvetheriddle
Added 2 years ago

@mikebrisy @JPPicard thnaks for the comments guys. good work. yes slow quarter and it is lumpy.

i found Kate's comments on the interplay between the two giants, cerner and epic v ALC, fascinating and i am not too sure what to make of them. one of my bug bears is the lack of comments and analysis of small Aussie companies versus their competition. they talk a lot about their products and the general market when it is the relativity to competition that counts. we have to wait for sales as verification.

two thoughts going through my mind 1. bullish ALC will benefit from a huge market potential and a strong niche product, so grow well. 2. Bearish, the competition is huge, they could swallow ALC and not notice it. does the market move to one provider with a wide product range and lock ALC out. the truth is probably in between for the time being. so i continue to hold.as a speculation.

12
mikebrisy
Added 2 years ago

Did any other Straw People notice that Kate dropped the usual one pager giving updates on new contracts, additions and extensions?

This coincided with a Q of weak new sales. In the Q&A she said something about customers not wanting contracts disclosed and that in future they would provide info on a geographical basis (if I remember correctly).

A few observations:

  • Healthcare SaaS peers appear to have no issue disclosing contracts ($PME, $VHT, $M7T), albeit no real NHS News flow from any
  • The sensitivity arises in a Q with v. low new sales
  • The new regional basis wasn’t reported
  • Just out of interest, I have looked at some UK NHS Trust FOI applications on contract disclosures, and found that these do tend to be declined for commercial reasons.


(Just using the new SM commenting function to log a thought on my own Straw!)

15

JPPicard
Added 2 years ago

I think this one is up for debate. They disclosed: Q3 new sales of $4.0M, with $2.1M recognisable in FY23.

That is weak when compared against the fact they they had closed $18.6M of new contracted sales in 1H’23 (So quarterly average would have been ~$9M.

But the reality with Alcidion is that they've always been massively lumpy, and given they always then to talk in TCV terms (total contract value), rather than ACV (Annual), it makes the contrasts seem even sharper.

If we cross compare to Volpara which you mention (and is now nearly twice the size of Alcidion as an org by market cap), they added approx. US$900k on the prior quarter. If we do the math backwards on this and assume average 4 year contracts (a blend of 3 and 5); that's $3.6M USD, which is $5.4M AUD. That's not miles more that Alcidion's $4M. Just my take really

Of course, you can see all of Alcidion's lumpy track record this in the graph you refer to, which they use to have:

dac191fc16df6a3501d0395185e006beb2d334.png

15

thunderhead
Added 2 years ago

Having the ability to comment on Straws certainly makes things a lot more easy to follow and organised. Kudos to @Strawman and team!

12