Forum Topics PNV PNV 1H FY24 Results

Pinned straw:

Added 2 months ago

PNV 1H FY24 Results

Dermal repair company $PNV reported its 1H FY24 results this morning. The major elements of 1H have been pre-released in the “Trading Result” announced over a month ago. This set out the sales results, which were very strong, as well as anchored the key financials. So, I expect that today will be less about the result itself and more about the trajectory towards the FY. More on all that below.

 Their Highlights

The half year audited results attached to this release show:

  • Record 1H FY24 sales of A$42.2m up 54.9% on STLY of A$27.3m.
  • Total revenue including BARDA of A$48.8m up 65.6% on STLY of A$29.5m.
  • Strong growth in U.S. achieving record sales of A$32.2m up 41.7% on STLY of A$22.8m.
  • ROW sales of A$10.0m up by 122.2% on STLY of A$4.5m including strong performances in ANZ, UKI, and the Middle East, also growing sales in India, Hong Kong, and Canada.
  • The Group recorded a net profit after tax of A$2.7m (1H23: A$3.8m loss).


During the Period, the Company’s other key initiatives and achievements include:

  • Exceeded $8 million monthly NovoSorb BTM sales for the first time in November ($8,810,000).
  • Appointed Chief Medical Officer and Chief People Officer.
  • Additional funding of US$10 million from the Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Authority (‘BARDA’) for the pivotal trial of NovoSorb BTM in full thickness (third degree) burns.
  • Passed the mid‑way point for the recruitment of the pivotal trial, with 90 patients currently enrolled.
  • Increased sales teams and customer base globally, 861 hospital accounts and 237 staff.
  • Progressed the product pipeline for NovoSorb BTM and NovoSorb MTX and developed surgical mesh prototypes for hernia repair.
  • Finalised concept design and commenced detailed design of additional, new manufacturing facility in Port Melbourne.

 

Context for today’s result (you can skip this as it is a little self-indulgent!)

SP action for $PNV is a rollercoaster that sometimes defies belief, bearing little relationship to the business fundamentals. A bit like riding a rollercoaster in the dark, where you cannot see if the next move is a soaring climb, or a plummeting fall that risks bringing the contents from the last fast food stall you visited before the ride back up! Entertainment value is added by Ride Master David Williams – red-jacketed, red-faced, and gesticulating, wildly to “Roll-up. Roll-up” as he waves at you with a 30cm piece of BTM, while CEO Swami in the background cooly explains the genius of the engineering that allows the ride to function, assuring punters of their safety.

$PNV reached its most recent low point in October. This was driven by a mixed market reaction to the growth of the cost base supporting the global acceleration (clearly signalled at the 2022 capital raise), raising doubts as to the path to profitability, not helped by Ride Master DW saying he didn’t care about profits.

However, since that time, four factors have driven a sustained 5-month uptrend of +80%:

1) the release the $8m/($9m record month in December,

2) the January pre-released Trading Result with preliminary bottom line,

3) the record single sales order of $1.2m and

4) broader, macro-risk-on.

But this is a rollercoaster, and we are still some way off the lofty heights of $2.69 reached in the run-up to 1H FY23, so you never know how far the climb continues or whether we temporarily lurch downwards once more before recovering.

Through all this, I try not to let the “Buy, Buy”, “Sell, Sell” trader-analyst-fundies distract me. They’re not much help really with an average Target Price of $1.95 representing a wild range of $1.00 to $2.90 – materially down on 12 months ago ($2.53, $1.90 - $2.90).

My model is at $2.00 ($1.63-$3.30) with my eye clearly focused on the disproportionate upside potential, even though I have also come off my position in Sept-22 ($2.46, $1.62-$3.28).

So, with the scene set, what do I make of today’s result?

  

My Analysis

On the release David has said: “There is little new here that was not in our 22 January announcement. It was a great half, but we have moved on. There is a lot to talk about that has happened since 31 December, which we expect to talk about during our investor webcast on 27 February.

In other words “Roll-up Roll-up to the David, Swami and Jan show at 1pm AEST today!

Important Note: My analysis below may differ to what is presented today. In fact, it will, That is because $PNV typically make various adjustments and report underlying numbers in their presentation, whereas I stick to the audited accounts. That said, no-one audits my analysis. So, all care, no responsibility!!

 

Revenue

There is nothing to add on sales to the detail I gave in my straw on 22-January. Revenue (which includes BARDA) is up 65.6% - a slight acceleration from the PCP. Sales are up 54.9%, with the US up 41.7% and RoW up 122.2%, with sales in several new markets.

With a FY revenue consensus of $101.4m, revenue in H2 needs to hit $52.6m, which would be growth over the pcp of 42.0%. So, how likely is this? Well, H2 growth rates in FY22 and FY23 have been 43% and 56%, respectively. And looking at the last three years, there is no clear 1H / 2H trend. H2 FY24 also has the boost of at least 1 large order to Ukraine valued at A$1.2m. And with the recent impetus in RoW from the expansion of the global sales and marketing footprint, everything points to a strong finish to the year. My model is for FY sales of $105m for the FY. But I am a $PNV bull, so DYOR!

Gross Margin

Gross Margin comes in at 95.9%, compared with 94.5% in pcp. Overall,it is in the usual ballpark of 90-96%. This is expected as the direct fixed costs of the current facilities are recovered over progressively increasing volumes. However, when the new facilities come onstream in FY25, I expect %GM will drop back sharply, as the new facilities have been sized to support sales up to $500m p.a!

Still, compared to the competition in dermal repair, $PNV has an extremely high %GM.

Opex

Opex (excl. D&A) grew 46% from $30.6m to $44.6m, a slower rate than 107% in the PCP. Importantly, it is now growing at a slower rate than revenue. Opex is now 91% of revenue, down from 104% in pcp. Yay!

This moderation was expected for two reasons, First, a major expansion of the workforce occurred during FY23, following the capital raise, to pursue the broader global sales strategy. While expansion has continued in 1H24, there has been a greater focus on execution. The second reason is that the FY23 comparison was distorted due to some items relating to former CEO compensation. In the presentation this is one of the “underlying” corrections that Jan has made.

That said, corporate costs have expanded significantly, given the senior hires indicated above. However, $PNV is not a truly global business, and you need functional heads capable of delviering their roles in that context.

Within Opex, R&D continues to expand. This is important and welcome, as without ongoing innovation $PNV can never become a long-term winner in dermal care. Management seem to be applying capital discipline here, holding R&D/Revenue at 10%, in order to deliver their commitment to getting to profitability.

So, overall, I am very happy with the progression of the Opex profile.

Profit and Cash

By my calculations, EBIT is $1.1m (up from -$3.8m) – an improvement of $4.9m.

NPAT is $2.7m, up from a PCP loss of -$3.8m – an improvement of $6.5m, assisted by the Tax refund of $1.6m.

So, well done David, Swami and Jan and team. You are on track to delivering your commitment at the FY22 Capital raise to be profitable in FY24.

Cashflows align quite well with the financials. We are now just Operating Cashflow positive, at $0.58m compared with -$2.73m in PCP. And by my measure of FCF (which includes all capex), they are close to breakeven at -$0.48m.

It is worth noting that capex has increased from almost nothing to $1.1m, as the build the new production facilities. This should be expected to ramp up significantly over the next 12 months. So, hopefully, management will guide on that in the presentation this afternoon.

The balance sheet is strong with Cash and Equivalents at $45.58m, and debt at $2.2m (current and long term) is negligible and being paid down.

 

My Key Takeaways

Solidy on track. Continuing strong revenue growth and management demonstrating cost discipline to meet their commitments. May it continue.

Valuation

I’ll update my valuation after the FY24 results. For now, I am content to stay at $2.00 ($1.63-$3.30)

However, I can say that if execution continues in this manner, I'll be upgrading as the downside cases in my model start to fall away.


Disc: Held in RL and SM (with high conviction)


wonkeydonkey
2 months ago

I nearly lost faith in PNV after 17 months of a drifting share price

481c9a91e329ab06ba253f378a5b965411e5c4.png

10
Rick
2 months ago

b41c51ec23c1cb92ebb03c2f4bcccc87acea27.jpeg

Thanks for the brilliant write up @mikebrisy. I missed the webinar but this is what I was picturing in my head as you described the roller coaster scenario in DW’s results address!

I like that you’ve added your valuation of $2. I’m not even going to attempt to value Polynovo as I have no clue how to do that.

This is my gut feeling play, and a rather large bet with 4.6% invested in real money.

My thesis is that this is a proven CSIRO product changing the lives of patients who are currently benefiting from it. The number of useful applications is growing as more doctors and researchers explore its use cases. The management team have done a brilliant job in getting the benefits of BTM more widely known by putting on a sales team. This has been costly, but it is needed at this point in time to accelerate BTM globally. This marketing cost can be reduced later when the product starts to sell itself. As Polynovo expands, the margins and ROE should continue to improve, the market will be truly global and the profits will start to roll in solidly for investors holding for the long term.

That’s my thesis anyway. I think Santa (who is waving his arms around and shouting out loudly) and his copilot Swami (who is nervously clinging to the roller coaster carriage, making sure it stays on track while making all the calculations so it doesn’t derail) are doing an excellent job as a team. The skills are complimentary and probably suited to the business at this point in time. So I’m happy to take a back seat in this wild carriage, and cling on tightly enjoying the ride, knowing Swami is there to keep Santa in check, and to stop us from derailing before we get there! :)

Held IRL (4.7%), SM (14.2%)


23

mikebrisy
2 months ago

I love it, @Rick , but I feel you might have given Santa DW a little square of BTM to wave!

Just off the call now. It ran for an hour and a half, with an hour of Q&A. There is a lot to digest, so I recorded it and think I will have to go back over it tomorrow - as my brain is fried for today.

We heard a lot more from Swami on the Q&A today, and got a lot of insights into clinical and market development. Jan was also more relaxed and appeared to volunteer quite a bit of additional data not captured in the formal materials. Overall, it was really good how David, Swami and Jan worked together on the call - they each knew what space the other needed. Best team performance yet.

I will share one picture now. Below shows the growth in hospital accounts on the LHS and employee growth on the RHS. You can really see the operating leverage come through, i.e., evidence of the delay between: 1) add staff >> 2) open accounts >> 3) growth within accounts. It is quite exciting really.

I've taken the slide from the pack, annotated with with FY datapoints disclosed previously, and then indicated the headcount forecast shown. I think it speaks for itself.

In the interests of balance, it is not all plain sailing. For example, it looks like they are going to do a major reset on the DFU trial. But I think they have time with all this, as momentum is still on their side.

Bottom line: I left the call even more positive than when I entered it. It will be interesting to see how much there is in it for the analysts. I think they can at least meaningfully calibrate the operating leverage in their models. We'll see. Certainly, the lower price targets are surely becoming untenable.


af0d6f3700bc14843646183915782defe47217.png

Source: 1H FY24 Presentation; annotations in red from prior FY presentations; green from Q&A


Now look at sales trajectory ... Customers being a leading driver of sales!

da7ffc0357ea024dea2781cd3c4929be929072.png




21

mikebrisy
2 months ago

@Rick , here are some images for next time.

LH - DW on the call. RH - DW posting on LinkedIn 5 minutes after the call ended.

0aaba363d78ed3cb95a87e48cccf1a423a432c.png

14

Rick
2 months ago

Thanks for those @mikebrisy. That was a quick turnaround for the stylist! David is certainly a colourful character, in more ways than one. Nothing wrong with that! :)

13

Parko5
2 months ago

I asked the question “when he will change his red jacket for a green one given we are profitable now!”


good to see!

13

Parko5
2 months ago

@mikebrisy


I have only had about 10 mins to review my model. But I note the following:

  • I found that my prediction for sales staff was too high.
  • But my revenue was about right.


Thus that would mean that each sales person is generating more sales?

What was your take on the numbers of sales staff and the revenue they are generating?


Also @mikebrisy how are you valuing the future applications/uses of the PNV technology. Do you think that the existing sales force can sell these new items or will there need to be more hiring of sales staff?

8

mikebrisy
2 months ago

Hi @Parko5

Good questions.

On your Q1

Yes, like you my sales and marketing model is ahead of where I think they areon headcount. My total sales complement for FY24 is 153, of which I have 90 in the US. However, we know that they will only get to 85 in the US by Year End.

This aligns with what Jan said yesterday - on opex budget they are on track, but on revenue budget 1H FY24 is ahead. I think this is learning benefits from the workforce investments in FY22 and FY23 coming through.

What this means is that the sale force is achieving higher aggregate productivity than we are modelling. There are two factors:

  1. Lag time from putting headcount on and sales growth. Not all "heads" are equal. For example, a new starter coming across from Integra will have knowledge, relationships, and skill they can apply from Day 1, whereas a "Newbie" can take a year or more to cover their costs. (Separately, the CEO at $ARX says it takes 2-3 years to build the sales productivity of a new starter.)
  2. New account sales grow independent of incremental Sales Headcount. Once a new account is opened and starts ordering, there is then an organic growth as more clinicians adopt to using the product from within one account. We know the rate of account growth is high, and I imagine the adoption is a gradual process that probably takes a few years.


To an extent, I model these in my revenue model. But frankly, looking outside in we cannot really "model" this. It is simply a method for me to link Opex growth to revenue growth and attempt to scope out different scenarios of operating leverage. As they say, GIGO ("garbage in, garbage out").

I'll have a look at re-turning the model at the FY Result, as hopefully the Annual Report will continue to publish how many sales people there are.

A work of caution, however. RoW is becoming material. For example, we have over 20 staff in India who - until now - have probably been giving a lot ot product away to give KOLs experience. I don't think we'll get visibility of sales numbers until a big tender is announced, and even then we might not.

My point is there is a very big difference in Sales per FTE in an experienced US Sales Manager ($2m/yr) and a Sales Associate in India in FY24 (c. <$0.1m/yr).

On your Q2

My DCF is an explicit 10 year model. As far as I am concerned, I am treating BTM/MTX as a single product, and modelling revenue growth in Developed and Developing Markets, to add up to an overall Revenue number. Here, I consider the growth to cover burns, trauma, and the ongoing and future applications to complex wounds.

I honestly believe the new products beyond this will not be material within the 10 year timeframe.

The new products drive my assumptions about the Continuing Value (CV) growth rate. For this I am currently using 5%. That is high for a CV assumption, but I believe it is justified by the potential of the platform.

In my next model update I will run a few scenarios with different levels of R&D and some sensitivities on CV-growth rate.

I just don't believe we have the information available to be more sophisiticated on long term growth (revenue, margins, investment) from new products. If I believe the new products will fail, then CV growth should probably come back to 3-3.5%, Whereas, if you believe they will continue to innovate and develop new product platforms for the next 10-20 years, then you'd probably want to run a CV growth rate of 5-6% (in which case, back up the truck!)

On sales force implications for the product range, potentially, when new products for internal appliactions are launched, these will have dedicated reps driving the initial adoption. Also, if DFU ever gets off the ground, this will have dedicated reps in some countries (US) visting the out of hospital podiatric surgeons. From a modelling perspective, I think it is too complicated and imprecise to break any of that out. But we can see what happens over the years to come.

On both of these questions, I am more thinking out loud than giving you a considered view. But that's what's buzzing around in my head pending my next DCF update.

Bottom-line: its all looking very good. Hope this helps ... and thanks for the questions!

10

Parko5
2 months ago

Thanks @mikebrisy

I agree with everything you have said above. Def something to keep an eye on in the next few years.

A second thought I have had, is acquistions. I'm not really across the medical side....but are there any likely companies out there with good synergies? I guess there would only be two reasons for buying another business. First is to acquire the technology/product (to keep selling or shelve). Second is to buy the workforce/market.

Obviously this would be hard to value....but just interested in peoples thoughts....

David Williams loves a good merger!

9

mikebrisy
2 months ago

When Swami joined he said they might consider a focused acquisition for market access. He used the example of finding a company in the US that had a sales force of 100 reps accessing the podiatric surgeon market (DFU again).

However, he made clear that they are not looking for products to acquire. The investment has to go into development of the Novosorb platform.

However, never say never. There are a lot of innovative products and technologies in dermal care. But I think that both David and Swami believe they have the "genuius" product and a technology which can be a platform for many products. It makes sense to focus on exploiting that to the max, first, and build a moat of publications, patents, product variants, indications and registrations. That's a huge undertaking, and more than $PNV can currently do with their limited capacity. What,... maybe 10-15 R&D people,... gimme a break.

So, I really hope they focus, focus, focus.

Maybe in 5-10 years, in the failure case, M&A might make sense.

12