Could A Spinoff Be In NCR’s Future?

The WSJ recently reported that ATM & cash register equipment maker NCR Corp (NCR) is considering ‘its strategic options’, including a possible spinoff or asset sale. NCR has a long and rich history, including making the first mechanical cash register, but the company’s stock price has been lagging as point of sale transactions and cash register use is decreasing. Mobile-payments and other non-traditional payment methods are increasing in popularity and the company is adjusting to new trends. The recent weakness led several activist investors to jump into the name, including Marcato Capital Management, whose founder, Mick McGuire, joined the company’s board of directors late last year. Jana Partners is also a large shareholder in the company, holding just over 7% of the shares. Activists are always good at pushing for change. Another positive sign is the fact that the company is no stranger to spinoffs, having been both a parent (it spun of Teradata (TDC) in 2007) and the spinco (it was set free from AT&T (T) back in 1991).

Unfortunately, the WSJ didn’t go into much detail (in fact any) regarding what could be spun off, but Valuewalk summarizes a range of opinions on the situation, including The Edge Consulting’s view of the situation. Basically, they see a financial services spinoff as a possibility, given the segment’s outsized margins and peer valuations, but a complete sale could also be a possibility. It’s worth noting that the same piece also highlights a nice presentation from Spruce Capital which is quite bearish on the name. That piece is worth reading in its entirety, but their opinion that a spinoff is unlikely does seem on point given recent comments by CEO William Nuti during the most recent quarterly conference call. Here is one exchange supporting that:

Ian A. Zaffino

Okay. And I just want to step back, maybe ask more of a philosophical question here. But if you look at the business, 3 different businesses, can you explain to us — or where is sort of your head and the way you’re looking at the businesses right now? Do they need to be together? Does it make sense maybe to not be together? Are there large dis-synergies if you take them apart? Is it more value-accretive if you take them apart? Just what are you thinking here? And just give us a little insight into the value being together versus the value of not being together.

William R. Nuti

Sure. I’ll give you the short answer, but I can spend 4 hours on the topic on this one with some bad jokes mixed in. First, I’d say that every industry we’re in is moving towards omni-channel software platforms. And the — what we provide, whether you’re a bank or a retailer or a restaurant, is a common platform to deliver on the promise of omni-channel. And so there’s a lot of synergy from a technology point of view. There would be, if you pull the business apart, significant dis-synergies. For example, all of my divisions share a common services delivery infrastructure around the world. I don’t have a separate services business for Retail and Financial and Hospitality. All of them share a common supply chain infrastructure, plants, distribution centers. Of course, we get lots of value from that scale, and they all share a common G&A infrastructure as well. So it would be very difficult, if not value-destructive, to try to pull them apart.

Could it be clearer? Then there is this one…

Kartik Mehta

And then just one last question, Bill. You talked about the common service platform, which you’re able to leverage across all your platforms. When you mentioned that, is it just that the person servicing either the ATM business or Retail business is the same? Or is there more to it than just that infrastructure? And does it get more complex and deeper when you look at the service business, your ability to leverage it across your platforms?

William R. Nuti

Oh, it’s a lot deeper than that, Kartik. For example, all of our customer engineers — we have about 11,500 people who are badged NCR employees who repair our equipment. All of them use common systems for dispatch, common logistical infrastructure for delivery of parts, common systems, like the tools they’re provided to do their jobs. And they do share on calls. So a CE who fixes an ATM can also fix a self-checkout device. And by the way, they’re not that different from each other. They both have similar cash dispensers and so on. They’re not quite that different.

and finally this one…

Meghna Ladha

That’s very helpful. And just last question on my side. What’s the #1 priority for the company today to enhance shareholder value? And could we see a potential announcement of a share buyback or dividend once we — once you reach your target leverage ratio?

William R. Nuti

The #1 priority for us is to continue to execute and do what we said we’re going to do. We’re coming off of Q3 last year. We were not happy about that miss, to be very candid with you. And our goal right now is to continue to execute and not surprise our investors negatively at all. We feel really good about Q1. I’m feeling confident in Q2 and the full year, and we’ll continue on that track. Now of course, there’s a number of priorities vis-à-vis strategic execution and tactical execution beyond that. But I say that’s point one. Could you see something from us vis-a-vis a share buyback or dividends? We’re currently undergoing, as I’ve said on previous calls, an entire review of all of our strategic alternatives, and right now, we’re deep into that process. And the answer would be, of course, you could. But until we’re ready to report something, we’ll hold off on giving any particular guidance on that.

Interesting that Mr. Nuti specifically noted a buyback or a dividend as something one could see and nothing else. Couple that fact with his other comments about the potential destruction of value from breaking apart the business and it sure seems like he isn’t so keen on a spinoff. Sorry WSJ. Of course, the fact that the current CEO doesn’t like the idea of breaking up his fiefdom doesn’t actually mean that it’s a bad idea or won’t happen. It’s certainly a big hurdle though.

We will keep an eye on this one. While it sounds like the company may ultimately pursue some ‘shareholder friendly’ options such as a buyback, a spinoff may not be so likely. Of course, whether or not these choices address any underlying problems is a different story entirely.

Disclosure: Author holds no position in any stock mentioned.