I'm trying to follow along with your analysis.. hopefully teaching myself a bit of stock analysis along the way... To that end, can you share from where you pull the fully diluted share count? Thank you.
given they run a GAAP loss, basic and diluted share counts are the same. But they have to disclose potential shares that are excluded from diluted as "anti-dilutive" (since, if you run a loss, more shares included makes the loss per share *smaller*).
so here we just did the quick-and-dirty method of adding the most recent share count from the 10-K (top of the cover page: 79.834835 million) and the anti-dilutive count (p. 82, 4.863 million). That's actually probably a bit too conservative - most of the 2.3 million stock appreciation rights, for instance, are out of the money (see p. 83) - but it's not a bad thing to be a bit too conservative.
It shouldn't affect the business much here, except maybe on the margins. You can imagine, for instance, a Trump EPA quietly rolling back some of the proposed rules around PFAS.
But the core activities here are going to happen under any administration. Steel companies have to dispose of slag, medical waste programs aren't getting canceled, CVS and Walgreens are still going to offer prescription disposal, electronics are going to be recycled, etc. etc.
Whether a stock in the environmental 'category' moves along with election forecasts...I don't know. It's possible. But the core thesis here should be pretty resilient fundamentally to a Trump win - the PFAS opportunity, for instance, isn't in the guidance and isn't in our analysis. The business that is in the analysis is pretty insensitive to actions at the federal level.
I'm trying to follow along with your analysis.. hopefully teaching myself a bit of stock analysis along the way... To that end, can you share from where you pull the fully diluted share count? Thank you.
given they run a GAAP loss, basic and diluted share counts are the same. But they have to disclose potential shares that are excluded from diluted as "anti-dilutive" (since, if you run a loss, more shares included makes the loss per share *smaller*).
so here we just did the quick-and-dirty method of adding the most recent share count from the 10-K (top of the cover page: 79.834835 million) and the anti-dilutive count (p. 82, 4.863 million). That's actually probably a bit too conservative - most of the 2.3 million stock appreciation rights, for instance, are out of the money (see p. 83) - but it's not a bad thing to be a bit too conservative.
https://www.sec.gov/ix?doc=/Archives/edgar/data/45876/000004587624000010/nvri-20231231.htm
Could Trump doing well in the polls dampen the bull case? I mean could it throw the entire environmental group under the bus for a while?
It shouldn't affect the business much here, except maybe on the margins. You can imagine, for instance, a Trump EPA quietly rolling back some of the proposed rules around PFAS.
But the core activities here are going to happen under any administration. Steel companies have to dispose of slag, medical waste programs aren't getting canceled, CVS and Walgreens are still going to offer prescription disposal, electronics are going to be recycled, etc. etc.
Whether a stock in the environmental 'category' moves along with election forecasts...I don't know. It's possible. But the core thesis here should be pretty resilient fundamentally to a Trump win - the PFAS opportunity, for instance, isn't in the guidance and isn't in our analysis. The business that is in the analysis is pretty insensitive to actions at the federal level.