What Hertz had under the hood was not pretty
From the customer’s perspective, car rental is a
straightforward business. The only uncertainty is whether the hire company will
charge you for the scratch they discover when you hand back the vehicle.
Hertz Global Holdings Inc’s bankruptcy protection filing on
Friday last week was a reminder that today even the simplest business models
are underpinned by a lot more financial complexity than meets the eye.
The proximate cause of Hertz’s demise was of course the
sudden collapse in bookings caused by COVID-19 travel restrictions. The
company’s monthly revenue last month fell 73 percent year-on-year, a shortfall
that even the most resilient companies would struggle to withstand for long.
However, Hertz’s complicated financial plumbing contributed
to it becoming one of the most high-profile companies to seek protection from
creditors during the pandemic.
In the decade preceding its collapse, Hertz took on too much
debt, participated in overpriced mergers and acquisitions, and was accused of
playing accounting games to pad its earnings.
So when disaster struck and a request for a government
bailout was rejected — rightly in my view considering the top shareholder, Carl
Icahn, is worth about US$18 billion — Hertz was already standing far too close
to the precipice. Regrettably, COVID-19 will probably expose more of this type
of corporate frailty, both in the US and around the world.
Hertz’s debt binge began when it was acquired by private
equity firms from Ford Motor Co in 2005; the new owners quickly took out a US$1
billion dividend. Piling on debt juiced the potential returns for the owners
and helped pay the inflated US$2.3 billion price tag for the Dollar and Thrifty
brands in 2012, which Hertz struggled to integrate.
Hertz was only able to amass an eye-watering total of US$19
billion in borrowings thanks to a massive program of asset-backed lending,
which became its primary source of capital.
LEASE AND RENT OUT
Special-purpose financial entities purchase vehicles on
Hertz’s behalf and investors in the asset-backed securities make a return via
the lease payments that Hertz is obliged to stump up. Put another way, Hertz
leases vehicles long-term from the financing subsidiary — typically for about
18 months in the US — and then rents them out to customers for shorter periods.
In theory, this is a stable and low-cost way for a risky
borrower, such as Hertz, to fund the large capital outlays needed to keep its
fleet looking fresh.
Hertz’s corporate credit has been rated junk for the past
decade, but many of the asset-backed securities it issued were triple-A rated,
at least until recently.
However, economic shutdowns stemming from efforts to curb
the novel coronavirus suddenly threw a lot of sand in Hertz’s gears: The resale
value of its vehicles fleet fell sharply, requiring the company to inject more
cash into the financing structure.
With only about US$1 billion of cash on its books, Hertz was
ill-placed to fund that collateral call, and the pandemic meant it was not able
to sell vehicles to generate cash, because potential buyers were confined to
their homes and auctions and dealerships were closed.
Asset-backed securities holders appear to have decided that
allowing Hertz to fall into bankruptcy would prove no impediment to them
getting most of their money back, at least for those holding the better-rated
tranches of debt.
However, the same cannot be said for Hertz’s unsecured
lenders, or its shareholders. Building a 39 percent stake since 2014 probably
cost Icahn about US$1.6 billion, based on a Bloomberg average share-cost
estimate, but he now risks being wiped out.
Hertz’s predicament was made more severe, because in the US
it could not hand back most of its surplus vehicles to the manufacturer, as is
common practice in Europe. Instead, it faced the task of selling them itself
and bore the risk of any unexpected depreciation. The firm is one of the 10
largest sellers of used vehicles in the US.
The preponderance of these so-called “risk vehicles” in its
500,000-strong US vehicle fleet has increased since 2014, because it was more
profitable than paying a premium to the manufacturer to guarantee a fixed
repurchase price. There is no reward without risk, though, as Hertz’s
bankruptcy filing made abundantly clear.
Having lost money in three of the past four years, Hertz did
seem to have turned a corner lately: It raised capital to pay down debt last
year and was ranked No. 1 for customer satisfaction in J.D. Power’s North
American car rental rankings.
Not that customers have much choice. Consolidation has given
just three groups — Hertz, Enterprise Holdings Inc and Avis Budget Group Inc —
control of almost the entire US market for airport car rentals.
New competition from ride-hailing companies and a litany of
management missteps meant Hertz never achieved the pricing power that Icahn and
other recent investors probably assumed would come from all that merger
activity.
Because the industry’s fortunes are so closely tied to air
and business travel, car rental demand is likely to remain weak for a while.
Still, Hertz remains open for business and thanks to the
more lenient Chapter 11 process it should get another chance to make a success
of that oligopoly, albeit as a smaller company with different shareholders and
a new capital structure.
Comments
Post a Comment