- Joined
- 8 April 2008
- Posts
- 871
- Reactions
- 0
What constitutes the definition of "Free Cash Flow" seems to be an issue here.
Granted we have to be careful about definitions but I think the real issue is whether or not Telstra can afford to continue paying a dividend of at least 28 cents/share. If I believed Roger Montgomery when he said: "...they end up with free cash flow of about $600 million and their dividend was $1.7 billion ... so they can't afford their dividend. I reckon they are bleeding ..." I might panic and hit the sell button on TLS while the going is good. But where does that $600 million figure come from (?) and whatever it is it is NOT the measure of Telstra's ability to afford its dividend payments. Question: What is a suitable measure?
Mclovin refers to the Telstra reported free cash flow as 'unlevered free cash flow'. I'm happy to use that terminology - after all it is just a label. More importantly I am going to use it as a 'relative measure' of Telstra's ability to pay its dividend.( I'm sure someone is going to object to this but I simply offer it up for discussion.)
So I've looked up Telstra's 'unlevered free cash flow' numbers back to 2002 and compared them to the annual dividend payouts as shown in the attached table. If Roger Montgomery is correct when he says Telstra is "bleeding" [i.e. currently] then it has been bleeding for a long time and from 2002 until 2009 it was bleeding more profusely than it is now - and in 2007 it was haemorrhaging!