Collins St Asset Management just opened Collins St Special Situation Fund No. 1 applications. Offer to invest in a basket of global listed securities in the oil services industry. The fund is only available to new investors with a minimum investment amount of $250,000. Applications will close at midnight of 31 August, 2021.

Please click here to apply

For Formula E motorsport, the 2020-21 racing season was transformational. Seven years after electric single-seaters first raced, Formula E gained the elevated 'championship' status enjoyed by Formula 1, World Endurance, World Rally and World Rallycross.

Then came the embarrassment, the "absolute catastrophe", at the Valencia E-Prix in April. The Grande Finale turned shambolic when five appearances by the safety car forced an extra lap and the racers lacked the battery charge to compete at speed. Only nine of 24 qualifiers finished legitimately and three of these drivers crawled to the finish. Three other cars spluttered to a halt mid-last lap when they ran out of charge while five others were disqualified for exceeding energy limits to finish.

Don't be put off electric cars because an event to showcase the emissions-free driving option highlighted some of the challenges holding back the switch to green cars. In coming decades, electric vehicles are poised to become so reliable they will outsell autos propelled by fossil fuels. The race is on to switch to cars whereby an electric motor, battery and single-gear gearbox replace an internal combustion engine, radiator, fuel tank and multi-geared transmission and clutch because fossil-fuel vehicles account for about 10% of the global greenhouse-gas emissions driving climate change.

Governments worldwide are promoting or mandating the switch. Automakers have pledged at least US$300 billion to go electric and compete with Tesla Motors, the leader of companies created to build electric.

But there are issues that need solving to hasten the switch to electric. One is that batteries have power, thus distance, limits. But the improvements to batteries are expected to overcome this handicap before too long. Another is that the infrastructure to ensure country-wide charging needs to be built - it will be. Another hurdle to overcome is that while electric vehicles are simpler to make because they have fewer parts, a battery that is the size of the back seat makes the cars more expensive to produce. The 60% higher price tag on average is slowing sales even though electric car owners save money on energy costs (up to 70%) and maintenance (electric cars have only 20 moving parts compared with about 2,000 in fossil-fuel vehicles).

Another challenge is that while green cars emit no local pollution their environmental benefits come with caveats. The first is that generating the electricity they need to recharge produces emissions. But the emissions from generating electricity will fall over time as grids become more renewables based. A second qualification is that batteries make electric vehicles more emissions-intensive to manufacture. Part of the explanation for that is that the raw materials needed for battery cells, especially cobalt, lithium and rare earth elements, give off emissions during the smelting needed to extract them from ore. (Another might be that batteries are a challenge to recycle.)

The switch to electric, it needs to be acknowledged, comes with social costs. The typical electric car requires six times the mineral inputs of fossil-fuel counterparts by weight, and securing triple the number of raw materials can be problematic. A notable social cost is that more than 60% of the world's cobalt supply comes from the Democratic Republic of Congo where children become ill and die mining for US$2 a day to attain the ore - though Western companies are seeking to improve conditions. Another possible side effect is that securing the supply of key battery ingredients that are located in far fewer countries than is oil might add to tensions between the West and China.

Electric cars right now are more a luxury purchase due to their higher price. But already 30% of global sales of mopeds, scooters and motorcycles are electric because the price differential over petrol equivalents is lower. Car sales will trend the same way if the price gap to fossil power is eliminated as expected this decade as batteries become cheaper and greener grids enshrine the climate benefits of electric. Of the three touted future trends in driving - namely, car sharing that makes ownership redundant, fully autonomous driving, and electric vehicles - a world of green cars is the most believable.

To be sure, more advancements in the fuel economy of fossil fuels would sap the case for electric vehicles. A halfway switch to hybrids might slow the switch to fully electric while unexpected leaps in hydrogen power could make electric cars passé. Governments might wind back green subsidies to repair their finances (especially as some will lose revenue from fuel excise). Any delay in battery improvements would slow the switch. Banning conventional cars might misfire if the masses can't afford electric. Sales of electric vehicles could disappoint if people adopt a mentality that green cars will be cheaper and better distance-wise in a few years.

While the pace of the switch is debatable, the world of electric cars is coming. Valencia E-Prix debacles aside, the breakthrough into mainstream should prove as seamless as the switch from manual to automatic.

We have written previously about the importance of exits (link to previous article) and the important role that Private Equity managers play in generating returns through identifying the optimal path to a company sale.

The other critical role that Private Equity managers play in generating return is the provision of capital and management expertise to meaningfully help a company improve its operating performance.  The common misconception about Private Equity is that managers simply find companies with good cash flows, apply leverage to the balance sheet, significantly cut costs then pay down debt using those cash flows hence increasing the value of the business.  In the mid-market growth/buyout segment that Vantage Asset Management invests in, this misconception could not be further from the truth. For small to mid-market sized private companies, significant value can be created by leveraging the expertise provided by private equity firms. Company efficiencies are improved, growth is accelerated through customer expansion, M&A activity, managing cash, reducing costs, attracting talent and improving IT systems.

Often these businesses see private equity as a valuable way of accessing industry experts who can assist with benchmarking, entering new markets and generally providing expertise that is not readily available otherwise.  A study conducted by Adams Street Partners of the US buyout market found that the source of value creation from revenue growth through Private Equity manager intervention created 38% of the total return and multiple arbitrage (which is often a by product of revenue growth) created 33% of the return.  Leverage ranked a distant third of the return drivers.  This highlights the ability of Private Equity managers to bring meaningful value to private investments through the enhancements they make to businesses and ultimately the returns they generate for investors.

CASE STUDY: SILK LASER CLINICS

SILK was co-founded by its current CEO Martin Perelman in 2009 in Adelaide and had an initial focus on laser hair removal treatments.  The Australian non-surgical aesthetics industry is projected to generate revenues of $5.8Bn in CY2021 however it is highly fragmented with five large specialist clinic chains estimated to account for approximately 31% of the total number of clinics (as at 9 September 2020).

Advent Partners, one of Australia's leading Private Equity managers with a 35 years track record of investing in mid-market companies, first invested in SILK in January 2018. At the time the business consisted of 12 clinics primarily based in Adelaide whose revenue was mainly derived from hair removal procedures, a treatment which was experiencing margin reduction due to the procedure becoming more accessible to consumers.  At the time SILK also offered cosmetic injections, skin treatments and tattoo removal.

Subsequent to the acquisition, Advent worked with management to put a number of key initiatives in place to grow SILK including:

• Accelerating the adoption of a refined franchise model to boost the speed of network expansion into new geographical markets
• Improve clinic productivity through a focus on cosmetic injectables which attract a higher profit margin
• Nurse training and recruitment to enhance the cosmetic injectables rollout
• Adoption of data analytics to improve in-clinic financial operating performance as well as personalization of the offering
• Acquisition of rival networks of clinics
• Launch of a high-margin proprietary skincare brand Aesthetics Rx
• Introduction of body sculpting, a new technology attractive to existing SILK clients as well as attracting new clients

These initiatives saw SILK grow from 12 clinics to 56 clinics by December 2020 achieving two year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of 79% and 414% to FY2020 in Network Cash Sales and Underlying EBITDA respectively.

During December 2020, the Advent Partners 2 Fund completed the successful exit of SILK Laser Clinics Australia via an IPO. SILK Laser Clinics Australia (ASX: SLA) listed on 15 December 2020 at a share price of $3.45, implying an enterprise value of $162 million. Upon listing Advent Partners 2 realised 50% of their original investment holding in SILK, representing 2.0x of the Fund's original investment in SILK, with the Fund retaining 28% of SILK post IPO. Once fully completed the exit will deliver Advent Partners 2 investors, including VPEG3, with top tier performing returns across a 2.9-year investment period.  Pleasingly SILK has continued to perform since listing up 40c from its listing price with FY21 prospectus forecasts recently upgraded off the back of continued operating success thanks to the initiatives that Advent Partners have helped put into place.

If you would like to share in the growth and ultimate returns derived from similar small to mid-market company investments, Vantage Private Equity Growth Fund 4 ("VPEG4") remains open until 30 September 2021.

Funds operated by this manager: 

Premium Asia Fund, Premium Asia Income Fund, Premium China Fund

Funds operated by this manager: 

AIM Global High Conviction Fund

Since late 2020, we've pivoted our portfolios to businesses likely to benefit from the economy's reopening - and generated excellent returns. But the emergence of the highly infectious delta variant makes the future far less certain. My take is that higher quality and structural growth businesses should again be on your radar.

Allocating equity portfolios to companies growing structurally or to those recovering from earlier lockdowns and restrictions has benefited from optimism surrounding vaccine developments and rollouts.

By way of example, the pent-up demand for travel has hitherto provided enthusiasm for tourism companies with strong or repaired balance sheets.

Indeed, only last week the cruise ship company, Regent Seven Seas, broke all previous opening day records with all berths booked in less than three hours, despite prices ranging from $93,000 to a quarter of a million dollars. This echoes Carnival Cruises' experience last year when more than 90 per cent of cancelled travelers chose a US$200 on-board voucher for a future cruise in preference to a refund.

In the US, leisure travel has bounced back strongly. LAX (Los Angeles Airport) is reported to be packed and struggling with the volumes. Robust demand for travel amongst employees and clients has resulted in corporate travel returning. Twenty per cent week-on-week growth has been reported over the last six weeks, reflecting the preference for face-to-face meetings over Zoom. According to one analyst, travel by Amazon staff has fully recovered to pre-COVID-19 levels. Consequently, airlines are said to be hiring like crazy, and unable to recruit enough staff.

Anecdotally, rising delta cases globally aren't currently expected to halt the reopening. By way of example, Seattle's population is 74 per cent vaccinated and that city's Governor has said it won't shut down. Notably, 99 per cent of all hospitalisations are unvaccinated.

In Australia, however, a very different picture exists

A relatively low level (10 per cent of the population) of vaccinated individuals, lockdowns and border closures mean the return to normality is less clear. The delta variant is materially more infectious than the original COVID-19 strain and is now the dominant strain in Australia.

And, importantly, with half of winter remaining, the lack of a broadly vaccinated population presents the virus with an opportunity to mutate, potentially undermining the efficacy of current vaccines. This has investors on tenterhooks.

Victorian and New South Wales lockdowns, and the spread of the virus through other states, has resulted in less enthusiasm for forward booking travel. While leading indicators from Similarweb and Google trends remained strong into May, both trended lower into June, and are likely to have fallen further in July following the lockdowns of Australia's two most populous states.

Travel companies aren't the only businesses impacted

Lockdowns must necessarily shift spending from services and experiences (that were available in open cities) to online spending on goods. Online shopping spiked during the last 12-18 months, and as consumers returned to in-store shopping, online eased. This could rapidly reverse with only essential stores permitted to open.

Of particular interest is the outlook for the beneficiaries of the boom in home renovations and home improvement. Harvey Norman, JB Hi-Fi, Nick Scali, Adairs were huge beneficiaries during last year's lockdowns. And amid the recent easing of restrictions, they continued to win. But durable goods tend to have long useful lives, meaning replacement cycles are also long. As the current renovation and building boom matures, so must the rate of growth in the sales of fridges, ovens and air-conditioners.

Elsewhere, hospitals that might have seen a bounce in elective surgeries on the back of pent-up demand suffer from deferments and rescheduling. Further lockdowns and border closures would also necessarily slow the pace of economic recovery and, consequently, demand for raw materials and energy.

Meanwhile, the boom for building materials companies, including Adelaide Brighton Cement, Boral and CSR, amid persistently low interest rates, declining unemployment and consequent strong demand for housing/home improvement, could also be derailed.

And keep in mind the stricter Sydney lockdown is accompanied by smaller support and welfare payments in the absence of Job Keeper.

It should not be surprising, in such circumstances, to see at least some capital reallocated from profitable reopeners to lockdown winners.

The key question for investors to now consider, however, is whether a reopening is undermined by a new strain of the virus that evades vaccines.

Indeed, not everyone in the UK is excited about the country's reopening. England's Chief Medical Officer Chris Whitty admitted hospital admissions could hit "scary numbers" if removing all restrictions leads to out of control infections and the opportunity for COVID-19 to mutate again.

In just the last month, the Netherlands, with more than three-quarters of the population vaccinated, suffered the devastating effects of reopening too quickly. Infections rose more than 500 per cent in just one week. Shortly after the Dutch caretaker Prime Minister, Mark Rutte, announced that face masks would no longer be required, the Dutch government started backtracking on restrictions.

New infections had doubled to 8,000 in the week ending 6 July. By 9 July, 7,000 cases were recorded in 24 hours and almost three-quarters of the new cases were in young people, half of whom were infected with the delta variant.

A possible silver lining to the prospect of a longer road to reopening is a flatter yield curve (reflecting lower growth/inflation expectations) and dovish central bank frameworks.

And when it comes to the markets, higher quality and structural growth stocks may yet again be on investors' radars.

About the author

Roger Montgomery founded Montgomery Investment Management, www.montinvest.com in 2010. Roger brings more than two decades of investment, financial market experience and knowledge. Roger also authored the best-selling investment book, Value.able.

With the global electric vehicle (EV) market forecast to grow 10-fold by 2025 and 50-fold by 2030, and rising demand for energy storage, there's never been a better time to be a lithium miner. Fortunately, Australia has a number of quality mining businesses for investors to consider.

When it comes to electric vehicles it appears a tipping point has now been reached and investors have been profiting from the tidal shift in sentiment with Australia's wealth of natural resources ensuring there's no shortage of opportunities.

Earlier this year, Porsche, Audi, Skoda and VW owner, the Volkswagen Group's Powerday presented the company's roadmap for battery and charging technology up to 2030. The company had already nearly tripled deliveries of EVs in 2020 to over 212,000 and now it intends to deliver a million EVs in 2021 and invest more than €46 billion in EVs over the next five years.

Major competitors have responded swiftly

General Motors recently revealed its plans to sell more than a million EVs annually by 2025 and will spend US$35 billion by 2025 on EV (electric vehicle) development. That's up nearly a third on the spending plan announced just on six months ago.

Not to be outdone, Ford announced in June it will spend US$30 billion on EV development by 2030, sell 1.5 million EVs that year, while aiming for 40 per cent of its global model range to be electric.

According to Ernst & Young, EV sales in Europe, China and the US will outstrip internal combustion engined vehicles (ICEs) by 2033, which is five years earlier than previous projections. As I have previously explained, government mandated climate change targets combined with financial consequences for the manufacture of ICEs is driving the seismic shift in production and ultimately take-up rates. Consequently, the share prices of lithium miners have surged since April, substantially outperforming the market.

In the US, President Biden's proposed infrastructure bill has set aside US$174 billion to encourage EVs, with nearly US$18 billion for a national charging network. A recent US government technology report however has suggested nearer to US$90 billion will be required for the charging network to meet the government's 2035 EV target.

Perhaps most importantly, it is this last development - a network of ubiquitous rapid charging stations - that will speed up EV adoption, with important demand consequences for upstream suppliers including lithium producers.

Growing EV markets

A plethora of predictions typically expect the global EV market to grow 10-fold by 2025 and forecasts of a 50-fold increase by 2030 are not uncommon. And with lithium demand for the burgeoning energy storage market demand expected to far exceed that which is required for EVs, it is reasonable to expect bright revenue prospects for lithium producers.

Demand, of course, is but one side of the equation. Currently, global lithium (carbonate production) is roughly 500,000 tonnes per annum. If current predictions for the 2025 EV market alone are correct, demand will exceed 2.7 million tonnes per year. If 2030 predictions are correct, expect demand to exceed 15 million tonnes. By way of examples, Institutional Investor has reported that EV sales have more than tripled since only 2017, Citi Bank predicts 75 per cent of all mined lithium will be consumed by EV batteries by 2025, and finally, the IEA predicts a 40-fold increase in lithium demand by 2040.

Of course, if new and recycled supply cannot meet demand, 'Houston' will have a problem and the EV market will simply not reach adoption forecasts.

Are lithium stocks a bubble?

Australia is uniquely positioned to supply at least some of the expected demand. If currently planned Australian lithium refining capacity is met in the next few years, however, it will still only double global supply to about a million tonnes.

That suggests to me the jump in the prices of lithium production stocks since my last article on the subject is anything but a bubble. A long runway of exploration, development and production is ahead and remember this is an investment theme that is independent of economic, COVID-19, interest rate and inflation cycles.

Lithium-ion batteries contain other metals such as cobalt, nickel, graphite and manganese. And there's no shortage of mining projects being established to extract and produce these battery materials. New technology will also help to meet some of the projected demand with green credentials. Recently, General Motors struck a deal with Australian lithium miner Controlled Thermal Resources, to extract lithium from US geothermal deposits in the US. If successful the project could deliver another 600,000 tonnes annually.

Meanwhile, Albemarle Corp., the world's largest lithium producer, is working on a new laboratory in North Carolina to accelerate production of ultra-thin lithium foils and anodes that could double energy density and halve costs.

For context, a battery mining project only differs from other mining methods by the technology employed to remove the last few thousand parts per million of impurities. The success of battery mining projects, therefore, hangs on the ability, which should not be underestimated, to achieve the necessary purity economically.

Nevertheless, the transition to green energy - and as automakers embrace the EV revolution - rising demand for lithium-ion batteries should push lithium prices up while ensuring the supply of battery metals remains short for years. According to Macquarie Bank, a slight supply deficit this year of 2,900 tons will rise to 20,000 tons in 2022 and triple to 61,000 tons in 2023. Meanwhile, Credit Suisse is forecasting a deficit of 248,000 tons in 2025.

Unsurprisingly, lithium and nickel prices have already risen steeply this year. Lithium carbonate is up 71 per cent year to date, lithium hydroxide has nearly doubled and the premium on nickel briquette is up 24 per cent - the highest level since late 2019. If, however, projected demand continues to outstrip supply - supply which has been depleted and constrained by supply chain inefficiencies - prices can surge further.

At Montgomery, one of our key investment themes this year, along with demand for income, a boom in mergers and acquisitions, has been decarbonisation. And it appears there's some durability to the latter theme.

Globally, regulators and governments will prioritise clean energy, EV sales will continue to surge as choice flourishes and, so, battery metal demand will remain buoyant. If mining production fails to keep up, producers of battery metals such as nickel, copper and lithium will have a solid 2021 and 2022, while their shares will also enjoy growing demand from a happy band of fund managers who have been hitherto underweight and who are increasingly required to make ESG-friendly bets.

About the author

Roger Montgomery founded Montgomery Investment Management, www.montinvest.com in 2010. Roger brings more than two decades of investment, financial market experience and knowledge. Roger also authored the best-selling investment book, Value.able.

'This time' will rarely be the same as the past. History has always been misquoted and misused; usually to support a preconceived view of the writer. Learning to identify, and then look through these distortions when reading financial musings is crucial. Especially true when the writer speaks with a tone of 'definitive authority' on the basis of the past. Here are a few tips when forming views from history;

History, it's not different this time. It's different EVERY time. Each crisis or surge is different. Nature is never constant. It is the arrogance of man to assume his 'rules' are set to never change and he is exempt from nature. The Great Depression didn't emulate the depression of 1920-1921 just like that differed to the panic of 1907. The current crisis versus the GFC has far more differences than similarities. Historical panics do have one thing in common, they all end. Stocks recover. Economies grow. People still get up every day looking to get ahead.

Historical 'context' is fine but it's not the answer. Back-tests are not called Front-tests for good reason. Understanding financial market history is not the same as it telling you what will happen next. It does provide a range of outcomes not 'the' full range of them. New outcomes frequently occur - a classic failure most commentators forget to factor in. What you can do is analyse the present and use the past to come up with reasonable probabilities when making decisions about the unknown, but never limit the outcomes just to past ones. Nature is always morphing and creating as is history. It's not static.

History warns us about ignoring human nature. It's said, 'Never bet against the Fed'. I would add 'Never bet against the human spirit'. If you are, I'll take the other side of that bet. Commentators holding a far right or left of field view tend to ignore the human spirit. They do this because it gets in the way of their belief systems. This is the heartbeat of all human endeavour and hence of capitalism too. When you take a bet against human endeavour you are betting against the heart and engine room of our lives. Doomsayers value endeavour, imagination, stubbornness, curiosity, determination, and relentlessness at zero.

History shows risk is easier to predict than returns. Strolling down memory lane helps give investors a decent approximation of potential outcomes (e.g. the presence of risk in financial assets that seek to earn an expected return above the rate of inflation). Risk means different things to different people but it is always there no matter what you do with your money or even if you're aware of it in the first place. One recurrent big risk for investors during bad times is the feeling that the good times won't return for a long time.

History helps us avoid mistakes of the past. Charlie Munger (Buffets amazing partner) once said, "I believe in the discipline of mastering the best that other people have figured out. I don't believe in just sitting down and trying to dream it all up yourself. Nobody's that smart."

The inverse is also powerful; avoiding the worst that people didn't figure out in the past to avoid lethal mistakes... is easier than emulating brilliance.

History shows life always has hardships. People have always lived through hard times and then thrived! How did one generation born into poverty and no social security get through World War I, the Spanish Flu pandemic, the Great Depression, massive social upheavals, two market crashes, and World War II - all within the span of only 30 years, and yet progressed their lives? Maybe it's that thought about underestimating human endeavour? People have many flaws but we are exceedingly adaptable. Never underestimate human endeavour and the will to progress.

Einstein once said, "I would rather be approximately right than precisely wrong." Each investment plan requires educated and analysed guess work. Baseline assumptions backed by strong theories that use probabilities to make key decisions is a part of portfolio construction. The future still remains unclear to everyone. Investment information is imperfect. You work with what you've got, update assumptions and probabilities as new information comes to light. Good plans are flexible enough to take new realities into account. Balance this with how easy it is to get caught up in the moment and to then lose perspective (temperament) - especially considering time as a factor and in every way it impacts money.

History shows temperament is more useful for investors than intelligence. Overconfidence or underconfidence during a market event is lethal. Subduing those emotional attributes in the investment decision-making process is wise. Using educated specialist third-parties such as advisers and fund managers is good insurance for this and are useful tools to managing your money, including how history is accounted for. I'll leave you with the thought below...

Our actions result from our behaviours that are determined by our attitudes...that are governed by our beliefs.

Note: Our thanks to Ben Carlson (CFA) in the USA for generating the idea for this article and for various portions of the content.

Humans are linear by nature and our ability to grasp exponential change is extremely poor, this creates a blind-spot when it comes to assessing the potential of technology. While the cloud opportunity is already thought of in the trillions of dollars, it may actually become three to six times this size over the coming decade.

One of the most difficult things to do as an investor is delineating promotional rhetoric from a genuine glimpse of an explosive new secular trend. Separating the so-called "signal and noise" is less clear-cut than the phrase implies. For instance, the parabolic moves (up and down) in AMC and GameStop (both were recently considered bankruptcy candidates), clearly highlight how one investor's signal can be another investor's noise, with the market as polarized on the future of the businesses as oil and water.

Interestingly, often the loudest debates about a company's future are highly bifurcated like AMC and GameStop, with the opportunity worth many multiples of what the market implies today or nothing at all (similar debates were had over Amazon and Tesla too). Hence it is quite an unusual situation when the debate is not between success and failure, but rather success and unfathomable success! Paradoxically such a situation may be available at one of the largest companies in the world, with a market cap approaching US$2 trillion, Microsoft's opportunity may actually be underestimated by the market.

Before we dig into this frightening proposition, that such a "large company" has a potentially larger opportunity than we can comprehend, let's revisit some of the perspectives from Google's world-renowned futurist and Director of Engineering, Raymond Kurzweil. Famous for advancing numerous cutting edge fields, Kurzweil posits that humans are linear by nature, whereas technology is exponential. In fact human ability to grasp exponential change is so poor that even when it is presented in the plain language of mathematics, our minds often short-circuit and struggle to resolve situations that are indisputably true. For example, Kurzweil's "law of exponential doubling" notes that it takes seven doublings to go from 0.01% to 1% and then seven more doublings to go from 1% to 100%. So within 14 moves we have gone from something that is completely invisible in the linear world (0.01%), to entirely encompassing it (100%). Perhaps the global pandemic and the exponential spread of the virus has given us a real-world look at what exponential growth "feels", like given the speed with which our lives were disrupted, however, most humans are simply not built to intuitively reconcile this phenomenon.

Shifting back to Microsoft, it is generally accepted that the biggest opportunity ahead of the company continues to be cloud computing and its powerful claim on the growth of technology more broadly, driven by its privileged position with enterprises and consumers. It has also become somewhat of a consensus view that the cloud market will be over US$1 trillion within a decade, this alone puts Microsoft in exceptional shape to deliver multiples of its stock price for shareholders over that time. So case closed right, what more is there to say? So what would it mean if the consensus view was wrong and massively underestimated the opportunity. Many will raise their eyebrows and ask "how can that be, the opportunity is already over US$1 trillion", which is actually the natural default for our linearly predisposed human minds.

Perhaps thinking exponentially, a signal of how large the cloud opportunity may be, came on a recent Microsoft earnings call, during which CEO Satya Nadella made the following comment regarding the future of global technology spending:

"At the highest of levels, today as a percentage of GDP tech spend is 5%. We think it will double in the next 10 years, and if anything, this pandemic perhaps has accelerated that doubling…[and] what is the largest, most secular need? It is the need for distributed cloud infrastructure" - Satya Nadella (CEO of Microsoft)

At first blush, this comment looks trivial, but putting some numbers around it reveals quite an interesting result. Current global IT spend is ~$3.6 trillion (of which cloud is only ~10%), were it to double as a percentage of global GDP (which is also growing) over the coming decade, it would imply global IT spending would hit $9.6 trillion from current levels (~10% CAGR ). Given Nadella noted the pandemic had "accelerated that doubling" it would imply faster growth for cloud relative to pre-pandemic levels, which was already growing more than ten times (10x) faster than the industry. Hence if Nadella is right, the market may be ~US$6 trillion by 2030 or six times (6x) the size consensus perceives it to be now. Even if Nadella is wrong and there has NOT been an acceleration, the cloud opportunity would still be ~US$3 trillion or triple (3x) the market consensus. A truly staggering thought for the potential of this explosive, exponential secular trend!

At Montaka Global we have a single clear goal: to maximize the probability of achieving multi-decade compounding of our clients' wealth alongside our own by owning the long-term winners in attractive markets, while they remain undervalued.

Montaka owns shares in Microsoft.

Amit Nath is a Senior Research Analyst with Montaka Global Investments.