I see the Clown Club is still desperately posting with the foolish perception that just because they create 5 extra accounts per Clown Club member, they have any sort of control over the price. I always assumed that reading made you smarter, until I read the drivel posted by Stonks, Tekky, Tradie and the other muppets and quickly realised that there can be exceptions to this. Anyways, popped in to share this (the Clown Club can ignore as I know they struggle with basic comprehension and may find an article with big words like this difficult to understand)

Why Tyndall has gone all in on Zip Co’s turnaround story

James Nguyen is co-portfolio manager of Tyndall Australian Small Companies Fund. The Sydney-based firm oversees around $7 billion in assets.

Which stock in the fund do you think is most undervalued by the market and why?

I am going to be a little controversial here and say buy now pay later business Zip Co. This was previously a market darling, capitalised at over $6 billion despite reporting losses of more than $200 million per annum. Higher interest rates, loose credit leading to high bad debts, and a weaker consumer resulted in significant shareholder value losses.

While the macro environment is now more supportive, it is the company-specific turnaround under new management that sets Zip apart from its BNPL counterparts. Growth for growth’s sake has been abandoned, as has its international domination aspirations, and in place is a sustainable, profitable growth strategy.

While the market cap of Zip is now 80 per cent lower, I can see the business making close to $100 million of cash earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation, and amortisation in 18 months’ time. This places Zip on a ratio that compares a company’s enterprise value to its EBITDA multiple that’s not too dissimilar to the broader market, despite offering one of the highest available growth rates.