The trouble is, when it comes to making assumptions or asking questions about the future, just like a chain is only as strong as its weakest link, any forecast of the future is only as strong as the weakest assumption behind that forecast.
And no one - not even the most detail-prone analyst - will be modelling financial forecasts using inputs at the level of granularity contained in your questions.
Nonetheless, I'll have a bash at answering, although by the sheer nature of the beast, my answers are unlikely to be very meaningful (even if they all prove to be correct, which is is certain to not be the case).
So, here goes:
1) Approx what percentage of current custom, that was paying full price, will bring in their shopper dockets and claim the discount? This is pure revenue loss.
No idea. However, this revenue loss will be offset by existing WOW customers who do not purchase fuel from CTX currently, but who would now do so because they would be able to bring in their shopper dockets in the expanded redemption network (which has gone from 104 to 225 sites under this agreement).
2) What amount, if any, of the discount is carried by Woollies? i.e. what's the actual discount attributable to Caltex per litre?
Actually, I don't even know this number on a unitary basis, but that's not important if we know the aggregate dollar figure, which we do because they told us: the additional discount will come $80m.
3) Historically, what percentage of volume increase can be expected from adding Woollies dockets?
No idea.
But I'm not sure knowing this figure would help one make any adjustment to CTX's ~$23bn in sales
4) How will this roll-out affect the Foodary roll-out? (Particularly: a/ Wwill there be reduced number of Foodary outlets in stations as Woollies venues take priority and b/ Will the roll-out of Non-Station Foodary outlets slow; personally I'd be happy to that take a back seat is it's somewhat riskier.
The answer to this is known, because they told us. Foodary will be paused in favour of rolling out of new JV sites with Woolies. The financial impacts of this will be to increase the added EBIT from Convenience over 5 years of $120m to $150m (previously advised), to the top end of that range. Importantly,the required capex is unchanged and the execution risks are lower, so the risk-adjusted ROE on the Convenience expansion is reduced.
5) When all numbers from above are taken into account, what is the expected level of organic growth in Rev/Ebitda?
Organic Revenue and EBITDA growth - Based on $150m of additional EBIT, Revenue can be roughly estimated using precedent EBIT margins; and amortising the capital investment over, say 10 years, and then adding that depreciation charge to EBIT in order to derive EBITDA.
6) How does this 15 year partnership add up in EV and Book Value, there's a certain intrinsic value in the partnership to add, as well as the value of increased Rev/Ebitda growth. What might those figures be?
It is possible to calculate it, but whatever answer is generated, it won't be an accurate one given the long-dated nature of the exercise.
In these sorts of situations, I believe that precedent matters. And the precedent that needs to be drawn upon here is the credibility and track record of management.
For it is management who have negotiated this deal with Woolworths on behalf of the owners of the business, and in doing so management are thereby implicitly saying that the deal is shareholder value-accretive.
So it gets down to whether or not you think Caltex management know what they are doing.
For mine, I do; otherwise I would never have bought shares in the business when I did some 5 years ago.
Because - at that time - with the share price some one-third of its current level, they were saying that they would create value for shareholders by shutting down refining activity at Kurnell, and sourcing refined transport fuels from offshore.
Clearly, they have created value for shareholders.
In spades.
So, the extent to which they walk their talk is clear for all to see; hence, I am happy to give them the benefit of the doubt.
The point here is that Caltex's business has been significantly de-risked by this partnership agreement and that - compared to two years ago when CTX was at risk of losing $150m of EBIT - management had more than plugged that $150m earnings hole with a series of acquisitions, organic growth and cost-cutting measures.
Now that the adjustment on the Woolworths contract has ended up being only half of what had been expected, the net effect is a near-$100m net EBIT uplift compared to 2016.
ONE FINAL IMPORTANT THING - CONTEXT
The problem with discussing stocks on a forum such as this is that the discussion often occurs in a contextual vacuum. And the context that needs to be considered is that everyone's circumstances are likely to be different and unique.
So my investment in CTX might occur for entirely different reasons to yours.
When I first bought CTX, it was because I felt it was fundamentally undervalued by a long way. Today, I believe it is less significantly undervalued (but nowhere near to being over-valued, mind).
But the reason I continue to own CTX is not because I think it is going to triple in value again (or double in value, or even rise by 50%, for that matter).
I own it because I believe CTX will, at some stage in the next year or two, undertake another structured off-market share buyback, comprising a small capital component and a large fully-franked dividend (CTX has around $900m - equivalent to ~$3.50/share in accumulated franking credits).
Which, given the way my affairs are structured, means that I can reduce my holdings in CTX in a very tax effective manner.
So, it needs to be borne in mind that where I come from when it comes to viewing CTX as an investment, could very well be from an entirely different angle to you.
.
CTX Price at posting:
$31.13 Sentiment: Buy Disclosure: Held
