Why I passed on CTD., page-77

This comment seems to show a fundamental lack of understanding in how stocks are valued and can grow. 

Taking it to a hypothetical extreme to show a point, if a billion dollar healthy business on an earnings multiple of 10 buys another healthy business on a multiple of 0.1 for a billion dollars, what happens to the overall value of the equity for a listed stock? This has nothing to do with "paper magic", this is the result of tangible cashflows and earnings and how stocks are priced in the market.

 Yes a roll-up strategy gets harder to repeat at scale with the same rate, but in terms of global market share particularly in Asia and the US there are still ample opportunities in an incredibly fragmented, and that isn't going to change in 1, 5 or even 10 years. There are risks from changes in the market or failures integrate businesses, but CTM have a strong track record up to this point and unlike every recent ASX 200 roll-up catastrophy I can think of, they aren't bogged down by significant long-debt, nor are they acquiring businesses of an unmanageable scale or at an irresponsible rate.

Also in the case of this company, I'm not going to go in depth to babysit you but their ROE is very strong and currently the highest it has been in 4 years, also looking at the figures yourself you can also see that earnings growth in the past 12 months for example significantly outstrips the basic increase from recent acquisitions, the "no organic growth" is demonstrably false in an absolute sense and it doesn't take a deep analysis to see this. All it requires is that you bother to read their recent financial reports. Sure you can make claims about doubting future organic growth prospects, but people have done that for the past 4 years with this company since I bought it and have yet to have any success in being proved right.