The Israeli Defense Industries Sector February 2008

Transcription

1 Finance & Economics Division Economic Sector The Israeli Defense Industries Sector February 2008 Overview The Israeli defense industries sector includes the production of electronic and electrooptic systems for the enhancement of air, land, and sea military platforms, such as night-vision equipment, unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs), laser products, air photography systems, data processing and presentation systems, communication systems, and more. In addition, sector activity includes the manufacture of munitions, military equipment, and protective gear. Ownership composition Activity within the sector is carried out by both public as well as private, governmentowned, companies. Government-owned companies include "RAFAEL Armament Development Authority Ltd."; "Israel Military Industries" (IMI), which holds 88% of "Ashot Ashkelon"; and "Israel Aerospace Industries Ltd." (IAI), which fully owns the shares of "ELTA Systems Ltd." In 2006 employees at these companies numbered 20,310; and their total assets amounted to NIS 18.7bn. This asset figure is supplemented by an additional NIS 9.8bn in market capitalization of public companies in the sector, that are active in the areas of electronics and textiles (protective gear). It is important to note that the lion share of assets among the public companies, approximately NIS 7.5bn at the end of 2006, is attributed to "Elbit Systems Ltd.". In addition, during 2007 Elbit's proportion of assets in the entire sector increased significantly after it acquired "Tadiran Communications", the second largest of the publicly traded companies in the sector. Substantial R&D investment as an important characteristic of the sector One of the notable characteristics of all the companies in the sector, but primarily among those that manufacture military equipment and less so those that manufacture protective gear, is that they all have high R&D expenditures. This is due to the increasing demands, by both the Israeli Defense Ministry and also by foreign armies, for sophisticated and precise military equipment that provides a comparative advantage. The high level of R&D expenditures is apparently related as well to the general inclination by countries, which is often reflected in regulations demands, to acquire defense products from domestic suppliers. Thus, Israeli companies need to be innovative and to reach R&D targets before companies operating in target market countries do. We should point out that in order to deal with the regulations of this type in foreign countries, some local Israeli companies established fully owned subsidiaries in target market countries. The Economics Sector, Chief Economist Dr. Gil Bufman, P.O.Box 2, Tel Aviv Ph: , Fax: , Gilbu@bll.co.il

2 It appears the R&D expenses of the public defense companies are higher than those of the government-owned defense companies. Thus, "Elbit Systems" invested approximately 6.0% of revenues in R&D on average over the last three years. In contrast, "IAI", the largest of the government-owned defense companies, invested in R&D approximately 3.0% of sales on average in the last five quarters ending in September It is possible that this is due to the financial conditions of the government-owned defense companies which for the most part, is being less favorable than those of their publicly traded counterparts (as reflected from the financial reports) As a result, they seem to have fewer resources to dedicate to R&D. In addition, it could be that the government-owned defense companies rely heavily on the Israeli Defense Ministry as one of their main clients, and thus working under the "umbrella" of the government ministry allows them to survive despite their relatively low investment in R&D. Overall government assistance to these companies stood at US$ 4.7bn during the period of The market for defense products Defense products are marketed in the local market to one primary customer the Israeli Ministry of Defense (MoD). This fact creates a strong correlation between the defense budget of the state of Israel and the performance of companies in the sector. Since 2003 the defense budget as a percentage of GDP has been on a downward trend, in accordance with the conservative fiscal policies enacted by the government, reaching 6.7% of GDP in This figure compares to 8.1% in % 8% 8% 7% 8.1% Government of Israel defense spending budget as a % of GDP 7.8% 7.6% 7.2% 6.7% 7.2% 7.0% 7% 6% 6% 5% The figure for 2008 is based on a growth forecast of 3.8% for the Israeli economy. This trend in Israel's defense budget, which had a certain negative impact on companies in the defense sector, was cut short as a result of the Second Lebanon War in the summer of 2006, which forced fiscal expenditure in all wings of the military. In order to finance these costs, the government authorized an additional NIS 8.2bn in budget supplements, which have been spread out over the period. In 2007 the defense budget stood at 7.2% of GDP. This development is likely to positively affect the performance of Israeli defense companies, especially those that are governmentowned. However, the impact is not expected to be strong, since the link between the 2

3 performance of defense companies and the size of the defense budget is weakening. This is due to the declining proportion of Israeli Ministry of Defense projects out of total sales of the government-owned defense companies, as these companies increase their export sales. In the past, exports represented a very low proportion of the output of the governmentowned defense industry. This is apparently due to the Israeli policy-makers intent to guard the country's accumulated defense knowledge and know-how, and not to distribute this to other countries. Over the years this guarded approach has changed, and thus these companies have increased exports in order to improve their profits. Thus, "IAI" noted in its third quarter 2007 financial results that "Most revenues derive from the export of the company's goods and services to various customers around the world. However, the Israeli Defense Ministry remains one of the main customers of the company." The company also noted in its report that sales to the military sector (which represents approximately 60% of the company's overall sales) are primarily based on sales to two countries in Asia and to Israel. The proportion of sales to Israel in the first nine months of 2007 reached 25.0% of total revenues. Most public defense companies in Israel target their output to the export market. Thus, Elbit Systems' overseas sales represented approximately 80% of total revenues in the first three quarter of Also the Israeli company "Rabintex Industries Ltd.", which manufactures ballistic protective gear, noted in its financial results that most of its sales derive from outside of Israel. In addition, Israeli protective gear company "FMS Enterprises Migun Ltd." established in 2005 a fully-owned subsidiary in the US in order to fulfill the high demand in the American market, as noted in the company's full year 2006 financial results. It is important to note that according to foreign sources Israel is considered one of the top five weapons exporters in the world. According to various estimates, in 2004 and 2005 Israeli defense industry exports amounted to US$3.7bn and US$3.4bn, respectively, and in 2006 defense exports spiked up to US$4.8bn. According to various estimates, Israeli defense exports in 2007 amounted to more than US$5.0bn. Israeli defense exports are shipped to a wide variety of countries, including the US, which accounts for close to 50.0% of total global demand for defense products; Southeast Asian countries; Latin American countries; Turkey; and others. The proportion of exports out of the total output of defense factories in Israel is close to 70%, a very high percentage in comparison to other Western countries. For the purpose of comparison, in the US only approximately 16% of the production in the sector is exported (approximately US$20bn per year), while in Italy the figure is 23% and in France the proportion going to export is 32% of the total output of the sector. Also in terms of defense manufacturing as a percentage of GDP Israel is the Western world leader. The expected decline in the defense budget, after the supplements added following the Second Lebanon War will fully utilize, is leading the local defense industry to increase its cooperation with foreign countries and institutions. Against this backdrop, it is important to uncover the local defense industry's full potential, in order to reach the target export figure of 85-90% of total output of the sector. 3

4 The difference in performance of government and non-government owned companies The differences between the government-owned defense companies and their public counterparts can be seen, among other places, in the profitability levels of the two groups. In 2006 the public defense companies registered operating profit margins of around 8.0% on average, while the government-owned companies had operating profit margins of only 3.3%. However, it is important to note that the profitability levels of the government-owned companies are improving, while the operating profitability of the public companies eroded in the years The main contributors to the profitability erosion among the public companies include protective gear companies "FMS" and "Rabintex", which recorded in the first three quarters of 2007 declines of 14.8% and 11.4%, respectively, in their operating profit margins compared to the first three quarters of In addition, the government-owned defense companies tend to be relatively highly leveraged, as their aggregate shareholder equity represented less than 8.5% of their balance sheets in This figure reflects a relatively low level of financial stability, which is overlooked when analyzing the composition of debt that these companies have. These companies' short-term debt, which is generally more expensive and more risky than long-term debt, represented in 2006 approximately 74.0% of their balance sheets, while the proportion of long-term debt represented only approximately 17.5% of the balance sheets. However, working under the government "umbrella" does provide a form of financial stability for these companies. This is in contrast to the shareholder equity levels of the public defense companies, which in 2006 stood at 30.0% of the balance sheet, with short-term liabilities during the same year being 41.0% of the balance sheet, and longterm debt being 19.3% of the balance sheet. In the first three quarters of 2007 the proportion of shareholder equity of the total balance sheet of public companies fell to 24.0%, and since 2004 the decrease in shareholder equity as a percentage of the balance sheet reached a cumulative 14.0%. The main contributor to this development is "Elbit Systems", whose long-term debt in relation to its balance sheet jumped two levels: once in 2005 and then again in 2007, apparently due to its purchase of "Tadiran Communications". The short-term debt of the company also increased during the last three years, albeit by a more moderate rate. These developments reduce the degree of the sector's financial stability, which is reflected in an increase in financial leverage of the sector. Also the level of liquidity of the government-owned companies, as reflected in the "current ratio", appears lower compared to the liquidity levels that characterize the public defense companies. In 2006 the "current ratio" of the government-owned companies stood at a relatively low level of 1.07, which represents an increase of 0.2 compared to In contrast, the average "current ratio" of the public defense companies in 2006 and in the first three quarters of 2007 stood at 1.33 and 1.29, respectively. Compared to 2004 these recent figures represent a slight erosion. The relatively weak financial condition of the government-owned defense companies, as portrayed in their financial reports, is the result of an on-going business crisis that 4

5 began in the beginning of the 1990s. The main problems that apparently contributed to the deterioration in the conditions of these companies are related to their rigid business structures, together with high salary outlays, and overcapacity. Government assistance was provided to these companies through, among other things, help in recovery plans, which were intended to treat the fundamental problems mentioned above. However, according to reports from the Ministry of Finance in the 2008 defense budget proposal, it does not appear as though any of the problems have been solved. The government sponsored recovery plan for 2008 is based on the goal of privatizing "IMI" by selling off two of its factories to "RAFAEL" or to "IAI", and selling its remaining factories to a private investor in a tender offer process. It appears that this is the only way of extracting the company from its difficult financial situation in which it now finds itself, as reflected in, among other things, negative shareholder equity and operational losses in the period Looking ahead Looking forward, it appears as though the effects of the Second Lebanon War on the local defense industry have still not been fully absorbed, as the supplement to the defense budget as a result of the war will reach NIS 2.5bn in In addition, the state of the security situation around the world is expected to continue to stoke global demand for the products of the Israeli defense industry. Author: Inbal Balbule The data, information, opinions and forecasts published in this publication (the Information ) are furnished as a service to the readers and do not necessarily reflect the official position of the Bank. The above should not be seen as a recommendation and should not replace the independent discretion of the reader, nor should it be considered an offer or invitation to receive offers or advice whether in general or in consideration of the particular data and requirements of the reader to purchase and /or to effect investments and/or operations or transactions of any kind. The Information may contain errors and is subject to changes in the market and to other changes. Likewise, significant discrepancies may arise between the forecasts contained in this booklet and actual results. The Bank does not undertake to provide the readers with notice, in advance or in retrospect, of any of the aforementioned changes by any means whatsoever. The Bank and/or its subsidiaries and/or its affiliates and/or the parties controlling and/or parties having an interest in any of them may, from time to time, have an interest in the information represented in the publication, including in the financial assets represented therein. 5