Spruce Point Capital Management Announces Investment Opinion: Releases Report and Strong Sell Research Opinion on C3.ai, Inc. (NYSE: AI)
Spruce Point Capital Management warns about C3.ai (NYSE: AI), citing a potential 40% to 50% downside risk to its share price, estimating values between
- None.
- 40% to 50% downside risk to share price estimated at $12.85 to $15.40.
- Over 30% of revenue relies on Baker Hughes, posing contract risks.
- Concerns regarding financial reporting and accounting practices.
- Three different CFOs since 2020 raise red flags about management stability.
- Allegations of exaggerated claims about market position and technology.
- Governance concerns due to board members' financial ties to the CEO.
NOTE TO EDITORS: The Following Is an Investment Opinion Issued by
Highlights Growing Risk of Additional Revenue Deferment or Contract Elimination from
Observes Financial Reporting and Accounting Issues Related to Baker Hughes Joint Venture Sales Commissions, Accounts Receivables and Gross Margins
Uncovers Significant CFO Turnover at
Finds a Pattern of Exaggeration and Irreconcilable Statements Regarding C3.ai’s Customers, Technology Development Cost, Total Addressable Market Size, Pace of Market Growth, Market Share, Alliances and Sales Cycle to Close Deals
Believes Investor Expectations for Revenues Are Too High Given Significant Salesforce Turnover and Recent Restructuring
Raises Corporate Governance Concerns Related to the Board's Objectivity Given Directors' Past and Current Financial Dealings With Chairman and CEO
Sees
***
Spruce Point Report Overview
Founded in 2009 by
Currently, the Company positions itself as a leader in the enterprise artificial intelligence (“AI”) platform market. Amid surging interest in technology stocks, C3.ai IPO’ed at
-
Evidence of a severely challenged partnership with
Baker Hughes , a related-party andC3.ai's largest customer. InJune 2019 ,Baker Hughes /GE ("Baker Hughes ") purchased equity, which at pre-IPO accounted for approximately15% of Class A shares, at an implied valuation, and agreed to both use and resell C3.ai’s product suite to its oil and gas customers with a minimum annual revenue guarantee over three years to reach$460 million by$170 million April 2022 . Baker Hughes’ Chief Executive OfficerLorenzo Simonelli also joined C3.ai’s Board of Directors (the "Board"). The contract has since been amended three times, most recently inOctober 2021 , resulting in peak purchase commitments being deferred to by$125 million April 2025 and price concessions now being offered to prospective clients.Mr. Simonelli recently resigned from C3.ai’s Board inDecember 2021 . Based on our research, we believe the joint venture is a marriage that simply isn’t working. With more than30% of C3.ai’s revenues tied toBaker Hughes , and set to expire inApril 2025 , we see an escalating risk toC3.ai shareholders from continued revenue deferment or early contract termination.
-
Signs of problematic financial reporting and accounting regarding the Baker Hughes joint venture and a revolving door in
C3.ai's Chief Financial Officer position.C3.ai reports Baker Hughes’ revenue and cost contribution to its financial statements at nearly100% gross margin, which one former employee we interviewed described as “impossible.” We believe there is a discrepancy in accounts receivables tied toBaker Hughes and a related increase in unbilled receivables, which suggest thatC3.ai may be aggressively recognizing revenues fromBaker Hughes . Furthermore,C3.ai has been accruing and payingBaker Hughes sales commissions in excess of what we believe appears reasonable given the joint venture’s challenges selling. In addition, sales commissions are being amortized as an expense to the income statement at a slower pace compared to actual cash payments which have recently been made. Since its IPO registration inSeptember 2020 ,C3.ai has employed three different CFOs. We believe C3.ai’s current CFOAdeel Manzoor is a problematic choice given his aggressive background, which includes a domestic violence charge, and a material weakness and financial restatement in his prior CFO and CAO leadership role atTelenav, Inc.
-
Challenges in product adoption and significant salesforce turnover make it unlikely that
C3.ai will meet aggressive analyst estimates. Former employees have commented thatC3.ai is “literally invisible” in the market, despite its marketing and promotional efforts. While described as a company with good technology, employees have also calledC3.ai “complex,” “too technical for consumption” and said, “it was a tough sell because [C3.ai ] uses a huge number of 3rd party products.” Despite C3.ai's CEO recently claiming the Company's sales cycle is 4.5 months and decreasing every month, our research indicates that the sales cycle is closer to 18 months to two years. WithC3.ai recently discussing a global sales salesforce reorganization on its last quarterly earnings call, we believe the Company will struggle to meet aggressive analyst revenue expectations, which have increased in recent months. Excluding revenue fromBaker Hughes , analysts are implying40% growth from all other customers, which is nearly 2x the historical growth rate. Our analysis of C3.ai’s non-cancellable backlog from all other non-Baker Hughes customers suggests it has largely been flat over the past few quarters.
-
Evidence of exaggerated or irreconcilable claims made by
C3.ai . We find numerous discrepancies on matters such as the value of and cumulative investment made byC3.ai in its technology, description of its customers, its total addressable market (“TAM”), the pace of its market growth and the scale of alliances with companies such as Microsoft, Hewlett Packard Enterprises, Google Cloud, Intel andAmazon Web Services . To illustrate,C3.ai changed the size of its TAM from to$170 during its IPO process, with no evident change in its business mix or offering.$271 billion C3.ai claims it’s a leader in its industry but given the Company’s current revenue run rate, its implied market share is just0.12% . This suggests its TAM is too large – orC3.ai is not as relevant to the industry as it claims. In forming a newDigital Technology Institute ,C3.ai ascribed a value of to its technology. However, its top two customers only spend an average of$60 million , and when we asked a former salesperson what the theoretical value for unlimited use of$28 million C3.ai would be, the answer was approximately .$25 million C3.ai has suggested that it has spent on its product development since inception, but other statements suggest$1 billion -$500 . Lastly,$785 million C3.ai has changed its definition of customers and entities. At one point, it stated a buying entity needed to only have “an enterprise agreement to deploy or establish the governing terms should we contract to deploy the C3 AI suite or one or more C3 AI Applications to different customers within the Entity.” Loose language like this could open the door for customer count overstatement.
-
Worrisome corporate governance practices and insider enrichment. Spruce Point warns public retail investors that they have little ability to effect change at the Company given the CEO and Chairman’s
95% control over the Class B 50x super-voting shares. The dual class share structure also limits C3.ai’s stock from index inclusion and institutional buying. Furthermore, we question multiple directors’ ability to objectively consider shareholders' best interests. We note that directorsCondoleezza Rice and “Independent Lead Director”Michael McCaffery are associated withMakena Capital Management , which according to recentIRS filings, has managed financial assets forC3.ai's CEO’s family foundation.Ms. Rice fails to include in her biography her director role atKior , an alternative energy technology company charged with fraud by theU.S. Securities and Exchange Commission .C3.ai directorPatricia House , who fails to put on her biography that she served as a director atShutterfly – which revealed a non-reliance opinion and financial restatement – is also a long-time ally ofC3.ai's CEO and served on his holding company’s Board. We estimate CEO Siebel and CTO Abbo have sold of$640 million C3.ai stock at advantageous prices in the$60 s, while C3.ai’s share price languishes40% below its IPO price.
-
We conservatively estimate
40% -50% downside risk to C3.ai’s share price. Despite C3.ai’s abysmal post-IPO performance, analysts are still split on the Company's outlook, with nearly half saying “Buy” and one analyst dangling a price target of more than per share (the current average price target is$100 per share). Retail investors appear to be the biggest shareholders being baited by these optimistic targets. We cannot find a single AI thematic ETF that holds$53.50 C3.ai as a top 10 position in its fund. We valueC3.ai as a run-off of its existingBaker Hughes revenue commitments and believe the partnership will cease to exist in FY '25 at best – or at worst, be modified with even lower revenue or canceled prior to FY '25. We build in additional cash burn over the next 12 months and additional stock dilution. We adjust C3.ai’s balance sheet for newly created operating lease commitments and cash liabilities to theDigital Transformation Institute . We believe the stock has40% –50% downside risk over the next 12 months. As an additional reference point, we note that C3.ai’s recently departed CFO forfeited options to buy more than 900,000 shares at per share –$17.10 30% lower than the Company's current price – which had an intrinsic value of approximately when he resigned.$20 million
***
Please note that the items summarized in this press release are expanded upon and supported with data, public filings and records, and images in Spruce Point’s full report. As a reminder, our full report, along with its investment disclaimers, can be downloaded and viewed at www.SprucePointCap.com.
As disclosed, Spruce Point has a short position in
About Spruce Point
View source version on businesswire.com: https://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20220216005507/en/
doliver@sprucepointcap.com
(914) 999-2019
Source:
FAQ
What is the downside risk for C3.ai (AI) according to Spruce Point?
How much revenue does C3.ai (AI) generate from Baker Hughes?
What financial issues has Spruce Point identified in C3.ai (AI)?
What governance concerns are associated with C3.ai (AI)?