Filing Flows › Companies › MSG Knickerbockers › Analysis traps
MSG Knickerbockers (MSGK): analysis traps
Where its figures could mislead a reader, and what to check before taking them at face value · Data: Q1 FY27, to Sep 30, 2026, filed Nov 6, 2026; rules v1.1
MSG Knickerbockers (MSGK): 0 rules of 10 triggered on the filings to Sep 30, 2026. 1 to review; 3 with insufficient data; 3 not applicable. Each is a question to verify, with the normal explanation that would produce the same figures.
Check these first
A precise DCF value = the true value To review · confidence high
The DCF's point value is 10.62 a share (price 396.10); 81% of it is the terminal value, a number about years no one has seen. Moving operating margin by ±3 pts alone takes it from -9.19 to 28.80; across every method the research ran the range is -193 to 584. The value is a range; the decimals are not information.
Innocent reading: A stable, mature business with a narrow range of outcomes, where the point value is a fair summary.
Every rule
A01 FCF growth = the business improved Not triggered confidence high
Free cash flow did not rise ($88M → $61M): the trap does not arise.
The figures and how they are read
| Fiscal year before | FY25 |
| Fiscal year | FY26 |
| Operating cash flow, year before | $92M |
| Operating cash flow | $63M |
| Capex, year before | $4M |
| Capex | $1M |
| Free cash flow, year before | $88M |
| Free cash flow | $61M |
| Change in FCF | −$27M |
| Change in capex | −$2M |
| Working capital: change in its cash contribution | −$42M |
FCF = operating cash flow − cash capex; ΔFCF = ΔOCF − ΔCapEx; the working-capital part is the change in the cash-bridge items (receivables, inventory, payables, accruals), with the sign of the cash flow statement
Source: FY26 (cash flow statement, fiscal year) · FY25 (cash flow statement, fiscal year before)
A07 Stock compensation added back = no economic cost Not triggered confidence high
Stock compensation is 1.9% of revenue: small enough that adding it back changes little.
The figures and how they are read
| Fiscal year | FY26 |
| Stock compensation | $22M |
| Revenue | $1.2B |
| SBC / revenue | +1.9% |
| Buybacks | 0 |
| Buybacks / SBC | 0.0 |
| Diluted shares, year before | 24.1M shares |
| Diluted shares | 24.3M shares |
| Diluted shares: change | +0.7% |
SBC / revenue from the cash flow statement's add-back; the diluted weighted share count year over year; buybacks from the financing section
Source: FY26 (stock compensation, buybacks and the diluted share count, fiscal year)
B02 Receivables growing = future cash is certain Insufficient data
fewer than five quarters with receivables and revenue on file (a year-over-year comparison needs five)
B08 Adjusted profit = economic profit Insufficient data
no reconciliation table read from the releases yet and fewer than three quarters with both an adjusted and a GAAP EPS
C02 Low net debt = no refinancing risk Insufficient data
neither a maturity table nor the current portion of debt is on file
D03 EPS growth = profit growth Not applicable
a loss in one of the quarters: EPS growth has no meaning
E02 Low P/E at a cyclical peak = undervalued Not triggered confidence medium
Net income of $8M is not at a cyclical high against the last eight years (median $11M, best $59M): the P/E of 1233.7× is on a normal year.
The figures and how they are read
| market value | $9.6B |
| net income ttm | $8M |
| pe ttm | 1,233.70 |
| net income median fy | $11M |
| pe mid cycle | 837.70 |
| net income peak fy | $59M |
| years | FY19 / 11.0; FY20 / -182.0; FY21 / -14.0; FY22 / 51.0; FY23 / 48.0; FY24 / 59.0; FY25 / -22.0; FY26 / 8.0 |
| down years in window | 3 |
P/E on the trailing twelve months' net income against the P/E on the median net income of the last eight fiscal years (a mid-cycle stand-in); 'at a peak' = this year's profit at or above 90% of the best year and at least 1.3× the median
Source: Q1 FY27 (net income, trailing twelve months)
E07 A precise DCF value = the true value To review confidence high
The DCF's point value is 10.62 a share (price 396.10); 81% of it is the terminal value, a number about years no one has seen. Moving operating margin by ±3 pts alone takes it from -9.19 to 28.80; across every method the research ran the range is -193 to 584. The value is a range; the decimals are not information.
The figures and how they are read
| dcf value | 10.62 |
| price | 396.10 |
| terminal value share | +81.2% |
| swing by input | Operating margin / ±3 pts / -9.19 / 28.8; WACC / ±1 pt / 8.44 / 13.71; Capex (share of revenue) / ±1 pt / 8.19 / 13.04; Revenue growth (each year) / ±5 pts / 8.83 / 12.74 |
| range all methods | -193.33; 584.0 |
the DCF's point value against the share of it that is the terminal value and the value at each input moved by one step (growth ±5 pts, WACC ±1 pt, margin ±3 pts …); the range across every method the research ran
Source: 2026-11-06 (valuation research)
What would explain it innocently
- A stable, mature business with a narrow range of outcomes, where the point value is a fair summary
- The inputs that matter most are themselves well known (a regulated return, a long contract)
What to look for in the filing
- Which input you believe differs from the research's and why
- What the price implies for growth (the reverse DCF on the fair-value page)
What would show the trap does not apply
- The DCF's value is robust to the terminal growth and discount rate (the range's low end is still above the price)
- The company's cash flows over the next three years track the DCF's early years
Look again: next filing.
J06 A bank's low P/E and high profit = safe Not applicable
not a bank
J08 A REIT's low net income = the dividend is unsafe Not applicable
not a REIT
What the statuses mean
Triggered: the filings show the pattern; read the normal explanations and the missing evidence before concluding anything. To review: one quarter or a weak signal; a reader's judgement, not a pattern. Not triggered: the pattern is absent on these figures. Insufficient data: the filings read so far do not hold what the rule needs; this is not a clean bill. Not applicable: the rule is not meant for this kind of company (a bank's working capital, a loss-making quarter's EPS growth). Out of date: the latest filing is more than fifteen months old.
Severity is what the pattern could mean for cash, value or solvency; confidence is how reliable the inputs and the reading are. The two are kept apart.
Record a view
A reader's judgement, grounds, what would change it and the next review; kept in the browser (needs JavaScript).
Every rule and the companies it triggers on → MSG Knickerbockers: cash flow →
Each rule reads the company's own filings by a fixed formula and says what would explain the same figures innocently. A triggered rule is a question to verify, not a finding of manipulation, and not a view on the stock. Missing data is shown as missing, never as clear. Not investment advice.