Please ensure Javascript is enabled for purposes of website accessibility

Why You Should Watch This Payments Company

By Brian Feroldi – Updated Jun 17, 2020 at 3:27PM

You’re reading a free article with opinions that may differ from The Motley Fool’s Premium Investing Services. Become a Motley Fool member today to get instant access to our top analyst recommendations, in-depth research, investing resources, and more. Learn More

Its focused approach to payments is what differentiates it from other players in the space.

In this episode of Industry Focus: Tech, Dylan Lewis chats with Motley Fool contributor Brian Feroldi about a recent IPO of a little-known company focused on the integrated payments space. Get a breakdown of their business model, balance sheet, etc. Find out about their revenue, future growth prospects, and much more.

To catch full episodes of all The Motley Fool's free podcasts, check out our podcast center. To get started investing, check out our quick-start guide to investing in stocks. A full transcript follows the video.

This video was recorded on June 12, 2020.

Dylan Lewis: It's Friday, June 12th, and we're talking about an IPO. I am your host Dylan Lewis, and I'm joined by's distinguished grandmaster of errors grammatical, Brian Feroldi. [laughs] Oh, that's a good one; that's a really good one. You're outdoing yourself, Brian. [laughs]

Brian Feroldi: Thank you. It's true. I am the grandmaster [laughs] of errors grammatical at The Fool, as my editors will attest.

Lewis: Yeah, I was going to say, having looked at these shared outlines that we do a lot, Brian is aptly named TMFTypeoh with his Fool username. [laughs]

Feroldi: Not so good with the words and the arranging of the letters in the right order, Dylan. [laughs]

Lewis: Hey! You just have to say them when we're doing the podcast, you don't have to type them, that's the beauty of it.

Feroldi: That's right.

Lewis: Brian, we get the thrill of doing an S-1 show. We get to talk about a company going public. Amidst everything that's going on, companies are still going public, that's pretty great.

Feroldi: Amazing, right. The IPO markets are still open. And we actually have a pretty exciting company to talk about today or at least one that caught my attention, because it has the name "payments" in there, and I'm a huge fan of anything that has to do anything with the payments industry. So, whenever I see that word, I always think the company is worth a look.

Lewis: Yeah, I mean, Jason Moser is known for the War on Cash basket. He is the one who coined the name and he is the one who, you know, decided to really institutionalize it within The Fool. That said, a lot of us like the payments space, and I own a couple of those War on Cash companies, I don't own the whole basket. We are getting to this before he did though, so maybe we'll be able to claim this company as a tech show company. We're going to be talking about Shift4 Payments (FOUR -2.81%), and the ticker for that is FOUR, nice and simple. Brian, what's the background on this business?

Feroldi: So, this is a company that is in the fintech land, it was founded in 1999. So, it's actually been around for 21 years now. So, they just came public on June 5th, so just a few days ago, and their market cap is about $2.5 billion. And one of the things that I always check with any company I'm investing in is their mission statement, because that kind of tells you what they're trying to do. So, Shift4's mission statement is "To power the convergence of integrated payments and commerce-enabling software." That's kind of a mouthful, it's not the best mission statement I've ever seen, but if you're looking for an easy comparison, this company is very similar to Square, very similar business model to Square, except for they are more focused on the hospitality segment: restaurants, lodging, leisure. And I had actually never heard of this company prior to them coming public, but they're much bigger than I would have assumed based on their number. So, this is actually a business with 200,000 customers, including companies like Caesars, Pebble Beach and 21,000 other hotels and 125,000 restaurants. So, quite sizable.

Lewis: Yeah, I was kind of impressed with the number of names that use them. I think they power the online reservations for Hilton Worldwide as well, like, there are a lot of really big players in the hospitality space that they are partnered up with. And the pitch that they offer, you know, to kind of go back to that mission statement for a second is, to be Square in terms of the end-to-end payments and making it really simple for people to have transactions, but also to kind of work across various systems that might exist within one of these locations.

And I was kind of scratching my head a bit when I saw that they were so narrowly focused on hospitality. And the example that I saw is, you might see a resort where they have the core hotel resort, you know, kind of like office area where you'd check-in, but then they also have their golf club area and they also have this retail gift shop type thing, and ideally, you have one central system that's able to monitor all of that and give people one check. That's the value prop that they're bringing to this space, and I think that's why they've tended to focus on what we might consider to be a little bit of a niche industry.

Feroldi: Yeah. And sometimes it can make sense to have a focus like this, if you can really become known as the go-to place for a specific industry vertical, like restaurants or hospitality, for example. That gives you a core base to grow from and to dominate and then to expand outward from there. And that's exactly what we're seeing from this company. And they do offer the point-of-sale products themselves, which make it easy for customers to pay at the register or even at the booth, they also offer a suite of backend services that allow restaurants and hotels to get details on reports, analytics on their customer spending to manage their social media campaigns online, and they can just act as purely a third-party payment processor. So, any business that really needs help or wants assistance with digital payments, credit cards, debit cards, mobile payments, Shift4 is a company that can do that.

Lewis: To your point earlier, Brian, bigger numbers than I might have expected coming from this company, especially because it had, kind of, flown under the radar, 3.5 billion transactions last year, and over $200 billion in annual payment volume using a variety of different payment methods, that's pretty impressive.

Feroldi: Yes, it's very impressive. And as I said, it was surprising to me that I've not heard of this company before as well. And just to break down their business model a little further. So, about 57% of their revenue comes from merchants and payment fees. They do have 27% of their revenue coming from subscription fees, so that is licensing the point-of-sale products and the software. And then they also get transaction fees, just the third parties, that's about 15% of the total. So, a nice diversified business -- and, Dylan, you know I'm going to say it -- lots and lots of recurring revenue.

Lewis: [laughs] That's what you love to see, right? And I think in this case, in particular, we talk about why software is just so sticky, period. If you are the enterprise provider and you are able to get in and handle someone's accounting systems, handle someone's CRM approach, what have you, it becomes really difficult to dislodge as a business and have someone else come in and take over those things, because you wind up getting embedded more and more in the business, especially if it's a multi-year type thing.

While the recurring elements in some of these other, kind of, services that they're layering in are part of the story, the bread-and-butter here is going to be what they're collecting on those merchant and payment fees, that's the lion's share of the revenue for this company right now. But, you know, this is a sticky model, we've seen it work before, no reason to say it couldn't work again.

Feroldi: Exactly. And so, Shift4 just came public. They sold shares for $23 and they ended up raising $324 million. The share price immediately popped from there, it's currently in the $30s. So, they left a whole bunch of money on the table, as we've seen [laughs] numerous times from companies, but that's a good chunk of money that they built in. The troubling thing is what they were doing with that money. So, this wasn't a company where all that money immediately went into their bank account and then they were just flush with cash, they actually used the bulk of the proceeds to pay down debt.

So, this company was pretty heavily indebted prior to the IPO, and they're still pretty heavily indebted. So, when I look at their balance sheet, I see $194 million in cash, that's good, but $523 million in debt. And that's after paying off a big chunk of it from the IPO. So, the company has been fairly aggressive with its use of debt to make a number of acquisitions since its founding to kind of build out its suite. So, not the best balance sheet we've ever seen, Dylan.

Lewis: No. And for folks that have heard Brian give his rundown before, typically we like to see cash be in excess of that debt, we like to see a net cash position, just because it allows a business to be a little bit more nimble. If you owe money you got to pay it, [laughs] otherwise things start going pretty poorly for you. And it's not crazy for them to be in a position where they're taking on debt; I wish that they had more cash to cover it, but this is a business in growth mode, they're investing heavily, I just wish that debt wasn't such a large part of how they're financing everything.

Feroldi: Yeah, and you can't necessarily blame them. I think in their minds, they're like, "Well, we have a really sticky business model," which we'll get into, they certainly do, that "Our revenue is dependable, our revenue is growing, we can afford to, kind of, take on some leverage." Of course, that becomes a big burden when there's downturns such as the one we're in right now, for example. So, I was glad to see that they used a big chunk of this to pay down their debt and, kind of, right-size their balance sheet, but not a perfect start.

However, once you go further down to the other financial statements, the story gets a little bit prettier. So, in 2019, this company reported revenue growth of 30% to $731 million, that's a really nice number. Adjusted EBITDA, which is a metric that has a whole bunch of asterisks in it, but adjusted EBITDA was $104 million. On the bottom line, the company is losing money, about $58 million, that was up over the prior year, but on a cash flow basis, they're pretty darn close to cash flow breakeven.

One thing that I was surprised at, though, when I looked at this company's income statement, much lower gross margins than I would have expected. Gross margin here is only 24%, and that's because they pay a huge amount of their revenue to network fees and they are partners with some of the biggest networks in the world. So, Visa, MasterCard, etc.

Their subscription margin is much higher, but again, a good comparison here, I think, is Square. Square has a gross margin of 39%. Again, Shift4, only 24%.

Lewis: Yeah, I thought that was really interesting too, Brian. Because you hear "payments" and you're like, alright, we're going to be talking about somewhere in the 30s at least on a gross margin basis. These are highly scalable businesses. And once they take off, they really take off. The network effects can be really strong, that can be really sticky if they're part of the core business and how they do things.

I did look back, because I was curious, I did the comp and I looked at Square and I looked at PayPal recently, but I went back and looked at where Square was around 2012-2013, and they were hovering somewhere in the mid-20s with their gross margin. So, as Square scaled, they wound up being able to enjoy more operating leverage, and those margins started to improve pretty dramatically.

The reason, maybe, we didn't realize that was because they went public with margins in the 30s. [laughs] They waited until those numbers got a little bit rosier before they wound up deciding to go into the public markets and be, kind of, split out as its own business. So, it's not crazy that they're this low, I'm just a little surprised that they decided to go public with them being where they are, given the space that they're in.

Feroldi: Yeah. And if they can match Square's trajectory of steadily increasing their margins over time, I mean, they have a lot of revenue given their size. So, it's just worth noting. So, if you're going to make an apples-to-apples comparison here, it's worth noting that it's a different gross margin profile today than it is for Square, and because of that, you have to be a little bit more careful with the metric like the price-to-sales ratio, which is what we see for a lot of high growth businesses like this. So, Shift4 has a much lower price-to-sales ratio, even after this pop, it's somewhere below four. Which, if that was the only thing you knew, you'd be like, wow! That's a super-low number, but when you look at the gross margin, it makes sense why.

Lewis: Yeah. And you know, it might be something where they're able to enjoy expanding gross margins down the road for a variety of reasons. You know, as you get bigger a lot of these businesses scale really well, but they also might be in a position where they can get more favorable terms with some of these network fees and some of the card operators that they work with.

So, scale helps for a variety of reasons, it certainly helps when you're at the negotiating table and you're talking about the amount of business that you're going to drive to somebody's network. [laughs]

Feroldi: Yeah, totally. But on the flip-side, their financial statements are pretty good or the financial statements are OK, not the most impressive that we've ever seen, but I think this company actually has a pretty strong moat. As we've seen with payment processors, Dylan, once you get your foot in the door and you become a part of that business, it's awfully hard to get kicked out.

So, a couple of moats here. So, they have direct relationships with the largest payment processors on Earth and they accept payments on over a hundred different devices. When they sign up a new customer, they sign them to a multi-year contract that keeps them very loyal. They have 350 integrations with different software suites, so their software is built right into a whole bunch of different CRM and other SaaS products, and they have over 7,000 different software partners. So, to me, you add all that together, I think this company has a pretty wide moat.

Lewis: Yeah, I agree with you. This is a great space to be in. And if it works, and this might be a situation where they're able to serve a niche really well in a way that a larger provider could be maybe a B- solution and they're able to be a B+/A- solution. And rather than try to compete broadly in a category of all payments, they're able to be something that's more tailored and more directly addresses people's needs, which makes them even stickier in a niche. The focus that they have in that hospitality market is, both, I think an opportunity for them and kind of a moat for them, but also a huge risk.

Feroldi: Yeah. I don't know if you can guess this, but hospitality companies, kind of not doing great right now. They did call this out in their S-1 that COVID-19 has kind of put a big damper on their business. They throw some numbers around that. In the middle of February, they were doing about 30 million transactions per week on their network. One month later that dropped to 7 million. So, they went from 30 million to 7 million in a very short period of time. It's been climbing back since then, or we've seen parts of the country start to reopen, and they have noticed that they've doubled from the bottom, but they're still below their previous highs.

Now, the company has taken a number of actions to kind of offset that weakness, they increase their debt, unfortunately, to kind of build up their cash position, they instituted a hiring freeze, they furloughed 25% of their employees, they also adjusted their product so that it could be repurposed for curbside pickup, which is nice to see that they are helping their restaurant partners to get some revenue in the door. But, yeah, so no doubt COVID-19 has hit their customer base very hard, they have made the adjustments though, to make sure that their head is above water.

Lewis: Yeah. And there's some fun stuff going out the window, I don't know if you can hear the sirens [laughs] going by my house, Brian. There are some interesting growth levers for this business, I think, because of the size. So, what makes them a business that you worry that they get squashed is also something where, if they're able to bring a lot of customers on, they're still kind of in that sweet spot in terms of market cap where they could multiply a couple of times over and still not outgrow this very specific category that they're operating within.

Feroldi: Yeah, again, a $2.5 billion market cap, and I for one, I'm not worried about them getting squashed at all. If they were going to get squashed, it would have been sometime during the last 21 years that that would have happened. The company has clearly been able to survive a huge onslaught of competition and grow, grow, grow throughout that period. So, that wouldn't concern me.

And to your point, this company also could make a nice tuck-in acquisition for one of these big payment providers down the road, perhaps even a Square at some point. But obviously, that's not the thesis you want to have when you're going in.

Lewis: No. And given that Square wound up getting rid of Caviar, I don't really know where they stand right now in the restaurant industry. But I also think what's kind of interesting about this business is, because they are very industry focused, they probably have an advantage in rolling other software into their offerings in a way that a lot of other businesses might, they don't enjoy the same scale, but they enjoy specificity and that might be able to help both with stickiness and their ability to upsell customers.

Feroldi: Well, again, one way to think about this for comparison would be a company like Veeva Systems. So, Veeva Systems is a CRM that was hyper-focused on the lifestyle industry and they really dominated in that specific category, and overtime their strategy has shifted to continue to dominate there but branch out into new areas. And management has called that out as very much their plan. So, right now they are very well focused on hospitality, but they plan on opening this up to other industry verticals down the road.

They basically said, our growth strategy is to sign up more customers, introduce new products, upsell, make occasional acquisitions ourselves, and then expand internationally. But the opportunity here is still massive. I mean, we called out $200 billion in payment processing, that's a big number. However, the payment volume in the U.S. alone is expected to be $10 trillion by 2027, so there is still plenty of room for this company to grow.

Lewis: I always, like, get taken aback a little bit by those huge TAM numbers that get [laughs] thrown out there. And, you know, you have to apply your healthy discounts to those, but they still do a really good job of painting a picture of a lot of greenfield ahead.

I think one of the things that we may be glossed over with this business is the origin story, which is really fun and kind of different than maybe what you'd expect. You know, we tend to think of a lot of the payment players -- you know, like, Dorsey is a well-known guy, like, we know the backstory with PayPal mafia, it's very kind of established at this point and part of investing lore. Somehow, we glazed over the fact that [laughs] the CEO of this company started the business when he was in his teens.

Feroldi: He was 16 years old when he started this business in his parents' basement. I mean, clap for him, right? I mean, talk about having the guts to say, "I'm 16, I'm going to start a payments business in the hospitality suite," but that's exactly what he did, and his name is Jared Isaacman, he is still the CEO to this day. And after the IPO, he still owns about 12% of the stock. So, certainly something that we love to see as Foolish investors. We love it when founders are calling the shots, and that's exactly what we have with this business.

Lewis: Yeah, and not only Founders, but I think Jared Isaacman is kind of a very self-aware leader. He's just made some interesting comments about compensation. I love that he has that over 10% equity stake in the business, clearly has skin in the game. The fact that he's been with the business for two decades at this point and hasn't gone anywhere, shows that this is his baby. But I like the way that he approaches his base salary too.

Feroldi: Yeah. He's basically said that he wants to be paid the same base salary as an entry-level manager at his business. And he said that his compensation is going to be entirely up onto the Board's Compensation Committee, of which he is not a member. And with a 12% ownership stake, you know, again, this is a $2.5 billion company, that's worth $300 million or so. So, he's doing OK for himself. But clearly, he is lashed to the mast here, and for him to do well Shift4 investors, outside investors are going to have to do well.

And, Dylan, one thing that we always check with companies like this is, what do employees think, right? As an outsider, we love to see a founder at the helm. So, overall, I would say, OK results. So, 3.6 stars out of 5 on Glassdoor, and a 72% CEO approval rating. I would list those as OK, not great, not the worst we've ever seen, so middle of the road.

Lewis: Yeah. And for a business this size, I think the CEO can really have an outsized impact on the outcomes of the company. You know, when you get into these larger tech mega-caps, you know, like, Mark Zuckerberg is definitely calling the shots at Facebook, but the platform takes over at a certain point, you can only exert so much control if you're a $100 billion business.

When you are talking about that [laughs] $2.5 billion valuation, the CEO is going to wield a lot more control over the direction of that company. And so, you got to be invested alongside the CEO, otherwise you're going to have a bad time.

Feroldi: And not only that, this is a company that has a dual share class structure. So, while outside investors will own a sizable amount of the company itself, the CEO has 10 times the voting power of outside shareholders. So, just know that going in, your vote doesn't matter, you are basically along for the ride with whatever Jared Isaacman wants and also the venture capital firm that's taken this company public. Searchlight has been an investor in this company for years. They also have super majority stock, so just know that ahead of time, you're along for the ride and you basically have no say.

Lewis: So, Brian, we've done a lot of shows together where we have taken a company and put it through your ringer, going through either the S-1 checklist or your standard stock checklist. I'm sure listeners are wondering -- where does this one rank, taking all these different factors that we've talked about into consideration?

Feroldi: Yeah, overall, there's positives and negatives here in my opinion. So, I definitely like the business, I definitely like the moat, I definitely like the opportunity and I love that it's run by a founder. Those are all wonderful things.

On the flip-side, I'm not exactly thrilled with the growth-by-acquisition strategy. I think that the balance sheet is ugly, the gross margin is low, and let's not forget that competitors in this space include Fiserv, Global Payments Network, Worldpay, Adyen, Lightspeed, Shopify, Square. So, it's not like they have this market all to themselves.

So, overall, I would say this is an interesting business, I'm glad we know about it, but it wouldn't be a high enough conviction for me to want to rush out and buy this, but what do you think, Dylan?

Lewis: Yeah, I'm kind of with you. I mean, I think there are probably easier ways to play payments where you won't lose nearly as much sleep watching the business. I'm always someone who likes to look a couple quarters before buying anything that goes public. What I do think is really interesting is, they don't have a lot of customer concentration in a financial sense. So, no one customer makes up more than 1% of Shift4's end-to-end payment volume for the last fiscal year that they reported, which is impressive. And usually that's something, if we're talking about a business that's sub $3 billion or $4 billion, you're probably going to run into some customer concentration risk, it's awesome that they don't have to deal with that, at least in the payment volume side.

On the flip-side they are totally overweight to the hospitality industry. And so, if anything disrupts hospitality, if anything disrupts consumer spending, they are going to have a huge hit to their business. I think, for me, I would rather play payments with some of the easier, more broad-based businesses that have their networks built out, but I have to think that this is a watchlist business for 2020. Maybe not necessarily investing on the watchlist right away, but certainly one where, you know, this could be an up-and-comer in the payments space.

Feroldi: Yeah. I think that that's completely fair. And like you, I'm not one to just jump in on day one. We know that cultures change, it's different being a public company than it is being a private company. I want to give this company a couple of quarters to see how they perform. Are they living up to Wall Street's expectations, are they a be-in-race kind of culture, does the culture take a turn for the worse now that they have a number over their hem? Those are all unknowns at this point, so I do think that there is a thesis here that is worth getting to know. And, boy! If that top line continues to grow and they have gross margin expansion, that could lead to some wonderful things for investors from here, but for now it's firmly on my watchlist, not my buy list.

Lewis: I think the key takeaway for investors, and you hit on this earlier, and I want to kind of harp on this with Shift4 is, do not be fooled by the valuation. It is very easy to look at something that goes public and isn't at 10 times, or 20 times, or 30 times, or 40 times sales, we've gotten so accustomed to that in the tech space because of the way that these platforms scale so easily. You have to look at the margin profile for this business, and then back that into what we're looking at with valuation, it looks really attractive on a price-to-sales basis and you just need to make sure you're understanding those inputs.

Feroldi: Yeah, for sure. So, I'm glad we know more about this company today and I look forward to following it for years to come.

Lewis: That's the beauty of it, you know, sometimes we can just talk about a business, [laughs] we don't need to invest in it, Brian.

Feroldi: That's right.

Lewis: Before we wrap up, I did want to circle back to a story that we had talked about a couple of weeks ago. And it's crazy, Brian, my brain is in ultimate time-warp mode. Not even a month ago, we did a show talking about the rumors that Uber was going to be buying meal delivery company Grubhub. Seemed like the two sides were interested, they could not agree on a price. And that quarrel became Just Eat's opportunity.

Brian, have you ever heard of Just Eat [laughs]

Feroldi: Not until I read the press release saying that they were going to be [laughs] buying Grubhub for $7.8 billion. So, no, had you?

Lewis: No. And actually, if you were in a time machine and you went back to 2018 or I think even earlier in 2019, there was no Just Eat Takeaway. That business is the result of a merger where bought Just Eat for just under $8 billion. And when we did the show talking about Uber and Grubhub, we talked about how this space is just right for consolidation. It seems like the only way where people are going to really make money is when the players start to consolidate and they're actually able to charge true margins for what it costs to be able to run these types of businesses.

The consolidation happened; it just wasn't the business we thought was going to do it.

Feroldi: Yeah, exactly. So, Grubhub is getting taken out for $7.8 billion, that values the stock at $75.15 per share, depending on when you bought this thing, you might be happy, you might be really upset. So, that's nowhere near their all-time high, but it is up substantially from their low. Again, Grubhub was a stock that I owned for a few years, there was a lot to like about it. I just got the moat wrong, I thought this was a business that had a very wide moat, and I think it's very clear that the industry was far more competitive than I thought. So, no surprise to see massive consolidation taking place here. I'm guessing we're going to end up with one or maybe two of these things in the long-term, but, hey, if you're a short-term shareholder of Grubhub, you've done OK.

Lewis: Well, you know, [laughs] Brian, I think with moats, maybe the lesson here is that a lot of moats can stand up to regular market conditions, a lot of moats will crumble if venture cap money just gets thrown at that market [laughs] over and over and over again. And that's what has happened a lot in the meal delivery space.

What I think is kind of neat about this deal is that this is a geography play. We hadn't heard of or Just Eat because they don't really operate in the U.S. They are providing deliveries in Europe, Australia, Israel, New Zealand, Canada, Mexico, Brazil, so a lot of markets that we don't tend to focus on as much. Grubhub actually gives this combined business access to the U.S. markets, and it'll be kind of interesting to see what they do, because a lot of the focus for the consolidated company has been more on, actually kind of similar to what we were talking about with Shift4, where they are providing the software and infrastructure in order to allow companies to accept deliveries and kind of build out those operations as part of their restaurant operations.

A little different than what Grubhub has done where they've kind of created websites and digital presences, but focused a little bit less on the logistics, aside from having the person who is handling it. So, it seems more to me like, what Just Eat Takeaway does is more empowering the restaurants whereas what Grubhub does is handling all of the logistics and kind of hiving it off very hard. I don't know if I have that read correct, though.

Feroldi: Yeah, that's my read too, but you know, [laughs] Grubhub is going to be or this other company's problem [laughs] Just Eat Takeaway's problem from here. So, it doesn't really matter for [laughs] shareholders much anymore. So, again, congrats if you bought Grubhub in the last couple of months, you've done pretty well. The longer-term picture isn't as pretty, but it is interesting to see another founder-led business gets taken off the market.

Lewis: Another one. And don't worry, folks, the pre-acquisition of Just Eat business was also not profitable, so it's not like people are making money in other parts of the world on this business model. I think everyone is trying to figure out how to make meal deliveries work and turn it into a viable business, not only for the folks who are doing the actual meal delivery side of things, but also the restaurants as well, because the model does not work unless everyone's making money.

Feroldi: I think that's an excellent point here. From what I've seen, Grubhub has essentially become the Ticketmaster of the industry, [laughs] where restaurants are getting nickeled-and-dimed the entire way and it's really hard for them to make money. So, it doesn't sound like an ideal situation, so no surprise to see Grubhub saying, we give up. [laughs]

Lewis: Yeah, I can understand that. They've caught a lot of ire recently with COVID, deservedly so. They have some things that I'm not a particularly large fan of, and this was a stock that, like you, a couple of years ago, I was kind of interested in. And as I grew to know more about their business and some of the things they were doing, especially over the last year and a half or so due to some really awesome reporting that was out there, I started, kind of, having a bad feeling in my stomach with what they were doing.

So, hopefully they operate better under the Just Eat umbrella. You know, another fun space for us to watch. We've got homework, I think, from this episode, if nothing else, Brian, two spaces that we can be paying more attention to.

Feroldi: You know, we love doing homework here, Dylan. [laughs]

Lewis: [laughs] That's our favorite. Well, Brian, I'm always happy to do homework with you. Thanks so much for hopping on today's show.

Feroldi: Another fun one. Thanks for having me, Dylan.

Lewis: Listeners, that's going to do it for this episode of Industry Focus. If you have any questions or you want to reach out and say, "Hey!" shoot us an email over at [email protected] or tweet us @MFIndustryFocus. If you want more stuff, subscribe on iTunes or wherever you get your podcasts.

As always, people on the program may own companies discussed on the show, and The Motley Fool may have formal recommendations for or against stocks mentioned, so don't buy or sell anything based solely on what you hear.

Thanks to Heather Horton for all her help behind the glass today. For Brian Feroldi, I'm Dylan Lewis, thanks for listening and Fool on!

Randi Zuckerberg, a former director of market development and spokeswoman for Facebook and sister to its CEO, Mark Zuckerberg, is a member of The Motley Fool's board of directors. Brian Feroldi owns shares of Facebook, Mastercard, PayPal Holdings, Square, and Visa. Dylan Lewis owns shares of Facebook, PayPal Holdings, and Square. The Motley Fool owns shares of and recommends Facebook, Mastercard, PayPal Holdings, Square, Veeva Systems, and Visa. The Motley Fool recommends Uber Technologies and recommends the following options: short September 2020 $70 puts on Square and long January 2022 $75 calls on PayPal Holdings. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy.

Invest Smarter with The Motley Fool

Join Over 1 Million Premium Members Receiving…

  • New Stock Picks Each Month
  • Detailed Analysis of Companies
  • Model Portfolios
  • Live Streaming During Market Hours
  • And Much More
Get Started Now

Stocks Mentioned

Shift4 Payments, Inc. Stock Quote
Shift4 Payments, Inc.
$43.98 (-2.81%) $-1.27
Meta Platforms, Inc. Stock Quote
Meta Platforms, Inc.
$140.41 (-1.69%) $-2.41
Visa Inc. Stock Quote
Visa Inc.
$183.96 (-0.98%) $-1.83
Mastercard Incorporated Stock Quote
Mastercard Incorporated
$293.58 (-1.60%) $-4.78
Global Payments Inc. Stock Quote
Global Payments Inc.
$115.04 (-0.90%) $-1.05
Caesars Entertainment Corporation Stock Quote
Caesars Entertainment Corporation
Fiserv, Inc. Stock Quote
Fiserv, Inc.
$97.95 (-0.62%) $0.61
Hilton Worldwide Holdings Inc. Stock Quote
Hilton Worldwide Holdings Inc.
$118.33 (-0.91%) $-1.09
GrubHub Inc. Stock Quote
GrubHub Inc.
Veeva Systems Inc. Stock Quote
Veeva Systems Inc.
$162.57 (-0.19%) $0.31
Uber Technologies, Inc. Stock Quote
Uber Technologies, Inc.
$27.82 (-2.66%) $0.76
PayPal Holdings, Inc. Stock Quote
PayPal Holdings, Inc.
$86.97 (-0.79%) $0.69
Block, Inc. Stock Quote
Block, Inc.
$56.27 (0.61%) $0.34

*Average returns of all recommendations since inception. Cost basis and return based on previous market day close.

Related Articles

Motley Fool Returns

Motley Fool Stock Advisor

Market-beating stocks from our award-winning analyst team.

Stock Advisor Returns
S&P 500 Returns

Calculated by average return of all stock recommendations since inception of the Stock Advisor service in February of 2002. Returns as of 09/24/2022.

Discounted offers are only available to new members. Stock Advisor list price is $199 per year.

Premium Investing Services

Invest better with The Motley Fool. Get stock recommendations, portfolio guidance, and more from The Motley Fool's premium services.