Advance payments and valuation of a firm

Hi - we have following discussion among partners

You have a Company A with
ENV = 50 (= ENterprise Value)
C = 10
D (bank) = 15
EQV = 50 + 10 - 15 = 45 (=EQuity Value)

Now the owner of company A has learned something about finance and does a smart move: she/he makes her/his customers pay advance payments and does that consistently. That way a permanent cash excess is being created of 5, bringing the cashlevel to 10+5 = 15.
New situation of company A
ENV = 50
C = 10 + 5 = 15
D (bank) = 15
Advance payments from customers = 5

Hypothesis 1 : EQV = 50 + 15 - 15 = 50. Here the advance payments are not deducted from the ENV because they represent a permanent operating financing that is continuously renewed, each time a new customer is paying an advance, replacing an "old" customer. Moreover advance payments do not have to be repaid, provided the products/services are actually delivered. The free cashflow advance payments provide stays within the company. This delivers an excess cash that could be paid out to shareholders and hence increases the equity value of company A from 45 to 50.

Hypothesis 2 : EQV = 50 + 15 - 15 - 5 = 45. Here the advance payments are deducted. The reasoning is that a company cannot add EQV by obtaining permanent free financing from its customers, permanently increasing its (extra) cash level. Therefore the debt of the advance payments should be deducted from the extra cash the advance payments create.

Could someone provide us the answer?

Winsight

 
Most Helpful

You're using a faulty premise in each of your hypotheses that ENV would be unchanged by a permanent reduction in working capital. And you should look at ENV as a function of EQV, not the other way around.

Market value of equity is increased, but by how much is complicated.

Assume the extra $5 is immediately paid as a dividend to equity holders. Through a DCF lens, this would be +$5 at t=0, so an immediate increase of exactly $5. However, this is now a slightly riskier business than it was before, because it has a $5 increase in working capital liabilities. In theory, this could impact its borrowing rate on existing debt and/or slightly increase the discount rate used for its valuation, which would slightly offset the $5 increase in valuation. In practice, that offset might be negligible.

Or you could assume the extra $5 was used to pay down debt. This would mean no immediate cash impact for equity holders, but reduced interest payments going forward. Again, increase in value to shareholders, but can't say exactly how much.

The only scenario where equity value wouldn't change is if management kept this "excess" cash on the balance sheet without returning it to shareholders, paying down debt, or investing it in growth (which also creates value). Leaving it on the balance sheet implies its not "excess" cash at all, so it's still essentially working capital.

Short answer: EQV increases to

 

Jesus. Slow down, Cowboy.

  • Sure, there are plenty of times where it's useful to arrive at equity value after arriving at enterprise value. Here, it is not. The question is what happens to equity value? Any attempt to solve this through the impact on ENV is just an extra unnecessary step.

  • Good point about customer defaults. But my point stands that, all else equal, lower net working capital amplifies the cyclicality of a business. It's not just about the impact on collateral. The more working capital there is, the more it becomes a source of cash in a stress situation with declining revenues. This matters to lenders. This is a theoretical exercise, and I can't quantify this from a hypothetical any better than you can quantify the impact of reduced customer defaults.

  • "so EV effect is +5 minus a bit..." Assuming you mean enterprise value, you're ignoring the debt payment, which immediately reduces EV by $5. Equity value, even assuming sub-optimal capital structure and increased WACC, still goes up but an uncertain amount, as we both said.

  • You need to rethink your Apple analogy. Of course Apple's B/S cash counts in its equity valuation. The cash counts here as well. That's not the question. The question is: what happens if Apple's receivable's suddenly and permanently transformed into cash? The only way that impacts equity value is if investors think Apple will one day do something with that cash that they couldn't have otherwise done with A/R. If they never plan to return it to stakeholders or use it to grow the business, then its assumed to be required operating cash, ie working capital instead of "excess" cash (this is why the Enterprise Value formula technically uses debt less excess cash). Moving working capital from one bucket to another won't impact eqv.

[quote="Rover-S"] Short answer: he is right EQV will increase to something between 45 and

Career Advancement Opportunities

May 2024 Investment Banking

  • Jefferies & Company 02 99.4%
  • Lazard Freres No 98.8%
  • Harris Williams & Co. 25 98.3%
  • Goldman Sachs 17 97.7%
  • JPMorgan Chase 04 97.1%

Overall Employee Satisfaction

May 2024 Investment Banking

  • Harris Williams & Co. 18 99.4%
  • JPMorgan Chase 10 98.8%
  • Lazard Freres 05 98.3%
  • Morgan Stanley 07 97.7%
  • William Blair 03 97.1%

Professional Growth Opportunities

May 2024 Investment Banking

  • Lazard Freres 01 99.4%
  • Jefferies & Company 02 98.8%
  • Goldman Sachs 17 98.3%
  • Moelis & Company 07 97.7%
  • JPMorgan Chase 05 97.1%

Total Avg Compensation

May 2024 Investment Banking

  • Director/MD (5) $648
  • Vice President (21) $373
  • Associates (91) $259
  • 3rd+ Year Analyst (14) $181
  • Intern/Summer Associate (33) $170
  • 2nd Year Analyst (68) $168
  • 1st Year Analyst (205) $159
  • Intern/Summer Analyst (146) $101
notes
16 IB Interviews Notes

“... there’s no excuse to not take advantage of the resources out there available to you. Best value for your $ are the...”

Leaderboard

success
From 10 rejections to 1 dream investment banking internship

“... I believe it was the single biggest reason why I ended up with an offer...”