I've posted this question already in the equity research forum, however they don't seem to be really active.
To be more accurate it's about the TMT sector, so the question would also fit in this forum.
What can I deduce from a low ARPU/RGU ratio compared to peers? Also it seems like I dont fully grasp the difference between the two.
| +238 | UBS preparing for a October Layoff Massacre | 188 | 2d |
| +183 | A Message to Students Who Think this Job Will Fix Their Life | 27 | 9h |
| +155 | Work and Suicide | 48 | 1d |
| +74 | Interns without return offers, careers & perspective | 5 | 1d |
| +56 | Are all these UBS postings bullshit? | 15 | 5h |
| +44 | I'm in love with my MD | 9 | 8h |
| +40 | UBS IB Balance Sheet Set to take a Hit | 10 | 2d |
| +35 | My grandma thinks I work at a Chase branch | 5 | 1d |
| +34 | If Investment Banks Were Divorced Dads | 11 | 1d |
| +31 | Will they pay Directors $1mm+? | 9 | 2h |
Career Resources
Get instant access to lessons taught by experienced private equity pros and bulge bracket investment bankers including financial statement modeling, DCF, M&A, LBO, Comps and Excel Modeling.
ARPU = Average Revenue Per User (per month) RGU = Revenue Generating Unit (similar to a subscriber)
The way I've seen RGU used is primarily as a product (for example, a triple-play subscriber might constitute 3 RGUs - telephone, cable, internet).
Therefore, ARPU/RGU = on average how much you're getting from each product. This is usually a very similar number to what you'd be charged for the service ($60-70/month for cable, etc).
A lower ARPU/RGU ratio means the provider may not be charging as much as competitors, or is offering incentives/discounts.
drewz123 is spot on. It's a measure of how hard the company is squeezing each user on average for money. Just make sure your peer set are pure play comps or very similar, or otherwise you can explain why comps which are slightly different are still comparable (ie comps 101).
valuation using ARPU (Originally Posted: 05/01/2007)
Can anyone offer any advice on how to value a company using ARPU, CPGA, churn, etc? Please help... thanks
ive never heard of any of these...i guess im a noob
ARPU = Average Revenue per User, used in telecom I guess.
churn = another telecom thing, how many of your customers are old and how many are leaving/new, something like that.
CPGA = no idea
And I've no idea how to value with that, my lack of real Finance experience shines through here :\
Id assume some multiple i guess
.
Take the ARPU, erode it by the monthly amount of churn, and then make an assumption on the amount that falls to the contribution (ie contributed profit before allocated expenses). Then discount each expected contribution amount to the present.
Subtract out marketing spend to acquire the customer.
This represents the PV of an acquired customer (on a contribution basis).
Telecom and distribution companies sometimes think of these sorts of businesses (where you spend money to acquire a customer, they pay a recurring amount, and eventually roll off through churn) in terms of lifetime value of a customer.
Thanks, GK
decarez - cpga = cost per gross addition
Question about telecoms -- why the obsession with ARPU? (Originally Posted: 03/28/2011)
First off, I'm not in equities or telecoms or anything related to either of them. However:
Something I have wondered for a while now, is why management and analysts alike seem to have such an obsession with ARPU in the telecom industry.
In every industry I have seen up to now, it is some combination of risk-adjusted profits and prospective profit growth which directly determines firm value; not absolute non-cost-adjusted non-risk-adjusted average revenue per user or customer (ARPU). Yet in telecoms there seems to be a different order of priorities, at least according to my limited observations.
Sure, ARPU is a nice number to glance at for quick and not-particularly-meaningful comparison across firms to see how much revenue is being generated by each user. But I have heard conference calls, and seen management presentations with a huge emphasis on this seemingly arbitrary metric. What good is a sky-high ARPU if it costs an arm and a leg in advertising expenses to steal the big-spending customers from competitors? And what good is having those high-ARPU customers if the costs associated with retaining their custom makes them less profitable than lower revenue but less churn-prone lower maintenance users? In some cases it seems as though management is even eager to cripple or eliminate lower-revenue service packages in order to "encourage upgrading" to more expensive service packages. The fact that a large number of those customers may simply switch to a different company due to shitty service incompatible with their needs doesn't seem to be a concern to many of these telecom CEOs and equity analysts, because this is going to "drive ARPU growth".
As a capitalist, this makes no sense to me. Are these management teams' compensation deals linked strongly to ARPU growth? If so, I can understand that these managers are just responding rationally to the incentives they face; but it doesn't explain the analysts' behavior, nor would it explain why shareholders would have approved such an incentive structure in the first place (since it seems likely to directly conflict with management's one true purpose: increasing firm value).
I mean, my guess is Walmart's ARPU is pretty low, much lower than some high end fashion boutique in Soho, but who cares? Profits are what matter to Walmart shareholders and management, not ARPU. It's possible that for year-over-year tracking it could be an interesting footnote in the annual report, perhaps an indicator of possible trends when viewed in the context of the other far more important financial information. But that's about as far as I would expect it to go, not to become a central topic in conference calls.
Yes I know telecoms and retail are different. But I cannot understand why the profit motive would not be common across all industries including telecom. In telecoms there seems to be more focus on this ARPU calculation than on making as much money as possible. And it seems that some managers are basically willing to leave money on the table or flush money down the toilet if it will increase ARPU. And it seems that many telecom analysts don't have a problem with this.
Please help me understand what is really going on here. Thanks.
Dude ok pricing is important but at the end of the day they still have to beat EPS estimates and they know that.
arpu d2?
Consequuntur illo quis maiores id nulla omnis sint cum. Qui quo iusto animi ratione est officiis sint. Quae similique possimus et quia exercitationem tenetur sint voluptatem. Voluptatibus quo odit eius nam qui aliquam. Explicabo nostrum nesciunt porro quis voluptas at possimus qui. Delectus dicta voluptate fugit beatae. Molestiae sed omnis cum odio est laboriosam eius nihil.
Nam aut sint modi minima quia quia. Tempora modi sint fugit aut praesentium. Est nemo non quisquam velit. Error labore omnis consectetur occaecati nostrum. Neque omnis soluta voluptas odio tempora minus sit. Placeat tempora repellendus et qui. Voluptatem rerum aut ipsum et reprehenderit numquam nihil velit.
Numquam maxime quos ut dolore iste excepturi quia. Mollitia eum ipsa amet nulla aspernatur sed. Minima suscipit eaque molestiae deleniti tempora. Minima qui itaque tempora nisi ut sit laborum inventore.
Ut et similique rem et. Molestiae velit omnis itaque ullam ut. Voluptate iste cumque quidem. Et id blanditiis ex et. Et voluptas sed id. Veniam aut rerum id magni delectus.
See All Comments - 100% Free
WSO depends on everyone being able to pitch in when they know something. Unlock with your email and get bonus: 6 financial modeling lessons free ($199 value)
or Unlock with your social account...