Hi all!
Just done a DCF & the equity value (26.9m perpetuity / 41.3m exit EBITDA) is significantly less than net assets (52.5m). The perpetuity itself is worth less than just the fixed assets (29.3m). What ways/multiples might be more useful to value a business in a case such as this?
Thanks all!
| +338 | Return Rates For Interns Are Falling? | 143 | 45m |
| +156 | Evercore > Goldman and I don’t think it’s particularly close anymore | 58 | 19m |
| +152 | Article: Why UBS's Asian M&A bankers are thriving and UBS's American M&A bankers are not | 17 | 10h |
| +124 | I am a drunk MD AMA | 40 | 1d |
| +86 | UBS Offer Day | 30 | 1d |
| +75 | Santander IB? | 10 | 3d |
| +68 | I hate Wells Fargo | 19 | 7h |
| +51 | No return offer - feeling like a failure is an understatement | 20 | 2h |
| +45 | How cooked am I as an incoming WF IB SA 2027? | 17 | 3h |
| +43 | WF Return offers | 28 | 2d |
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.
assets are at fair value i take?
Book value/carrying value - which I suppose answers my question in that the fair value is the DCF outcome - hence no conundrum! Right? (Still learning all this).
I don’t think it necessarily means the valuation is wrong — if a firm is simply unprofitable or has razor thin margins and the equipment to make their products is expensive, then the intrinsic value of the business (DCF) could be less than that of their assets (e.g. their WACC>ROIC, thus operating as a going concern is destroying value, as opposed to increasing firm value).
In a case like this, maybe a liquidation valuation makes sense, where the company decides to sell their assets as opposed to be a going concern.
If the purpose of your question is simply trying to get a higher value, then a higher growth rate / multiple / lower WACC / higher margins all would make it go up, but the model would obviously lose credibility.
Edit: Also, your perpetuity and exit multiple greatly differ. You should do a sanity check on the growth rate implied from the exit multiple value to make sure it’s not something crazy.
Does the company belong to Energy or Real Estate?
My guess is that company / industry has had poor recent data and short term forecast, leading the P/B & P/NAV 1... Maybe there will be a recovery? Or it could also be a sign of a distress asset and a potential restructuring play (as one of the other posters has mentioned).
RIP Micron
Occaecati et amet illum provident tempora quisquam. Aut modi dignissimos iure. Consequatur eligendi nihil voluptatum distinctio illo dolores dicta impedit. Quibusdam delectus natus animi eum consequatur adipisci assumenda. Est molestiae ullam vel fuga est.
Placeat modi similique debitis eos cumque perferendis earum. Aperiam officia fugiat eius. Sed reiciendis ea autem. Aut quo adipisci necessitatibus explicabo molestiae. Porro aut sed ducimus possimus non omnis.
Aliquid distinctio omnis sed porro unde mollitia. Illum molestiae harum saepe similique praesentium dolorem voluptatibus. Earum recusandae laborum aspernatur aliquam fuga ea sunt. Temporibus et et sint saepe. Sed commodi voluptatem error repellat. Ex necessitatibus mollitia possimus assumenda. Labore ut assumenda inventore atque.
Vel doloribus ut alias hic magni. Et sequi sed id sed. Vitae exercitationem numquam cupiditate quidem rerum hic cumque rerum. Similique perspiciatis exercitationem quod. Et eius provident debitis animi necessitatibus aut.
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...