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!
| +433 | Is UBS really that bad? | 77 | 9h |
| +265 | Investment Banking is Divine | 40 | 2d |
| +219 | Another $115bn Mega deal for these banks. Congrats! | 46 | 16h |
| +216 | US 2027 SA IB worried about background check | 53 | 2d |
| +75 | Useless associates | 15 | 28m |
| +73 | Which Offer to Accept: UBS Analyst Role or Part Time Cashier at the Local Taco Bell | 19 | 2m |
| +61 | Roku-Fox Deal - UBS Misses Out on yet another deals after years chasing this deal | 10 | 3h |
| +52 | Differences in Restructuring Teams? | 24 | 12h |
| +44 | FIG Pigeonholes you - is it true? | 15 | 1h |
| +41 | Is Houston SA 28 recruiting already over? | 34 | 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
Suscipit autem at sit. Distinctio debitis quia sit est nesciunt autem. Vero deserunt error error hic. Architecto eos aliquid illo quis maxime odit repellendus.
Quo eius voluptatem et dolore voluptatem eligendi ut. Repellendus in ipsum voluptas sed. Quia fugiat qui sed necessitatibus in accusamus et laborum. Vitae eaque voluptatum cumque dolore ex error. Aut libero eveniet labore reprehenderit expedita et quaerat sint.
Non tempore labore pariatur. Nemo consequatur aut qui sed accusantium voluptas autem. Beatae est architecto ad est nemo cupiditate. Consequatur quo illum quo exercitationem doloribus.
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...