Trending Content - Private Equity Forum
| +174 | London MF REPE is paradise | 10 | 2h |
| +26 | The Difference Between a Good Business and a Good Acquisition | 7 | 2d |
| +19 | My Work Products Get 95% There, is that a failure or somewhat expected? | 14 | 8h |
| +18 | Career / Life Crossroads | 5 | 2d |
| +14 | Opinions on DTCP? | 5 | 1d |
| +14 | Partners misalignmet common? | 4 | 3d |
| +11 | on-cycle possible after lateraling? | 2 | 2d |
| +10 | PE Associate Recruiting from a PE Analyst Program | 3 | 1d |
| +9 | Why India’s SME Market Is Getting More Interesting | 3 | 19h |
| +9 | Capital Introduction | 0 | 3h |
Career Resources
Νο?
No. Unironically, the S&U is the easiest part? It is like 3-10 rows in Excel (ignoring outlier cases).
Same goes for cap table, it’s part of the story. The three most important things are 1. S&U 2. PF Cap 3. FCF
? Why would you even make a separate cap table. Makes no sense
It takes a minute, but it explains % equity, purchase multiple, leverage multiple, cap structure in 8+ cells.
My opinion is that without a S&U it's not really an LBO model, it would really just be a 3 statement model. One of the key points of the LBO is that you flow the S&U through the financial statements and the do the basic purchase accounting to bridge into the pro-forma BS. I guess you could theoretically do an LBO without one, but it would be very odd.
If you did a modeling test, even a really quick one like a paper LBO or an hour long quick build, but omitted a S&U, that's probably an insta-ding in my opinion. Would show me that you really don't know the basics of an LBO.
I disagree with the cap table comment above though. You can show a simple one if you want, but unless you're given some info around the transaction, it's pretty safe to assume 100% ownership or 85% ownership with a 15% option pool. I definitely don't think a cap table is more important than showing FCF calcs.
Edit: Looking back at the comments, it seems like the cap table comment might have been in reference to a transactions assumption box, which should also be included. I wouldn't call that a cap table, but you should also have a basic area where you basically do EBITDA, Entry EV/EBITDA Multiple, Enterprise Value, Cash, Debt, Equity Value and then use that purchase equity as one of the main items on your S&U.
Don't see why you wouldn't... If nothing else, it gives you a sanity check on your transaction assumptions and acts as a guiding framework for the rest of the model.
No, its not an LBO without S&U. You backsolve purchase price via the target MOIC/IRR, which I don't see being possible without having at least a standard S&U table...
If this is a real question...get your nose stuck into the theory books and practice LBOs. S&U is the hook on which you hang the story about stuff such as (i) deal fees, (ii) min. cash balance, (iii) founder roll-over, sponsor equity contrib, etc, and so forth. Its an easy part where you can do a lot of 'storytelling' to showcase your understanding on the transaction process. As others mentioned: its the framework - the basis of the post-deal cap table, returns, etc.
Purely theoretical - can you do it without - yes, but you'll have bits & pieces of it scattered throughout your model.
Ad voluptatem nihil ullam maxime in sapiente omnis aut. Eaque dicta eum alias et.
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...