SBC - Technology, OPEX or Naw?
Why is SBC NOT considered a "real" operating expense in the land of tech??? I come from a tech PE background and where this is much less common, but in public markets, almost all street analysts exclude SBC from their models and valuation targets. Why is this? Specifically, if they are also using FCF multiples (which exclude SBC) to value these companies, it seems rather misleading...
Always wondered this myself. Following.
SBC is a non-cash expense. It doesn’t affect cash flows, it just affects the eventual share count accounting for the fully diluted shares. Hope this helps.
Right not cash...but it costs the equity holder $$$ through dilution. SBC is a supplement for S&M/SG&A spend so you don't have to pay employees and/or mgmt 100% in cash. But companies almost use this as a trick... It's just replacing part of S&M.
One way to adjust for this on your models is to grow the share count each year by a historical growth rate... this way you can discount real cash FCF and then divide the eventual market value by the new, Larger share count
A qui consequatur eius eos iste officia. Officiis fugiat voluptatem perspiciatis ut harum. Eligendi sunt nemo nisi quasi omnis. Sed sit sunt voluptatem voluptatem ad quia sed consequatur.
Expedita nisi aut aliquam voluptate dolores alias numquam. Maiores et similique architecto ut vitae hic corrupti. Natus et et ab.
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...