preview

Laura Martin: Case Study

Better Essays

Question 1 What are the tradeoffs in using Multiples versus DCF analysis? DCF Valuation 1. Forecast revenue for each year for from the firm’s financial data. 2. Select appropriate discount rate based on WACC 3. Discount each cashflow back to it present value 4. Obtain the terminal value through an application of terminal value multiple 5. You add these values together 6. Using this method, Martin calculates the price of Cox’s share to be $54.29 Multiple Valuation: 1. Identify comparable firms that have growth, cashflow and risks similar to those of target firm whose value is in question. 2. Obtain the individual multiple or ratio of the firm’s price to their financial data, such as EBITDA. 3. Average these multiples to …show more content…

What assumptions does this analysis rely on? Overview of Exhibits 2 and 6 • Exhibit 2 shows the financial summary for selected comparable companies. In particular, it shows the first few steps of multiple analysis, the calculation of industry average multiple using comparable firms. • Exhibit 6 shows the target share price, EBIDTA value and various other equity data for Cox. In particular it shows the last few steps of multiple analysis, namely the application of industry average multiple to Cox, in order to arrive at its target price of $50.00 • When combined, the exhibit 2 and 5 demonstrates the complete process of traditional multiple analysis via EBITDA. Assumptions: • This traditional analysis is based upon many assumptions. • For instance, Exhibit 2 shows Selection of firms based on industry. It assumes that these firms have the same growth, risk and return as the target firm. In reality, these fundamental variables differ from firm to firm even in the same industry. Reckless reliance upon this flawed assumption maybe detrimental if an industry has very few firms. The average obtained would contain a lot of errors. • Secondly, there is the definitional assumption. Analysts assume that their definition of EBIDTA is uniform with others. But in reality this is not true! In exhibit 2, Martin defined the multiple to be Implied Cable value + Non Cable Consolidated Assets/adjusted EBIDTA. A different definition may be used in another

Get Access