Professional Documents
Culture Documents
In his annual letter to company and under-valuing can spell For Online Travel Agencies (OTAs),
shareholders1 recently, Buffett potential disasters. their complex business models
noted that almost all the make the valuation exercise even
While the overall value of a
businesses he wanted to acquire in more challenging. The business
business is determined by factors
2017 were just too expensive. ‘A models of OTAs are defined by a
such as financial performance,
sensible purchase price’ was hard variety of pricing models,
projected sales, assets and
to come by, he wrote, as prices for numerous customer outreach
customer reach, it can be tricky to
even ‘decent businesses’ hit an all- channels, alternate revenue
accurately value intangibles such
time high. streams, management of large
as human and intellectual capital.
amounts of inventory and multiple
Buffett’s lament underscores one
vendors, and massive investments
of the biggest challenges faced by Add a plethora of valuation
in next-gen tools and apps. Hence,
entrepreneurs – calculating models to the mix (each with its
an increasing number of OTAs are
valuations for their businesses that own limitations) and the challenge
exploring holistic approaches that
are both attractive and realistic. of discovering the true value of
can help them compute agreeable
Reliable valuations are critical for a business is amplified.
valuations for their business.
businesses as both over-valuing
1
http://www.berkshirehathaway.com/letters/2017ltr.pdf
There are multiple reasons why [Earnings Before Interest, Taxes, Some assessors also add the
OTAs want to objectively determine Depreciation and Amortization current value of the OTA’s available
the value of their business. For (EBITDA)] for the last 12 months inventory to the multiplied SDE
some, knowing their company’s with a mutually agreed upon amount to arrive at a truer value
current value gives them a strong multiple (between buyer and for the business.
footing while negotiating for seller). In the current market
In addition to these models, there
financial backing / investments. scenario, most potential buyers
are a few industry-agnostic
For others, a fair value, computed offer a multiple between three and
valuation methods that are widely
using an established valuation four. For example, an OTA with
used.
method, helps provide an objective recast profits of USD 100,000 will
and transparent view to potential attract offers starting from USD
Discounted Cash Flow Model
buyers. 300,000.
(DCF): In this method, a company’s
future free cash flow projections
In the current OTA ecosystem, the Sales EBIT Model: Smaller OTAs
are adjusted (discounted) for the
top two players own 75-90 percent2 can be valued by multiplying their
Time Value of Money (TVM) and
of the market in the U.S., leaving [Earnings Before Interest and
added to arrive at its current
the remaining players to compete Taxes (EBITs)] with a factor of
valuation. While DCF is a financially
for a smaller slice of the pie. High either two or three using this
sound model for valuation, it has
commission rates, service fees and model. For larger OTAs, the
its limitations. For example, the
disproportionate advertising multiplying factor can range from
valuation’s accuracy is largely
spends add to the challenges. It is three to five.4 Often, the value of the
determined by the quality of
not surprising, therefore, that at OTA business is pegged at 45-50
assumptions used for variables
least some OTAs are aiming for percent of its annual gross profits.
such as future free cash flow.
significant returns on their
Discretionary Model: This
investments by selling off their
These assumptions are subjective
approach involves valuing an OTA
attractively valued business.
in nature and may lead to different
by multiplying its Seller’s
valuations by different analysts.
So, let’s take a look at some Discretionary Earnings (SDE –
The value derived is also extremely
OTA-specific valuation models that profits with certain expenses added
sensitive to input variables – even
exist today. back to give a more accurate
minor variations in the inputs to
picture of the profit-making
Recast Profit Model: In this model, the model can significantly skew
potential of the business) with a
an OTA’s valuation is determined by the company’s valuation.
multiple of either two or three.
multiplying its recast profits3
2
https://medium.com/traveltechmedia/online-travel-agencies-2016-and-h1-2017-results-and-a-look-at-googles-travel-revenues-436f208389cb
3
http://www.travelweekly.com/Mark-Pestronk/So-you-want-to-sell-your-travel-agency-Whats-the-next-step
4
https://www.vikingmergers.com/blog/2016/the-roadmap-to-selling-a-travel-agency/
The WNS model takes into In Figure 1, we have listed these (F), Digital and Analytics (DA), Social
consideration multiple factors to factors under relevant categories, (S), Business Operations (B),
arrive at a holistic valuation namely, Technology Platform (T), Ownership Structure (O) and Market
approach. This effectively plugs the Domain Expertise and Pricing (E), Scenario (M).
gaps in the models described Financial Profitability and Revenues
earlier.
§
Number of social media §
Customer mix §
Number of digital §
EBITDA
channels technologies deployed
§
Sales pipeline for one year §
Net Profit After Tax
currently – Augmented
§
Number of social media
§
Market niche for offerings Reality, Virtual Reality, §
3-5 years CAGR for
followers
Artificial Intelligence, profit / revenue
§
Revenue per employee
§
Average monthly & annual Machine Learning, §
Q-o-Q / Y-o-Y sales growth
social media user base §
Vendor & supplier
Blockchain, Robotic
relations §
Market capitalization (Equity)
§
Average monthly & annual Process Automation
website visitors §
Number of customers / §
Seller Discretionary Earnings
§
Number of processes
locations / employees
§
Average monthly & annual where digital technologies §
Value of current assets (liquid
customer complaints §
Age of current business are deployed & non-liquid) & product
inventory
§
Number of loyalty §
Online & offline channel §
Number of analytical tools
programs & members partners network to support digital insights §
Organic & inorganic revenue
(if any) streams
§
Direct / indirect §
Number of data sets &
competitors organized data sources, §
Dividend yields
Technology frequency of making
§
Number of trademarks / §
Price / Equity ratio
Platform (T) business decisions based
patents
on analytical tools §
Price / Sales ratio
§
Depth of technology §
Other projects in pipeline deployed §
Price / Book ratio
platform
§
Return on Assets
§
Number of processes Domain Expertise
Market Scenario (M) §
Return on Equity
supported by the platform & Pricing (E)
§
Ease of technology usage §
Industry vertical expertise §
GDP & industry growth Ownership
§
Ability to scale up the §
Domain-led team size §
Prevailing M&A activity Structure (O)
platform through
technological §
Domain-led customer §
Growth forecasts §
Promoter holding
advancements engagements & clients
§
Expected earnings §
Institutional / FII holding
§
Levels of processes that §
Pricing effectiveness for
clients based on domain §
Quality & experience of
are automated (Level 1, 2,
expertise management team
3, 4 or 5)
§
Number of current §
Number of pricing models
technology partnerships Generally accounted factors
§
Number of upcoming Critical factors contributing
technology partnerships to business decisions
(V) [30% (T) + 20% (E) + 15% (F) + 10% (DA) + 10% (S) + 5% (B) + 5% (O) + 5% (M)]
(V) [0.30 (T) + 0.20 (E) + 0.15 (F) + 0.10 (DA) + 0.10 (S) + 0.05 (B) + 0.05 (O)+ 0.05(M)]