Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by SemanticFog 5590 days ago
This guy is math challenged:

>Let's do some simple math here, folks. Assume you bought an entire company that had $100 in revenues and 50% profit margins. And that you paid just two times revenues, or $200. It would still take you four years to break even with revenues holding steady.

The company he describes is in fact a fabulous buy, with a PE of 4. His mistake is to completely discount cash flows past the fourth year. You still own the company after four years, so unless it is set to self destruct, it is worth a lot more than the $200 you paid for it. A non-bubble growth tech company with those margins would typically be worth $1000+.

He's also ignorant of history. Great companies like Google and Microsoft had very high PEs in their early years, which many investors balked at. Those who could stomach the valuations made a mint.

Another way to value companies is to look at comparables that aren't affected by the bubble. For example, Yahoo has been bouncing between 20 and 30 billion -- a valuation that has held up for years. Facebook has similar revenue potential but much better execution and vastly higher growth. Valuing it at 2-3x Yahoo looks reasonable in my book.

He may well be right that some of the companies in the article are overpriced, but he makes a very weak case for his argument.

1 comments

He said it would take 4 years to break even. He didn't say anything about whether or not profit would follow.
In his example, the company is profitable from day one. The question is deciding how much those profits are worth -- ie, valuing the company. PE ratios and comparable company valuations are two standard ways to assess the long-term value of a stream of profits.

Adding up the profits until it equals the sum of your investment is an extremely crude measure, because it leaves out what you most care about -- how much the company is worth at the end of the initial time period.

P1. Yes - the company is profitable, but you have to subtract off the price you paid for it in order to find out whether it is profitable from your perspective.

P2.1 P/E is also crude.

P2.2 How much the company is worth at the end of the initial time period is certainly not what I most care about. If it is not viable also as a buy-to-hold, then you are playing greater fool speculation.

P2.3 It gives a useful perspective on the information. Where will Google be in 23.74 years? Will it still be a viable model? Will quantum computing have been proved so I can have a search engine in my pocket? Will all searching have to be social? Will Bing and Facebook become viable alternatives in the next year, driving down Google's margins? Will they ever pay a dividend, or will they keep re-investing until they go bust? My money will be locked up for 23.74 years, and there might be nothing at the end.

Was there a correction to the article? Because I see 6 years in the article. Which actually works out to 12% annual return, not that shabby in these return-challenged days.