that's not really the net tangible. take out the deferred tax asset of $127M plus dilution from recent acquisitions (another $12M) and the recent trading losses and I think tbv is closer to $4.75, something like that. and that doesn't deserve a 15x mulitple (on earnings) because mgmt is so bad. this stock is unbelievable below where it was at 2009 lows. wow. and now with biotech bull market over, cowen is in a bad place.
if you take the production and then figure the rest of teh production to sell at same price that gets you to $200M so even net of cash the production alone worth about $3.
well they lost $50M trading. so how much do you want to pay to watch cohen and his clowns lose money trading? I can lose money trading all on my own. I'm pretty good at it. no the problem here is that
what if Yahoo acquired - wouldn't that drive down the customer acquisition cost? cut that in half and you've got a very valuable business.
they can talk about ebitda but if they're not including the massive capex of $10M then it's deceptive. angi doesn't have much time before the cash runs out. I give it another three quarters before the creditors start to get woried.
lots of new jobs for the corporate client call center positions. that means more of the high margin, recurring corporate $$$$. care just has a better business model than the other social media laggards like whelp or angie who have to spend tons o' money to get new subs or advertizers.
care is a similar site that expenses all site investement . . . care has almost no prop plant and equip, angi has $72m. this company has no net cash and is burning lots of cash per quarter . . . only hope really is sale. there were no profits this quarter, burned over $8m of cash.
there were no profits this quarter. angi lost a lot of money. look at cash begin/end of period. over $10m of caitalized capex that really should go on the expense line.
I don't have a finance 101 book, I never took any finance classes. completely wikipedia trained. if you're saying I'm wrong, it's up to you to make the case. the cost of the equity is higher than the preferred because it's lower in the capital structure.
I don't really care what the cost of capital is because I don't have an MBA but if you can buy the preferred and get a better ROIC than the common is getting, that's a problem.
OK I don't even know what to say at this point. cost of capital =/ cost of debt. and no not of revenues, of ebitda.
so now you're evaluating the relative merits of my posts? that's weird. how much am I getting paid for this?
the hurdle rate is not the cost of the bank debt, it's the cost of capital, and radiant's cost of capital is above 10%.
of course at some point an acquiror will buy the revenues at some generous multiple, maybe even in the 13-15x range. discounted back to the present, and for uncertainty, that's not terribly relevant right now. and if radiant can't find a way to find more cheap shares to suckers, it will continue to buy assets earning less than its cost of capital. that's uneconomic and unsustainable. it's a bad business, and radiant hasn't shown any indication that it can do better.
doesn't that mean that the cost of capital is higher than the after-tax return on the deals? hmmmmmmmmm
the growth is there because crain sells shares at a premium to firm value. he sold shares at 6.75 for company that is now worth $4. he's selling hype and turning it into ebitda. so yes, in that sense, it worked. but the hype is over. he massively disappointed investors with the recent share dilution - nobody is going to bid the stock up again just in the hopes there will be another lousy deal. the wheels deal was premised on the idea that wheels alone, at industry typical margins, would generate $16M of ebitda or more - now, after the sba/skyways deal, the accretion is $11.5M. what happened? rollups have great arithmetic on the way up and #$%$ economics if they can't sell more overvalued shares to pay for more overhyped deals. paying 10x ebitda for franchises in terminal decline can only be sustained on selling more to greater fools. ultimately the share price will reflect the real economics of the business.
anyway, 20% pretax is not great. it's less than 15% post-tax, and that's not including debt issuance, integration, legal, severance, broken leases and working capital. it kind of sucks, actually.