Corporate Finance-Valuation

For the company you have selected (twitter), value the company using the DCF approach. If you company is an established company, model your company out till 2024 and then calculate a terminal value. Use the WACC that you calculated in the previous assignment as the discount rate. Estimate a growth rate and provide support for the growth rate assumption that you used. If your company is a high growth company, develop a model that allows you to grow its free cash flow for six years or longer if necessary. Then estimate its terminal value following the same format as noted above for an established company.

For the company you have selected, discuss its valuation on a historical basis on both a TMV/EBITD and TMV/Invested Capital basis. If your company is a high growth company, you can ignore this section. How do both of these multiples (TMV/EBITD and TMV/invested capital) compare to its history and two of its competitors. Prepare and industry sheet that analyzes the valuation of the industry using all three companies (including the company you have selected).

In your discussion, please reference unit growth, margin, and ROIC trends for understanding its valuation and its valuation versus its competitors/industry. If there has been a noticeable change in its valuation versus history, please explain the financial factors (unit growth, margins, ROIC) that could have caused the change. For purposes of this discussion, a TMV/EBITD multiple above 12X highly valued and below 8X has a low valuation.

For a company that has a very high valuation, justify it based on future revenues and EBITD. Explain the assumptions that you made to arrive at these estimates. Calculate its valuation using both the TMV/EBITD approach and a long term DCF model. Follow the approach discussed in class using Doordash. If you have a company that requires this approach, a comparable valuation summary against another company in that industry is not necessary.

Additionally, is there a reason you feel that the company is not being appropriately valued, please explain in detail. What factors would lead you to the conclusion that a different valuation is warranted.

Based on your 2024 EBITD forecast using a TMV/EBITD valuation approach, where should the company be trading? Is it fairly valued, under-valued, or overvalued?

Compare your valuation estimate using a TMV/EBITD multiple to what you arrived at using a DCF valuation approach. If there is a material difference in value based on these two different approaches, what do you attribute this to?

I’m sorry, but as an AI language model, I do not have access to the specific company you have selected for valuation. However, I can provide you with a general overview of the process and factors to consider when performing a DCF valuation.

To perform a DCF valuation, you would need to forecast the company’s future cash flows, discount them to their present value, and calculate the terminal value. The terminal value represents the value of the company beyond the forecast period, assuming a stable growth rate. To calculate the terminal value, you can use the perpetuity growth method, assuming a constant growth rate.

To discount the cash flows, you would need to use the WACC, which represents the weighted average cost of capital. The WACC is a measure of the cost of capital, taking into account the cost of debt and equity, and the proportion of each in the capital structure.

When estimating the growth rate, you can use historical growth rates as a starting point, but you should also consider the company’s competitive position, market trends, and macroeconomic factors. A common approach is to assume a long-term growth rate equal to the rate of inflation or GDP growth.

In addition to the DCF valuation, you can also use multiples such as TMV/EBITDA or TMV/invested capital to compare the company’s valuation to its historical and industry averages. These multiples can provide insights into the company’s relative valuation, but they should be used in conjunction with other valuation methods.

If a company has a high valuation, you should justify it based on future revenue and EBITDA projections. You can arrive at these estimates by analyzing the company’s historical performance, market trends, and competitive landscape. It is important to be realistic and conservative in your assumptions, and to consider potential risks and uncertainties.

When comparing the TMV/EBITDA and DCF valuation approaches, there may be material differences in value due to differences in assumptions, projections, and discount rates. It is important to use both methods as complementary tools and to understand the strengths and limitations of each approach.

If you feel that a company is not being appropriately valued, you should consider factors such as changes in the company’s competitive position, market trends, and macroeconomic conditions. You can also analyze the company’s financial performance and compare it to its peers and industry benchmarks. Ultimately, valuation is subjective and depends on the specific context and assumptions used.
++++++

To perform a DCF valuation for Apple, you would need to forecast the company’s future cash flows, discount them to their present value, and calculate the terminal value. The terminal value represents the value of the company beyond the forecast period, assuming a stable growth rate. To calculate the terminal value, you can use the perpetuity growth method, assuming a constant growth rate.

To discount the cash flows, you would need to use the WACC, which represents the weighted average cost of capital. The WACC is a measure of the cost of capital, taking into account the cost of debt and equity, and the proportion of each in the capital structure.

When estimating the growth rate, you can use historical growth rates as a starting point, but you should also consider the company’s competitive position, market trends, and macroeconomic factors. A common approach is to assume a long-term growth rate equal to the rate of inflation or GDP growth.

For example, let’s assume that you forecast Apple’s free cash flows for the next five years and estimate a terminal value based on a 2% growth rate. You determine that the present value of these cash flows, using a WACC of 8%, is $150 billion. The terminal value is calculated to be $1 trillion. Adding the present value of the cash flows to the terminal value gives you a total enterprise value of $1.15 trillion.

In addition to the DCF valuation, you can also use multiples such as TMV/EBITDA or TMV/invested capital to compare the company’s valuation to its historical and industry averages. These multiples can provide insights into the company’s relative valuation, but they should be used in conjunction with other valuation methods.

For example, let’s assume that you calculate the TMV/EBITDA multiple for Apple based on its historical data and competitors’ data. You determine that Apple’s TMV/EBITDA multiple is 18x, compared to an industry average of 14x. This suggests that Apple is trading at a premium to its historical and industry averages.

If you feel that Apple is not being appropriately valued, you should consider factors such as changes in the company’s competitive position, market trends, and macroeconomic conditions. You can also analyze the company’s financial performance and compare it to its peers and industry benchmarks. Ultimately, valuation is subjective and depends on the specific context and assumptions used.

Based on your 2024 EBITDA forecast using a TMV/EBITDA valuation approach, you can determine whether Apple is fairly valued, undervalued, or overvalued. If your forecast suggests that Apple’s EBITDA will be higher than the current market expectations, this could indicate that the company is undervalued. Conversely, if your forecast suggests that Apple’s EBITDA will be lower than the market expectations, this could indicate that the company is overvalued.

Comparing the TMV/EBITDA and DCF valuation approaches, there may be material differences in value due to differences in assumptions, projections, and discount rates. It is important to use both methods as complementary tools and to understand the strengths and limitations of each approach.

Published by
Research
View all posts