I’ve never understood why the value is supposed to be so much higher if they sign customers to contracts. I would actually feel better about “customers so happy they have 90% market penetration without contracts” than “customers hate them but stay because they’re stuck in contracts”. Also, it might be a fight to enforce contracts after an ownership change, no matter what the contract says, if customers are really itching for an excuse to get out.
Like Chuck says, multiple of EBITDA. Normally might want historic numbers on churn to assess risk, but it sounds like they don’t have much churn. The one downside of 90% take rate is not much potential for organic growth, unless there’s a housing boom. From: Af [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Chuck McCown Sent: Wednesday, January 11, 2017 3:16 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Price per sub? 4x ebitda From: Josh Reynolds Sent: Wednesday, January 11, 2017 2:14 PM To: [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Price per sub? How many subs? On Jan 11, 2017 3:13 PM, "Brett A Mansfield" <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> > wrote: When looking at buying a competitor, I'm wondering what everyone's thought is on a price per sub? They don't do contracts and they use the litebeam hardware. I'm not looking for legal advice, just wondering what all of you think is fair. This company has about a 90% take rate in the area they're in. Their plans are $20, $40, and $50/mo. Thank you, Brett A Mansfield
