Especially for a wisp that small, I would think 4x EBITDA is more than reasonable . Chasing a deal isn't usually a profitable strategy.
On Jan 11, 2017 7:10 PM, "Brett A Mansfield" <[email protected]> wrote: > Hahaha, I love it. +1 > > Thank you, > Brett A Mansfield > > On Jan 11, 2017, at 5:26 PM, Josh Reynolds <[email protected]> wrote: > > Just acquire, become more of a monopoly, write off all failed acquisitions > as losses, buy out competitors, and keep a wad of cash in the pockets of > the lobbyists you own so they can do their thing. Patent everything as fast > as you can. Buy as many patents as you can. Find ways to get regulations > that favor you and hurts any remaining competition. Murica. > > On Jan 11, 2017 3:56 PM, "Ken Hohhof" <[email protected]> wrote: > >> If the limiting factor is revenue, they need to get realistic. 4 years >> of earnings for a business that has already exhausted the available market >> potential (at least for sub count), and where infrastructure can require a >> forklift upgrade every 3-5 years, is about as good as they will find. >> >> >> >> On the other hand, if the limiting factor is costs consuming most of the >> revenue, the value of the business might change post acquisition. Perhaps >> you can cut salaries, if your existing techs can cover installs and >> maintenance, and you no longer need to pay the owners. Perhaps you can >> replace their expensive bandwidth with your less expensive bandwidth. >> Perhaps with your greater economies of scale and purchasing power, you can >> lower their other costs, renegotiate tower leases, etc. >> >> >> >> In business school, I remember being taught this is the stuff M&A is >> built on, assets that are worth more to the buyer than to the seller. >> Although you wouldn’t know it from the deals that make the news, they seem >> to be about getting bigger just to get bigger, with correspondingly bigger >> executive pay. >> >> >> >> >> >> *From:* Af [mailto:[email protected]] *On Behalf Of *Brett A Mansfield >> *Sent:* Wednesday, January 11, 2017 3:39 PM >> *To:* [email protected] >> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Price per sub? >> >> >> >> There are only 190 subs. I'll have to get their financials to determine >> ebitda since they don't even know. But if it's what I think it is then they >> won't sell for what I'll offer. 4x ebitda isn't much for only 190 subs. >> >> Thank you, >> >> Brett A Mansfield >> >> >> On Jan 11, 2017, at 2:14 PM, Josh Reynolds <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> How many subs? >> >> >> >> On Jan 11, 2017 3:13 PM, "Brett A Mansfield" < >> [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 >> >>
