Based on the various numbers and ratios in the spreadsheet, and based on what you know about the companies, what conclusions can you draw about the three companies and how they compare? How do their business models and strategies differ?
Generally, the companies are evaluated based on the Return on Equity or Return on Assets. As the gross margin may not be correct indicator of the business. As per the Dupont analysis,
= (Profitability)* (Asset Turnover) * (Financial Leverage)
Now for the given example if we assume store cost are same, and they are the only assets required, we have
Net Income Margin | Asset Turnover | Leverage | |
Company 1 | 1.98% | 0.82x | N.A. |
Company 2 | 3.84% | 0.52x | N.A. |
Company 3 | 2.81% | 4.88x | N.A. |
Here x is the variable which will be related to cost of the store.
Based on two factors, company 3 fare good as compared to other two companies, and Company 1 and Company 2 are comparable.
Now, since the balancesheet is not given, commenting on leverage is difficult.
However, by examining the interest expenses by the companies, we understand Company 2 pays highest interest for per square feet of the store. This may be because interest expense of company two is higher, or company 2 have higher debt.
For this case, if we assume, interest rates for all companies are same, then leverage component of Company 2 is higher. A comparison of interest is as per the following table;
Company 1 | Company 2 | Company 3 | |
Interest | 53 | 1004 | 2267 |
sq Feet Mn | 103 | 240 | 1164 |
Estimated leverage | 0.51y | 4.18y | 1.95y |
Here, y is a variable dependent on asset price and other things.
Hence, if interest rate are same, company 2 have twice the leverage as compared to company 1.
However, first two component of Company 3 are 6.85 time of company 2. Hence, Return on equity of the Company 3 is better. Further, the first two component represents the return on assets. Hence in terms of return of assets, company 3 may be doing good.
Based on the various numbers and ratios in the spreadsheet, and based on what you know...
What was the
EV/EBITDA multiple Amazon actual paid to acquire Whole Foods using
EBITDA at 9/25/2016? Use the data from Exhibit 1 for a
top down EBITDA calculation (Starting from EBIT not Net Income),
Depreciation & Amortization in fiscal 2016 of $498 million, and
Amazon purchase price of $13.7 bln as the EV which includes Whole
Foods debt (p.10 of the case).
A. 3.2x
B. 6.9x
C. 10.0x
D. 20.0x
Please answer as soon as you reasonably can
(in $ millions...
EV/EBITDA multiples can be used to benchmark or
determine the potential acquisition price (where Enterprise Value=
Net Debt + Market Equity Value). What is the implied enterprise
value for Whole Foods using the industry average
EV/EBITDA for fiscal year 2016? Use the data from
Exhibit for a top down EBITDA calculation (Starting from EBIT not
Net Income). Assumptions: Depreciation & Amortization in fiscal
2016 of $498 million, net debt at fiscal 2016 year end of $300
million, EV/EBITDA grocery industry average...