SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Technology Stocks : Advanced Engine Technologies (AENG)
AENG 0.00010000.0%Mar 7 3:00 PM EST

 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: PaulB who wrote (518)6/4/1998 12:53:00 PM
From: wonk  Read Replies (2) of 3383
 
Paul:

I believe I was fair and respectful to Mr. Travis. Now lets be fair to Goldfinger's point of view and look at the bear case.

The company is currently valued (market cap) of $286 million. ($13 * 21MM shares).

You buy the entire company out at the current share price (you pay zero premium for taking out the closely held shares). You expect to hold it for 20 years (life of the IPR w/o extension). You expect to make a 15% return on your investment compounded annually (rather modest expectation in this market environment).

Under that scenario, your cumulative net income (earnings) would have to be in the range of $4.7 billion dollars. ($286*((1+.15)^20). Assuming zero (0) debt service, net royalties before tax would be approximately 7.2 billion dollars at a 35% tax rate ($4.7/.65). Assuming zero (0) operating expenses, gross sales of products using the IPR would be approximately $144 billion dollars at a 5% royalty rate on sales (7.2/.05). Take the gross sales, pick any average wholesale price per unit, and calculate how many AENG-based engines must be sold. Lets say $500. Well that equals 288 million engines.

Some bet long, others short. Those currently betting short are wagering that (1) the IPR will not generate this royalty stream (2) management has not demonstrated it has the qualifications necessary to harvest this revenue stream (c) both.

This is an extremely simplistic example, lacking any kind of detail. You could argue that the IPR will last longer than 20 years, which would require additional going concern value and a host of other issues. OTOH, those numbers reflect zero expense, no R&D, no discussion of competition, alternatives or improvements to the current state of the art. IMO, the size of the numbers provides some idea of the task at hand to justify the current stock price.

ww
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext