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 : Amazon.com, Inc. (AMZN) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: puborectalis who wrote (28953)12/4/1998 8:57:00 PM
From: llamaphlegm  Respond to of 164684
 
Valuing an Internet Stock

One way is to start with the market price of the stock and determine
what kind of revenue growth that price implies. The question then
becomes whether that growth rate is realistic. Let's take Amazon.com.
An analytical approach called Economic Value Added (EVA)
indicates that with the stock at 214 a share, investors are implying that
revenues will grow 59.6% a year over the next 10 years, taking annual
sales to $63 billion from the current $587.6 million.

HERE'S HOW THOSE CONCLUSIONS WERE REACHED
-- First to be determined is the current operations value (COV) of the
company--what Amazon.com would be worth if there were no further
growth. But hold on--it's not making money now. Sure, but that's due to
large startup costs. Once those costs are out of the way, assume that
the company will earn a normal operating margin of 10%. So to
determine COV, assume the company is earning its average long-term
margin and is now profitable. Once the COV is known, it can be used
with the market value (MV) to determine the future growth value (FGV).

MARKET VALUE (MV) = CURRENT OPERATION VALUE (COV) +
FUTURE GROWTH VALUE (FGV)

NOW, SOME NUMBERS ARE NEEDED

WHAT'S KNOWN FOR CERTAIN?
STOCK PRICE 214
SHARES OUTSTANDING 50.2 MILLION
MARKET VALUE $10.8 BILLION

WHAT ASSUMPTIONS HAVE TO BE MADE?
SALES IN 1998 $587.6 MILLION
OPERATING MARGIN 10%
NET OPERATING INCOME AFTER TAXES (NOPAT)
(ADJUSTED FOR STARTUP COSTS) $41.1 MILLION

-- To get current operation value (COV), start with 1998 adjusted net
operating income after taxes (NOPAT), $41.1 million. What would
$41.1 million over the next 10 years be worth? To get that number, a
discount rate, or the cost of the capital needed to generate those
earnings, has to be assumed. Because the stock is volatile, assume a
high cost--15%. To get the COV, divide $41.1 million by 15%, which
yields $274.2 million. With no future growth, that's what the company
would be worth. A pittance--only $5.50 per share. Investors are
obviously betting that growth will continue to soar.

NOW, IT'S EASY TO DETERMINE AMAZON'S FUTURE GROWTH
VALUE
-- Simply subtract $274.2 million from the current market market value
($10.8 billion), which gives $10.5 billion. The question now is: How fast
do revenues have to grow over the next 10 years to give you a future
growth value of $10.5 billion? The answer is 59.6% a year, assuming
margins of 10% and a 15% capital cost.

-- Next question: Can Amazon.com sustain that kind of growth? As
E-commerce draws more competitors, it's probably an unrealistic
assumption.



To: puborectalis who wrote (28953)12/4/1998 8:59:00 PM
From: llamaphlegm  Respond to of 164684
 
Small Investors Drive the Net
Stocks

Except for America Online, the small size of the average trade suggests
retail investors rather than big institutions dominate Net investing.

STOCK NUMBER OF NUMBER OF AVERAGE
TRADES SHARES TRADED TRADE
(MILLION) SIZE
-----------------------NOVEMBER, 1998---------------------
EBAY 183,691 57 310
YAHOO! 424,016 185 438
AMAZON 239,550 108 453
LYCOS 178,843 104 580
AOL 59,621 241 4,051

DATA: BIRINYI ASSOCIATES INC.



To: puborectalis who wrote (28953)12/4/1998 9:02:00 PM
From: llamaphlegm  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 164684
 
llama is all phlegmed out and apologizes to those who have no interest in the posted excerpts (bulls i'd guess who use ouja boards) ... i'd honestly recommend that you all go out and buy this one -- very interesting and i'd just like to note the traditional SI/Time Magazine/Business Week cover story jinxes that have plagued companies and people for years