6 ms·
Where are you getting that the company is worth $50m? The article says it’s a “$100 million-a-year” business
by TheGeminon 3y ago
Where are you getting that the company is worth $50m? The article says it’s a “$100 million-a-year” business
- AceJohnny2 3y agoThat’s revenue, which is different from company value.
- mydriasis 3y agoOh boy, if his 100MM/year in revenue business is only worth 50 million, most startups are _really_ in trouble.
- missedthecue 3y agoMost startups are growing faster than a literal grain mill, and they have good unit economics. Another customer costs little for a software company. Another customer can cost a lot for a grain mill. These contribute to valuation.
- AceJohnny2 3y agoWhy yes, company valuation is uncorrelated from revenue. By the way, this is why VCs love software startups, and drive so hard for an IPO exit.
- cscurmudgeon 3y agoLook up revenue multipliers: https://www.bizbuysell.com/learning-center/industry-valuation-multiples/ https://www.bizbuysell.com/learning-center/industry-valuatio...
- c0pium 3y agoThat’s pretty clearly what they’re talking about, yes.
- cscurmudgeon 3y agoNot really. They and others here seem clueless about multipliers less than 1.
- c0pium 3y agoThey described a fractional multiplier. That’s their whole point.
- cscurmudgeon 3y agoThey were posting in disbelief. You should read their comment again.
- c0pium 3y agoThat is obviously incorrect, is English not your first language?
- _heimdall 3y agoI guess this explains Nvidia's valuation. Revenue and company value are completely disconnected.
- AceJohnny2 3y agoYes, see "P/E Ratio" aka "Price to Earnings Ratio", which is a basic measure of how overvalued a company is.
- gottorf 3y agoI believe the preferred Wall Street parlance now is the "price to innovation ratio" ;-)
- bigtunacan 3y agoTo oversimplify a company with $100MM revenues annually and costs of $120MM annually is still losing money and has a real current value of $0.