Investment banker valuation and securities pricing are
heavily used inter alia in IPOs (e.g. offering pricing ranges) and M&A (e.g.
fairness opinion).
They involve translating a firm’s expected operating performance into a price
in markets subject to asymmetric information. The price estimates are often
more influenced by momentum than fundamentals. Thus, they can diverge from
intrinsic value based discounted cash flow measures-sometimes intentionally.
Investment bankers can help bridge the gap between price and
value among buyers and sellers of capital and firms. They do so by posting
their reputation (the value of which varies considerably) as a signal, for a
fee, to give the parties comfort that the offered price is fair based on their
due diligence and technical analysis. The analysis is based on well know
business tools like discounted cash flow and risk adjusted returns-at least on
the surface.
The techniques used, however, are frequently a fig leaf
behind which many other factors (sometimes conflicting) are taking place. These
include:
1)
Objectives: What price (value) is the investment
banker seeking to justify for his client or himself?
2)
Inputs: How were the inputs selected based on
the firm, industry and market considerations? There is a great deal of (black?)“art”
(subjectivity) in selecting key estimates for sales growth, operating profit
margins, taxes, working capital, CAPEX,
and WACC.
3)
Who does the Investment Represent? For example,
with IPOs, although representing the issuer, the investment banker is
frequently more concerned with maintaining good investor relations as the
source of his long term franchise value. Therefore he is inclined to under
price the offering.
4)
Reverse Engineering: Is the valuation really
independent or reverse engineered to justify a desired result? Remember,
Investment Bankers do not get paid unless the deal closes. As Warren Buffet
notes -fees too often lead to transactions rather than transactions leading to
fees. This why his 2014 annual report
contains so many Investment Banking “slams”.
In theory, there should be no difference between practice
and theory, but in reality there is a big difference. Surveys showing an
alignment of academic valuation approaches and investment banking practice (see
valuation
from the field which references once such survey) should be taken with more
than the customary grain of salt. Investment Bankers herd and like to hide
behind “best practices” (i.e. “me-too-ism”) to look smart and reduce legal
liability. No one wants to admit they are using “primitive” earnings multiples unadjusted
for risk or the time value of money in their analysis.
Having practiced the black art for many years, I can assure
you that Investment Bankers are in the sales business. Therefore, the real
motivation behind the various valuation estimates must be considered when
reading their presentation booklets. Cash flow matters, but the question is
whose cash flow are we discussing-the client or the banker’s? The Salomon
Brothers quote from Liar's
Poker says it best-“do you want to
be a winner or the client?” Bottom line-do your own analysis and come to your
own conclusions. Academic finance as practiced by Investment Bankers can be
dangerous to your wealth.
Joe- a hopefully reformed ex-Investment Banker.
No comments:
Post a Comment