DOCSLIB.ORG

Ghostbusters Strategic Assessment and Valuation of Snap Inc. Master

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Ghostbusters Strategic Assessment and Valuation of Snap Inc. Master Ghostbusters Strategic Assessment and Valuation of Snap Inc. Master thesis Copenhagen Business School, 2018 Madeleine Ida Susanne Persson MSc in Accounting Strategy and Control Oscar Johan Eric Tydén Msc in Finance and Strategic Management Supervisor: Steen Rasmussen Pages: 116 Number of characters: 262,254 Hand in date: 15/05/2018 Executive summary This thesis aims to estimate the fair equity value of Snap Inc. as of December 31st, 2017. Founded in 2011, Snap is a US camera company. The company’s flagship product, Snapchat, is an application allowing people to communicate through short videos and photos called “snaps”. As of December 2017, the application had 187 million daily active users. The company serves two types of customers, (1) users and (2) advertisers. By developing features, Snap pursues to engage users to communicating through the platform. The engagement that follows attracts advertisers mainly in two ways. First by offering valuable Intel on targeted segments. Second, it offers the opportunity to spread information and interact with customers. Richer data and superior targeting capabilities as well as improved mobile infrastructure has made social media an effective channel for promotion. As a result, the market for advertisements on social media is expected to increase by 13.1% annually between 2016 and 2022 while the overall advertising market is expected to grow by 6% globally. Further, the network effect these platforms are built upon creates barrier to entry and as a result, there are a few platforms dominating the development. Overall, the outlook for the industry is largely positive. Supported by both secondary and primary data, through interviews and a questionnaire, the findings suggest that Snap has successfully managed to align their service with the preferences and needs of its targeted segment. Despite the network in itself is valuable for users, it is not sufficiently well positioned to outperform the peer average in terms of monetization. The lack of reciprocal communication between users and marketers as well as a more narrow brand exposure compared to Facebook makes the platform less attractive to the revenue-contributing group. Although, this paper suggest that Snap will improve its monetization and profitability, the concluding valuation suggest that the fair equity value is 27.8% below that of its reference date. Altogether, despite an overall optimistic view of the industry and the company, the traded valuation implies an over-confidence in the company’s future ability to generate value. Lastly, the paper recommend other authors to test conventional as well as network- specific multiples, potentially using network-based companies beyond solely social media actors, to test if DAU is becoming a better determinant of traded values compared to traditional multiple metrics. 1 Contents 1.0 Introduction ............................................................................................................................... 7 1.1 Research question formulation ..................................................................................................... 8 2.0 Methodology and study design ......................................................................................................... 8 2.1 Study approach............................................................................................................................ 8 2.2 Time period & delimitations ......................................................................................................... 9 2.3 Data collection ............................................................................................................................. 9 2.3.1 Semi-structured interview ...................................................................................................... 9 2.3.2 Survey ................................................................................................................................. 11 2.4 Validity and Reliability .............................................................................................................. 12 2.5 Limitations ........................................................................................................................... 13 3.0 Literature review ........................................................................................................................... 14 3.1 Models and theoretical framework ............................................................................................. 14 3.1.1 Strategic Analysis ................................................................................................................ 14 3.1.2 Financial analysis ................................................................................................................ 19 3.1.3 Valuation............................................................................................................................. 20 3.1.4 Selected topics ......................................................................................................................... 22 3.3 Analytical framework ................................................................................................................ 24 4.0 Snap ............................................................................................................................................. 26 4.1 Product offering ......................................................................................................................... 26 4.2 User development and average revenue per user ......................................................................... 28 4.3 Organization .............................................................................................................................. 29 4.4 Ownership structure .................................................................................................................. 30 4.5 Major Historical Events ............................................................................................................. 31 4.6 Strategy ..................................................................................................................................... 32 5.0 Strategic analysis ........................................................................................................................... 34 5.1 Competitors ............................................................................................................................... 34 5.1.1 Types of competing networks ............................................................................................... 34 5.1.2 Overview of selected network competitors ............................................................................ 34 5.1.3 Presentation of empirical findings from survey ..................................................................... 36 5.2 Macro ........................................................................................................................................ 41 5.2.1 Political ............................................................................................................................... 41 2 5.2.2 Legal ................................................................................................................................... 43 5.2.3 Economical factors............................................................................................................... 47 5.2.4 Social .................................................................................................................................. 48 5.2.5 Technological: ..................................................................................................................... 50 5.3 Industry .................................................................................................................................... 53 5.3.1 Buyer power ........................................................................................................................ 53 5.3.2 Supplier power .................................................................................................................... 56 5.3.3 Threat of Substitutes ............................................................................................................ 58 5.3.4 Threat of New Entry ............................................................................................................ 60 5.3.5 Rivalry among competitors .................................................................................................. 62 5.4 Internal ..................................................................................................................................... 63 5.4.1 Management and Board of directors ..................................................................................... 63 5.4.2 Product ............................................................................................................................... 65 5.4.3 User positioning ................................................................................................................... 67 5.4.4 Workforce ........................................................................................................................... 68 6.0 Financial analysis .......................................................................................................................... 70 6.1 Peer selection ............................................................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Accepted Manuscript Version
    Research Archive Citation for published version: Tony Shaw, and Tricia Jenkins, ‘An Act of War? The Interview Affair, the Sony Hack, and the Hollywood– Washington Power Nexus Today’, Journal of American Studies, April 2017. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0021875817000512 Document Version: This is the Accepted Manuscript version. The version in the University of Hertfordshire Research Archive may differ from the final published version. Copyright and Reuse: © 2017 Cambridge University Press and British Association for American Studies. This version is free to view and download for private research and study only. Not for re-distribution, re-sale or use in derivative works. Enquiries If you believe this document infringes copyright, please contact the Research & Scholarly Communications Team at [email protected] An Act of War? The Interview Affair, the Sony Hack, and the Hollywood/Washington Power Nexus Today An early quasi-police procedural showing J. Edgar Hoover’s Federal Bureau of Investigation “smashing” a communist sleeper cell in Boston, Alfred L. Werker’s 1952 docudrama Walk East on Beacon looks at first much like any other Red-baiting Hollywood production of the McCarthy era. On closer inspection, the movie offers us a keen insight into the Hollywood/Washington power nexus during the Cold War. Recently declassified documents reveal that the FBI’s top brass not only helped to inspire Walk East on Beacon but also to cast and market the film. More intriguingly, America’s most powerful military Cold War think tank, the RAND Corporation, was at the heart of the movie’s screenplay. Hollywood scriptwriter Leo Rosten worked as a part-time adviser on social sciences for RAND and based key elements of his plot for Walk East on Beacon on top-secret RAND projects, principally the military uses of satellites and computers.
    [Show full text]
  • The 2014 Sony Hack and the Role of International Law
    The 2014 Sony Hack and the Role of International Law Clare Sullivan* INTRODUCTION 2014 has been dubbed “the year of the hack” because of the number of hacks reported by the U.S. federal government and major U.S. corporations in busi- nesses ranging from retail to banking and communications. According to one report there were 1,541 incidents resulting in the breach of 1,023,108,267 records, a 78 percent increase in the number of personal data records compro- mised compared to 2013.1 However, the 2014 hack of Sony Pictures Entertain- ment Inc. (Sony) was unique in nature and in the way it was orchestrated and its effects. Based in Culver City, California, Sony is the movie making and entertain- ment unit of Sony Corporation of America,2 the U.S. arm of Japanese electron- ics company Sony Corporation.3 The hack, discovered in November 2014, did not follow the usual pattern of hackers attempting illicit activities against a business. It did not specifically target credit card and banking information, nor did the hackers appear to have the usual motive of personal financial gain. The nature of the wrong and the harm inflicted was more wide ranging and their motivation was apparently ideological. Identifying the source and nature of the wrong and harm is crucial for the allocation of legal consequences. Analysis of the wrong and the harm show that the 2014 Sony hack4 was more than a breach of privacy and a criminal act. If, as the United States maintains, the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (herein- after North Korea) was behind the Sony hack, the incident is governed by international law.
    [Show full text]
  • Seven Theses on the Future of Smart Glasses
    Seven Theses on the Future of Smart Glasses A trend analysis of the future of smart glasses in retail “Kapitelnavn” | Seven Theses on the future of Smart Glasses | Synoptik-Fonden side 1 ISBN: 978-87-93300-07-1 This trend report was funded by the Synoptik Foundation and carried out by Brian Due. Published as: CIRCD reports of social interaction, 1(4), 1-34, Centre of Interaction Research and Communications Design, Uni- Executive summary This report shows that opticians and people with interests in the eyeglass business need to be ready to understand, assist with and even sell smart glasses within the next five to seven years. On the background of an analysis based on research, papers, news stories, interviews and surveys, seven theses about the technological devel- opment and nearby future of smart glasses are proposed. The report shows that: • Today’s smart glasses are similar to the first versions of smartphones. But technological development is exponential and smart glasses will soon be mainstream. However, not as widely adopted as smartphones. • Google Glass is an icebreaker product and other products are following in the slipstream. There are already many different smart glass products on the market and on a prototy- pe level. All the big IT companies and many startups are already producing and/or have patents for new products. • Early adopters will start using smart glasses in three years and the early majority in five to seven years. • In terms of use and design, smart glasses will be divided into two types: 1) glasses for industrial, health and fitness purposes that will have many functionalities and thus a more computerized and sporty design, and 2) glasses for the ordinary consumer that will look more like ordinary glasses with fashionable designs.
    [Show full text]
  • Music's Augmented Future
    thereport ISSUE 410 | 17 OCTOBER 2017 Music’s augmented future 1 ISSUE 410 17.10.17 COVERAR SPECIAL FEATURE PART 1 AR you experienced? he first thing to understand about Cycle report alongside technologies like Kingston; in the years since there have been particularly around its potential to become augmented reality (AR) technology microblogging, social networking platforms a steady stream of experiments around music truly mainstream. There are several reasons is that while it may be a hot trend of and 3D printing. and AR. You can read about some of them for this, starting with 2016’s big app craze: 2017, it’s certainly not a new trend. 2008 was also the year when Apple and later in this issue. Pokémon Go (pictured). TSci-fi author William Gibson was writing Google launched their first app stores for In the years after 2008, many of these While catching virtual beasties in real- about the idea of augmenting humans’ vision smartphones, with startups like Layar and campaigns have, with hindsight (and often world locations also seemed gimmicky at first with digital content in 1994, although arguably Metaio early to experiment with “browser” even at the time) seemed like gimmicks; – the mobile game raced to $500m of revenue head-up displays (HUDs) in aircraft were the apps that overlaid information onto the good for getting a few headlines when they and then $1bn. Even in April 2017, there were first example of AR decades before that. phone’s camera feed. launched, then quickly forgotten with no still 65m active players globally, and for many report AR as we understand it in 2017 has been By 2009, Music Ally was writing about AR obvious impact on sales or fan engagement.
    [Show full text]
  • Complete Dissertation Aug 1
    Copyright by Courtney Elizabeth Brannon Donoghue 2011 The Dissertation Committee for Courtney Elizabeth Brannon Donoghue Certifies that this is the approved version of the following dissertation: “Lighting Up Screens Around the World”: Sony’s Local Language Production Strategy Meets Contemporary Brazilian and Spanish Cinema Committee: Janet Staiger, Co-Supervisor Joseph Straubhaar, Co-Supervisor Shanti Kumar Sonia Roncador Thomas Schatz “Lighting Up Screens Around the World”: Sony’s Local Language Production Strategy Meets Contemporary Brazilian and Spanish Cinema by Courtney Elizabeth Brannon Donoghue, B.A., M.A. Dissertation Presented to the Faculty of the Graduate School of The University of Texas at Austin in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy The University of Texas at Austin August 2011 Dedication To Brian, Mom, Dad, and Jessica for your enduring love and support. Acknowledgements After spending seven years as a Master’s and Doctoral student in the Department of Radio-TV-Film, many people contributed and shaped my journey and this dissertation project. I am deeply grateful for the support and encouragement from my incredible friends, family, and community of academics and educators. Through the process of two degrees, you helped me to strengthen and develop my own academic voice. Thank you to my all-star committee—Janet Staiger, Joseph Straubhaar, Shanti Kumar, Thomas Schatz, and Sonia Roncador—for all of the time, energy, and patience you poured into this project. Each of you has had a major part in shaping me as a scholar, teacher, and student. Janet, it has been an honor and pleasure to learn from such a prolific media scholar.
    [Show full text]
  • SONY Pictures Entertainment - Hack of the Century 1
    SONY Pictures Entertainment - Hack of the Century 1 SONY Pictures Entertainment - Hack of the Century SONY Pictures Entertainment - Hack of the Century 2 Submitted to the 2016 Arthur Page Society Case Study Competition Table of Contents Executive Summary ............................................................................................................................................... 3 Hacking Overview ................................................................................................................................................. 3 Guardians of Peace ........................................................................................................................................... 3 The Interview .................................................................................................................................................... 4 Sony Inc. ................................................................................................................................................................ 4 Sony Background .............................................................................................................................................. 4 Sony Pictures Entertainment ............................................................................................................................ 4 Sony Pictures Entertainment Market ................................................................................................................... 5 Market and Industry Analysis
    [Show full text]
  • Annual R E P O Rt 2007
    Annual R e p o r t 2007 2007 年 3 月 期 アニュアルレポート 2007年 3月期 ソニー株式会社 Printed in Japan Contents Financial Highlights Pictures: An Interview 2 21 with Top Management Letter to Shareholders: Collaboration in 4 A Message from 25 the Music Business Howard Stringer, CEO 8 “Sony United” 26 Business Overview Electronics: A Discussion Review of Operations 10 among Top Management 28 Electronics Game: An Interview Game 17 with Top Management 34 28 Sony United: Where Sony’s Revolution Begins Entertainment Financial Section 38 56 Table of Contents 43 Financial Services 57 A Message from the CFO 45 Research and Development 110 Stock Information Corporate Governance/ Stock Acquisition Rights 48 New Directors and 111 and Bond Information Corporate Executive Officers 52 Corporate Social Responsibility 112 Investor Information Cover pag e design c The representa oncept: tion of the ener gy created through “Sony Unit ed”—the collab oration of Sony’s many bus inesses, people and technolog ies 291 Financial Highlights Sony Corporation and Consolidated Subsidiaries Years ended March 31 Dollars in millions* Yen in millions Percent except per except per share amounts and number of employees change share amounts 2005 2006 2007 2007/2006 2007 FOR THE YEAR Sales and operating revenue . ¥7,191,325 ¥7,510,597 ¥ 8,295,695 +10.5.% $70,303 Operating income. 145,628 226,416 71,750 –68.3. 608 Income before income taxes . 157,207 286,329 102,037 –64.4. 865 Income taxes . 16,044 176,515 53,888 –69.5. 457 Equity in net income of affiliated companies .
    [Show full text]
  • Assignment: Common MGT 360 Management Analysis Report [email protected] [ Updated: Tuesday, March 12, 2019 ]
    Assignment: Common MGT 360 Management Analysis Report [email protected] [ updated: Tuesday, March 12, 2019 ] Course: MGT 360 Title: Management and Organizational Behavior (3 units) “Theory is about the connections among phenomena, a story about why acts, events, structure, and thoughts occur. Theory emphasizes the nature of causal relationships, identifying what comes first as well as the timing of such events.” --R. Sutton and B. Staw Goal: The Department of Management strives to ensure that all students enrolled in MGT 360 are critical thinkers and strong writers. In essence, the Department wants all students to be able to demonstrate competency and efficacy in applying the principles of management and organizational behavior to the issues of a contemporary organization and its broader environment. Objective: In narrative essay format, I want you to address a business/organization case study using multiple concepts from class. The case question and case text begin on page 5 of this document. Building upon your knowledge from MGT 360, students should demonstrate their best understanding of management and organizational behavior theory, and the application of those ideas to improve the understanding of various issues. You need to clearly identify at least three distinct, substantive issues. For each issue you need to 1), identify evidence from the case text that shows why this issue is important, 2), use theory from our textbook as a base for your analysis, and 3), draw an analogy from library materials other than the textbook to strengthen your argument. You also need to use appropriate in-text citations and provide a “Works Cited” (Reference) page.
    [Show full text]
  • Smart Glasses Design Exploring User Perception of Wearable Computing
    SMART GLASSES DESIGN EXPLORING USER PERCEPTION OF WEARABLE COMPUTING Master Thesis University of Lapland Faculty of Art and Design Department of Industrial Design Spring 2016 Vahab Pour Roudsari Farnaz 0371195 Abstract University of Lapland Faculty of Art and Design Title: Smart Glasses Design-Exploring user perception of wearable computing Author: Vahab Pour Roudsari Farnaz Degree Program: Industrial Design Type: Master Thesis Pages: 95 Year: 2016 As technology is growing rapidly and integrating itself to all aspects of people’s life, designers and developers try to provide a more pleasant experience of technology to people. One of the technology trends which aims to make life easier is wearable computing. Wearables aim to assist people to be in control of their life by augmenting the real life with extra information constantly and ubiquitously. One of the growing trends of wearable computing is Head Mounted Displays (HMD), as the head is a great gateway to receive audio, visual and haptic information. Also due to the Google Glass project, wearables in form of glasses gained much more attention during last years. However, because of the early stages of the technology adaptation, there is still much to explore on social acceptancy, key use cases and design directions of glasses as a type of wearable computing. This thesis has two stages. In the first stage, the aim is to explore the different use cases of a wearable eye tracker concept in different context and study the user’s perception of such a device. To accomplish this objective a user study with (n=12) participants were conducted using the experience sampling methods (ESM) and employing a mock-up of a smart-glasses as a design probe.
    [Show full text]
  • Investor Letter
    July 29, 2013 Second Quarter 2013 Investor Letter Review and Outlook Third Point’s opportunistic approach and robust framework allow us to search globally for attractive event-driven equity and credit opportunities and occasional “macro” trades. Our broad mandate has made it increasingly essential to study economic trends and attempt to identify key areas to dedicate our resources. Over our eighteen years, this flexibility has given us the ability to avoid (or short) asset classes that become overvalued, such as tech stocks in the bubble of the late ‘90s or credit leading up to 2007, and to press bets in areas that become oversold. As a result, our portfolio is built not only by reacting to special situations that arise, but also from top down insights. At our Investor Presentation in February, we outlined four key developments we expected would lead to interesting investment ideas in 2013: a) increasing allocations to equities as a consequence of a more benign macro environment; b) a re-rating of stocks due to improving global economic growth; c) a resurgent Japan; and d) an increase in merger and acquisition activity reflecting rising corporate confidence. More than halfway through the year, all of these developments have played out as expected, and a majority of our profits have come from event-driven investments in American and Japanese equities. Remaining opportunistic and responsive to scenarios that materialize – and those that do not – has been the key to generating positive performance in 2013. After a profitable first five months, many of our positions reached their price targets and we began to sell them near their highs in May and early June before the market began to correct sharply.
    [Show full text]
  • The Boston Beer Company, Inc. (Exact Name of Registrant As Specified in Its Charter)
    UNITED STATES SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D.C. 20549 FORM 8-K CURRENT REPORT Pursuant to Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 Date of Report (Date of earliest event reported): October 7, 2020 The Boston Beer Company, Inc. (Exact name of Registrant as Specified in Its Charter) Massachusetts 001-14092 04-3284048 (State or Other Jurisdiction (IRS Employer of Incorporation) (Commission File Number) Identification No.) One Design Center Place, Suite 850, Boston, MA 02210 (Address of Principal Executive Offices) (Zip Code) Registrant’s Telephone Number, Including Area Code: (617) 368-5000 Not Applicable (Former Name or Former Address, if Changed Since Last Report) Check the appropriate box below if the Form 8-K filing is intended to simultaneously satisfy the filing obligation of the registrant under any of the following provisions: ☐ Written communications pursuant to Rule 425 under the Securities Act (17 CFR 230.425) ☐ Soliciting material pursuant to Rule 14a-12 under the Exchange Act (17 CFR 240.14a-12) ☐ Pre-commencement communications pursuant to Rule 14d-2(b) under the Exchange Act (17 CFR 240.14d-2(b)) ☐ Pre-commencement communications pursuant to Rule 13e-4(c) under the Exchange Act (17 CFR 240.13e-4(c)) Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Act: Trading Title of each class Symbol(s) Name of each exchange on which registered Class A Common Stock SAM NYSE Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is an emerging growth company as defined in Rule 405 of the Securities Act of 1933 (§ 230.405 of this chapter) or Rule 12b-2 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (§ 240.12b-2 of this chapter).
    [Show full text]
  • The Spectacles Opportunity
    Snap Inc. The Spectacles Opportunity CENTRAL QUESTION What is Snap’s position in the wearables and augmented reality space? Question: What is Snap’s position in the wearables and augmented reality space? Snap may have started as a photo disappearing app in the convergence of wearables and augmented reality (AR). It’s 2011, but the company now has the potential to reinvent how clear the wearables and AR markets are gaining momentum as people use the camera. Now a public company, Snap must quell evidenced by the growth in wearable offerings and AR Wall Street’s demands while also competing against established development kits released recently. As the market and tech mature social media giants for revenue. The market expects nothing short over the years, Snap is strategically positioned to bring AR of flawless execution from 6-year-old Snap Inc. spectacles to the mass consumer market. Despite short-term stress, Snap’s position is envious. Its core With the release of seemingly unambitious Spectacles, Snap product, Snapchat, enjoys high engagement with a young, has ingeniously dipped into wearables without upsetting lucrative demographic that evades advertisers through traditional consumers. Spectacles offer little beyond Snapchat’s core usage. avenues like television. More importantly, despite competitors’ However, as Snapchat begins to introduce and become associated willingness to copy offerings, Snapchat is unique in its offerings to with AR, the gradual convergence of Snapchat’s AR offerings onto both users and advertisers. Snapchat’s competitive advantage is Spectacles will open up the possibility of mainstream adoption. not only its high quantity of engagement but also the quality of Snap’s product development shows it is swiftly striving engagement afforded by the camera.
    [Show full text]