Good question..
For all of the reasons cited above, I am almost certain that TLS will pay circa 2.5 times EBITDA for the stores.
Of course, there is some variability here, as well as what everyone will agree on is the stores adjusted EBITDA.. hence why I offered range..
Lets add everything up.. if you strongly disagree with the below, pls share why!
Retail network, about to be sold to TLS :180-200M
Net cash in bank: 30M
75M franking credits balance: 18M
Sprout accessories brand: 2M
3 or 4 TLS business centres being retained: 5M
Artisean/SHAW: 35-60M
SQDatheltica: 0M lol....
Minus CGT on TLS sale: -20M
Nets to 250M at low end, 295M at high end..
Regarding SHAW..
SHAW currently generates half the revenues, and half of the gross profit of SLA...(EBITDA will come with scale and clinics maturing), so you could argue that its at least 30% of the worth of SLA no?? Which would be circa 60M..
KKR paid 13 times EBITDA for LCA, 4 years ago..
Maxine paid circa 9.5 times EBITDA for the 6 clinics in the clear complexions acquisition
https://www.businessnewsaustralia.com/articles/vita-group-diversifies-into-skin-treatment-business-in--9-5m-deal.htmlSo the valuation on SHAW is a fairly wide range, but the bottom end of what I've cited is probably what they have spent so far on it.... And if they post SHAW EBITDA of 3 or 4M for this half (very reasonable forecast), then 60M which implies 8-10 times EBITDA, aligns...
In any case, even at the very low end, it all sums up to way way way more than the current market cap......
