Thanks for that post Toby9562. This is my take.
Firstly, the PYG financial year is from 1 April through 31 March.
At the same time PYG announced the IWS acquisition (31/3/21), they upgraded FY21 ARR guidance to
at least $21.5m (excluding benefits from the IWS acquisition).
At the time of the FY21 Results Presentation (1/6/21), the FY21 ARR was reported as $27.2, comprising:
- the BASE guidance of $21.5m ARR (31/3/21); plus
- the IWS ARR of $5.5m; plus
- a further ARR of $0.2m (more likely that the BASE ARR increased from $21.5m to $21.7m given the 'at least' comment).
The Results Presentation (p4) commented
"ARR is contracted recurring revenue of term subscriptions annualised to the single calendar (my emphasis) year and includes revenue from IWS."So ...
PYG acquired IWS on the last day of FY21 (31/3/21) and was thus able to increase the FY21 ARR to $27.2m and forecast an FY22 ARR of $37.0m, an ~36% increase. Further they were able to claim this ~36% growth as 'organic'.
But what if PYG had acquired IWS on the following day (1/4/21), the first day of FY22?
Then the ARR growth from FY21 ($21.7m) to FY22 ($37.0m) would have been ~70% ,,, but driven by both aquisition (IWS) and 'organic'.
Given the timing of the IWS acqisition, it appears PYG (and the market?) currently prefer 'organic growth' to 'growth by acquisition'.
But it all seems a bit slippery to me!
