In CFAI TT, one of the answers comments that asset based approach is best for valuing startups. However, aren’t startups asset poor? Would the income approach be more suitable?
Most start ups are capital intensive before they have even generated an income which makes the asset based approach best.
If you started a business with $100 in the business bank account the asset based approach would value the business at $100. The income based approach would value it at $0
Yes, a startup at “shell” stage would be perfect. But what about when they’re at seed stage - some traction - maybe 200-300k in sales or even lower - they very much would considered a startup? Is asset based approach still appropriate then?
At the seed stage a business is typically looking for equity financing because its capital poor and needs to finance it’s expansion which should drive sales. Both approaches could be used but which approach do you think would better reflect the value of the company? The characteristics of the entire company should be considered.
Tangent - Uber IPO. The valuation was not far from $80Bn yet the company has never turned a profit. Would the asset based approach provide a more appropriate valuation Vs the income approach? Are the valuations even reflective of the firm’s intrinsic value?