1 / 26

Module 8: abnormal enterprise income growth model Company: chipotle

Module 8: abnormal enterprise income growth model Company: chipotle. Matt Ramirez. Chipotle background. Mexican grill that focuses on serving quality food while maintaining speed and efficiency Found in 1993 by Steve Ells in Denver, Colorado

tawana
Télécharger la présentation

Module 8: abnormal enterprise income growth model Company: chipotle

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Module 8: abnormal enterprise income growth modelCompany: chipotle Matt Ramirez

  2. Chipotle background • Mexican grill that focuses on serving quality food while maintaining speed and efficiency • Found in 1993 by Steve Ells in Denver, Colorado • Considered a “fast-casual” restaurant: food that is served fast without the “fast food” methods or ambiance, allows customers to eat “on the go” or in a nicer restaurant environment • Not franchised, centrally-owned

  3. forecasting

  4. Forecast Assumptions

  5. forecasts

  6. Comments on forecasts • Chipotle will continue to grow for some time: focused on maintaining growth, opening up new restaurants, and overall expansion • It is difficult to predict how big Chipotle will grow to, when it will slow down, and for how long it will grow for • Forecasts are optimistic based on analyst estimates, current/past data: no signs of slowing down

  7. Wacc calculation

  8. Wacc calculation • rent= (rd x Vd/Vent) + (req x Veq/Vent)

  9. Bloomberg’s wacc (8.2%)

  10. Wacc comments • Calculated WACC (6.82%) more than 1% lower than Bloomberg’s WACC (8.2%) • While Bloomberg is seemingly arbitrary in calculating values, it provides a decent benchmark or comparison to own calculated values • Overall, Bloomberg’s higher WACC results in much lower enterprise value compared to my own WACC

  11. Dcf valuation

  12. dcf valuation

  13. Dcf valuation (bloombergwacc)

  14. Residual income valuation

  15. Residual income valuation

  16. Residual income valuation (bloombergwacc)

  17. Abnormal income growth valuation

  18. Abnormal enterprise income growth model • Different accounting anchor employed than residual income: forecast of EPAT (versus current NEA) • Captures most value within the forecasting horizon (compared to DCF & RI models), but least amount of continuing value • Need a sufficient forecasting horizon to achieve “steady state” of growth to calculate reliable continuing value: abnormal income growth model takes one extra year due to agr calculation

  19. Steady state requirements • 1) Sales growing at constant rate • 2) EPAT from each $1 of sales is constant • 3) NEA required for each $1 of sales is constant *Steady state has been achieved (sufficient forecasting horizon, seen on next slide)

  20. Abnormal income growth valuation

  21. Abnormal income growth valuation (bloombergwacc)

  22. discussion

  23. Residual income & dcf enterprise value (vs. market enterprise value)

  24. Value estimates

  25. Value estimates discussion • The AGR model captures 53% of Chipotle’s value within the horizon • Compared to other firms, 53% still seems low: significant amount of value still found in continuing value (beyond horizon) • Comfortable with AGR model due to its ability to capture most value within horizon: not confident with Chipotle’s continuing value at this point

  26. Final comments • Residual income enterprise, DCF, and abnormal income growth enterprise values are the same: accounting choices do not matter over time (self-correcting) • Different growth value (4% terminal growth) used for 2019 onward: 16.79% growth is not sustainable (declines 2.558% per year until 2019) • 4% chosen due to expected future growth & analyst estimates • My calculated WACC (6.81%) is lower than other estimates (e.g. Bloomberg at 8.2%): different values- my WACC provides value more closely related to the market

More Related