More from Tar ⚡
Open Question to fellow investors tracking Music Industry.
A business like Universal which controls more than 1/3rd of all published music globally is selling for less than 6x FY20 Sales.
Why are Indian businesses like Saregama / Tips selling for 11x, 20x their sales?
If I include all of the revenue generated by entire firm, its selling for ~4.5x FY20 Sales
Universal Listing Market Cap ~ 40 Billion USD
FY 20 Revenues ~ 8.87 B USD or 7.4B EUR
Catalogue of Music includes every international artist you can possibly name
Either Universal is grossly undervalued or Saregama/Tips are grossly overvalued.
https://t.co/aHzWSYtcUt
https://t.co/v0EMoCuYKX
A business like Universal which controls more than 1/3rd of all published music globally is selling for less than 6x FY20 Sales.
Why are Indian businesses like Saregama / Tips selling for 11x, 20x their sales?
If I include all of the revenue generated by entire firm, its selling for ~4.5x FY20 Sales
Universal Listing Market Cap ~ 40 Billion USD
FY 20 Revenues ~ 8.87 B USD or 7.4B EUR
Catalogue of Music includes every international artist you can possibly name
Either Universal is grossly undervalued or Saregama/Tips are grossly overvalued.
https://t.co/aHzWSYtcUt
Homework for all the interested participants here:
— Intrinsic Compounding (@soicfinance) June 27, 2021
Q1.Why 20% and not 50%+ Margins for UMG
Q2. Differences in dynamics between Western&Indian cos?
Q3. Trends in West vs Trends in India in the industry.
Research and find the answers. My job is done \U0001f601\U0001f64f
https://t.co/v0EMoCuYKX
If you see the ebitda of universal music its low 20% compared to our saregama 30% or tips 50%. So when you compare earnings saregama is 40x and tips is 30x and universal music is 30x. Also these type of companies are less( low or no capex with excellent and growinh cashflows)
— Srikanth V (@mynameisnani75) June 27, 2021
More from Iex
You May Also Like
A brief analysis and comparison of the CSS for Twitter's PWA vs Twitter's legacy desktop website. The difference is dramatic and I'll touch on some reasons why.
Legacy site *downloads* ~630 KB CSS per theme and writing direction.
6,769 rules
9,252 selectors
16.7k declarations
3,370 unique declarations
44 media queries
36 unique colors
50 unique background colors
46 unique font sizes
39 unique z-indices
https://t.co/qyl4Bt1i5x
PWA *incrementally generates* ~30 KB CSS that handles all themes and writing directions.
735 rules
740 selectors
757 declarations
730 unique declarations
0 media queries
11 unique colors
32 unique background colors
15 unique font sizes
7 unique z-indices
https://t.co/w7oNG5KUkJ
The legacy site's CSS is what happens when hundreds of people directly write CSS over many years. Specificity wars, redundancy, a house of cards that can't be fixed. The result is extremely inefficient and error-prone styling that punishes users and developers.
The PWA's CSS is generated on-demand by a JS framework that manages styles and outputs "atomic CSS". The framework can enforce strict constraints and perform optimisations, which is why the CSS is so much smaller and safer. Style conflicts and unbounded CSS growth are avoided.
Legacy site *downloads* ~630 KB CSS per theme and writing direction.
6,769 rules
9,252 selectors
16.7k declarations
3,370 unique declarations
44 media queries
36 unique colors
50 unique background colors
46 unique font sizes
39 unique z-indices
https://t.co/qyl4Bt1i5x
PWA *incrementally generates* ~30 KB CSS that handles all themes and writing directions.
735 rules
740 selectors
757 declarations
730 unique declarations
0 media queries
11 unique colors
32 unique background colors
15 unique font sizes
7 unique z-indices
https://t.co/w7oNG5KUkJ
The legacy site's CSS is what happens when hundreds of people directly write CSS over many years. Specificity wars, redundancy, a house of cards that can't be fixed. The result is extremely inefficient and error-prone styling that punishes users and developers.
The PWA's CSS is generated on-demand by a JS framework that manages styles and outputs "atomic CSS". The framework can enforce strict constraints and perform optimisations, which is why the CSS is so much smaller and safer. Style conflicts and unbounded CSS growth are avoided.