<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Victor Cheng &#187; valuation</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.victorcheng.com/tag/valuation/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.victorcheng.com</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 08 Sep 2010 15:54:08 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	
		<item>
		<title>The Psychology of the Absurd Valuation</title>
		<link>http://www.victorcheng.com/psychology-of-valuation</link>
		<comments>http://www.victorcheng.com/psychology-of-valuation#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sat, 10 Nov 2007 05:34:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Victor Cheng</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Victor Cheng Blog]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[facebook]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[microsoft]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[startup valuation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[valuation]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.victorcheng.com/blog/?p=14</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<p>A few weeks ago, Microsoft made a $240 million investment in Facebook for a 1.6% stake.  That puts Facebook&#039;s valuation at $15 billion versus sales of approximately $150 million.</p>
<p>That&#039;s a breathtaking 100-times revenues valuation.  By conventional logic, that&#039;s a nearly impossible valuation to justify.</p>
<p><a  href="http://www.victorcheng.com/psychology-of-valuation" class="more-link">More on The Psychology of the Absurd Valuation</a></p>


]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>A few weeks ago, Microsoft made a $240 million investment in Facebook for a 1.6% stake.  That puts Facebook&#039;s valuation at $15 billion versus sales of approximately $150 million.</p>
<p>That&#039;s a breathtaking 100-times revenues valuation.  By conventional logic, that&#039;s a nearly impossible valuation to justify.</p>
<p>But that pre-supposes that valuation is inherently a logical process.</p>
<p>Of course, you can whip out your MBA textbooks and read up on how a company&#039;s valuation is SUPPOSED to be a discounted cash flow, blah, blah, blah&#8230;</p>
<p>Yes, it is supposed to work that way&#8230; but in reality, valuation is driven by something far more powerful than logic &#8212; human nature.</p>
<p>You see, Facebook&#039;s valuation, triggered by the Microsoft investment, is far more revealing about Microsoft than about Facebook.</p>
<p>Most, if not all, of the mainstream media missed this point.  They all focused on Facebook and whether or not it was worth it.</p>
<p>The better question was what in the world was Microsoft thinking when they made such an absurd valuation?</p>
<p>The answer:  They weren&#039;t thinking; they were FEELING.</p>
<p><strong>Two feelings drive valuation:</strong></p>
<p><strong>1) Hope </strong></p>
<p><strong>2) Fear</strong></p>
<p><strong>Hope</strong> has to do with feelings about the future.  Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg must have told one heck of a story.  It was likely a story that used the magic words, &#034;Social networking is going to be the OPERATING SYSTEM of the future.&#034;</p>
<p>OH&#8230; magic hot-button for the folks in Redmond.  These are the folks who believe it is their birthright to dominate the operating system market for eternity.</p>
<p>Will Facebook become the next operating system?  Who knows.</p>
<p>This moves us to the second psychological aspect of valuation:  <strong>FEAR</strong></p>
<p>Can Microsoft afford to not see such a change coming down the pipeline?  On the off, off chance this vision becomes reality, can Microsoft afford to be <strong>left behind</strong> in the <strong>operating system market</strong>?</p>
<p>For a company with $51 BILLION in annual sales based on their dominance of the operating system market, is $240 million (a mere 0.5% of one year&#039;s revenues) a small price to pay as a form of insurance against this wild card scenario?</p>
<p>YES.</p>
<p>Think of it this way:  What if the next 10 years of all of your earnings could be wiped out by some catastrophic medical, geological, or military event.  Would you give up 0.5% of one year&#039;s income to avoid, or at least get, early notification of such a change?</p>
<p>Here&#039;s a simple example with round numbers.  Would someone making $100k a year, pay a $500 one-time fee to get 12 &#8211; 24 month&#039;s advanced notice that his/her industry is going to disappear?  Put in that context, it doesn&#039;t seem totally ridiculous, does it?</p>
<p>In a future, post I&#039;ll talk about how to use HOPE and FEAR to drive the valuation of your company&#8230; and the right mechanism for communicating this to private and public investors.</p>


]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.victorcheng.com/psychology-of-valuation/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
