Jargon busting the journey from Startup to SME: Part II

[avatar]

So far then, our startups have traversed the so-called “valley of death” and toiled their way to revenue generation and potential profitability. First they took seed funding from friends, family and angel investors to kick start business development, then they looked to professional investors for series funding to provide working capital, strengthen areas such as sales and marketing, and perhaps even facilitate expansion of property and other assets. So now that these startups are past the early stages of the business cycle, where should their directors turn to fund the next phases of business growth and development?

All these companies will now have traded for at least a few years, acquiring a financial track record and hopefully a steady customer base too. This increased business maturity and stability tends to translate into lower risk (and lower reward) for potential investors, an evolution in the risk profile that changes the nature of the available sources of finance.

Some companies with more robust balance sheets will now be in a position to seek out senior debt in the form of loans secured against assets of the business. Senior debtholders are those that are most likely to be repaid in the event that a business gets into financial difficulty. Gaining a loan from a bank at this this stage of development is notoriously difficult however. As such, businesses are increasingly turning to newer sources of finance, such as marketplace lending platforms, to provide them with the credit lines they need.

Others businesses that lack assets against which to secure debt, or the stable cash flows to service it, may look to invoice financing to improve their cash flow. Invoice financing can be split into discounting and factoring, both of which involve the third party finance provider advancing the money owed to a business by its customers, minus a service fee. With factoring, the finance provider takes control of the debtor book, whilst with discounting the relationship between a business and its customers is left untouched.

jargon part ii

For those businesses that seek to expand aggressively though, either of these forms of financing alone may not be enough, leading them to seek out mezzanine finance to help them achieve their goals. Mezzanine finance is usually unsecured and sits behind senior debt in terms of repayment priority. Because of this increased risk for the lender, it carries a much higher interest rate and also a clause that converts the debt into equity in the company if the loan is not repaid.

The above types of funding will suffice to meet business requirements of many companies, allowing for growth whilst keeping ownership in private hands. At the end of the financing road though, for those that choose it, is an IPO, or Initial Public Offering. There are a number of reasons why a company might consider ‘going public,’ such as reducing the burden of interest payments or generating publicity. Over and above any of these considerations though is the ability that being publically listed brings to raise large amounts of capital on a consistent basis. That said, firms must take into account the significant costs of the listing process, as well as the increased regulatory requirements that will be in place once public.

And so with IPOs we reach the end of the startup cycle, and the jargon that comes with it. It goes without saying that following the path through from seed funding to listing involves a huge amount of hard work and I dare say an element of luck. But with 99.3% of UK private businesses ranked as “small firms,” it is a journey we must hope many will complete successfully.

Where now for Lending Club?

[avatar]

Tuesday marked the end of the sell-side quiet period. This means underwriting banks can now publish their ratings and give us some insight as to where they see the stock price going in the coming months.

So how have Lending Club faired? All recognise the huge potential in terms of products, services, geography and the fact Lending Club is still growing at a significant pace. However, the general consensus seems to be that the current value reflects many of these points and the share price should begin to settle down at around $22.

  • Stifel was a ‘Hold’ but gave no price target this time
  • Goldman Sachs were ‘Neutral’ rating and believe that $22 is where they see things settling
  • Citigroup were ‘Neutral’ and set a $23 target
  • Morgan Stanley were ‘Neutral’ and a expect $22;
  • Only BMO Capital issued an ‘Outperform’ and expect to see the $28 range again

There’s no doubt that the LendingClub’s IPO has put Marketplace Lending (P2P, Crowdlending etc.) firmly on the map. However, it is just as important for our industry that a stable share price, in-line with analysts’ expectations and Lending Club’s ambitions are delivered.

Lending Club’s IPO: A watershed moment for P2P Lending?

[avatar user=”Tom Mitchell” /]

As the autumn nights have drawn in, many financial analysts have begun to reflect on a year that has already seen the peer-to-peer industry break numerous records globally. Yet recent news from the US suggests that our fledgling industry is set to achieve another significant milestone before the year is out.

Having launched in 2007, Lending Club fast became the largest peer-to-peer lending platform in the USA – and, indeed, the world – having originated over $6.2 billion of loans to date. As such, news of the platform’s planned Initial Public Offering (IPO) on the NYSE has been greeted with enormous interest, with numerous investment banks vying to manage the deal.

This event, which is currently scheduled to take place later this month, carries real significance for two key reasons in the author’s opinion. Firstly, it serves to validate the peer-to-peer experiment begun by Zopa in the UK, and followed in the US by Lending Club and Prosper. As Orchard’s Matt Burton puts it, “No one took social media seriously until Facebook IPO-ed. For all the people who are not taking this space seriously it’s harder to ignore once you have companies go public.” Lending Club’s CEO Renaud Laplanche has echoed these sentiments, explaining in an interview that it is a perfect opportunity to strengthen their brand and develop awareness.

Secondly, and equally importantly, the value that is ascribed to Lending Club by the market will naturally set a precedent for all future platforms that look to issue equity in the capital markets. As it stands, many analysts predict that a valuation of between $4 billion – $5 billion is the likely outcome. However, given that the platform will be the first peer-to-peer lender to IPO, an obvious question arises: how should the company actually be valued? In predicting a valuation of over $4 billion, the majority of analysts have chosen to align Lending Club with technology firms such as Twitter and Facebook, which often trade at many times book value and other multiples. But to value Lending Club as a pure technology company is problematic, for it ignores the fact that, despite its new and innovative structure, Lending Club is also a financial services provider. More traditional financial institutions, such as banks, usually trade at much lower multiples than technology firms, and as a result the platform’s current valuation leaves it at odds here.

One would hope that analysts’ current appraisals of Lending Club prove to be a true reflection of the company’s future earnings potential. Whatever value the market ultimately places on the platform, though, the ramifications from its IPO will be substantial.