This would be funny if it wasn't meant to be serious. Put simply the value of a company is the value of it's equity. This equity value is adjusted to take account of future growth and returns to shareholders. A company that has to consistently raise equity to fund growth and which achieves the sub-par returns on that equity such ABS has been doing for some time now is a poor business.
Also PE's are an indicator of price but have nothing to do with value.
Dhukka, the “market” value of a company is the (market) value of its equity. This is calculated by multiplying the share price by the number of shares on issue – so the share price, ceteris parabis, measures ‘value’ as perceived by the market at any arbitrary point in time. But is subject to market failures such that one can argue there is an intrinsic or true value of a company’s equity, which, as you said, takes account of future growth and returns to shareholders. Growth in EPS is important because EPS = earnings/no. of shares on issue. So it in fact fully compensates for more shares on issue. The most recent equity raising was only about 12% of equity. So after the full year perhaps we could reconvene to look at ABS diluted EPS.
For a company such as ABS, in a fragmented market with high capital expenditure requirements – it needs to fund growth somehow. Debt or Equity? That’s not a question I purport to answer here – but I.M.O. a leveraged balance sheet is a sign of a company that is leveraging its opportunities. In the life-cycle of a business, ABS is still quite young – at the stage where its capital outlays are high, it is raising debt/equity and operating CF’s have not come through strongly yet.
Now also take into consideration the ABS model – buy the franchise, refurb. the centres, drive down vacancy rates (increase efficiency) then reduce overhead through synergy – don’t pass the cost savings to customers = betters CF’s a margins. This doesn’t happen overnight in any business. I can’t think of any strategy involving rapid and significant expansion into new markets not involving large initial outlays funded by either debt or equity – and no shareholders expecting ambitious growth in earnings without a higher s-t debt burden or EPS dilution. Nor are growth-through-acquisition strategies expected to yield high CF’s in its early stages. Perhaps our difference of opinion is due to differing investment time-frames. I.M.O. if you wait for ABS to become a mature business (achieving high ROE, high operating CF’s, lower debt etc), you won’t be paying under $7 a share. Simple.