Indian startups, especially those building online businesses, have lately been seeing more than the usual level of interest from venture capital investors. As more and more deals get done, across stages from seed to Series B and C, the inevitable and pertinent question is: are the current valuations justified?
Let’s consider the early-stage valuations of some of the more successful companies around. A fast food company is raising money at a valuation of 10 times its revenues. It is not profitable yet. Another company that has not yet launched its product was valued at Rs 20 crore a year ago. Its sales will not cross Rs 2.5 crore after two years, which gives them a valuation multiple of eight times two-year forward sales. A group of investors including Seedfund recently invested in Redbus at a valuation that was more than a few times the company’s gross revenues. And it was worth every penny.
So are high valuations the preserve of only early stage investors?
Is it fair to term large bets on companies that are growing faster than early stage startups ridiculous?
Is it so unrealistic to expect an Indian startup to attract multi-billion dollar valuations?
Let’s take a look at a simple comparison of valuations of Chinese and American online companies:
| United States | Valuation
($ bn) | China | Valuation
($ bn) | Ratio
(US:China) |
| GDP | 14500 | | 5880 | 2.5 |
| Ebay | 38 | Alibaba | 8.9 | 4.3 |
| Priceline | 26 | Ctrip | 22 | 1.2 |
| Groupon | 10 | Lashou | 1 | 10 |
| Google | 189 | Baidu | 50 | 3.8 |
| Facebook | 75 | Renren | 5.8 | 12.9 |
The American companies are bigger than their Chinese peers. So Chinese companies still have some room to grow, particularly given that their GDP is growing faster. There is a factor of minimum income per capita and access to connectivity, but mobile internet and cheaper internet is solving that already. Both India and China will undergo behavioural changes that will be necessary to match expectations, but that’s happening too.
| United States | Valuation
($ bn) | India | Valuation
($ bn) | Ratio
(US:India) |
| GDP | 14500 | | 1730 | 8.4 |
| Priceline | 26 | MMT | 0.7 | 37.1 |
| Amazon | 92 | Flipkart | 1 | 92 |
| Groupon | 10 | SnapDeal | 0.22 | 45.5 |
| Gilt | 1 | Fashion & You | 0.20 | 5 |
As shown in the table above, categories like travel (MMT), e-commerce (Flipkart) and local deals (SnapDeal) have a long way to go. However, this does not imply that these very companies will do well in the categories mentioned. That is the risk that venture capital investors are taking. But, in the next five years or less, somebody will touch and surpass these valuations. One can also assume that by then India’s GDP will be higher, per capita GDP will be higher and connectivity and behaviour will be favorable.
As for the risk, yes, the guys who are signing the big checks are taking risks. But frankly, an investor who writes a $6 million cheque to an Amazon.com equivalent in India, at however low a valuation, is taking a far bigger risk than somebody who writes a $150 million or $40 million cheque. The risk is lower with a fatter cheque because one is able to roll out good infrastructure and fortify barriers of entry.
Then there is the argument about profits. Profits don’t happen by chasing profits but by focusing on consumers. If consumers are happy, everything else falls into place. Sometimes, when you are fighting consumer behaviour, poor infrastructure, broken supply chains and hostile banking services, keeping consumers happy can be quite expensive. Enough has been said about those who are hiring SEM marketing agencies. These companies will die soon and it will not matter whether their valuations were high or low.
I have a theory about retail in India. We skipped the entire telecom wired revolution and jumped to mobile. The United States went through a phase where Barnes and Nobles shut down mom-and-pop establishments and then Amazon stunted Barnes and Nobles. In India, retail is yet to roll out and we are already looking at ecommerce companies giving them a run for their money. We will skip the entire retail store rollout phase in India and modern retail will significantly be run online.
A word about profits in online companies. Redbus is profitable, Infibeam doesn’t lose much compared to its revenues and MMT has finally become profitable. I am sure many others will do so in the coming years. And some day the profits will justify their current valuations.
As I wait patiently for some of our companies to roll out their products, delayed a couple of quarters, I am hopeful. My worry is not profits, or the infinite valuation we gave to a zero-revenue company. My worry is whether consumers will like the product or not. A good entrepreneur will never take his or her eyes off costs or profits, but he or she will dream big and bet big. It is these best-of-breed entrepreneurs who command the best valuations and also stir up debates.
I do gasp at some of the deals that are happening. There is a very high chance that all of us will exclaim after a few years, “I told you about these ridiculous….” There is a smaller chance that the same guys will say after a few years, “Nobody believed us when…”
As venture capitalists, we make this choice all the time. Now we have a few big boys joining the game, the game just got bigger. I am not complaining.
About the columnist: Anand Lunia is executive director at Seedfund where he leads investments in technology, Internet, education and retail startups. He has 15 years of experience as an entrepreneur, venture capital investor and corporate executive. An IIM Lucknow alumni, Lunia was co-founder of one of India’s earliest elearning companies, Brainvisa Technologies (acquired by Indecomm Global Services) where he created the business plan, led the team in fundraising and facilitated the exit of the company’s venture capital investors, earning them five times their investment. Follow Lunia on Twitter.