ROSETTA STONE: pricing the 2009 IPO

Anonymous

Question Description

do this case in one page


Unformatted Attachment Preview

ROSETTA STONE: PRICING THE 2009 IPO We are changing the way the world learns languages. —Tom Adams Introduction In April 2009 Rosetta Stone management was considering an initial public offering of Rosetta Stone stock during one of the most difficult periods in market and capital-raising history. Rosetta Stone provides an unique language-learning strategy and was a pioneer in developing a whole new market in language-learning. Their strong financial performance allowed them to consider going public during a difficult financial period. At the time of this case, managers are in the process of valuing the stock using various corporate valuation strategies, and making the decision on whether to go public. Purpose In development of this case, students will review the institutional aspects of the equity issuance transaction, explore the costs and benefits associated with initial public share offerings, develop an appreciation for the challenges of valuing unseasoned firms, develop corporate valuation skills, specifically using market multiples, and evaluate related the financial anomaly of IPO underpricing. Case It was mid-April 2009. Tom Adams, president and CEO of Rosetta Stone, Inc. (Rosetta Stone), the language learning software company, reached for his iPhone to contact Phil Clough of private equity fund ABS Capital. Adams and Clough had been discussing plans to take Rosetta Stone public for some time. The wait was finally over. In the wake of the 2008 financial crisis, the market for initial public offerings (IPOs) evaporated. By early spring the market was showing its first encouraging signs. Just a week prior, Chinese online videogame developer Changyou.com had listed on the NASDAQ at a price to EBITDA of 6.5 times followed by a one-day jump of 25%, and the online college Bridgeport Education was currently circulating its plans to go public at a range of 10 to 12 times EBITDA. Having received preliminary approval of its registration filings with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), Rosetta Stone was authorized to sell 6.25 million shares, a 30% stake in the company. Exhibits 1 and 2 provide financial statements from Rosetta Stone’s IPO prospectus, required by the SEC to inform investors about the details of the equity offering. Half of the shares were to be new shares and the other half were shares to be sold by existing shareholders. Rosetta Stone management had circulated an estimated price range of $15 to $17 per 1 share, representing a price to EBITDA of about 8 times. Demand for the shares was strong, and some analysts believed that Rosetta Stone was leaving money on the table. Yet with world financial and product markets still in turmoil, there was a strong case to be made for prudence. Economic Conditions The previous year had been a dramatic one for the world economy. Prices on global credit and equity markets had been in free fall. The U.S. equity market was down over 50% from its peak in October 2007 (see Exhibit 3 for details of the recent price history of U.S. equity market returns in total and for select industries). The collapse of world financial markets had preceded deterioration in economic activity worldwide, including dramatic shifts in real estate values, unemployment levels, and discretionary consumer spending. The severity of economic conditions had prompted massive intervention by world governments with dramatic policy changes, particularly by the U.S. federal government. The economic and political conditions were frequently compared with those of the Great Depression of the 1930s. In February and March of 2009, there had been some evidence of improvement in financial and economic conditions. Wholesale inventories were in decline. New-home sales were beginning to rise. The equity market had experienced a rally of over 20% in recent weeks. Yet many money managers and analysts worried that such economic green shoots were only a temporary rally in a longer-running bear market. There was strong concern that the magnitude of government spending would spur inflation in the U.S. dollar. GDP growth was still negative, corporate bankruptcy rates and unemployment were at historic highs, and many believed the economic void was just too big for a quick recovery to be feasible. A Wall Street Journal survey of U.S. economists suggested that the economy was expected to generate positive growth in the last half of 2009.1 In contrast, a survey of U.S. corporate executives stated that less than a third of respondents expected to see an economic upturn in 2009.2 The debate regarding the economic future of the world economy raged on. Rosetta Stone In the 1980s, Allen Stoltzfus, an economics professor, real estate agent, and history buff, was frustrated with his slow progress in mastering the Russian language. He was enrolled in a conventional classroom Russian course but found it much less effective than the process he had used to learn German while living in Germany years before. Seeking to produce a more natural language learning method, Stoltzfus envisioned using computer technology to simulate the way people learn their native language—with pictures and sounds in context. Rather than learning the language by translating one language to another, his approach would be to use electronic technology to encourage people to think in the target language from the beginning. He sought the aid of his brother-in-law, John Fairfield, who had received graduate training in computer science. Together they explored the concept of how a computer could be made to facilitate language 1 2 Phil Izzo, “Obama, Geithner Get Low Grades From Economists,” Wall Street Journal, March 11, 2009. “Economic Conditions Snapshot, March 2009: McKinsey Global Survey Results,” McKinsey Quarterly, March 2009. 2 learning. Stoltzfus and Fairfield founded Fairfield Language Technologies in Harrisonburg, Virginia, in 1992. The emergence of CD-ROM technology in the 1990s made the project feasible. The company released its first retail language training software product in 1999 under the name Rosetta Stone.3 The Rosetta Stone series of CD-ROMs provided users an effective way of learning new languages. The software utilized a combination of images, text, and sound to teach various vocabulary terms and grammatical functions intuitively by matching images with the spoken word. Following the way children learn their first language, the company called this method of teaching languages the Dynamic Immersion method: “dynamic” because digital technology and the teaching method powerfully engaged the learner in an interactive learning process, and “immersion” because learners anywhere, from any language background, started at the very beginning and studied exclusively in the target language. A recent research study provided scientific evidence that the language test scores of students that completed 55 hours of Rosetta Stone training performed comparably to those who had completed an entire semester of a good quality college language course.4 Rosetta Stone users were broadly satisfied with the experience and regularly recommended the software to others. After focusing initially on school and government sales, the company began aggressively pursuing the retail market in 2001. Following the death of Stoltzfus in 2002, the company hired an outsider, 31-year-old Tom Adams, as chief executive. Adams brought an international dimension to the small-town, rural company: A native of Sweden who had grown up in England and France, he was fluent in Swedish, English, and French. He had studied history at Bristol University in the United Kingdom and had earned an MBA from INSEAD in France. Prior to arriving in Harrisonburg, Adams had been a commodity merchant in Europe and China. Adams got right to work by entering new markets and scaling up the current business; from 2004 to 2005, the revenues of the company nearly doubled. Acknowledging the need for capital and professional support as the company expanded, Adams solicited a capital infusion from the private equity market. In 2006, two firms, ABS Capital Partners and Norwest Equity Partners, made major equity investments in the company. As part of the recapitalization, the name of the company was changed from Fairfield Language Technologies to Rosetta Stone, Inc., to match the signature product. Over the ensuing two years, revenue continued to expand aggressively, more than doubling from 2006 through 2008. Since Adams’s arrival, the compound annual growth rates of Rosetta Stone’s revenue and operating profit were at 70% and 98%, respectively, and the company employed over 1,200 people. By early 2009, Rosetta Stone was the most recognized language learning software brand in the world. Millions of language learners in more than 150 countries were using the Rosetta Stone software. The company offered self-study language The name Rosetta Stone referred to a black basalt tablet discovered in 1799 by a French engineer in Napoleon’s army near the Egyptian town of Rosetta. The tablet contained an inscription of a single text in three languages—two Egyptian scripts (hieroglyphic and demotic) and ancient Greek—thus enabling 19th century scholars to decipher Egyptian scripts conclusively for the first time. 4 Roumen Vesselinov, “Measuring the effectiveness of Rosetta Stone,” working paper, City University of New York, January 2009. 3 3 learning solutions in 31 languages to its customers. (Exhibit 4 lists the language training software currently offered by the company.) In 2008, approximately 80% of Rosetta Stone revenue was accounted for by retail consumers, 20% by institutions. Institutional customers included educational institutions, government and military institutions, commercial institutions, and notfor-profit institutions. In a few short years, Rosetta Stone had successfully developed a strong brand; its kiosks with bright yellow boxes had become an institution in U.S. airports, and its print advertising in travel publications included a popular print ad of a young farm boy holding a Rosetta Stone box, the copy reading, “He was a hardworking farm boy. She was an Italian supermodel. He knew he would have just one chance to impress her.” The unaided awareness of the Rosetta Stone brand was over seven times that of any other language learning company in the United States. Leveraging a strong brand, steady customer base, and diverse retail network, Rosetta Stone had maintained positive profitability in 2008 despite the severe economic downturn and, in both average orders of bundled products and services and in units sold, even had experienced increases. The company expanded its product line by increasing the number of languages and levels offered and broadened the language learning experience by introducing Rosetta Studio and Rosetta World. Rosetta Studio allowed each Rosetta Stone learner to schedule time to chat with other learners and with a native-speaking coach to facilitate language practice, motivation, and confidence. Rosetta World connected a virtual community of language learners to practice their skills through a collection of games and other dynamic conversation opportunities. Adams envisioned a substantial growth trajectory for the company with a multitude of ways to leverage its novel learning technology and expand its geographic reach. With a fixed development cost, Adams expected the strategy to continue to increase company operating margins and expand revenue, but he recognized that, as the company continued to show strong profit and growth, the incentive for competition to attempt to gain market share would intensify. Exhibit 5 provides three video excerpts of an interview with Adams in which he describes the future of Rosetta Stone. Industry Overview The worldwide language learning industry was valued at more than $83 billion, of which more than $32 billion was for self-study learning, according to a Nielsen survey. The U.S. market, from which Rosetta Stone generated 95% of its revenue, was estimated to be more than $5 billion for total language learning and $2 billion for self-study learning. The total language learning market was expected to expand as proficiency in multiple languages was becoming increasingly important due to trends in globalization and immigration. The self-study market, particularly through electronic delivery, was expected to dominate the industry expansion given that self-study was increasingly accepted by language learning and travel enthusiasts. The language learning industry had historically been dominated by specialized language schools that taught languages through conventional classroom methods. The largest player in the market was privately held Berlitz International. Berlitz taught languages in its classrooms using 4 the Berlitz Method of Language Instruction, which advocated immersion in the target language, among other things, and according to company literature, offered programs and services through more than 470 centers in over 70 countries. Auralog, a French company, was another important competitor in the industry. Both Berlitz and Auralog offered electronic software packages that provided quality language training software. As had the Rosetta World product, businesses such as LiveMocha, Babalah, and Palabea had also adopted a social media approach, connecting language learners through the Internet, but these sites tended to be secondary enrichment sources for language learners. Major software companies with deep pockets represented the most important potential threat. Although the novelty of Rosetta Stone’s approach shielded it from many of the existing players in the industry, the entry of a company such as Apple or Microsoft into the language learning market had the potential to thwart Rosetta Stone’s aspiration of dominating global language learning. Pricing the Rosetta Stone IPO Adams had a preference for a strong balance sheet and cash position for the company. As a private company, corporate investment was limited by the amount of capital the company could borrow from private sources. With constrained resources, Adams was concerned that Rosetta Stone was an attractive takeover target for a company with the needed resources. Led by Phil Clough at ABS Capital, the private equity investors were anxious to recognize the gains achieved through the Rosetta Stone investment. In March, the board had discussed the matter and yielded the IPO decision to Adams. Despite the uncertainty of taking a relatively young company public in the most volatile markets in decades, Adams was inclined to move forward with the deal. The fourth quarter financials continued to show impressive performance, with a 53% expansion in revenue despite the global economic contraction. (Exhibit 6 details the historical financial performance of the company along with historical internally generated values of Rosetta Stone shares.) Advisors at Morgan Stanley had shared their view that Rosetta Stone was one of only a handful of companies that currently had a shot at a successful IPO. Senior management had been preparing the systems and organization of the company for public company status for years. Adams saw the IPO event as significant opportunity to establish business credibility and build the Rosetta Stone brand in a global marketplace. His decision was to launch. Over the following week or two, senior management and bankers visited prospective investors on the east and west coasts of the United States and in Europe. The investor response was highly enthusiastic, with investors commonly asking to “max out” their allocation in the deal. By the end of the road show, Morgan Stanley reported that the book was more than 25 times oversubscribed, meaning that the underwriters maintained orders for 25 shares for every Rosetta Stone share being offered in the deal. 5 Adams was delighted that many investors appeared to share his vision of Rosetta Stone’s unique capacity to play a substantial role in the global language learning market. Such a trajectory implied revenue growth rates of 20% to 35% for some time. Other analysts were more skeptical, predicting revenue growth of around 15% for the next five years and then tapering down to a longterm growth rate of 3% to 4%. Adams believed that the operating leverage in the organization allowed margins to continue to improve for some time; others believed that competitive pressure would soon drive margins down. (Exhibit 7 provides one view of how the financials were expected to play out in the years to come.) In the debt market, Rosetta Stone faced a prevailing borrowing rate of about 7.5%. The marginal corporate tax rate for the company was 38%. Exhibit 8 details the current ownership structure of the company and details the new shares to be sold in the offering, which would grow the total number of shares outstanding from 17.2 million to 20.3 million.5 Comparable multiples played an important role in the valuation of IPO firms. Exhibit 9 provides financial data on a broad set of industry comparable firms. Adams liked K12 Inc. as a comparable match, but acknowledged that no other firm perfectly matched Rosetta Stone’s business strategy, skill set, risk profile, or growth potential. Still, there was some debate regarding whether Rosetta Stone would be positioned as a technology company or an educational company. See Exhibit 5 for a link to video excerpts of Adams and Clough discussing this topic. Please address the following discussion questions and submit your answers to Canvas by 11:59pm on October 15th. Be sure to include names of all the group members in your file and each group only needs to submit one copy. 1. What are the advantages and disadvantages of Rosetta Stone going public? 2. What are the steps of an initial public offering? 3. What is a roadshow? What is book-building? 4. Compute a valuation of Rosetta Stone using the market-multiples approach. Please use the financial data in year 2008 and compute the price per share for Rosetta Stone based on the Price/EPS of K12 Inc, the average Price/EPS of For-profit Education industry, the average Price/EPS of Internet industry, and the average Price/EPS of Software industry, respectively. (The market-multiples for comparable firms are listed in Table 9) 5. Discuss the pros and cons of the market-multiples approach. 5 To avoid the dilution of the value of securities of pre-IPO investors, it was appropriate in pricing IPO shares to divide the total premoney equity value of the firm by the premoney shares outstanding. In the case of Rosetta Stone, the number of premoney shares outstanding was 17.19 million. Since the pre-IPO investors held claim on the ongoing business, a valuation based on the ongoing business represented a premoney valuation. Valuations based on postmoney shares required adding the value of the new IPO shares to the ongoing business valuation prior to dividing by the postmoney shares. 6 6. Discuss, and justify your recommended offer price for the Rosetta Stone IPO. That is, recommend an offer price for this firm and try to justify your recommendation based on your calculations in #4, the firm's current and expected performance, the market condition, and/or any other factors that you think are important to IPO pricing. Grading Rubrics: Excellent performance Good performance Acceptable performance Poor performance Application of theoretical concepts (25%) Team members demonstrated a thorough understanding of key concepts and were able to apply them all correctly Team members demonstrated a fairly thorough understanding of key concepts and were able to apply most of them correctly Team members' understanding of key concepts was uneven or incomplete, so several key concepts were not applied correctly Team members lacked an understanding of key concepts and were unable to apply them correctly Interpretation ...
Purchase answer to see full attachment

Tutor Answer

WeezyCassilas
School: Duke University

Here is the final answer buddy!! Kindly review

ROSETTA STONE: Pricing the 2009 IPO
ROSETTA STONE: Pricing the 2009 IPO

Name:
Institution:
Course:
Tutor:
Date:

ROSETTA STONE: Pricing the 2009 IPO
Question 1 Answer
The advantages of Rosetta going public include; the concerned process is capable of
allowing the firm to do an expansion of the business through using capital since the companies
sell equity so as to make profits. Such kind of expansion is also quite important for a business to
get into the new markets so as to internalize and build the brand. It could also benefit from
enhancing its reputation and corporate image. As for the disadvantages, it takes a three months
minimum, making young firms to be at risks of profit and loss. The process is also expensive and
legally is made up of printing and accounting costs, which have to be paid regardless of failures
or success of the entire process (Dempsey 21).
Question 2 Answer
The steps of an initial public offering include; having a reliable and trusted management
team; being ready with the financial systems for reporting; choosing the investment bankers;
writing the story of the company; registering with SEC; Starting the roadshow; pricing the IPO
and finally getting ready to be a company that is publicly owned.
Question 3 Answer
A road show is a process through which a company meets its prospective investors through
traveling and attending many press conferences, meeting and vi...

flag Report DMCA
Review

Anonymous
Top quality work from this tutor! I’ll be back!

Anonymous
Heard about Studypool for a while and finally tried it. Glad I did caus this was really helpful.

Anonymous
Thank you! Reasonably priced given the quality

Studypool
4.7
Trustpilot
4.5
Sitejabber
4.4
Similar Questions
Related Tags

Brown University





1271 Tutors

California Institute of Technology




2131 Tutors

Carnegie Mellon University




982 Tutors

Columbia University





1256 Tutors

Dartmouth University





2113 Tutors

Emory University





2279 Tutors

Harvard University





599 Tutors

Massachusetts Institute of Technology



2319 Tutors

New York University





1645 Tutors

Notre Dam University





1911 Tutors

Oklahoma University





2122 Tutors

Pennsylvania State University





932 Tutors

Princeton University





1211 Tutors

Stanford University





983 Tutors

University of California





1282 Tutors

Oxford University





123 Tutors

Yale University





2325 Tutors