Use access key #2 to skip to page content.

TMFPostOfTheDay (< 20)

Groupon: Two More Nails in the Coffin?

Recs

6

November 17, 2011 – Comments (2) | RELATED TICKERS: GRPN , GOOGL , YHOO

Location: Noceilings's CAPS Blog

Author: Noceilings

In yesterday’s bearish take on the future of Groupon (Nasdaq: GRPN), I neglected to address the company’s much-discussed introduction of “adjusted consolidated segment operating income”, or CSOI, as a key metric in an accurate understanding of their financial health. Put briefly, CSOI relieves operating income of the twin burdens of marketing and acquisition. Their prospectus touts the, ahem, innovative figure as an indicator of the profits to be had in the near future, when Groupon’s loyal costumer base will be firmly in place, pesky competitors and cumbersome ad campaigns will be a distant memory, and the sun, generally speaking, will shine brightly upon the faces of steadfast investors.

Sound too good to be true? Well, not to be the bearer* of bad news, but…

Methinks the 424B4 doth invent too much.

While it’s certainly pleasant to consider the day when Groupon will stop having to shell out to the tune of nearly $500m to get new costumers onboard—and keep them there—it’s also, and ultimately, an exercise with very little grounding in reality. The fact of the matter is that Groupon is engaged in a rapidly emerging market with almost zero barriers to entry, and wherever they look to expand, they are going to find competitors either:

A) Waiting for them, or

B) Waiting for them to settle in, develop a costumer base, and set the stage for a new kid on the block.

In other words, the buyouts aren’t going to stop anytime soon. In fact, as long as Groupon sticks to a script of giving a pretty penny to whatever local outfit stands in their way, there’s going to keep being serious incentive for upstarts to throw their hat in the ring. Furthermore, and perhaps most damningly, a closer consideration of point B yields this startling, but undeniable, truth:

Whatever competitors Groupon doesn’t buy out, Groupon advertises for.

With their sector so brand-spanking new that most people over thirty are still struggling to wrap their heads around it, it’s safe to say that Groupon’s marketing is doing just as much to introduce and explain their business model as it is to build their brand.* Thus, whereas they propose to be building a rock-solid clientele, I’d more realistically liken what they’re doing to warming up a crowd, signaling (dollar by precious dollar) to consumers and merchants alike that the model works. That they are doing this on their own dime is costly; that they are doing to the benefit of their competition, both present and future, is disastrous.

If you don’t believe me, go ahead and think about the Groupon copycats. Now think about how you heard of them. In my case, someone told me that I should try out LivingSocial because it was, and I quote, “just like Groupon.” And guess what?

They were right.

*Pun definitely intended.

*Consider the search bar: would Google (Nasdaq: GOOG) have enjoyed such word-of-mouth success if Yahoo (Nasdaq: YHOO) hadn’t first bought the idea some traction?

2 Comments – Post Your Own

#1) On November 17, 2011 at 11:00 AM, devoish (97.62) wrote:

Thus, whereas they propose to be building a rock-solid clientele, I’d more realistically liken what they’re doing to warming up a crowd, signaling (dollar by precious dollar) to consumers and merchants alike that the model works. - Noceilings

Just to nitpick a little, if they are shelling out $500mil then the models not actually working, which I think is your point.

Best wishes,

Steven

Report this comment
#2) On November 17, 2011 at 11:30 PM, Goofyhoofy (< 20) wrote:

Oh baloney. You might have said the same thing about the Yellow Pages 20 years ago and they still have only one main competitor (not including the Internet, which is an entirely different kettle of fish.) Even the Yellow Pages,which had a quasi monopoly spent hundreds of millions on advertising. That's a cost of doing business for everyone. Microsoft, Apple, Ford, nobody gets away without doing a lot of it.

Groupon may achieve mind-share, which is difficult to overcome once well established, which is not to say that somebody can't try, but good luck. As for the "it's just like Groupon" comment, well, how do you think Google got started? Or Android phones? You're picking a trait that happens to virtually every category leader and thinking it's somehow unique to Groupon. Is it easier to replicate than some other things? Yes. Does that mean it's somehow fatally flawed? Hardly. What stops you from starting a retail store to compete with WalMart? A few important things today, but nothing during their first twenty years. Coke? McDonalds? Hilton?

I have no position in Groupon (nor much interest). It's another marketing channel, one I wish I had thought of, but otherwise, absent gigantic missteps by management, it will probably do fine. It' introduces new people to new products which is the hardest thing to do, and if they're not all perfectly matched, well, what is? No, I think you overstate the bear case, and while there is one to be made, this isn't it. 

Report this comment

Featured Broker Partners


Advertisement