Forum Topics CLU CLU Valuation of Cluey Learning (CLU)
Hackofalltrades
Added 4 years ago

CLU are releasing their quarterly tomorrow, so I figured it was a good time to take another look at this.

I've simplified the model into something that is hopefully a bit more normal - I set a fixed cost and then a gross profit margin. Most of the variables they should give in their reports, but will be in the next quarterly as this is the first quarter of the half (half of the half?).

Feel free to have a play around with this model. https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1b-u9V95AbhRbqTxVAt7gGpwY-KUwzGmaXgyoRQNHyXM/edit?usp=sharing

I also took a very brief look at the UK market and the competition there looks significantly stronger than Australia, but still extremely fragmented.


Current thoughts at the moment is that I would avoid this stock unless I see new students increasing substantially (or other major changes in metrics). Even then, I'd want to see they were going to replicate that in the UK market, else they just won't make money and will probably lose a lot. Might need to update my straw at some point.

8
Slew
Added 4 years ago

https://investlikethebest.libsyn.com/sameer-shariff-breaking-language-barriers-founders-field-guide-ep-46

Camply is an online English tutoring app. On the podcast,  founder Sameer Sharrif talks about the challenges and rewards he has found in setting up the business.

What echos  with the Cluey discussion is the recruitment of quality tutors and matching of styles between the student and tutor. This sounded like one of the biggest hurdles they have overcome and it wasn’t until they achieved a sizable scale that this became possible.

I don’t follow the space but this podcast may be of interest to those that do.

7
Hackofalltrades
Added 4 years ago

Hey guys, 

I had a bit of a go at putting together a valuation and report for Cluey. I'd love your feedback on any part of this report - trying to learn how to analyse shares. I'm a teacher by trade and have run my own tiny tutoring business (with student contractors) for a few years, so have some insight into the industry, but not amazing depth in it. 

 

General

Cluey is a startup online tutoring centre. At prospectus they offered tutoring to students aged 2-12 in mathematics and English, and Chemistry in years 11-12. In my experience, ~40% of tutoring is in English, 50% in maths, 10% in science, and 5% other stuff (GST included).  

 

They have ~80 full time staff and ~620 tutors (think this was prospectus), somewhere around 10-15k of active students, with 61% of these from Government schools. 

 

Cluey’s price for customers last year was $80 for the 1:1 offering, and $45 for the small group offering. Customers' perception in my experience is that $80 is expensive, but $55 is very reasonable. 

 

Thoughts

 

The gross profit margins of Cluey aren’t fully useful for calculating scalability. The gross profit is basically subtracting the cost of tutors from the revenue  generated, but obviously as they increase in size, there are going to be a lot of other costs generated. I don’t disagree with them that their product will scale well, but suspect that costs may rise more than implied as their revenue increases. 
 

Strengths

 

  • Demonstrated ability to grow revenue very quickly from a small base. 

  • Educational and curriculum support setup looks decent. 

  • Revision set outside of tutoring hours will help a lot with improving student outcomes. 

  • Cluey’s tutors can work from anywhere, which will make it a good deal for them and reduce recruiting costs. It’s genuinely significantly cheaper to offer tutoring from home. 

  • This has the potential to be a really good deal for tutors. 

  • Average number of sessions per student was 1.4.

  • Everything is being driven by marketing, and not much by word of mouth at the moment. Word of mouth takes time to develop, but could add into their customer acquisition. Customers will also come back after finishing tutoring. 

 

Weaknesses and threats

 

  • Australia’s tax situation with GST means that small players with <75>

  • Entering the UK market may prove more difficult than the Australian 

  • Online competition for market share is nasty as much of it is driven by google auctions. 

  • Most people find tutors through google, and google makes it very hard for one player to be completely dominant. Even were these guys to become the major player, I think achieving a market share of >10% would be very difficult. 

  • I’m not convinced that online group tutoring will be terribly effective. 

  • A recession may crush this business. 

  • Tutor screening appears weak, though they are getting many more applicants than positions. (they do phone screens, video submission reviews, and interviews, though is suspect the interviews are skype based - I’m not convinced this is enough to maintain quality control, though they may have training that weeds more out). 

  • They say they are trying to fill 50% of tutors capacity at any one time. This could cause problems with tutor retention. 

  • It seems like it is very flexible and that they don’t book students in for long periods of term (ie., during a term or something), this is potentially problematic. 

  • Cluey’s cost of acquisition is bad, but potentially okay if it can be maintained at large scale. They have reduced this from $815 in Q1FY20 to $514. I am not sure how much of this marketing spend is being spent on things like SEO, which will net long term returns. The company is expecting this to decrease over time, I’m not convinced. 

  • The Australian tutoring association have been trying to set themselves up as a regulatory body. Cluey seems aware of them, but I have not noticed any ATA branding on their website. The ATA accredits tutors, but this is entirely ATA imposed and expensive. This could potentially make Cluey more expensive. 

 

Empire building 

The CEO has previously run a large education group and their recent acquisition of Code Camp was… interesting. I can see some synergies, particularly with cross marketing, but it seems strange given they are still establishing their core business. The CEO may have larger ambitions than implied in the prospectus. 

I’m not sure whether this is a good thing or a bad thing.

Management

 

I haven’t done much research here yet, sorry. Judging by their online offering and quick growth, they seem competent. 

 

Key Metrics to Watch

 

I don’t know whether this business is going to scale as management seems to think it will. I think there are a few key metrics to keep an eye on. 

 

Revenue expansion 

 

  • When will the company reach the end of normal avenues for growth through online marketing? What market share can they attain in Australia (which should theoretically apply to the UK) IF they currently have ~15k active students (This figure is fuzzy and I think it’s slightly less on a month by month basis) and assuming Australian students in tutoring of 400 000, this would indicate a market share of 3.75%. I expect that Cluey will reach at least 8.75% estimated market share in Australia.  

  • New students 

  • Estimated Lifetime revenue/value per student - How much can the business make out of a single student - Are they able to improve this with their quality control, which they say has a lot of data feeding into it. 


 

Costs

 

The question here is how much the cost is going to increase as the revenue increases. 

 

Cost of sales (ie., only the cost of the tutor) is unlikely to change significantly compared to revenue in the long term, but is worth watching. One metric to keep an eye on here is:

 

  • Percentage of tutoring sessions in group sessions -  These have the potential to be significantly higher margin. 

 

The company labels revenue minus the costs of sales/the tutor as “gross profit.” The potential problem with this is that there are a number of other costs that are going to increase significantly as student numbers increase. Whether this business is profitable or not will significantly depend on how much these costs are going to rise with the increase in student numbers. The key metrics to watch here are: 

 

  • Marketing costs including:

    • Customer Acquisition Cost - is the business able to continue reducing the CAC, or are l imits of the market size going to force this up? A part of the CAC is included in employee benefits under sales (learning advisors). 

  • Administration expenses - this should theoretically be highly scalable, will this play out?

  • Employee benefits - This is theoretically quite scaleable, but I have questions given the nature of different curriculums in the UK, the need to develop further tech in a rapidly developing area, and the fact that 25% of the staff (not by cost) were in Sales (learning advisors), and 13.5% in operations + customer care. 


 

Valuation

 

This company is speculative and highly leveraged to differences in margin, market share, actual addressable market size and participation (I’m not sure if I’ve estimated these accurately), and the state of the economy. Please read the full assumptions below valuation because there are many and this is really a best guess. 

 

Current Market cap is 188.49 mil at a price of 1.425 with 132.3m shares on issue according to ASX (a google search lists market cap as 133m???) with . Compounding this at 10% for 5 years, we get ~302m, factoring in dilution of 10%, we get 333.9 mil needed for a price of $2.294 for a 10% return pa. Tax rate assumed is 30%. 

 

Assuming an addressable market of 15.08 mil students, with 1.508 mil of these in tutoring, with a margin of 20% for future growth based on 2020/21 financial figures there are a few scenarios that might play out. I’ve made estimations. 

 

Option 1 - 10% - Company leverages their tutoring to effectively turn themselves into a fast growing education conglomerate. Estimated market share 20%, with PE of 30. (Ceo seems to have big plans…) Estimated market cap 1253 mil, price per share 8.64. 

Option 2 - 20% - Company is very successful and attains 15% market share, while maintaining margins at Market cap at PE of 25 is 712 mil, price per share of $4.91.

Option 3 - 20% - Company is successful and attains 10% market share, while maintaining a 20% margin. Estimated PE is 20 and market cap 303 mil, price per share $2.094.

Option 4 - 20% - Company is moderately successful, but levels off around 8.75% market share (which is the lower end of what I think they will achieve in Australia, barring current figures just being a covid bump). Estimated PE is 15 and market cap 178mil. Price per share $1.227.

Option 5 - 30% - Recent growth proves to just be a covid bump, the company fails to launch into UK, or the company proves not able to scale effectively. Company goes to zero, or manages to set up some sort of viable business, but loses most of its market cap. Estimated market cap 20 mil, share price ~14c. 

 

Averaging this all out (0.1 * 8.64 + 0.2*4.9 + 0.2*2.094 + 0.2* 1.227 + 0.3 * 0.14) this gives an expected value of $2.55 if 5 years time. 

 

Undoing the 10% compounding rate, this gives a target price of $1.583, but there are no adjustments for risk and it’s only an 11.1% margin of safety from the current price.

Cluey Learning is highly leveraged to a few key metrics, so if these go well, the value of this company could change quickly, even if the price does not. I wouldn’t put any substantial amount into this company until I either see the share price drop or the key metrics improve. 

 

Assumptions listed below, see forum post for more details. There is a link to the model I have here:

 

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1b-u9V95AbhRbqTxVAt7gGpwY-KUwzGmaXgyoRQNHyXM/edit?usp=sharing 

 

Assumptions

 

There are so many assumptions built into my model for this company.

A few key ones are those that contribute to the margin. I have made estimates that the following costs increase as a percentage of new revenue at these rates:

Cost of sales - 40% of new revenue

Marketing expenses - 20% of new revenue

Occupancy expenses - 1% of new revenue

Administration - 4% of new revenue

Employee benefits (including sales employees) - 15% of new revenue

 

Total - 80% of new revenue 

 

True margin for new revenue - 20%

 

The implication for this is that the breakeven point for the business is ~81 million revenue. 

 

My other key assumption is the market size. I haven’t calculated this precisely yet, but am estimating that there are ~15 mil students across AUS, the UK, and NZ, and estimated 10%, 1.366 mil of these in tutoring at any one time.  (I don’t think the Middle East is worth considering) I am not certain of both these figures. 


 

Unanswered Questions

 

What is the total addressable market actually? 

 

What is the true gross profit margin here? Will they make 25% of revenue, will they make 15% of revenue? This really determines what the go is.
 

Is it actually possible for these guys to get more than 10-15% of market share given the highly fragmented market? 

 

Can they expand into NZ and UK and maintain their margins and pricing? (I suspect prices for tutoring in NZ and UK are slightly lower)

 

Can Cluey leverage their position of having access to so many students? It seems like they are aiming towards it with the acquisition of code camp. 

 

Can Cluey expand into the USA market long term? I note players like KME have not (though they recently bought tutorfly). 

 

What is the actual churn of Cluey’s students and what would the cumulative drop off graph look like? (My experience in tutoring tells me that there is a high drop off rate in the first 0-15 session, a moderate rate up to about ~30-40, but after this a very long tail of long term customers). I’ve worked out an average of ~ 32 sessions per student, which is reasonable. With ~10 sessions per active student per half, I’m estimating a churn of 1/3? per half year. 

 

Who are their competitors? What is their possible impact? The UK market also seems fragmented into directories and physical tutoring centres, but I am unsure what other online competition exists. 


 

26

elpaso96
Added 4 years ago

Perfect summary better than mine :) 

Yea the operating margins is also my key concern. Especially where Marketing spend doesn’t reflect in gross margin. The Codecamp acquisition leads to more questions than answer and I hate how much they are overpaying. 

Interesting insight on the tutoring TAM as you have experience with the education market. I’ll poke around your model and ask questions later. Really good insights 

11

elpaso96
Added 4 years ago

After poking around, I was left with more questions than answers. It's not a clear model and hard to know what variables are (facts, assumptions and forecast). 

Here is a list of things I did not understand/ require clarification: 

  • Active students rationale (I don't think we know the actual churn). From my understanding their definitions are: 
    • Active students = Represent the number of students completing at least one session in the period
    • New students = Represent the number of students completing at least one session, not including newly enrolled students yet to complete their first session.
    • This means Active students consider both (existing and new students). Active students do not equal new students. Hence, we don't even know how many new students are yet to complete a paid active session. Hence your model showing 27% churn cannot be verified. It's either right or wrong but we are not provided with the actual data. 
    • Cluey should follow how Megaport presents its numbers and provide cohort analysis with churn for each cohort. It would clarify a lot of assumptions and make our models cleaner. Maybe if they are daring enough, provide gross margins for each cohort over time :D You can answer all the questions below via cohort analysis.
      • Are new customers enrolling on more sessions than old customers? 
      • How many average sessions per cohort? Is it rising, staying flat or declining?  
      • How many old customers (let's say Pre-2018) discontinue using Cluey? (i.e. long term churn) 
  • Profit Calculator 
    • In the model, you highlighted what it takes to overcome a $16M loss:
      • I believe your assumptions are 150K students comprising 10% of the TAM in Aus.
      • With 20% sales margin or $80M revenues (I do not understand this metric as you are mixing gross and operating margin)
    • The difficulty with those assumptions is that it is hard to understand how you are assessing management but also how you adjust your forecast when there's new information. 
      • I very much doubt marketing expenses be less than 20% of total revenue during the short term. 
      • Also shouldn't acquisition cost be treated as an expense? Cluey is paying to acquire companies which means they either borrow money via debt (from the bank/ debt holders) or equity (cap raises from shareholders). It affects the cash flow statement and ultimately cash is king. Especially when a business can use its own cash to grow instead of borrowing from shareholders.    
        • There's also Goodwill to consider where they disclose it in the Balance sheet just how much they overpaid for an acquisition.  
  • Market cap calculator 
    • P/E of 30 is a bold assumption (my question is when? I could see P/E 100 if they grow $100M revenue and generate $1M profit in like 5+ years time). I would be amazed if Cluey can get a positive P/E within 5 years :D 
    • Hence, I do not agree that P/E should be used to value the company. Free Cashflow is better but it's looking more like cash outflow than cash inflow for the short term. 
    • In saying that, Afterpay has validated a strategy I did not think about. The strategy is to acquire/ grow triple-digit revenue year on year until a larger player buys you for a premium. So technically speaking if Cluey grow triple digits year on year till 2024 you are looking at ~ $100M revenue with a market cap that could be in the high 500 million-billion range and then face an acquisition offer from a large player like Chegg for $2B and you take the deal. The prime objective of the strategy is to not die in 4 years. Afterpay to their credit timed it perfectly. They grew aggressively and got the acquisition offer. Central Banks will start tightening next year so the timing was perfect. Hence, that's why Matt in the last virtual meeting was saying that analysts have a hard time plugging in a cost of capital when the risk is virtually zero right now as central banks are printing and keeping rates low. 

15