Skip to main content

Microsoft / Skype vs AT&T / TMobile

A lot of the press today is claiming that Microsoft overpaid for Skype.  I am not so sure.
Here are some numbers for comparison.

Skype has 560 million registered users, of which about 2% (say 11 million) are paying customers with an average ARPU of $8.  Thus, Skype should be generating about $8*12*11M ~ $1B/year in revenue right now, with an EBITDA of about $250M.  So, Microsoft is paying about 8X revenue, and 32X EBITDA.

T-Mobile US has about 33M subs, with an ARPU of about $50.  So, T-Mobile's revenue should be around  $21B/year.  AT&T is paying about 2X revenue, and 7X EBITDA.

Thus, Microsoft is paying a 4-5X premium for Skype compared to what AT&T is paying for T-Mobile.

The obvious question is : Can Microsoft leverage Skype 4X more effectively than a traditional mobile carrier?  To that, I think the answer is yes:

1) Skype is not a major enterprise player, yet.  Microsoft should be able to make this happen.  That alone should be 4X in ARPU, and should lead to better margins.

2) ARPU for T-Mobile has strong downward pressure as mobile operators (especially AT&T) become dumb pipes.  Skype ARPU should have lots of growth room. The $8 to $50 ARPU gap should meet somewhere in the middle; say $25.  This is huge growth for Skype and a huge challenge for T-Mobile.  If this happens, Microsoft got a steal.

3) Skype should be able to improve gross margins with stewardship from Microsoft.

4) Microsoft should open up new revenue streams from Skype. For example with Skype bundled into other product offerings (Office, X-box Live, etc.), ad revenue and/or premium bundles are quite possible.

There is also the obvious strategic wins for Microsoft.  They increase their brand equity with leading edge users; they bundle Skype with every mobile, gaming, and OS product, giving an easy to use, cohesive, and consistent experience.

Of course, it comes down to execution, but if Microsoft executes at all, I think the premium they are paying is reasonable.


Comments

Popular posts from this blog

The Centre Cannot Hold

Some thoughts on decentralization .  With all of the blockchain and Ethereum news, along with the dramatic uptick of ICO's, it is worth building a framework for decentralization.  The linked post makes a start on that.

Acsoi - Land Grab Economics

"Adjusted Consolidated Segment Operating Income" ( Acsoi ), is a measure of what a companies profits would be if they were not spending like crazy to acquire a space:  in GroupOn's case, this would be retailers. To me, using Acsoi as a measure is really an admission that a company has no staying power beyond brand awareness.  So, they need to grab and own as much mindshare as they can, as quickly as they can, to increase the barrier to entry for competitors.  Without intellectual property to help protect them, and with the cost of switching (for a user) being effectively zero, building a global brand, and relying on brand stickiness, is the best way forward. Companies like Amazon that have been effective at this have also built in other "sticky" factors over time: recommendation engines, one-click purchasing, etc.  This increases the cost for the user to switch, and allows the company to stop pouring money into marketing and acquisition costs.  You also buil

Gliese 581g

So...there is probably intelligent life out there.  As the old Monty Python saying goes, "I hope so, cause there certainly isn't much here on earth."  Case in point.  The video for Gliese581g is on MSNBC, and works fine in IE, but crashes in Chrome [ here ].