Aryaman Asthana
Many of us apprehend only one aspect of a Shark Tank agreement, the valuation. Entrepreneurs pitch their monetary valuation of the business proposition, seeking funding from Shark Tank investors in exchange for a certain “stake” in their company. As viewers, we tend to assume that we’re cognizant of the entire business transaction between the two parties solely based on these two aspects of the valuation. After all, the holistic trade-off is investment from a lender in exchange for part ownership in a business. Though, in reality, we all know that we have a relatively superficial understanding of these agreements. We neglect/misinterpret stipulations within the negotiations, strategies used by both investors and entrepreneurs to deduce a profitable valuation, key terminology, and agreement add-ons, and as a result, only partly know all of the details of the deal.
Why did that “shark” choose to partner up with another one?
Why did the “shark” lower the proposed valuation?
Hmm. That was a pretty good offer. Why didn’t the entrepreneur pursue that valuation?
Why didn’t the “shark” drop out of the deal?
To begin, let’s consider this valuation:
Seeking $500,000 for 20% stake in the business...
Understanding the valuation:
A stake (or other times referred to as equity) is the percentage of ownership of a business an investor would receive if they were to fund that company for a certain amount. In this example, if a “shark” invested $500,000 in this business, they would be compensated with a 20% equity stake in the company. A valuation determines the full-scale value of the business, and equity stake is a major facet of the valuation of a business. A $500,000 investment would warrant an equity stake of 20%, meaning for 100% equity stake (or the entire business), the business would be valued at $2,500,000 as a whole ($500,000/0.25 equity share).
Determining a valuation (“shark”) as fair or unreasonable:
Before “sharks” determine if a valuation is fair or not, they must see an investment as a lucrative opportunity and also be interested in pursuing a deal with the entrepreneur. They may also ask the entrepreneur about their professional background and expertise. Next, they must inquire into the logistics of the business as a whole and at its current state. Let’s suppose this business sells an eco-friendly dish soap. Oftentimes, “sharks” first examine the market value (the highest amount that someone is willing to pay for a product as well as the lowest amount that a seller is willing to sell at) of the business product or service. To do this, “Sharks” may ask about the retail price of one unit of their product, which is the price that consumers purchase the product for in retail stores. Consequently, “sharks” may ask about the cost of production of one unit of their product to determine the gross profit margin, or the percentage of the sales that the business receives from retail units sold.
Entrepreneur: “Each dish soap bottle costs $9.99 retail price. The cost of production is $4.50.”
Gross profit margin is calculated by subtracting the cost of production from the retail price and using that value to find a percentage that correlates to the retail price.
In this case, $9.99 (retail price) - $4.50 (cost of production) = $5.49
$5.49 (profit per sale)/$9.99 (retail price) x 100 = approx. 55% gross profit margin
A 55% gross profit margin for a retail product is above average retail margin, meaning an investment in this business would secure a relatively high rate of return. This also indicates a high market value because the business is maintaining an above average profit margin while also selling thousands of units of the product to consumers.
Next, a “shark” may want to consider the annual net sales revenue (or net revenue/sales) of the business. To deduce this, the “shark” needs a value that is indicative of the number of units of the product this business typically sells. The “shark” may ask for the average units sold of this product.
Entrepreneur: “We’ve sold around 18,000 units in the past 6 months of this product.”
If this business has sold 18,000 units of this product in 6 months, or 36,000 units in a year, the total gross sales revenue would be determined by multiplying the number of units sold by the profit per sale generated by the product. In this case, 36,000 units x $5.49 (profit per sale) = approx. $198,000 in gross sales revenue. By deducting allowances and other distribution and exportation expenditures that the entrepreneur mentions, the “shark” determines that the annual net sales revenue equated to around $150,000. With this knowledge, the “shark” may see the valuation as overpriced. A company valued at $2,500,000 only produces $150,000 in net sales revenue per year, meaning that it would take more than 16 years for the business to reach $2,500,000 in sales. This may compel a “shark” to propose a lower valuation (if they were interested), or if the entrepreneur was reluctant to lower his valuation, drop out of the offer. However, if the entrepreneur would have stated that the business recently entered a sales agreement with Walmart to sell $600,000 worth of the product, the valuation would be more appealing to the “shark” based on the sales forecast. The “shark” may perceive a potential to scale the company to exceed market demands and sales volume and capital capacity to generate more and more revenue over the years.
If this convinces the “shark” to pursue an offer but still pose a risk to the overall outlook of the investment, they might negotiate for a royalty. A royalty allows the “shark” to demand a fixed amount of money to be returned to them for every one unit of the product sold. Royalties are beneficial because they almost guarantee a return on investment for the “shark” in case the business is successful or not, even if royalties are suspended after a “shark” is returned a certain fixture of total money.
In this case, if a “shark” accepted the valuation of the entrepreneur but asked for a $2 royalty on each unit of the dish soap sold, the past year the “shark” would have made $72,000 even if the business was on a downward trend and losing revenue annually. As businesses grow, the royalty takes a toll on the revenue that businesses generate and hinder the growth of a company.
If royalties don’t interest an entrepreneur, a “shark” may pursue a partnership with another “shark”. This allows for a “shark” to invest less money into a business while usually attempting to maintain the initial equity they might have received if they had pursued the offer by themselves.
All in all, there are many tenets of economics that play a role in Shark Tank investments and stipulations that are implemented within a valuation. By just considering the valuation as the overarching trade-off may obscure some of the broader trade-offs and stipulations that may or may not benefit or hurt the investor. Additionally, there are many factors in determining a fair valuation or agreement between an entrepreneur and an investor because there needs to be a reasonable compromise between the two parties to generate capital and develop a business. With this better understanding of a Shark Tank, we can fully understand the offers that appear on the iconic show.
Works Cited
August 20, 2021 by Dave Schools - Grow. “How ‘Shark TANK’ Revealed the Difference
between Gross Profit Margin and Net Profit Margin.” Launchopedia, 20 Aug. 2021, fundingsage.com/how-shark-tank-revealed-the-important-difference-between-gross-profit-margin-and-net-profit-margin/.
Cestare, Tommy. “The (Sorta) Comprehensive Guide TO ‘Shark Tank’ Terms.” Medium, The
Tommy Cestare Blog, 17 Mar. 2020, medium.com/tommycestare/the-sorta-comprehensive-guide-to-shark-tank-terms-5bb7706cc1a8.
Yu, Jea. “How Is a Business Valued on 'Shark Tank'?” Investopedia, Investopedia, 8 Sept. 2021,
www.investopedia.com/articles/company-insights/092116/how-business-valued-shark-tank.asp.