Singapore Entrepreneurs

logo

Realistic Forecasting

Here is the 2nd part on my recent experience as a judge in a business plan competition. Of course, it is a good learning experience for me to see why some business plans fail. In fact, here is a known secret from investors. There is a very simple way to know which start-ups we do not want to invest. We decide by whether the entrepreneurs can provide us a realistic cashflow forecast on their start-ups. Realistic Forecasting is an Art

After going to a lot of business presentations at the university, I often see that the teams try to show the judges and investors that they can break even within a year. When they do that, we immediately know that they have eliminated themselves to be a credible start-up. Perhaps, it is easier to explain why investors don’t find the promise of being able to break even within a year to be realistic. Let me illustrate using a simple business case study. Imagine you start a business to produce a new textile product and you need to set up a factory. In a typical business school setting, you usually get the story from the team in the following manner. First, they claim that they need about a few million to set up the factory, and they usually assume that the factory will take them nine months to build. Then they followed with the claim that the factory can immediately produce the textile goods within 3 months, and generate enough yield to break even. Will you be gullible enough to invest in such a team? The answer is no. The reason why investors and judges know that it would fail, is the risk involved. First of all, it is not possible to get a factory up and running within 9 months. Even the machines (that you need to import for the production) require a while before the workers can maximize the output for the business. Hence it is not realistic to claim that you can break even within a year. Usually a 2-3 years period of breaking even sounds reasonable, and for those who may want to know, the horizon for a biotech start-up to break even goes even further to 5-7 years. Assessing the risk of your business is a matter of forecasting. Of course, risks are never absolute, but rather relative, in the sense that they can only be estimated on the basis of assumptions. Of course, one good way to assess risk is to look at the different scenarios that ensure that the future business development of the company are stress-tested in several conditions. In a business plan, that comes in the form of a cumulated cash flow projections. Let’s take a look at the cash flow diagram which we have drawn here.

On the cashflow diagram, you can see two curves. The blue curve indicates the best case sscenario, where you can tell what will happen if you can seize the opportunities you see and all the positive expectations are generally fulfilled. The yellow curve is the base case scenario, which is the case that it is likely to happen. Of course, anything below these two curves are the worst case scenario, where the major risks occur and the negative expectations are generally fulfilled. The realistic part is the break even point, or turning around the valley of death. All start-ups work on the basis that they will go negative in the first 2-3 years. The lowest point on the curve is the maximum amount of debt that you can go before your start-up goes bust. Hence it is important to minimize by working out a good financial plan to ensure that your cashflow don’t go haywire. In a business plan, one should give a short description of the scenarios in the business plan. What kind of events, how much sales, what amount of prices are your financial analysis based on? How much capital is really needed to finance the business, and when is the time to break even such that your cashflow can go positive? Finally, what is the effective return on the investment and when will it come? All these questions will direct you the entrepreneur to make a realistic assessment on whether your business can survive.

No related posts.

BL is BL is currently working full-time as a chief operating officer for SENATUS Pte Ltd. When I find some leisure time, I will invest, seed and incubate start-up companies in the digital interactive space in Singapore via Thymos Capital. The other parts of my time is spent on writing out my thoughts and academia, where I give guest lectures (NUS, NTU and INSEAD) and moderate panels in the topics of entrepreneurship and business strategies in the web/tech industry.
All posts by BL

6 Comments, Comment or Ping

  1. Yes, it is a fact a good idea may not produce intended results because of financing issues.

  2. cal

    where can we get a list of local start-ups and with descriptions of their activities?

  3. Hi Cal,

    This is a start: http://thedigitalmovement.wikispaces.com/Web2.0_Singapore

    If you know of any better consolidated list, please feel free to let us know!

    Warmest regards,
    Gwen

  4. I believe only a small proportion of entrepreneurs know anything about finance.

    Of those that do have some finance knowledge, they might not have any entrepreneurial finance experience and will be confused by the different valuation methods employed by VCs (CEQ, RADR, ridiculously high hurdle rates, etc).

    I think the universities should provide some basic entrepreneurial finance training for their teams going for business plan competitions.

    It’s really sad for a great business plan to get shot down on the financials.

  5. BL

    Actually, it is not the financials that the judges are shooting down. In some sense, the financials are reflections of how an entrepreneur think. The problem is that most people in the universities may have realized that 2-3 years are realistic for any business, but they choose to try to circumvent that assumption and hence creating “Enron Financials” as a result of wanting to be different.

  6. I agree with BL, VC’s do not shoot down business plans based on the financials. The financials is in fact the last thing they look at because any numbers shown, let’s face it, are purely theoretical. They are often used by the VC to negotiate terms and set milestones / targets more than anything else.

    The numbers always change when things get serious. No one ever takes the original numbers at face value. Show me any VC that shoots down a proposal because someone hasn’t done their financials with the academic rigour of someone trained in finance, and I’ll show you a very unsuccessful VC.

Reply to “Realistic Forecasting”