Torque Precision Auto Business Plan — Investment Analysis

A 46.3% project IRR and 39.5% return to equity on a four-times exit multiple, with the return tested against alternative exit assumptions.

Investment Analysis

Jump to section
On this page

  • 11.1 Returns
  • 11.2 Sensitivity of the return to the exit assumption
  • 11.3 What would improve the return

11.1 Returns

Measure

Base case

Comment

Capital deployed over five years

R8 000 000

Equipment, fit-out, parts stock, working capital and contingency

Promoter and investor equity

R5 400 000

68% of capital deployed

Asset finance

R2 600 000

Drawn against equipment at 13.75%, five years per tranche with a two-year capital moratorium

Project internal rate of return

46.3%

Five years plus a terminal value at 4 times Year 5 EBITDA

Return to equity

39.5%

No distributions in the projection period; value realised on the terminal position

Money multiple on equity

5.28x

Terminal equity of R28 538 671 against R5 400 000 subscribed

Terminal value

R22 092 000

4x Year 5 EBITDA of R5 523 000

Net present value at 20%

R7 938 807

Positive

Net present value at 25%

R5 769 097

Positive

Cumulative profit after tax, Years 1 to 5

R3 333 230

Start-up losses recovered during Year 5

Year 5 EBITDA run rate

R5 523 000

On R8 000 000 of cumulative capital

Cumulative project cash flow before terminal value
Figure 20. Cumulative project cash flow before terminal value.

11.2 Sensitivity of the return to the exit assumption

Returns against the exit assumption
Figure 21. Returns against the exit assumption.

Exit multiple of Year 5 EBITDA

Terminal value (R)

Project IRR

Terminal equity (R)

Equity IRR

3x

16 569 000

39.1%

23 015 671

33.6%

4x

22 092 000

46.3%

28 538 671

39.5%

5x

27 615 000

52.5%

34 061 671

44.5%

6x

33 138 000

58.0%

39 584 671

48.9%

The base case applies four times Year 5 EBITDA. Independent workshops are typically valued on a multiple of sustainable earnings, with the multiple driven by the proportion of contracted fleet work and the durability of the technician team rather than by bay count. At three times the project still returns 39.8 per cent; at six times it returns 56.4 per cent. Readers should substitute their own multiple, and should form a view on the technician team before they do.

11.3 What would improve the return

Lever

Effect on Year 5 EBITDA

Assessment

Posted rate at R875 rather than R795

+R1 299 330

The largest single lever, and the workshop controls it directly. Still R225 below the dealer mid-point

Utilisation 88% rather than 81%

+R1 115 688

A diary outcome: marketing, reputation and fleet contracts

Efficiency 117% rather than 110%

+R821 426

A people outcome. Paid for through the efficiency bonus

Leakage 4% rather than 7%

+R416 525

Quote discipline and rework control. Invisible on the price list

A second site once the first exceeds 80%

Not modelled

Only after utilisation is proven; the plan explicitly defers this

Insurer and warranty-administrator panel work

Included at about 10%

Referred on published standards once accreditation and track record are in place