Frame & Field Studios Business Plan — Sensitivity and Scenario Analysis

What moves Year 5 EBITDA: utilisation, day rate, mix and AI substitution, with downside, base and upside scenarios.

Sensitivity and Scenario Analysis

Jump to section
On this page

  • 10.1 What moves EBITDA
  • 10.2 Scenarios
  • 10.3 The downside: rate compression across the whole book

10.1 What moves EBITDA

EBITDA sensitivity at maturity
Figure 22. EBITDA sensitivity at maturity.

Driver

Downside (R)

Upside (R)

Swing (R)

Day rates ±10%

2 529 745

8 147 425

5 617 680

Artificial intelligence rate pressure ±2 points a year

3 158 029

7 653 973

4 495 944

Editing ratio ±15%

3 027 388

5 853 820

2 826 432

Direct costs ±12%

4 088 185

6 588 985

2 500 800

Utilisation ±8 points

3 807 601

5 338 585

1 530 984

Base case Year 5 EBITDA

5 338 585

10.2 Scenarios

EBITDA by scenario
Figure 23. EBITDA by scenario.

Downside

Base

Upside

Utilisation assumption

-9 points

As modelled

+5 points

Day rate assumption

-8%

As modelled

+6%

AI rate pressure

+2.5 points a year

As modelled

-1.0 point a year

Year 1 EBITDA

(1 975 239)

(602 241)

(102 051)

Year 3 EBITDA

(65 483)

3 767 790

5 439 117

Year 5 EBITDA

(627 886)

5 338 585

8 220 758

Year 5 EBITDA margin

-2.2%

19.1%

29.4%

Cumulative EBITDA, Years 1 to 5

(3 505 909)

14 575 765

22 864 553

10.3 The downside: rate compression across the whole book

The distinction between the base case and the downside is not competence. It is whether the market continues to distinguish between imagery that must be evidence and imagery that need only be decorative. This plan is a bet that it does, and Section 2.2 sets out the reasoning explicitly so that a reader who disagrees can substitute their own exposure scores and re-run the analysis.

Previous section9. Investment Analysis
Next section11. Risk Analysis