Levubu Root Business Plan — Assumptions Framework
How the model is constructed, which assumptions drive which outputs, and where the sensitivities concentrate.
Assumptions Framework
Jump to section
- Overview & contents
- 1. Executive Summary
- 2. Investment Thesis
- 3. Company and Business Overview
- 4. Problem, Customer Need and Value Proposition
- 5. Products and Services
- 6. Industry Analysis
- 7. Market Analysis and Sizing
- 8. Customer Analysis
- 9. Competitive Landscape
- 10. Business Model
- 11. Go-to-Market Strategy
- 12. Operating Model
- 13. Management and Organisation
- 14. Strategic Plan
- 15. SWOT Analysis
- 16. Risk Analysis
- 17. ESG and Sustainability
- 18. Implementation Roadmap
- 19. Financial Plan
- 20. Assumptions Framework
- 21. Funding Requirement and Structure
- 22. Break-Even and Debt Serviceability
- 23. Investment Case and Valuation
- 24. Sensitivity and Scenario Analysis
- 25. Key Performance Indicators and Management Dashboard
- 26. Conclusion
- A. Appendix A: Assumption Register
- B. Appendix B: Conditions Precedent to Drawdown
- C. Appendix C: Index of Exhibits and Tables
- D. Appendix D: Glossary
This section sets out every material assumption in the model with its basis. Where an assumption is uncertain, the section says so rather than presenting a point estimate as a finding. A full register with ranges is at Appendix A.
|
Assumption |
Value |
Basis and commentary |
|---|---|---|
|
Yield, commercial crop |
26 rising to 34 t/ha |
Well-managed irrigated ginger in Limpopo achieves 30 to 40 tonnes a hectare. The plan starts below that band and reaches the lower half of it, reflecting a company learning its way up a curve. This is the assumption with the largest effect on outcome and the one to diligence hardest. |
|
Seed block yield factor |
92% of commercial |
Seed blocks are managed for rhizome quality and multiplication rather than for tonnage, and are typically harvested slightly earlier. |
|
Crop loss to soil-borne disease |
12% falling to 8% |
Provisioned as a recurring operating cost, not a tail risk. The improvement assumes the plant health protocol in Section 12.4 is enforced and that land quality improves as screening data accumulates. |
|
Marketable share |
88% |
Share of harvested weight meeting fresh grade after wash, grade and cure. The balance sells to processing. Consistent with own-packhouse handling; outsourced handling would be lower. |
|
Seed rate |
3 t/ha |
Standard commercial planting density for irrigated ginger on raised beds. |
|
Fresh price realised |
R22.00 to R25.00/kg |
Mid-range against the domestic band and deliberately below shortage-period levels. Escalation of 3.2% a year is below assumed general inflation, which is a conservative treatment for a price-taking producer. |
|
Certified seed price |
R68.00 to R76.00/kg |
No established domestic reference price exists, because no established domestic supply exists. Anchored to the grower’s cost of a failed crop rather than to a substitution price. This is the assumption with the weakest external evidence and it is tested at ±20% in Section 24. |
|
Field cost per hectare |
R210,000 to R245,000 |
Excludes planting material. Escalated at approximately 3.9% a year, above assumed general inflation to reflect fertiliser and energy exposure. |
|
Seed block cost premium |
1.22x field cost |
Reflects lower density, higher plant health intensity, individual lot handling and indexing. |
|
Land lease |
R12,000 to R15,000/ha controlled |
Applied to the full rotation footprint of 504 hectares by FY2031, not to planted hectares. This is the assumption most often understated in ginger business plans. |
|
Rotation crop income |
R5,000/ha resting |
Net contribution from maize, soya or cover crops on resting land under a share arrangement. Netted against lease cost. |
|
Post-harvest cost |
R2.20 to R2.60/kg |
Wash, grade, cure, cold store and packing on own infrastructure. |
|
Seed conditioning cost |
R5.00/kg |
Individual lot handling, indexing, laboratory testing and separate storage. |
|
Purchased planting material, FY2027 |
R5.0m |
24 tonnes of indexed material for the seed block at R95,000 a tonne, plus 60 tonnes of commercial-grade rhizome at R45,000 a tonne. Purchased once only. |
|
Overheads |
R4.4m to R13.4m |
Six functions built bottom-up from headcount and activity rather than as a percentage of revenue. Falls from 39% to 16% of revenue. |
|
Capital expenditure |
R42.6m over five years |
Six asset classes with lives of 7 to 15 years. Front-loaded on capacity that cannot be added mid-season. |
|
Working capital |
DSO 32d, DIO 72d, DPO 35d |
55% of sales collect in the month of sale. Inventory is dominated by retained seed rhizome. Payables at 35 days with 45% of field cost on 60-day supplier terms. |
|
Term debt |
R20.0m at 11.5% |
10-year tenor with a 3-year capital grace period on each tranche. Fixed rate. |
|
Seasonal facility |
Limits R8.0m to R40.0m at 13.75% |
Prime-linked. Sized against the June peak requirement with headroom, not against the year-end balance. |
|
Taxation |
27% corporate rate |
Section 12B allowances at 50%/30%/20%; First Schedule development expenditure ring-fenced to farming income; assessed loss utilisation capped at 80%. |
|
Discount rate |
17.5% WACC |
Cost of equity 22.5% from a risk-free rate of 10.75%, equity risk premium 6.0%, beta 0.85, size premium 4.5% and a crop-specific premium of 2.0%. Target gearing 35%. Tested at 15.5% / 17.5% / 19.5%. |
|
Exit assumptions |
5.25x EV/EBITDA at FY2031 |
Range of 4.00x to 5.25x to 6.50x. Sits below listed agribusiness averages to reflect scale, leased land and a five-year operating history. |
Table 47. Assumptions framework. The basis column states where each figure comes from, including where the evidence is thin.