Is your company using its assets effectively?

Artashes

Administrator
Staff member
It is common for companies to not only look at how profitable they are as an entire organization, but to study certain elements of business activity to see how profitable those elements are.

A variety of profitability ratios are known in financial analysis. Profitability ratios measure the operating success of a company for a given period or point in time.

One of the most widely used element, which is extremely essential for web hosting companies is Assets. If you wish to see how profitable (if at all) your assets are and if they are being used effectively, use the following formula:

Return on Assets = Profits after taxes / Total Assets

The return on assets ratio (presented as "%") indicated the amount of earnings generated by each dollar invested in assets. Thus, the higher the return on assets, the more profitable the enterprise.

Now, imagine you found your company's return on assets ratio, which is 6.30%.

What possible use can you gain from it? Well, you can either compare this data against your competition or industry averages. In order to demonstrate the use of return on assets ratio, consider the following examples.


Example #1: Imagine a fictional company named Web Hosting Company. From Web Hosting Company's Income Statement for the year 2002 we can find:

Profits after taxes (a.k.a. Net Earnings): $23,500
Total Assets: $275,000

% Return on Assets = $23,500 / $275,000 = 8.55%

The ratio tells us that Web Hosting Company generated 8.55 cents on every dollar invested in assets (servers, office, other equipment, etc).


Example #2: Now let's choose Interland, a market rival and a publicly trading company. From Interland's Income Statement for the year 2002 we can find:

Profits after taxes (a.k.a. Net Earnings): -$145,720,000 (Net Loss)
Total Assets: $395,280,000

% Return on Assets = -$145,720,000/ $395,280,000 = -36.9%

The ratio tells us that Interland lost almost 37 cents on every dollar invested in assets (servers, office, other equipment, etc).

Keep in mind that Interland is a publicly trading company, and economic recession, coming from slowdown in business activity, is one of the biggest reasons to explain such poor data. As economic conditions become more appealing, Interland's return on assets ratio will demonstrate rapid improvement not common to smaller/private companies.


Conclusions.

From the two examples we learnt the ratios of:
Web Hosting Company (8.55%)
Interland (-36.9%).

Your company's ratio was fictionally set to 6.30%.

Industry average for 2002 was 4.26%.

We can make the following conclusion: While your company's return on assets ratio exceeded that of the average firm in the industry, your venture's profitability appears strong. Our fictional Web Hosting Company has an even higher profitability which comes from a more efficient use of their assets. Interland, in comparison to your company, Web Hosting Company and the industry average, is losing money.

Your company is clearly outperforming the industry. But a good manager will not stop here. The next step for him will be to look closer at competitors whose return on assets ratio is higher than yours. Analyze the company's operation's methods and imitate or introduce similar strategies to gain an even stronger position within the industry.

*********************************

You are welcome to leave your comments, suggestions, ideas either privately through PM or e-mail or by posting below.

Best,
 
One of the problems that we had early on was that we wanted to make sure we had everything setup for our customers - this involved setting up multiple servers, each with a different control panel and OS (e.g., cPanel on linux, two windows boxes with plesk/helm. A windows and a linux box with Ensim, etc).

In addition, we also setup a massive toll free phone number system, toll free fax number, cell phones for employees, two way pagers for system administrators and several other such expenses/assets.

Of course, this resulted in a HUGE loss and we eventually downgraded to just what we needed. I should also mention that for each server we setup an "identical" backup server with another data center, and also used a third data center that offered unlimited bandwidth on T1 connections (which only equates to 500bg per month if i remmebr correctly - too tired to do math).

While it was a draw to customers to be able to claim that we have over 60 servers and we did have two or three customers sign up for a rather expensive 100% uptime package where if they were down for more than 60 seconds at once in a month they got a credit for the entire month - it turned out that it wasn't worth it at all financailly.

One of the things that I've always found strange is why a few cometing hosting providers don't join to gether to offer failover services - each sharing some of the others server space in a round robin dns setup (which is basaicly setting DNS refresh rates to a horribly small amount of time and hosting accounts off the dns server - that way if the server is unreachable, the viewer's comptuer contacts the next DNS server and automatically goes to the server that is working.

The only difficulty with this (asside form the cost) was that we had to develop a script to do "live updates" whenever a customer modified or uploaded a new file to their site - not to mention that we had to take care of setting up SQL databases to work properly for customers by modifying the code that they used - which was annoying (as we wern't overly familar with their custom code and had to figure it out). Speaking of which, why don't people document their code any more?

At any rate - asside from that, based on how often the assests/resourse we have right now are used (such as the toll free number, cell phones, etc) - they aren't really worth it fiancaiclly and we'd probably turn a greater profit by getting rid of it - but it is nice to be able to provide an extremly high level of support to our customers...
 
Stephen, that's sad to hear that after building a great infrastructure you had to downgrade. Maybe a mistake was done in the budgeting instead of all this hardware?

I'm sure you would have operated just fine should the company had more funds at their disposal. The setup you had is rare and I'm sure plenty of customers would have noticed that.

Best,
 
Back
Top