Hi OB; whilst I agree generally that there is value here, I feel such is aside from Bolt. Personally, and this is just my aversion to the Uber/just eats/deliveries of the world, I don't see Bolt gaining traction/profit. Other than the scale/first mover advantage of the Ubers, there are a proliferation of Bolts, that prevent them from the necessary scale of coverage/economies. Take Grab, which is pretty much the Uber of the Philippines. Not only better funded, but funded by higher profile blue chip backers. The only upside I see in Bolt is not in it's own potential for profitability, but for it being taken out by a competitor to remove a competitor. I currently rate Bolt as zero, that aside, without it, TMT definitely offers value .
the perspective I would offer is that Bolt is the leader - and first mover - in numerous territories where Uber has not bothered to enter. Notably Eastern Europe and Africa. Of course you can say the $ value of somewhere like Tanzania is much lower than the USA but it is also true that there is a "leapfrog" effect in those countries where people embrace new technologies in a way mature economies do not. My impression from people who've visited various African countries is that Bolt is the "go to" option for vehicle hire. More recently it has aggressively built a presence in many Western European countries - is large in Germany, Spain and Benelux and now is expanding in the UK.
It is also true that Bolt is heavily involved in mobility in a way that Uber does not. Electric scooters and the like - and it has learned lessons from early players and builds in sensors and controls to manage the behaviour of its users, but also to manage those assets. The UK's scooter population appears to be errant children from council estates but in other countries there is a thriving daily hire business. Uber is not in that space. At least not yet.
Yes, Bolt is certainly complementary to an existing player (either Lyft, Uber or others) so yes could be bought out. And to an acquirer it has some USPs geographically and in terms of service mix.
Valuing it at zero is pretty harsh..... to get $220m support from a consortia of banks suggests I'm not alone in this thinking. I guess time will tell :)
To clarify, I value Bolt at zero in the context of the value of TMT. Yes I don't see Bolt as of value, personal view, merely an also ran ticking over but never moving the dial. As for the funding, well banks/financials at $220 look just to be spreading their bets to cover all the options, wanting not to miss the winner rather than picking with conviction, the losers. I don't share your conviction on it's value to TMT, but happy to be proved wrong. I don't believe in the sphere at all, but if I did, Grab shouts at me more than Bolt.
Uber pay $950m for a food delivery business in Taiwan.
https://investor.uber.com/news-events/news/press-release-details/2024/Uber-Eats-to-Acquire-Delivery-Heros-foodpanda-Delivery-Business-in-Taiwan/default.aspx
Positive read across for Bolt from Lyft this evening. Revenue up, losses down, cash flow positive in 2024.
https://www.wsj.com/livecoverage/stock-market-today-dow-jones-05-07-2024/card/lyft-grows-revenue-trims-loss-under-new-ceo-umbxo2zFcgp4OGBfjWAz?mod=lctimeline_finance
Hi OB; whilst I agree generally that there is value here, I feel such is aside from Bolt. Personally, and this is just my aversion to the Uber/just eats/deliveries of the world, I don't see Bolt gaining traction/profit. Other than the scale/first mover advantage of the Ubers, there are a proliferation of Bolts, that prevent them from the necessary scale of coverage/economies. Take Grab, which is pretty much the Uber of the Philippines. Not only better funded, but funded by higher profile blue chip backers. The only upside I see in Bolt is not in it's own potential for profitability, but for it being taken out by a competitor to remove a competitor. I currently rate Bolt as zero, that aside, without it, TMT definitely offers value .
Hi Damien,
the perspective I would offer is that Bolt is the leader - and first mover - in numerous territories where Uber has not bothered to enter. Notably Eastern Europe and Africa. Of course you can say the $ value of somewhere like Tanzania is much lower than the USA but it is also true that there is a "leapfrog" effect in those countries where people embrace new technologies in a way mature economies do not. My impression from people who've visited various African countries is that Bolt is the "go to" option for vehicle hire. More recently it has aggressively built a presence in many Western European countries - is large in Germany, Spain and Benelux and now is expanding in the UK.
It is also true that Bolt is heavily involved in mobility in a way that Uber does not. Electric scooters and the like - and it has learned lessons from early players and builds in sensors and controls to manage the behaviour of its users, but also to manage those assets. The UK's scooter population appears to be errant children from council estates but in other countries there is a thriving daily hire business. Uber is not in that space. At least not yet.
Yes, Bolt is certainly complementary to an existing player (either Lyft, Uber or others) so yes could be bought out. And to an acquirer it has some USPs geographically and in terms of service mix.
Valuing it at zero is pretty harsh..... to get $220m support from a consortia of banks suggests I'm not alone in this thinking. I guess time will tell :)
To clarify, I value Bolt at zero in the context of the value of TMT. Yes I don't see Bolt as of value, personal view, merely an also ran ticking over but never moving the dial. As for the funding, well banks/financials at $220 look just to be spreading their bets to cover all the options, wanting not to miss the winner rather than picking with conviction, the losers. I don't share your conviction on it's value to TMT, but happy to be proved wrong. I don't believe in the sphere at all, but if I did, Grab shouts at me more than Bolt.