QuinStreet IPO Check

by Kris_Tuttle on February 8, 2010

We pub­lished a short research note on Quin­Street on Fri­day based on our ini­tial inves­ti­ga­tion into the “ver­ti­cal” online direct mar­ket­ing space. The com­pany is on the road for an IPO man­aged by Credit Suisse, Bank of America/Merrill Lynch and JP Mor­gan. (Inter­est­ingly an old hand in the tech IPO space, Frank Quat­trone, is back in the game act­ing a spe­cial “IPO advi­sor” to the com­pany. We like that trend.)

Most investors got an edu­ca­tion on this mar­ket from com­pa­nies like BankRate (RATE — acquired by Apax for $571M) and more cur­rently com­pa­nies like Mon­ster World­wide (NYSE: MWW $14) and WebMD (NASDAQ: WBMD $39) which have a read­er­ship and traf­fic slice that is far more spe­cific to the domain area than the more gen­eral traf­fic at “hor­i­zon­tal” online mar­ket­ing loca­tions like Google, Microsoft, Yahoo or AOL.

The mar­ket­ing spend has been mov­ing online for some time now and is poised to con­tinue given that it still has quite a bit of “catch up” to do in order to reach cur­rent view­ing lev­els of online ver­sus offline con­tent. So the space is large and has strong fun­da­men­tals. In the S-1 fil­ing the com­pany cites a total mar­ket of $149B for direct mar­ket­ing, of which about 16% is spent online. So the TAM looks good.

How­ever com­pa­nies like Quin­Street are focused on more of what we would call a con­sid­ered pur­chase. That is a deci­sion that will require some thought and inves­ti­ga­tion. These include high ticket and com­plex prod­ucts and ser­vices. Things like online edu­ca­tion pro­grams, insur­ance, a med­ical oper­a­tion and home remod­el­ing all fall into this category.

For pur­chases like this con­tent is impor­tant. So Quin­Street actu­ally owns a large num­ber of “feeder” sites that are used to attract, qual­ify and har­vest poten­tial pur­chasers for their clients. Quin­Street has pur­chased online prop­er­ties like www.insure.com and many smaller sites. It might not be fair to call the com­pany a roll-up but it is clear that acqui­si­tions (there have been over 100 of them since 2007) will be a major com­po­nent to the strategy.

Quin­Street gets paid based on suc­cess ver­sus gen­eral adver­tis­ing which is based on “impres­sions” or even clicks. Mar­keters using Quin­Street only pay for qual­i­fied leads, opt-in deci­sions and other results which are more read­ily quan­tifi­able in busi­ness and finan­cial terms than online brand­ing and traf­fic generation.

Quin­Street has been grow­ing this busi­ness steadily for over a decade. With cur­rent rev­enues around $300M on a run-rate basis and 20% EBITDA mar­gins the busi­ness is finan­cially very attractive.

The ver­ti­cal online direct mar­ket­ing space hasn’t received the same degree of atten­tion that the broader search and adver­tis­ing area has but it looks like an attrac­tive niche.

The matu­rity and prof­itabil­ity of the com­pany would sug­gest to us that a public-market trans­ac­tion can hap­pen (unlike FriendFinder Net­works which pulled their IPO again) The cur­rent pric­ing range is a bit aggres­sive given that mid-point is only a few dol­lars from our esti­mate of full intrin­sic value but in the end the mar­ket will decide where the shares should trade.

If this IPO is suc­cess­ful it may help lesser com­pa­nies like TheStreet.com (NASDAQ: TSCM — $3), Web­Me­dia­Brands (NASDAQ: WEBM — $1.13), TechTar­get (NASDAQ: TTGT — $5.31) get a lit­tle more inter­est from investors.

At the same time more estab­lished com­pa­nies like WebMD and Mon­ster World­wide may get some addi­tional credit for hav­ing the same or very sim­i­lar oppor­tu­nity to receive fees from ven­dors based on lead gen­er­a­tion, opt-in and other “no lose” propositions.

Any­one inter­est in the research note itself may get it at no charge as a Research 2.0 mem­ber but this requires free reg­is­tra­tion and approval. More infor­ma­tion can be found via this link.

[Dis­clo­sure: The Research 2.0 model port­fo­lio has a long posi­tion in Google. No posi­tions for any of the other com­pa­nies at the time of this writing.]

Comments on this entry are closed.

Previous post:

Next post: