Call us on 1300 794 893

The Experts

Reality bite for “buy now, pay later” sector? Or will we see much more?

Tim Boreham
Thursday, June 27, 2019

Bookmark and Share

The Australian Stock Exchange’s status as the global home of listed “buy now, pay later” (BNPL) stocks  is under scrutiny, with leader Afterpay (APT, $25.72) being probed for money laundering violations and the sector more broadly under the blowtorch for fostering profligate ways among our free-spending youth.

And yet, the BNPL bandwagon keeps rollin’ on, with the Minneapolis based Sezzle pondering an ASX debut in coming months.  From what we can see, Sezzle’s business model is close to Afterpay’s but management says it won’t be competing directly with the Antipodean dazzler.

While BNPL valuations have undergone a steep reality check, Afterpay has just raised $317 million of fresh equity, while the New York based Splitit (SPT, 66 cents) pocketed $30 million from a placement, with up to $10 million to come in a share placement plan.

Shares in the Afterpay and ZipCo (Z1P, $3.03) are both down around 22% and 19% respectively from their May peaks, while newcomer Splitit is 67% off the pace from its March peak.

Having said that, holders of any of the stocks since IPO are well in the money - which can’t be said for consumers caught in the trap of easy money.

The share correction has been attributed to the flow-on effects of the Austrac probe into Afterpay, which follows revelations the proxy agitants Ownership Matters set up an account in the name of Miguel Laucha (Mickey Mouse), while a 16 year old was able to buy $300 of alcohol.

Feeling a little Goofy, the company said it has closed off that avenue of abuse.

More broadly, it’s also just as likely that BNPL investors took a smoke-o given the extravagant valuations the sector’s exponents are trading on (Afterpay is still worth $4.8 billion and Zip is valued at just over $1billion).

The perceived problem with the BNPL model is that customers are not subject to rigorous credit checks, except for a light going over at the point of sale. Think of those attendants at sporting events who have about two seconds to frisk a patron for an explosive device or - worst still – a bourbon and cola UDL.

The approach might work in times of relatively low unemployment, but in tougher times easy credit (not that the BNPL schemes are defined as such) has a way of biting back.

Perceptions of course can be stronger than reality and a Zip says the company rejects 40% of all applications. “Zip does more upfront due diligence on new customers than any other credit provider in Australia, including credit and identity checks for every single application,” the company says.

The Afterpay/Zip/Sezzle models are ‘anti credit’, appealing to largely unbanked millennials without a credit card.

In contrast, Splitit takes the approach of teaming with the banking establishment with a model that intermediates the existing credit or debit card payments chain.

Consumers can split their payments into up to 36 monthly instalments, without incurring interest. The bank credit card providers – who have already vetted the customer -- continue to bear the credit risk.

“From a competitive perspective we are different to the others,” says Splitit chief Gil Don. “Especially in the Australian market, we do not provide new credit or debt.”

If anything, Splitit’s rivals are not BNPL providers, but store cards and perhaps the 30-day interest free capability of a credit card.

While Afterpay’s average balance is around $150, Splitit’s is $1,000 which reflects its older demographic of 28 and above.

Don says it’s healthy to have the option of half a dozen providers at the checkout – physical or virtual – because it’s not a case of one size fits all. A $100 purchase is not really suited to Splitit, because few consumers would bother with $20 instalments over four months.

Having said that, how many payment options at the checkout can a consumer tolerate before the tyranny of choice simply confuses them? And how many schemes can the merchants keep track of with its internal auditing and other procedures?

While endless schemes may well flourish with their tweaks and niches, the most fruitful rewards will go the providers who can emulate PayPal and become the global household name in payments.

With its US momentum reportedly gathering more momentum than a pro-gun rally in Wyoming, Afterpay may well take line honours and silence its sneering critics.

Like Afterpay, the New York based Splitit is focused on the US retail sector which turns over $US8 trillion a year with more than one-thirds still carried out by credit cards.

 “The strategy is to acquire as many merchants as we can, but from a quality rather than quality perspective.”

With revenue last year of only $US790,000 ($1.14m), Splitit is smaller than Afterpay (first half income of $112m) or Zip (first half revenue of $34m). Splitit also lost $US4.64m for the year but Don notes Splitit’s expenses are lower than that of the other BNPL providers because the company doesn’t have to devote resources to chasing delinquent shoppers. “If we can get to the numbers they are doing, you only have to do the math,” he says.

While Splitit operates in 27 countries it has a US revenue bias. This month it also struck a deal with EFT Payments Asia - the partner of Chinese ecommerce titan Alipay - making Splitit available to customers of retailers such as Estee Lauder, Sunglass Hut, Kate Spade and Marriott.

“This is just the beginning of the beginning,” says Don.

tim@independentresearch.com.au

Disclaimer: Under no circumstances have there been any inducements or like made by the company mentioned to either IIR or the author. The views here are independent and have no nexus to IIR’s core research offering. The views here are not recommendations and should not be considered as general advice in terms of stock recommendations in the ordinary sense.

Published: Thursday, June 27, 2019


New on Switzer

blog comments powered by Disqus
Pixel_admin_thumb_300x300 Pixel_admin_thumb_300x300