When the board of directors at Hipgnosis Songs Fund (HSF) cut the value of the company’s catalog by 26% last week, it admitted something investors had long believed. Although the London-listed royalty fund had amassed an enviable collection of songs since going public in 2018, changes in market conditions and the very nature of some of those rights may have merited a significantly lower fair value all along.  

A new valuation by Shot Tower Capital put the portfolio of music rights — which includes Neil Young, Shakira and Red Hot Chili Peppers, among other A-list artists and songwriters — at $1.8 billion to $2.06 billion. As recently as Sept. 30, the catalog was given a fair value of $2.62 billion by HSF’s longtime valuation expert, Citrin Cooperman (previously Massarky Consulting). Six months earlier, it was said to be worth $2.8 billion.  

HSF’s new board of directors hired Shot Tower in the wake of investors’ Oct. 26 votes against continuation and a partial catalog sale — effectively a vote of no confidence in both the previous board and the investment advisor, Hipgnosis Song Management. Shot Tower will give HSF’s board its final due diligence by Mar. 25, and HSF will provide an update on those findings by Mar. 29. 

Some longtime critics of HSF’s previous valuation found validation in Shot Tower’s lower number. Stifel analysts claimed the new number shows HSF “clearly overpaid for catalogs,” they wrote in a Mar. 4 investor note. To date, HSF has spent about $2.2 billion on acquisitions. It raised over 1.3 billion pounds ($1.67 billion) from an IPO and seven successive offerings and has drawn $604 million from a revolving credit facility.  

Such a large decline in the valuation suggests the various experts had differing opinions on both the catalog’s revenues and the riskiness of those revenues. Shot Tower calculated HSF’s net revenue after third-party royalties and administration expenses at $121.7 million for the 12-month period ended June 30. The accounting firm BDO calculated a similar amount — $119.4 million for the 12-month period ended Sept. 30 — for a quality of earnings analysis. 

The higher $2.62 billion valuation appears to be based on a higher annual net revenue. A July 2023 investor presentation put HSF’s annual revenue at $134 million (based on a $2.8 billion portfolio fair value and an implied historic net publishers share, or NPS, multiple of 20.89). That’s $12.3 million more than Shot Tower’s figure and $14 million more than BDO’s estimate. The difference in annual revenues, however, only explains part of the difference in valuations.  

The discount rate appears to have also played a major role in HSF’s lower valuation. Shot Tower used a weighted average discount rate of 9.63% for the entire catalog, more than 1.1 percentage points higher than the discount rate used for previous valuations. Experts Billboard spoke with called the rate “on the high side” and “a particularly high number.” Some other recent valuations used a lower discount rate. Discount rates and valuations are inversely related: A higher discount rate will produce a lower present value of cash flows, and vice versa.  

Until this week, HSF had been valued using an 8.5% discount rate since the Sept. 30, 2020, valuation conducted by Citrin Cooperman. FTI Consulting’s valuation of a Kobalt portfolio used in an asset-backed security (ABS) offering in February used an 8.5% discount rate for songs older than 18 months (and 11.75% for songs aged 3 to 18 months). FTI’s valuation of the portfolio behind Concord’s $1.65 billion ABS used an 8.25% discount rate for catalog songs (and 11.75% for recorded music frontline content and options for future releases).  

The HSF discount rate has been a point of contention amongst analysts and investors in recent years. When HSF lowered its discount rate to 8.5% in 2020, analysts complained the valuation increased even though the investment manager had not yet added value and market assumptions hadn’t changed. When interest rates started rising in 2022, analysts wondered why HSF stuck with the 8.5% discount rate.

The discount rate depends on the riskiness of those future cash flows. Perfectly safe revenue is discounted using a risk-free rate of return such as a 10-year U.S. Treasury Rate. Because no business is without risk, a company’s revenues would merit a higher rate. If a company carries debt, its borrowing cost — also more than the risk-free rate — would also be baked into the discount rate.  

Shot Tower’s discount rate took a variety of factors into account, according to the press release, which could explain how it got to 9.63%. For example, Shot Tower found that 65% of HSF’s revenue derived from passive rights where the company does not control publishing, administration or licensing. In many cases, HSF owns only a songwriter’s share rather than the publisher’s share, or the producer’s royalties from a sound recording. Investors might have assumed that HSF had more control over administration, distribution and licensing: In HSF’s annual report for the year ended March 31, 2022, it said it had 100% interest ownership in 96% of the songs in its catalog (138 of the 146 catalogs).

“That control has a lot of value,” explains an industry insider. Strategic buyers — usually music publishers and record labels — will pay a premium to control a song’s administration and licensing or a recording’s distribution. Passive rights typically trade at a discount because they carry more potential risks of counterparts (co-writers, for example) and potential collection risk (as is the case when royalties are re-directed from a label rather than received from a PRO). With a writer’s share, “you’re a lot more along for the ride,” this insider says. The producer royalties that HSF acquired — such as RedOne, Jimmy Iovine and Timbaland — are also passive.

For a company looking to bolster its credibility with investors, Shot Tower’s valuation was a double-edged sword. The lower number confirmed some investors’ long-held belief that the portfolio is worth less than HSF had claimed. But the decrease in valuation further hurt HSF’s share price. Shot Tower’s lower valuation prompted HSF’s board to commit to using its cash to pay down debt rather than resume the dividend it suspended in October. So, while the lower valuation better reflected HSF’s market capitalization, the continued loss of a dividend was the likely cause behind the stock dropping 11% the day of the announcement.