SECTION 1 -

There are no listed companies that conduct business exclusively in the services and
employee benefits sector, but the following American listed companies were used on the basis of the
criteria described above: Visa, MasterCard, Paychex and ADP. Although, based on their company
profiles, none of these companies is exactly comparable to New Services, they nevertheless have the
following similar features:
• Visa and MasterCard are not exactly comparable to New Services because (i) they
are only active in the payment sector and not in the employee and public benefits
sector, and (ii) they do not operate with a structurally negative working capital
balance which regularly generates financial revenue. However, their business
model is similar to that of New Services for several reasons: (i) they use a “B2B”
commission model and with no credit risk on the ultimate end user, (ii) they have a
presence in numerous countries, (iii) their businesses are generally correlated with
the growth of GDP, (iv) some of their growth is linked to the development of e‐
money payment methods and online solutions, and (v) their revenue growth is
derived from factors similar to those of New Services.
• Paychex and ADP are also not exactly comparable to New Services because these
companies offer services to companies of a different nature (mainly payroll
management and human resources departments). However, their revenue sources,
their presence in B2B markets, their underlying growth drivers (the relation to GDP
and to the development of salaried employment in general) and their management
of negative working capital requirements, generating financial revenues, may in
some ways be considered similar to New Services.
New Services generates negative working capital requirements that in turn generate financial
proceeds on a recurring basis that are reported, pursuant to IFRS standards, in revenue, and
accordingly as EBIT. The companies mentioned above that were chosen as potential comparables to
New Services have no, or few, similar features, and furthermore are subject to U.S. GAAP. For this
reason, to the extent that their application to comparable aggregates is not possible unless significant
adjustments are made, the multiples established as the ratio between the enterprise value and the
EBIT were not used. Revenue multiples were not used because they did not take into account
different profitability levels of the companies included in the sample.
Accordingly, only the Price Earning Ratios are mentioned in the chart below. This multiple is
defined as of May 4, 2010 as (i) the average price at which the shares of the companies in question are
traded over a period of 30 days and (ii) the net earnings per share published by each company (for
2009) or resulting from the consensus of analysts’ forecasts concerning such companies (for 2010).
Company
PER 09A PER 10E
ADP 16.5x 16.7x
MasterCard 22.9x 18.9x
Paychex 23.0x 22.6x
Visa 27.2x 22.6x
Note: Net EPS at December 31 for Automatic Data Processing (for the period ended June 30). Paychex (for the
period ended May 31) and Visa (for the period ended September 30)
Source: Datastream, CapIQ as at May 4, 2010, 10‐K annual reports and 10‐Q quarterly reports available on May
4, 2010.
130