Procter and Gamble (P&G) and Colgate-Palmolive (C-P) are two of the largest consumer goods company in the world and have been in the industry since the 80s. The companies manufacture and market fast moving consumer goods (FMCG) such as household products, personal care and hygiene, targeting at various segments of consumers. Among the brands carried by P&G are Downy, Olay, Tide, Clairol and Bounty. Popular brands under C-P are Palmolive, Kleenex, and Colgate. In terms of financial performance both companies have performed well. This brief review will focus on the financial performance such as profitability, solvency and liquidity. Firstly, based on the profitability, P&G has earned higher profit from each dollar of revenue which is 13.4% compared to C-P 12.9% for the recent year 2013. In addition, P&G also has higher EPS of US$4.04 compare to C-P US$2.41. In contrast, C-P register a Gross Profit of 58.7% and Return on Equity of 91.0% as opposed to P&G’s 49.6% and 17.0% respectively. C-P seems to rely heavily on debt and this has helped to improve the Return of Equity. P&G also has its downside in asset turnover ratio (0.62) and fixed turnover …show more content…
Its receivable turnover is 13.4 times per year, which is higher than C-P 10.5. In addition, the average number of days from sale on account to collection for P&G is 27.2 days while for C-P is 34.8 days. Based on the efficiency ratio analysis, P&G’s inventory moves quickly from purchase to sale, which the inventory turnover ratio is 6.2 and the time for the purchased inventories to be on sale is on the average of 58.6 days while C-P’s turnover ratio is 5.2 and the average days to sell is 70.6. This shows that P&G takes a shorter time than C-P to sell their inventories. However, C-P has a higher ability to pay their short-term liabilities, whereby the current ratio is 1.08 as opposed to P&G
...s are doing well and over the many years have gone up. The company has not lawsuits currently pending which is good. The company as a whole seems to be growing even when the market is down.
We compared the two companies in a variety of ways. To start, we will give a brief background
Another highlight of the company was the company’s gross margin, which was 32.8 in 2012, just a little more than the 31.9 in 2011 and their selling rate went down by 20.9
After conducting a basic 10 year financial analysis of the company, it has become evident that even with a highly competitive market structure they are able to improve on their performance. Ranging from 2004 to 2013 financial information, the company has shown a significant increase in their sales revenue roughly $3865 million sales in 2004 to almost four time that valuing $12970 million in 2013, which was an “increase of 10.4% over the 53 week prior year” The company’s growth strategy has been to diversify its product market and make them...
Although Lafley has had success, the underlying problem remains. How will Lafley return P&G to its rightful place in Corporate America? P&G's solution to its problems is through product line extensions, expansion into non-premium brands, as well as acquisitions, licensing, reinforcing market orientation through consumer focus, and outsourcing. This recommendation was based on following items;
P&G Canada has five operating divisions, organized by product category. The divisions and some of their major brands are:
The objective of this report is to give an overall view on research and analysis to regards of two companies, Wm Morrison Supermarkets Plc and Tesco Plc that I have chosen for. In this report, I will be comparing two companies’ financial analysis based on their comprehensive income and balance sheet for one year; and also will be comparing their generating cash ability, cash management and financial adaptability based on statement of cash flows for the past two year and also determine whether the two companies have the ability to repay their debts to their creditors, generating into cash and going concern which related to finance.
Liquidity measures a company's capacity to pay its debts as they come due. However, Wal-Mart’s current ratio is 0.93, Target current ratio is 1.11 and the industry ratio is 3.04, which is much higher, so I would say that it is good but needs improvement. The quick ratio for Wal-Mart is 1.04 and Target’s quick ratio is 0.21 and the industry ratio is 0.31, which is much higher. Wal-Mart’s is higher and needs some improvement and Target’s is good. Accounts receivable for Wal-Mart is 9 days and Target’s is 6 days, whereas an estimate for the industry is 17 days, which means that both of them are doing better than the industry standards. Target’s inventory ratio is 6.04 and Wal-Mart’s inventory ratio is 0.81, and the industry ratio 1.58. These numbers shows that Wal-Mart is good but Target needs improvement. Furthermore, based on this analysis, I would say that Wal-Mart and Target are doing well but both have areas that need improvement.
Johnson & Johnson researches, develops, manufactures, and sells products in health care. The company was founded by three brothers, Robert Wood Johnson, James Wood Johnson, and Edward Mead Johnson, in New Brunswick, New Jersey, in 1886 (J&J website). Alex Gorsky is currently the chairman and chief executive officer of the company. Johnson & Johnson is known for providing a competitive pricing strategy. In the United States, Johnson and Johnson strives to keep their net price increases for health care products within the Consumer Price Index. The company supports more than 600 programs that address major health-related issues in local communities in more than 50 countries, making it the world’s largest corporate donors (J&J website).
...re chances of growth and development for the company which is clearly understood through the research done on the Ansoff’s matrix. P&G is much ahead of its competitors and has also won many honors in terms of offering quality and innovative products. The company’s products are also sold by wide variety of retailers around the world and also through many e stores that sells the product online. Finally the company has also got more expansion opportunities which is clearly understood through the Yips model of Internationalization. As the company continues to acquire international brands over the years and succeeds in offering quality and innovative based products to the people all over the world it tend to give a much better completion to its competitors and of course get a wider market share making its competitors give a tough time in the industry.
Addressing Price Earnings Ratio, the considerations for both companies seems to be at opposites. From 2008 through 2012 GOOG had increased their P/E ratio by 25% which is an indicator of what the market believes each dollar is worth of annual earnings, but cautiously could be overvalued until validated by increased earnings. As with YHOO, it has deflated to a -59%.
In the $1 billion Indian Oral Care Industry, Procter & Gamble faces three main opponents: Colgate Palmolive India, Hindustan Unilever Limited and Dabur India. Colgate Palmolive India had its start in 1937 as an oral care product. SInce then, it has enjoyed 78 years as the leading oral care provider. Currently, it has 41.4% of the toothbrush market, making it the leading brand. Its toothbrushes are marketed towards any and all toothbrush users with a special emphasis towards expanding into rural markets.
Once America’s most innovative consumer products company, Procter and Gamble (P&G) started by selling soaps and candles in a small Cincinnati storefront in 1837 (Procter and Gamble, 2008). After a hundred and seventy-one years P&G has grown to over one hundred household brands in over eighty countries (Markels 2006). Their products range from air fresheners to prescription drugs. However, as P&G headed into the twenty-first century they announced that they would not be meeting their 1st quarter earnings forecast [Lafley, 2003]. Revenue margins were dropping and P&G was quickly losing market share to Kimberly Clark and Johnson & Johnson. After missed earnings P&G’s stock price fell from $59.18 to $26.50 between January 2000 and March 2000 (PG). Upset, the board of directors pressured then CEO Durk Jager to resign after a lack luster attempt at turning P&G around and replaced him A.G Lafley, an unproven CEO, whom analysts felt lacked the experience to give P&G a much needed clean up (Lafley, 2003).
Toothbrush manufacturers have poured millions of dollars and hours, to marry form and function in oral health care products that enable their users to brush frequently, comfortably, and above all, properly. Along the way, they have built the U.S. oral care market into a $2.9 billion industry, changed the brushing habits of millions and turned the lowly toothbrush into a trendy lifestyle accessory.
P&G’s purpose is to provide branded products and services of superior quality and value that improve the lives of the world’s consumers. P&G values their employees through leadership, ownership, integrity, passion for winning, and trust. P&G entices and recruits best people in the world, builds their organization by promoting and rewarding from within, and believes that their employees will always be the most important asset. P&G has many principles such as (1) showing respect to all individuals, (2) valuing differences, (3) inspiring and enabling employees to achieve high expectations, standards, and challenging goals, (4) valuing personal mastery, (5) believing that all individuals can and want to contribute to their fullest potential, (6)