Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Marketing impact on growth of a business
Importance of advertising in the fast food industry
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Marketing impact on growth of a business
1. According to the article, I noticed that California Pizza Kitchen (CPK) spend only 1% of its sales on their advertising. On the other hand, CPK's competitors usually spend 3%-4% of the sales on their advertising. This means that CPK has less advertising costs compared to its competitors. However, CPK need to realize that advertising is important impact to attract more customers and improve their sales. So, increasing advertising budget is one of the important things to do for CPK's success. Then, CPK needs to repurchase the company's stock because their stock price has decreased by 10% in June, which means it is a good opportunity to repurchase their stocks at a lower price. Next, I noticed that CPK avoided their debt financing. So, CPK should increase their ROE by increasing leverage by borrowing to acquire more assets. By leveraging, CPK is able to reduce their …show more content…
corporate income tax liability, which was almost $10 million in 2006. 2.
I calculated financial leverage for CPK on the below, it has financial leverage of 28.05%, 32.90%, and 33.52% respectively in 2005, 2006, and 2007. The financial leverage for CPK increased slightly in the last three years which means it is going to help to improve CPK’s ROE.
Next, I have ROE of 8.99%, 9.52%, 10.19%, and 11.05%. Based on the calculations on the above, ROE is rising when CPK takes on more debt and becomes more leveraged. Moreover, ROE of CPK increased because of CPK is expanding their business by using higher debt for a CPK’s operation.
For the cost of capital, each alternatives have a slightly different cost of capital of 5.51%, 5.46%, and 5.43% of 10%, 20%, and 30% of debt to total capital respectively. I noticed that when CPK maintains higher debt to total capital, the cost of capital reduces. To analyze that when leverage increases, it has effect on cost of capital by decreasing it slightly.
I calculated the anticipated share price and its equity. Next, I have outstanding shares of 1,010.24, 1995.49, and 2954.05 that CPK repurchases under each alternatives of 10%, 20%, and
30%. The tax deductibility of interest for CPK is an encouraging aspect of using debt financing to repurchase its outstanding shares due to it helps to eliminate double taxation on the shareholders. This way shareholders would receive more money to purchase additional new shares, and with higher returns because the outstanding shares already have decreased. Also, we talked about the case in a class, this case situation happened right before the financial crisis in 2008. CPK hit the niche market at the time and no body competed against them. 4. For the capital structure policy I would recommend for CPK to choose within the options, to go with 30% of debt and 70% of equity. As professor has mentioned at a class, the higher risk has the higher return. Nevertheless, when CPK gets more debts, it will reduce taxes. This will result the cash flow increase by certain amount. To analyze, with 30 percent of debt financing, CPK would have financial figures of: - Return on equity would be 11.05 percent -Outshading shares would be over 26 millions with share price of $22.94 of each -WACC for CPK would be 5.43% -Lastly, the debt would be a little over $65 million and equity would be almost $600 million.
This requirement makes it important to look through a majority of the return ratios, which include return on sales, return on assets, and return on equity. Additionally, investors are also interested in the ratios related to the company’s earnings, such as earnings per share (EPS) and PE ratio. Looking at return on sales, we can see that Wendy’s has a 7.27% return on sales and Bob Evans has a 1.23%, which demonstrates Wendy’s has a higher profit margin. Moreover, Wendys’ return on assets is 2.85% and Bob Evans is 1.58%. Also, Wendy’s and Bob Evan 's have return on equity ratios of 6.66% and 4.30%, respectively. All of these return ratios show that Wendy’s has a better handle on turning working capital into revenue. On the other hand, although Wendy’s return ratios are higher than Bob Evans, Bob Evans has a better performance on earnings per share and PE ratio. This is due to Bob Evans having less common stock share outstanding, which makes their earnings per share and PE ratio higher than Wendy’s. Due to the EPS being higher for Bob Evans, we would recommend that investors look towards Bob
In order to do this the WACC approach will be used based on the assumption that leverage will stay constant after 2012. Industry average of debt/value is 28.1 percent and debt/equity 71.9 percent. These figures will be used as an estimate for long-term leverage because it is expected that AirThread will maintain a leverage ratio that is constant with the industry. From this the relevered equity beta is found to be 0.9847 which will give an equity rate of return of 9.42 percent. The rate of return on debt will be 5.5 percent. This is the percentage of debt because it is the interest rate of the 10 year U.S. Treasury bond. The WACC is now found to be 7.80 percent. Next, the long-term growth rate of 2.9 percent will be assumed to stay constant. In order to determine the FCF 2013 FCF 2012 of $315.60 will be multiplied by the growth rate. This will give a FCF 2013 of $323.48. The FCF 2013 will then be divided by the WACC minus growth rate. By doing this the PV of terminal value is found to be approximately $4.6 billion. To see the calculations for this step refer to Exhibit 3 in the
Higher leverage is very likely to create value for a firm considering capital structure change by exerting financial discipline and more efficient corporate strategy changes.
Based on the optimal capital structure analysis, they should pursue as 70% debt proportion, which will give them the lowest cost of capital at 11.58%. Currently Star has no debt in their capital structure, so these new projects should begin to add debt to the company. However, no matter what debt and equity proportions are chosen for each project, the discount rate of 11.58% should be used, as the capital budgeting decisions should be independ...
First of all an analysis of the packaging machine investment’s hurdle rate is required. I will use comparable firm parameters approach to figure out the hurdle rate (WACC) of the firm using the information provided in Exhibit 5. The cost of debt should be calculated using the bond information given in footnote 2 of case under Exhibit 2. The cost of equity should be calculated using the Capital Asset Pricing Model.
We defined several criteria to determine our choice – return, risks and other quantitative and qualitative factors. Targeting a debt ratio of 40% will maximize the firm’s value. A higher earning’s per share and dividends per share will lead to a higher stock price in the future. Due to leveraging, return on equity is higher because debt is the major source of financing capital expenditures. To maintain the 40% debt ratio, no equity issues will be declared until 1985. DuPont will be financing the needed funds by debt. For 1986 onwards, minimum equity funds will be issued. It will be timed to take advantage of favorable market condition. The rest of the financing required will be acquired by issuing debt.
11a. Answer: (Book Value WACC) Debt = 61.2 / 155.7 = 39% Preferred Stock = 15 / 155.7 = 10% Common Stock = 79.5 / 170.8 = 51% 2. Answer: (Market Value WACC) Debt = 30% Preferred Stock = 10% Common Stock = 60% C. Answer: Weighted Average Cost of Capital determines marginal cost of issuing new securities to finance projects. Such securities should be issued at market value. Therefore weights allocated to debt and equity in determining WACC should be based on market value.
The first method we will review is the accounting method. Through this accounting approach we will analyze specific ratios and their possible impact on the company's performance. The specific ratios we will review include the return on total assets, return on equity, gross profit margin, earnings per share, price earnings ratio, debt to assets, debt to equity, accounts receivable turnover, total asset turnover, fixed asset turnover, and average collection period. I will explain each ratio in greater detail, and why I have included it in this analysis, when I give the results of each specific ratio calculation.
In assessing Du Pont’s capital structure after the Conoco merger that significantly increased the company’s debt to equity ratio, an analyst must look at all benefits and drawbacks of a high debt ratio. The main reason why Du Pont ended up with a high debt to equity ratio after acquiring Conoco was due to the timing and price at which they bought Conoco. Du Pont ended up buying the firm at its peak, just before coal and oil prices started to fall and at a time when economic recession hurt the chemical industry of Du Pont. The additional response from analysts and Du Pont stockholders also forced Du Pont to think twice about their new expansion. The thought of bringing the debt ratio back to 25% was brought on by the fact that the company saw that high levels of capital spending were vital to the success of the firm and that high debt levels may put them at higher risk for defaulting.
Notably, its share price has dropped 43% just in the last year, after the publication of the year losses of €6.8 billion (remarkably €2.8 billion more than the losses of 2008) . The ROE for the bank passed from 7.89% in 2010 to minus -9.02% at the end of 2015. Based on the figures in the latest interim report in July 2016 the ratio decreased further to -11.52% in June . Considering this trend, we need to take into account also that in recent years, the ROE was consistently below the cost of capital, eroding value. A company can increase its ROE in 2 ways: increasing the numerator - raising your net income - or decreasing the denominator – the equity capital. Banks represent generally a capital-intense business, and the introduction of tighter regulations is posing difficulties to the banks that aim to reduce their equity capital. It appears clear that the only way to achieve a better ROE is to attain a high financial leverage . The pre-financial crisis leverage level was impressive (71.73%), and today is 27.11%, above the standard of its direct competitors .The return on assets has also decreased in the last six years and has reached a negative level of -0.46%
The increase in debt ratio has attracted the attention of rating agencies who have clearly stated that in order for HCA to maintain their A bond rating, HCA must return to their 60-40 capital structure. Now the question arises as to whether the A rating should be sought or should HCA move to a less conservative position. Some investors believe that a more aggressive use of leverage would present greater opportunities in the future. Others feel that with changes in the Medicare/Medicaid reimbursement structure on the horizon, HCA should remain conservative. In order to decrease the debt ratio, HCA would have to 1) decrease the growth rate (inadvertently decreasing ROE) or 2) decrease debt/increase equity.
The final model used to compute the cost of capital was the earning capitalization model. The problem with this model is that it does not take into consideration the growth of the company. Therefore we chose to reject this calculation. The earnings capitalization model calculations were found this way:
Kodak’s debt ratio has been improving since 2012 when it was considerably above 1. Their 2014 debt ratio is 0.89, which is very close to Hewlett-Packard and Sony. The debt-to-equity ratio of Kodak is the first signal within the ratios that the company is not performing well. Generally, this ratio should be below 1 and for Kodak in 2014 it was 8.83. Their equity is almost non-existent and this is signaling very weak balance sheet strength. Compared to Kodak, Hewlett-Packard and Sony are doing okay, but their ratios are both well above 1. In terms of ability to pay interest, Kodak’s only strong year was 2013. Their ratio has dipped in 2014, showing that they aren’t able to pay their interest or are struggling to pay it. Hewlett-Packard had no interest expense in their latest fiscal year and Sony’s ratio is very strong. In 2012, Kodak’s free cash flow was in the negatives (-$1,176,000). Surprisingly, it reached over two million in 2013, but then dropped to only $33,000 in 2014. Without sufficient cash flow, Kodak is going to have a difficult time increasing their shareholder value. Hewlett-Packard has free cash flow over five million dollars which is huge compared to Kodak. Kodak does not seem to have sufficient cash to handle their business obligations. The cash flow adequacy ratio should be above 1, but Kodak’s are negative. The competitors are around 0.5 for their cash flow adequacy ratio, which
The analysis of these ratios shows how Ford stands as a company for the past five years. Return on equity (ROE) reveals how much profit a company earned in comparison to the total amount of shareholder equity on the balance sheet. For long-term investing with great rewards, companies that have high return on equity ratios can provide the biggest payoffs. This ratio also tells investors how effectively their capital is being reinvested, so it is a good gauge of management's money handling skills. Ford is showing a considerable turn around in this area this past year, which could easily be due to changes in management. They are also reasonably following the industry in this area.
The return on equity ratio is calculated by dividing the net income minus dividends by the equity. Per the Principles of Accounting textbook, “return on equities ratio enables the comparison of capital utilization among firms…this can help assess of effective the firm is in using borrowed funds”. Kinder Morgan’s return on equity ratio for December 2015 was .59%. In 2013 the ratio was 9.14% and in 2014 it was 3.01%. The return on equity ratio, like the return on assets ratio significantly declined over the past three years. One significant decrease to cause this decline is due to the deterioration of net income. Kinder Morgan’s net income from 2013 to 2015 was $1.19 billion, $1.02 billion, and $240 million successively. This sharp decline in net income can cause misplaced judgment on the decline of the debt ratios. When Kinder Morgan had a much higher income, their debt ratios were much