Marriott estimates its equity beta to be 1.11. Based on this information, if Marriott had no debt in their capital structure, I believe their equity beta would be lower, more in line with the S&P 500, because adding debt to a firm increases leverage in their operations. If a firm has more leverage, they have more room to take risks and this reflects a higher beta, which in turn leads to greater returns. This series of events is one of the main factors as to what lead to the immense growth of Marriott throughout the 1980’s. Note: I am not
Therefore, it is unlikely that Marriott will be able to exercise decisions relating to investing and financing of projects and use of capital generated from hotel assets and operations. Since most growth opportunities require investment of capital (e.g., for acquisitions), this will limit Marriot’s ability to pursue “aggressive investments in growth opportunities”. Had Marriott owned these assets, it would have full authority in making decisions to invest cash generated from hotel operations in profitable projects in its three business lines since it would not be required to distribute earnings from operations to investors under the “specified return clause”. In theory, it could use the cash to further its growth opportunities as opposed to borrowing cash through issue of debt. This would increase profitability and earnings of the company due to reduction in interest payments and better use of cash.
It would be my advice for Mr. Jones to not buy the stock because of the liability of current and future tax obligations which Mr. Jones would incur from the purchase of the stock. Since the tax identity of Smithon corporation would have not ceased, it is not a favorable purchase for Mr. Jones. Ina a case where the tax identity of a firm does not cease not to exist, the tax aspects will remain the same and so will the existing tax schedule. So in this case it would mean that Mr. Jones would not be allowed to change the financial year to end on December 31. The buyer in cases where he can’t change the legal entity is in a non -benefice situation, the buyer is limited to follow the current tax basis on the company’s assets even if the buyer paid more for the
CanGo is not considering the major benefit of an IPO, which is increased capital that comes from investors. If CanGo does not take this form of increased capital into account it will limit their growth. Recommendation 3 Offer an IPO CanGo should offer an IPO, allowing for increased capital. By offering an IPO CanGo will able to take a big step in the right direction of expanding their new ventures. Investors investing in an IPO are aware that it takes time to see a solid return/profit when a company is expanding into new ventures and that risks are involved.
Other things equal they prefer to pay more for stocks that are more risky and have uncertain cash flows. • Investors are risk averse. Other things equal they prefer to pay more for stocks that are less risky and that have relatively certain cash flows than other stocks. When determining the value of a firm, which of the following statements is ture? • A financial asset is considered to have value if it has the ability to generate positive cash flows.
Question 1 Which of the following is generally NOT true and an advantage of going public? Answer | | Facilitates stockholder diversification. | | | Increases the liquidity of the firm's stock. | | | Makes it easier to obtain new equity capital. | | | Establishes a market value for the firm.
The higher the ratio the more assurance exists that the retirement of current liabilities can be made. The current ratio measures the margin of safety available to cover any possible shrinkage in the value of current assets. Normally a ratio of 2 to 1 (2.0) or better is considered good. Short-term creditors prefer a high current ratio since it reduces their risk. Shareholders may prefer a lower current ratio so that more of the firm's assets are working to grow the business.
There would have been no issues of relocation for financial purposes if the “unfriendly merger” between Pillsbury (owner of Green Giant) and Grand Metropolitan Company had not taken place. The following facts created the issue: the merger between Pillsbury(Green Giant) and Grand Metropolitan Company; and the necessity of increasing profits at the division to help pay off debt arising from the unfriendly merger. The issue is as follows: Green Giant had two distinct paths it could take to decide the most economical manner in which they could increase profits so that severe career implications that Grand Metrolpolitan alluded too would not take place. The first choice is to move Green Giant’s Plant to Mexico, uprooting their operations in Salinas, California to have cheaper labor and utilizing the economic doctrine of comparative advantage. The second choice is for Green Giant to stay in Salinas so individuals are not laid off and deal with executives “light but firm hand upon” career implications due to Green Giant not substantically and quickly increase profits.
Investors find this information lucrative because the more expendable cash a company has the more likely they are to pay out in dividends for the stock holders.. Liquidity Ratios: Current assets are a business's total current assets divided by its total current liabilities. Total Current Asset / Total Current liabilities 1,971,000 / 116,290 16.949 = 16.9 Current Ratio- 16.9:1 or 17:1 (16.9 to 1 or 17 to
Their objectives are often huge which requires a lump-sum to be invested. The older people choose this security also because it gives fixed income which is guaranteed, there is minimal risk and less management needed. 8) What is laddering GICs? Pros and cons? Ans): Laddering GIC(s) is a proven method of investing (also known as a laddering strategy) it can help you reduce the risk of interest rate fluctuations and increase your portfolio's overall return.