Ust Case Solution

Aside from the two aforementioned proposals the company can raise its leverage in other ways. By conducting DuPont analysis and understanding operating leverage we see that purchasing fixed assets and decreasing stockholder’s equity will raise the equity multiplier and the firm’s operating leverage. In this instance we recommend against this approach as the firm already has a large amount of excess cash above what they require to fund new positive NPV projects and purchase new assets. Investors would rather see their capital returned to them in the form of share repurchases and dividends as it is evident by the company’s cash stockpile that they can

Increased leverage would increase the risk for the shareholder. This is due to the fact that an increased amount of debt would increase the financial return that investors expect. For example, if a company has no debt and posts better than expected earnings, the equity holder would get all of this benefit. If the company had some debt and posted better than expected earnings, the bond holders would get a fixed payment as usual, and shareholders would still enjoy increased profits; the problem arises if worse than expected profits were shown by Kelly Services. If Kelly Services had no debt and posted bad earnings, then the equity bears all the risk in that situation. However, if Kelly

Before evaluating whether $1b is value enhancing in quantitative measure, ability to cope with pre-requisite interest payment and potentially dividend payment (possibly dividend growth maintenance) should be considered.

In order to calculate the impact of the leverage recapitalization on UST’s value, we used the WACC and APV methods to calculate its value before and after the recapitalization.

My recommendation is for the company to stay focused on its main competitive advantage of supplying a

Comments from teacher: In question 1, why do we use these equitation’s, explain and show then, i.e. ROE can go up with more leverage. More on comparables. In Q1 assumptions explained, that are then used in DCF. Max for question 1 and 2, two pages. Must power to put in Q3. Deduct tax in table 3. In DCF, show more how calculated and assumption missing about other income and corporate expenses. Table 6 to be fixed (already been done). Skip in DCF advantage and disadvantage. Do table 4 different, use Exhibit 11, value range, use median value and calculate enterprise value with multiples en deduct net debt 318,5 and get equity value. Explain better in main text footnote 12. . Use

First, a large share repurchase will significantly increase shareholders’ percentage ownership of BKI. BKI has been under levered for decades. The company acquisitions of several small manufacturers made shareholders’ equity be diluted even more. In other words, shareholders, especially the main shareholders in Blaine’s board, are paying for BKI’s over-liquidity. This share repurchase will not only give the board more flexibility to allot dividends, but will lead to a stable development of BKI’s business in the long run.

SRC offers superior returns on common equity (ROCE). This undoubtedly reflects the greater amount of debt in the capital structure vis a vis WM, and a stronger gross margin. However, SRC’s ROCE has declined in the last year mainly because a reaffirmation charge (40% of Net Income) generated in lawsuits and a possible violation of the United States Bankruptcy Code. We need to highlight the uncertainty associated with the reaffirmation charge; this means that the actual results can differ from the

Even though the company face lots of litigation and product diversification risk, the overall business risk is still low based on the price elasticity, inelastic consumer demand of the product. Also, the UST has introduced products in the price value market and sale their products in high price, which raise the value and demand in the market. Since the company has a steady demand and dominant market position and brand name with regard to their core business, the UST has a low business risk.

The owner of Hansson Private Label (HPL) must determine whether or not to accept an aggressive expansion project that would preclude the company from pursuing any alternative investment opportunities for several years. The investment, if successful, would offer numerous benefits to the company, capturing greater market share, strengthening relationships with major customers, crowding out competition and increasing firm value. Nonetheless, the decision carries significant risks and could lead to a substantial decline in firm value, if not bankruptcy, should any number of variables prove unfavorable to HPL. Moreover, the project relies heavily on a contract with a single large

From 1993 until the start of 1995, MCI’s stock had outperformed the S&P. However, in 1995, the stock’s performance was poorer than the S&P. With shareholder’s getting restless, the idea of a stock repurchase was being considered. Depending on which option MCI chooses—stock repurchase with debt issuance or open market repurchase program—the message being sent could be different. Let’s consider option one—MCI issues debt and uses the proceeds to repurchase stock. According to the article “Raising Capital: Theory and Evidence” by Clifford Smith, the market would likely react very positively to this leverage-increasing event. Because of the information disparity between a

The use of debt increases (leverages) the financial return to the private equity sponsor. The total return of

It seems then that companies should fully leverage the company or a least come close to doing so but there is a probability that the company enters financial distress as its leverage (D/E) increases. Financial distress can be very costly for companies, and the cost for this scenario is shown in the current market value of the levered firm's securities. Investors factor the potential for future distress into their assessment of the present value (this is where PV of distress costs is subtracted from un-levered company value and the PV of the tax-shield.) The value for the costs

Although the increased leverage decreases the amount of earnings available to stock holders from 496.9 million to 451.7 million for a total of 45.2 million dollars, it has a positive affect for the company’s tax structure. It actually reduces the company’s tax liability by 83 million dollars! Without the debt they have to pay 952.5 million dollars in taxes. However after an increase of 30% leverage, the new tax liability is 869.5 million dollars.

What are the advantages of leveraging this company? The disadvantages? How would leveraging up affect the company’s taxes? How would the capital markets react to a decision by the company to increase the use of debt in its capital structure?