therefore refer to the yields on zero-coupon
bonds also as the current spot rates
(1. if a firm wanted to borrow money today for the
next two years, it would have to pay an average interest rate of 3.5 percent per year.
2. Similarly, an investor who wanted to invest money in a riskless security for three years would
receive an average annual return of 5 percent.)
Cash Flows
Operarting:
That is income statement item, depreciation did not put money in my pocket or put it out, so i need to put it back. we want to know how much cash we receive from operation
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KAOrqyzgYzA
營運現金流量(Operating Cash Flow)
自由现金流( Free Cash FLow)
自由现金流是一种财务方法，用来衡量企业实际持有的能够回报股东的
现金。指在不危及公司生存与发展的前提下可供分配给
股东(和
债权人)的最大现金额。
自由现金流在经营活动
现金流的基础上考虑了
资本性支出和
股息支出。尽管你可能会认为股息支出并不是必需的，但是这种支出是股东所期望的，而且是一
现金支付的。自由现金流等于经营活动现金。
自由现金流表示的是公司可以自由支配的现金。如果自由现金流丰富，则公司可以偿还债务、开发新产品、
回购股票、增加股息支付。同时，丰富的自由现金流也使得公司成为
并购对象。
Return on Equity, Leverage Ratio (Ch. 7)
The capital asset pricing model (CAPM) is another method used to determine cost of equity.
Ke is the required rate of return on equity, or cost of levered equity = unlevered equity + financing premium.
KA is the company cost of equity capital with no leverage (unlevered cost of equity, or return on assets with D/E = 0).
Kd is the required rate of return on borrowings, or cost of debt.
is the debt-to-equity ratio.
is the tax rate.
Without taxes[edit]
Proposition I[edit]
where
is the value of an unlevered firm = price of buying a firm composed only of equity, and
is the value of a levered firm = price of buying a firm that is composed of some mix of debt and equity. Another word for levered is
geared, which has the same meaning.
[3]
To see why this should be true, suppose an investor is considering buying one of the two firms U or L. Instead of purchasing the shares of the levered firm L, he could purchase the shares of firm U and borrow the same amount of money B that firm L does. The eventual returns to either of these investments would be the same. Therefore the price of L must be the same as the price of U minus the money borrowed B, which is the value of L's debt.
This discussion also clarifies the role of some of the theorem's assumptions. We have implicitly assumed that the
investor's cost of borrowing money is the same as that of the firm, which need not be true in the presence of asymmetric information, in the absence of efficient markets, or if the investor has a different risk profile than the firm.
Proposition II[edit]
Proposition II with risky debt. As
leverage (
D/E) increases, the
WACC (k0) stays constant.
here
A higher debt-to-equity ratio leads to a higher required return on equity, because of the higher risk involved for equity-holders in a company with debt. The formula is derived from the theory of
weighted average cost of capital (WACC).
These propositions are true under the following assumptions:
- no transaction costs exist, and
- individuals and corporations borrow at the same rates.
These results might seem irrelevant (after all, none of the conditions are met in the real world), but the theorem is still taught and studied because it tells something very important. That is,
capital structure matters precisely because one or more of these assumptions is violated. It tells where to look for determinants of optimal capital structure and how those factors might affect optimal capital structure.
With taxes[edit]
Proposition I[edit]
where
- is the value of a levered firm.
- is the value of an unlevered firm.
is the tax rate (
) x the value of debt (D)- the term assumes debt is perpetual
This means that there are advantages for firms to be levered, since corporations can deduct interest payments. Therefore leverage lowers
tax payments.
Dividend payments are non-deductible.
Proposition II[edit]
where:
is the required rate of return on equity, or cost of levered equity = unlevered equity + financing premium.
is the company cost of equity capital with no leverage (unlevered cost of equity, or return on assets with D/E = 0).
is the required rate of return on borrowings, or cost of debt.- is the debt-to-equity ratio.
- is the tax rate.
The same relationship as earlier described stating that the cost of equity rises with leverage, because the risk to equity rises, still holds. The formula, however, has implications for the difference with the
WACC. Their second attempt on capital structure included taxes has identified that as the level of gearing increases by replacing equity with cheap debt the level of the WACC drops and an optimal capital structure does indeed exist at a point where debt is 100%.
The following assumptions are made in the propositions with taxes:
- corporations are taxed at the rate on earnings after interest,
- no transaction costs exist, and
- individuals and corporations borrow at the same rate.
Gordon growth Formula is another
Buy-Back
1.
看得见的效果就是因为流通股数的减少，导致每股盈利的提高，如果股息政策不变的话，那么股息率也相应提高，当然也增厚了每股净资产。
因为苹果目前已经体现出增长困境，回购可以说是认为自己被低估，对自己的看好；也可以说成是有钱不知道往哪里花。所以回购对股价的影响，恐怕很难说得清。
2.
一般而言，公司会在认定股票低估、现金充足的时候进行回购，以缩减股本，提高每股收益。总体上来说证券市场会给予积极评价。
当然，回购也可能和类似微软首次分红一样，被资本市场认定为：公司无法维持高成长，因而采用以回购的方式消耗现金，回报股东的一种方式。
具体到苹果，董事会的意见认为是股票低估，资本市场怎么想是另外一回事情了，不过目前而言，这个事情表现在证券市场还是积极影响。
3.
我国公司法规定公司不得回购自己的股票，这等于是在减少出资额，缩小公司规模。当然也规定可以在一些特定情况回购，拿资金去办事。具体发条懒得列举。只想说这不是投资行为，而可能是没闲钱了，弄一点拿去办事
4.
扯点八卦吧：
公司的职责为股东牟利，如果没有正当原因，是不能长期持有大笔现金不返还给股东的。这个“正当原因”的衡量是很松的，可以是留着现金作为商业发展，甚至用于还贷，借贷。 一般科技公司都倾向于多留现金进行收购或开发。换句话说，当科技公司开始大手笔回购股票了，那么很可能公司的高增长也脚步减缓了。
Tim Cook说，我们回购自家股票体现了我们对自己的信心。真的是这样吗？Carl Icahn发起股东投票，要求苹果再花50 billion来回购股票。而苹果目前总的现金是160 billion。也就是说投资者觉得你苹果已经不再像以前那样能够高增长了，你拿了这么多现金也没用，不如回购自家股票，这比你干别的什么都强。所以这么看来，苹果也不是自愿拿出14个billion来回购股票，估计是政治妥协的产物：carl icahn要求苹果花70b来回购，苹果想半天，那要不14b吧，icahn不依不饶，说不行再来50b。虽然很多情况下公司回购股票是体现对自家公司的信心，但是考虑到苹果是科技公司，又考虑到后面还有这样的故事，所以十有八九tim cook是扯淡。
Market Value of a Company
unlevered firm: P=CF/K+cash
is the debt-to-equity ratio.
