Question

In: Accounting

2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026...

2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026
BVPS, start of year 7 7.61 8.51 9.51 10.73 11.77 13.17 14.4 15.91 17.58 19.43 21.47 23.72 25.38 27.16 29.06
EPS 0.81 1.1 1.3 1.52 1.64 2 2.03 2.16 2.39 2.64 2.91 3.22 2.37 2.54 2.72 2.91
ROE 0.116 0.145 0.153 0.16 0.153 0.17 0.154 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1
Payout Ratio 0.247 0.182 0.231 0.197 0.366 0.3 0.394 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3
Dividends per Share (Div) 0.2 0.2 0.3 0.3 0.6 0.6 0.8 0.65 0.72 0.79 0.87 0.97 0.71 0.76 0.81 0.87
Retained Earnings 0.61 0.9 1 1.22 1.04 1.4 1.23 1.51 1.67 1.85 2.04 2.25 1.66 1.78 1.9 2.03
BVPS, end of year 7.61 8.51 9.51 10.73 11.77 13.17 14.4 15.91 17.58 19.43 21.47 23.72 25.38 27.16 29.06 31.1
Dividend Growth Rate 0.105 0.105 0.105 0.105 -0.263 0.07 0.07 0.07
Cost of capital, r 0.10 PIV Div 2017 - 2022 $    3.34 PV at 2022 23.72
ROE 2018 - 2022 0.15 NPV including PV in 2022 $   16.82 PV at 2024 27.16
ROE 2023 -2024 0.10
Payout ratio 2018 -2022 0.30 PV DIV 2017 - 2024 $    4.15
Payout ratio 2023 - 0.30 NPV including PV at 2024 $   16.82
Note: Valuation date is start of 2017. Dividends assumed paid at end of year.

What is Reeby Sports worth per share? We will value the company using George
Reeby's forecasts.
The spreadsheet accompanying this solution sets out a forecast in the same
general format as Table 4.5. Historical results from 2011 to 2016 are also shown.Earnings
per share (EPS)equals return on equity (ROE) times starting book value per share
(BVPS). EPS is divided between dividends and retained earnings, depending on the
dividend payout ratio.BVPS grows as retained earnings are reinvested.
The keys to Reeby Sports’ future value and growth are profitability (ROE) and
the reinvestment of retained earnings. Retained earnings are determined by dividend
payout. The spreadsheet sets ROE at 15% for the six years from 2018 to 2022. If Reeby
Sports will lose its competitive edge by 2022, then it cannot continue earning more than
its10% cost of capital. Therefore ROE is reduced to 10%startingin 2023.1
The payout ratio is set at .30 from 2018 onwards. Notice that the long-term
growth rate, which settles inafter 2023, is ROE × ( 1 – dividend payout ratio) = .10 × (1 -
.30) = .07.
The spreadsheet allows you to vary ROE and the dividend payout ratio separately
for 2018-2022 and for 2023-2024.2But let’s start with the initial input values. To
calculate share value, we have to estimate a horizon value at H = 2022 and add its PV to
the PV of dividends from 2017 to 2022. Using the constant-growth DCF formula,
PV = 0.71 = 23.72 H .10- .07
The PV of dividends from 2017 to 2022 is $3.43 at the start of 2017, so share value is:3
6
PV = 3.43+ 23.72 = $16.82
(1.1)
The spreadsheet also calculates the PV of dividends through 2024 and the horizon
value at 2024. Notice that the PV at the start of 2017 remains at $16.82. This makes sense, since the value of a firm should not depend on the investment horizon chosen to calculate
PV. (If you calculate a value that does depend on the horizon, you have made a mistake.)
We have reduced ROE to the 10% cost of capital after 2022, assuming that Reeby
Sports will have exhausted valuable growth opportunities by that date. With PVGO = 0,
PV = EPS/r.4So we could discard the constant-growth DCF formula and just divide EPS
in 2023 by the cost of capital:
PVH = 2.37 = $23.72 .10
This PVis identical to the PV from the constant-growth DCF formula. It doesn’t matter
how fast a company grows after the horizon date H if it only earns its cost of capital.
How much of Reeby Sports’ value is due to PVGO?You can check by setting
ROE = .10 for 2018 and all later years.You should get PV = $13.82. Thus PVGO = 16.82
– 13.82 = $3.00 per share for investments made in 2017onward.
George Reeby has also identified a "comparable," Molly Sports. We could use its
P/E ratio of 13.1 to calculate horizon value in 2022 and PV at the start of 2017. Using
the original inputs for ROE, EPS in 2023 is 2.37.5
H
6
PV 13.1 2.37 $31.05
PV 3.43 31.05 $20.96
(1.10)
= ´ =
= + =
We couldalso use Molly’s P/E ratio to calculate Reeby Sports’ PV at the start of 2017
directly from 2017 EPS:
PV = 13.1 ´ 2.03 = $26.59

The Question is ?
Both values based on Molly’s P/E are higher than our DCF calculations. Is Molly
significantly more profitable than Reeby Sports, or does our spreadsheet understate
Reeby Sports’ prospects?
What if Reeby Sports could continue to earn ROE = .15 for two extra years, until
2024?You can check by changing ROE for 2023-2024 from .10 to .15. (The ROE for
2025 and 2026 is hard-wired at .10.)You should get NPV of $18.04, somewhat higher
than our original DCF calculations, but not enough for Reeby Sports to match Molly’s P/E.You may wish to experiment to find inputs that generate P/E = 13 for Reeby Sports
at the start of 2017. Do you think these inputs are reasonable?

Solutions

Expert Solution

Though both values based on Molly’s P/E ratio are higher than DCF calculations still it would not be correct to say that Molly is significantly more profitable than Reeby sport as the spreadsheet has certainly understated the prospects of Reeby Sports.

The prospects of Reeby Sports as presented in the spreadsheet has been made on the basis of past experience of the management and the future prospects of the entity. Thus, to change Return on Equity from 0.10 to 0.15 or even higher would not be a reasonable approach to calculate Net Present Value (NPV). Thus, the changes in the inputs without any significant reasons will not be a reasonable and correct approach to calculate NPV. Also the concept of prudence suggests that the prospects of a business organization should be conservative rather than extravagant as the concept of prudence suggests that it is always better to account for all possible losses but not all possible profits.


Related Solutions

2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 Revenue 4,500 6,860 8,409 9,082...
2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 Revenue 4,500 6,860 8,409 9,082 9,808 10,593 11,440 12,355 13,344 14,411 Revenue Growth 52.4% 22.6% 8.0% 8.0% 8.0% 8.0% 8.0% 8.0% 8.0% Production Costs Fixed Production Expense (excl depreciation) 575 575 587 598 610 622 635 648 660 674 Variable Production Costs 2,035 3,404 4,291 4,669 5,078 5,521 6,000 6,519 7,079 7,685 Depreciation 152 152 152 152 164 178 192 207 224 242 Total Production Costs 0 2,762 4,131...
- 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 GREECE 129059 135314 153317 160986 168501...
- 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 GREECE 129059 135314 153317 160986 168501 167036 175100 181261 190523 SPAIN 377095 403834 419865 397462 427672 447048 451255 485805 497812 FRANCE 316137 322254 303269 303031 298203 297880 292160 302840 308629 CROATIA 24329 21862 18972 19366 18603 18930 18551 20798 21573 ITALY 494091 499885 476823 457078 443141 458020 461990 475164 501958 Selected 5 ports. a) Calculate the mean, standard deviation, median, minimum, maximum values of gross weight of goods handled in...
Time series is given: Year 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 Amount 65 61...
Time series is given: Year 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 Amount 65 61 73 68 67 72 75 70 Calculate and interpret the characteristics of it; Make the time series next value forecast by using any method.
Years 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Retail Sales 5.2% 0.3%...
Years 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Retail Sales 5.2% 0.3% -3.3% 3.0% 4.9% 3.9% 3.1% 4.2% 3.8% 3.9% 3.6% e-commerce Sales 19% 4.1% 2.8% 17.1% 17.5% 14.9% 13.0% 14.6% 14.7% 14.0% 16.0% Does Retail Stores Growth Reduced by E-commerce Growth? Null Hypothesis: Ho: Retail stores growth doesn’t reduce by E-commerce growth. Alternative Hypothesis: Ha: Retail stores growth does reduce by E-commerce growth Do the chi-square test for goodness of fit. with the level of...
Using the data in the following​ table,    2010   2011   2012   2013   2014   2015 Stock A  ...
Using the data in the following​ table,    2010   2011   2012   2013   2014   2015 Stock A   -10%   20%   5%   -5%   2%   9% Stock B   21%   7%   30%   -3%   -8%   25% consider a portfolio that maintains a 50% weight on stock A and a 50% weight on stock B. a. What is the return each year of this​ portfolio? b. Based on your results from part ​(a​), compute the average return and volatility of the portfolio.
2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 Operating Cash Flow 3,812 4,299 5,295 5,923 6,611 Capital Spending...
2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 Operating Cash Flow 3,812 4,299 5,295 5,923 6,611 Capital Spending 1,272 1,247 1,197 1,844 1,423 Change in Net Working Capital 1,248 1,321 2,052 1,837 1,195 Free Cash Flow: 950 1,292 1,731 2,046 2,242 3,993 PV of FCF: 1,182 1,449 1,567 1,571 2,560 % Growth of Free Cash Flow: 33.26% Geometric Average Growing Annuity Growth (g) 0.09978 30% of Analysis period Growth Horizon Period Growth (g) 0.03326 10% of Analysis period Growth PV of Analysis...
Pepsi 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Sales/Revenue 66.42B 66.68B 63.05B 62.8B 63.53B Coca-Cola 2013 2014 2015...
Pepsi 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Sales/Revenue 66.42B 66.68B 63.05B 62.8B 63.53B Coca-Cola 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Sales/Revenue 46.76B 46B 43.7B 41.38B 35.02B Using the year 2013-2017 financial data of Coca-Cola and PepsiCo companies, determine their 5-year average growth rates related to net sales and income from continuing operations. Coca Cola: Net Sales: 7.86% Increase. PepsiCo: Net Sales: 3.11% Increase. And what data to use to calculate.
It is January 1, 2020. Free cash flow for 2020, 2021, 2022, and 2023 are expected...
It is January 1, 2020. Free cash flow for 2020, 2021, 2022, and 2023 are expected to be -$5,000; -$1,000; $5,000; and $15,000. Cash flow growth beyond 2023 is expected to stabilize at 10% for 2 years, beyond which point free cash flows are expected to grow at 4% in perpetuity. If the discount rate is 20%, what should be the value of the firm today if there is $1,000 excess cash? What should the enterprise value be (assuming the...
Innovative Components, Inc. reported the following income statement data for 2013-2017.    2017 2016 2015 2014 2013...
Innovative Components, Inc. reported the following income statement data for 2013-2017.    2017 2016 2015 2014 2013 Net Sales $3,144.6 $2,993.1 $2,790.5 $2,654.0 $2,478.9 What would be an appropriate sales growth rate based on the historical data?
2017 2016 2015 2014 2013 Sales $ 699,332 $ 466,221 $ 368,554 $ 252,434 $ 189,800...
2017 2016 2015 2014 2013 Sales $ 699,332 $ 466,221 $ 368,554 $ 252,434 $ 189,800 Cost of goods sold 352,166 234,761 187,327 128,167 94,900 Accounts receivable 33,918 27,227 25,283 14,767 13,001 Compute trend percents for the above accounts, using 2013 as the base year. Trend Percent for Net Sales: Choose Numerator: / Choose Denominator: / = Sales 2017: / = % 2016: / = % 2015: / = % 2014: / = % Trend Percent for Cost of Goods...
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT