Question

Illinois Bio Technologies

Illinois Bio Technologies (IBTECH) was founded in Rosemont, Illinois, in 1992 by Kelly O'Brien, David Roberts, and Barbara Smalley. O'Brien and Roberts, both MDs, were on the research faculty at the Chicago Medical School at the time; O'Brien specialized in biochemistry and molecular biology, and Roberts specialized in immunology and medical microbiology. Smalley, who has a PhD, served a department chair of the Microbiology Department at the same school.

The company started as a research and development firm, which performed its own basic research, obtained patents on promising technologies, and then either sold or licensed the technologies to other firms which marketed the products. In recent years, however, the firm has also contracted to perform research and testing for larger genetic engineering and biotechnology firm, and for the U.S. government. Since its inception, the company has enjoyed enormous success - even its founders were surprised at the scientific breakthrough made and the demand for its services. One event that contributed significantly to the firm's rapid growth had been the AIDS research. Both the U.S. government and private foundations have spent billions of dollars in AIDS research, and IBTECH had the right combination of skills to garner significant grant funds, as well as perform as a subcontractor to other firm receiving AIDS research grant.

The founders were relatively wealthy individuals when they started the company, and they had enough confidence in the business to commit most of their own funds to the new venture. Still, the capital requirement brought on by extremely rapid growth soon exhausted their personal funds, so they were forced to raise capital from outside sources. First, in 2001, the firm borrowed heavily, and then in 2003, when it used up its conventional debt capacity, it issued $15 million of preferred stock. Finally, in 2006, the firm had an initial public offering (lPO) which raised $50 million of common equity. Currently, the stock trades in the over-the-counter market, and it has been selling at about $25 per share.

IBTECH is widely recognized as the leader in an emerging growth industry, and it won an award in 2008 for being one of the 100 best-managed small companies in the United States. The company is organized into two divisions: (1) the Clinical Research Division and (2) the Genetic Engineering Division. Although the two divisions are housed in the same buildings, the equipment they use and their personnel are quite different. Indeed, there are few synergies between the two divisions. The most important synergies lay in the general overhead and marketing areas. Personnel, payroll, and similar functions are all done at the corporate level, while technical operations at the divisions are completely separate.

The Clinical Research Division conduct most of the firm' AIDS research. Since most of the grant and contracts associated with AIDS research are long-term in nature, and since billion of new dollars will likely be spent in this area, the business risk of this division is low. Conversely, the Genetic Engineering Division works mostly on in-house research and short-term contracts where the funding, duration, and payoff are very uncertain. A line of research may look good initially, but it is not unusual to hit some snag, which preclude further exploration. Because of the uncertainties inherent in genetic research, the Genetic Engineering Division is judged to have high business risk.

The founders are still active in the business, but they no longer work 70-hour week. Increasingly, they are enjoying the fruits of their past labor, and they have let professional managers take over day-to-day operations. They are all on the board of director, though, and David Roberts is chairman.

Although the firm's growth has been phenomenal, it has been more random than planned. The founders would simply decide on new avenue of research, and then count on the skills of the research teams-and good luck-to produce commercial successes. Formal decision structures were almost nonexistent, but the company's head start and its bright, energetic founder easily overcame any deficiencies in its managerial decision processes. Recently, however, competition has become stiffer, and such large biotechnology firms such as Genentech, Amgen, and even Bristol-Myers Squibb have begun to recognize the opportunities in IBTECH's research line. Because of this increasing competition, IBTECH's founders and board of directors have concluded that the firm must apply state-of-the-art technique in its managerial processes as well as in its technological processes. As a first step, the board directed the financial vice president, Gary Hayes, to develop an estimate for the firm's cost of capital and to use this number in capital budgeting decisions. Hayes, in turn, directed IBTECH's treasurer, Julie Owens, to have a cost of capital estimate on his desk in one week. Owens has an accounting background, and her primary task since taking over as treasurer has been to deal with the banks. Thus, she is somewhat apprehensive about this new assignment especially since one of the board members is her former Kean University finance professor.

Table 1

Illinois Bio Technologies, Inc.

Balance Sheet for the Year Ended December 31, 2019

(In Millions of Dollars)

Cash and marketable securities	$	7.6	Account payable	$	5.7
Accounts receivable		39.6	Accrual		7.5
Inventory	9.1		Notes payable	1.9
Current assets	$ 56.3		Current Liabilities	$ 15.1
			Long-term debt		61.2
Net fixed assets		114.5	Preferred stock		15.0
			Common stock	79.5
Total assets	170.8		Total claims	170.8

To begin, Owen reviewed IBTECH's 2019 balance sheet, which is shown in Table 1. Next, she assembled the following data:

• IBTECH's long-term debt consists of 9.5 percent coupon, semiannual payment bonds with fifteen year remaining to maturity. The bonds last traded at a price of $891 per $1,000 par value bond. The bonds are not callable and they are rated BBB.
• The founders have an aversion to short-term debt, so the firm uses such debt only to fund cyclical working capital needs.
• IBTECH' federal-plus-state tax rate is 40 percent.
• The company’s preferred stock pays a dividend of $2.50 per quarter and has a par value of $100. It is non-callable and perpetual, and it is traded in over-the-counter market at a current price of $104 per share. A flotation cost of $2 per share would be required on a new issue of preferred stock.
• The firm's last dividend (D₀) was $1.09, and dividends are expected to grow at about a 10 percent rate in the foreseeable future. Some analyst expect the company' recent growth rate to continue, other expect it to go to zero as new competition enter the market, but the majority anticipate that a growth rate of about 10 percent will continue indefinitely.
• An important minority of analyst have noted that over the last few years, the company has had a 14 percent average return on equity (ROE) and has paid out about 25 percent of its net income as dividends. They believe the firm' expected future growth rate, g should be based on this information and used to estimate the cost of capital.
• The firm's per share dividend payment over the past five year has been a follow

Year	Dividend
2015	0.72
2016	0.75
2017	0.85
2018	1.00
2019	1.09

• IBTECH’s common stock now sells at a price of about $25 per share. The company has 5 million common shares outstanding.
• The current yield on long-term T-bonds is 8 percent, and a prominent investment-banking firm has recently estimated that the market risk premium is six percentage points over Treasury bond. The firm' historical beta, as measured by several analysts who follow the stock, is 1.2.
• The required rate of return on an average (A-rated) company's long-term debt is 10 percent.
• IBTECH is forecasting reinvested earnings of $1,800,000 and depreciation of 4,500,000 for the coming year.
• IBTECH's investment banker believes that a new common tack issue would involve total flotation costs - including underwriting costs, market pressure from increased supply, and market pressure from negative signaling effect- of 30 percent.
• The market value target capital structure call for 30 percent long-term debt, 10 percent preferred stock, and 60 percent common stock.

Now assume that you were recently hired as Julie Owen’s assistant, and she has given you the task of helping her develop the firm's cost of capital. You will also have to meet with Gary Hayes and, possibly, with the president and the full board of directors (including the Kean University Professor) to answer any question they might have. With this in mind, Owens wrote up the following questions to get you started with your analysis. Answer them, but keep in mind that you could be asked further questions about your answer, so be sure you understand the logic behind any formula or calculation you use. In particular, be aware of potential conceptual or empirical problems that might exist.

1. Cost of reinvested earnings using CAPM:
   1. Why is there a cost associated with reinvested earnings?
   2. What is IBTECH's estimated cost of reinvested earning using the CAPM approach?
   3. Why might one consider the T-bond rate to be a better estimate of the risk-free rate than the T-bill rate? Can you think of an argument that would favor the use of the T-bill rate?
   4. How can IBTECH obtain a market risk premium for use in a CAPM cost-of-equity calculation? Discuss both the possibility of obtaining an estimate from some other organization and also the ways in which IBTECH could calculate a market risk premium in-house.
   5. Calculate the cost of reinvested earnings (r_s ) using CAPM

Answer 1

a.Reinvested earnings are earnings generated internally, retained for purpose of re-investment , into the business--without distribution to the owners/ shareholders.

So, it is their money and it has an opportunity cost of return that could have been earned by them ,if invested in some other income-generating proposition.Using it, is like borrowing form them.

So,its cost is the return expected by the shareholders , on their equity funds.

b. Cost of Reinvested earnings (as per CAPM )=RFR+(beta*Market risk premium)

ie.8%+(1.2*(8%+6%))=

24.8%

c. T-bonds' returns are generally higher than T-Bill's returns, so they are generally preferred to set a higher bench-mark return.

T-Bill rates can be used as risk-free rate , as they are for a shorter duration of 1 year or less--so fluctuations are less.Rates will be reliable --but can be used only for shorter-duration projects.

d. An estimate of risk premium adopted by companies operating in similar trade, is obtained by studying the past /historical market performance--adapting it to suit one's peculiarities. Normally, for past market performances, companies use S&P 500 or some such rtaing agencies ,as benchmark. So, it is an average based on past performances of similar companies in the trade.

Calculating risk premium, in-house , involves deciding on the risk free rate & the required rate of return. The difference between the two , is market risk premium--ie. The premium the investor wants to earn, over& above the risk free rate, for undertaking the said risky project---whose return's volatility (beta) is as estimated , in the industry.

Formula for market risk premium=Expected /Required rate of return-Risk-free rate

e.Cost of Reinvested earnings (as per CAPM )=RFR+(beta*Market risk premium)

ie.8%+(1.2*(8%+6%))=

24.8%