Du Pont de Nemours and Company Case Analysis In assessing Du Pont’s capital structure after the Conoco merger that significantly increased the company’s debt to equity ratio, an analyst must look at all benefits and drawbacks of a high debt ratio. The main reason why Du Pont ended up with a high debt to equity ratio after acquiring Conoco was due to the timing and price at which they bought Conoco. Du Pont ended up buying the firm at its peak, just before coal and oil prices started to fall and at a time when economic recession hurt the chemical industry of Du Pont. The additional response from analysts and Du Pont stockholders also forced Du Pont to think twice about their new expansion. The thought of bringing the debt ratio back to 25% was brought on by the fact that the company saw that high levels of capital spending were vital to the success of the firm and that high debt levels may put them at higher risk for defaulting. The consistent high spending of capital equipment is the first reason why one would recommend reducing the debt to equity ratio. A company with higher levels of debt is less flexible in being able to adjust to new market demands and conditions that require the company to make new products or respond to competition. Looking at the pecking order of financing, issuing new shares to fund capital investing is the last resort and a company that has high levels of debt, must move to the equity side to avoid the risk of bankruptcy. Defaulting on loans occur when increased costs or bad economic conditions lead the firm to have lower net income than the payments on loans. The risk of defaulting on loans and the direct and indirect cost related to defaulting lead firms to prefer lower levels of debt. The financial distress caused by additional leverage can lead to lower cash flows available to all investors, lower than if the firm was financed by equity only. Additionally, the high debt ratio that Du Pont incurred also led to them dropping from a AAA bond rating to a AA bond Rating. Although the likelihood of not being able to acquire loans would be minimal, there are increased interest costs with having a lower bond rating. The lower bond rating signals to investors that the firm is more likely to default than if it had a higher (AAA) bond rating.
These ratios can be used to determine the most desirable company to grant a loan to between Wendy’s and Bob Evans. Wendy’s has a debt to assets ratio of 34.93% while Bob Evans is 43.68%. When it comes to debt to asset ratios, the company with the lower percentage has the lowest risk. Therefore, Wendy’s is more desirable than Bob Evans. In the area of debt to equity ratios, Wendy’s comes in at 84.31% while Bob Evans comes in at 118.71%. Like debt to assets, a low debt to equity ratio indicates less risk in a company. Again, Wendy’s is the less risky company. Finally, Wendy’s has a times interest earned ratio of 4.86 while Bob Evans owns a 3.78. Unlike the previous two ratios, times interest earned ratio is measured on a scale of 1 to 5. The closer the ratio is to 5, the less risky a company is. From the view of a banker, any ratio over 2.5 is an acceptable risk. Both companies are an acceptable risk, however, Wendy’s is once again more desirable. Based on these findings, Wendy’s is the better choice for banks to loan money to because of the lower level of
Net working capital represents organization’s operating liquidity. In order to compute the net working capital, total current assets are divided from total current liabilities. When there is sufficient excess of current assets over current liabilities, an organization might be considered sufficiently liquid. Another ratio that helps in assessing the operating liquidity of as company is a current ratio. The ratio is calculated by dividing the total current assets over total current liabilities. When the current ratio is high, the organization has enough of current assets to pay for the liabilities. Yet, another mean of calculating the organization’s debt-paying ability is the debt ratio. To calculate the ratio, total liabilities are divided by total assets. The computation gives information on what proportion of organization’s assets is financed by a debt, and what is the entity’s ability to pay for current and long term liabilities. Lower debt ratio is better, because the low liabilities require low debt payments. To be able to lend money, an organization’s current ratio has to fall above a certain level, also the debt ratio cannot rise above a certain threshold. Otherwise, the entity will not be able to lend money or will have to pay high penalties. The following steps can be undertaken by a company to keep the debt ratio within normal
Du Pont is organized into ten industrial departments. The department responsible for TiO2, the pigments department, is the second smallest of the ten departments. The revenue for this department in 1971 is $180 million which represent only 4.68% of Du Pont’s revenue. Although there is a considerable risk associated with the growth strategy, the committee is willing to grow this department because it is one of the smallest departments for du Pont, and the company performing so well financially as a whole. This leads us to the conclusion that the growth strategy should be pursued. Du Pont can afford to take a risk on this strategy given the small impact this department has on their associated financials, not to mention that the returns with the growth strategy are superior to the maintain strategy.
MCI current capital structure is x% debt and y% equity. Their key ratios are a, b, and c. Comparing to other firms in the utilities industry they appear to be underutilizing (debt/equity). (See exhibit D). Referencing the forecast there is expected to b...
DuPont is a very big company with a low debt policy designed to maximize financial flexibility and insulate operations from financial constraints. It is one of the few AAA rated manufacturing companies due its investments are primarily financed from internal sources. However, because prices fell in the 1960’s thus DuPont’s net income fell also. The adverse economic conditions in 1970’s escalated inflation: increase in oil prices increased required inventory investments of the company. 1975 recession negatively affected DuPont’s net income by 33% and returns on capital and earnings per share fell. The company cut dividends in 1974 and working capital investment removed. Proportion of debt increased from 7% in 1972 to 27% in 1975 and interest coverage falls from 38 to 4.6. The company perceived increase in debt temporary but moved quickly to reduce its debt ratio by decreasing capital expenditures. Debt proportion dropped to 20%, interest coverage increased to 11.5 by 1979.
Currently, HCA is approaching an all time high debt ratio of 70%, well above their established target ratio of 60%. The increase in debt ratio has attracted the attention of rating agencies who have clearly stated that in order for HCA to maintain their A bond rating HCA must return to their 60-40 capital structure. Now the question arises as to whether the A rating should be sought or should HCA move to a less conservative position. Some investors believe that a more aggressive use of leverage would present greater opportunities in the future. Others feel that with changes in Medicare/Medicaid reimbursement structure on the horizon, HCA should remain conservative. In order to decrease the debt ratio, HCA would have to 1) decrease the growth rate (inadvertently decreasing ROE) or 2) decrease debt/increase equity. The debt ratio is important for many reasons, but it should not be the basis of a company's future. The market will ultimately decide the value based on numerous facts, not just the bond rating.
A decreasing debt to total assets ratio shows that the business is improving at obtaining assets while using liabilities. Furthermore, both ratios are low which is very healthy and indicates that the company as great portion of assets in comparison to liabilities. Fairmount Energy has shown their ability to obtain more assets and less liabilities as the debt to total assets ratio has decreased within the year.
The purpose of this paper is to provide data and analysis of PepsiCo, Inc. and The Coca-Cola Companies financial statements so that a potential investor can make an educated decision about where to place their money. The paper shows a vertical analysis of each company’s consolidated balance sheet, a horizontal analysis of their consolidated statement of income ratios showing solvency, liquidity and profitability.
All companies use financial documents to record and journalize their business transactions. These financial documents are not only used internally by company executives, but the financial documents are also used by outside sources to evaluate the strengths and weaknesses of a company. The purpose of this paper is to provide financial analysis of PepsiCo and Coca Cola, provide examples that explain which company is more financially sound, and to provide recommendations on how to improve each company financially. The first item that I will discuss is a vertical analysis of both companies.
Evaluating a company’s financial condition can be done by looking at its profitability or its ability to satisfy long-term commitments. These measures can be viewed through an analysis of a company’s financial statements, including the balance sheet and income statement. This paper will look at the status of Scholastic Company’s (Scholastic) ability to satisfy its long-term commitments and at the profitability of Daktronics, Inc. (Daktronics). This paper will include various financial ratio calculations and an analysis of the notable trends. It will also discuss the profitability and long-term borrowing positions of the firms discussed.
Debt financing has both advantages and disadvantages. Debt financing is a business’ way to start up, expand, or recover by borrowing money from a preson or company. The money borrowed has to be paid back along with the interest that was accrued during the length of time the loan was carried out. This option is great for company’s that do not want investors. Debt financing is beneficial because the loaners do not often get involved with the company or any decision making within the company. The downfall is the risk that is assumed with the debt which is, the company may not be able to pay back the loaner. In that case, the loaner would go after the owner or partner personally. There are many forms of debt a company is allowed to take on, such as ‘venture’ debt, even if they are a high-risk corporation. ‘Venture’ debt is a form of senior debt ...
ADCT's debt/equity ratios are 17.7% 24.5, 24.7, 42.2 and 34.0 for 1995-1999. There are no comparison ratios. There was a dramatic increase in 1998. This increase reflects ADCT's 1998 decision to sell additional stock in the NASDAQ exchange. ADCT has used the raised capitol to invest in operating activities and is reflected in the reduction of this ratio in 1999.
There is no universal theory of the debt-equity choice, and no reason to expect one. In this essay I will critically assess the Pecking Order Theory of capital structure with reference and comparison of publicly listed companies. The pecking order theory says that the firm will borrow, rather than issuing equity, when internal cash flow is not sufficient to fund capital expenditures. This theory explains why firms prefer internal rather than external financing which is due to adverse selection, asymmetry of information, and agency costs (Frank & Goyal, 2003). The trade-off theory comes from the pecking order theory it is an unintentional outcome of companies following the pecking-order theory. This explains that firms strive to achieve an optimal capital structure by using a mixture debt and equity known to act as an advantage leverage. Modigliani and Miller (1958) showed that the decisions firms make when choosing between debt and equity financing has no material effects on the value of the firm or on the cost or availability of capital. They assumed perfect and frictionless capital markets, in which financial innovation would quickly extinguish any deviation from their predicted equilibrium.
Overall, assets increased at the end of the month compared to the beginning by $43,350. This
The debt ratios increased by 2.7% to 57% more than double the industry standard of 24.5%. The long term debt increased from $700,000 to $ 1,165,250 an increment of 66.5% in the year 2002. The company is currently highly leveraged thus it needs to work on reducing long term debts and continue to increase assets. The times interest earned ratio dropped by 0.3 to 1.6 in the year 2003. The company could face difficulties making interest payments in case of a sales slump.