DOCSLIB.ORG

Agriculture Lower Potash Assumptions

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Agriculture Lower Potash Assumptions July 20, 2009 Europe, Middle East & Africa: Agriculture July 20, 2009 Europe, Middle East & Africa: Agriculture Lower potash assumptions; no upside for ICL and URKA Lower potash price assumptions post Indian tender results The recently concluded Indian potash tender caught global potash market by RATINGS AND 12-MONTHS PRICE TARGETS surprise with the MOP price agreed at US$460/mt, 26% below last year’s Current Price target Company Rating Currency Return contract price and competing offers from the largest suppliers. Even though price Old New ICL N NIS 38 46 39 2% the new price level is yet to be confirmed as the new benchmark by other Uralkali N US$ 16 22 16 3% producers, recent supply-side commentary and industry sources indicate it is more likely to be accepted globally than not. On this basis and following Goldman Sachs US Agrochemicals Research team which recently cut their EV/EBITDA MULTIPLE FOR POTASH PRODUCERS 2010E potash price assumption from US$550/mt to US$475/mt FOB Saskatchewan, cut our potash price assumptions for Uralkali and ICL for 2H09 25 and thereafter. We now use a benchmark price of US$475/mt FOB Baltics to 20 drive our potash average selling prices forecasts; our 2009E/10E ASP changes are -13%/-13% for Uralkali and -11%/-15% for ICL. 15 10 Stand-off on benchmark contracts prompts 2009 volume cuts We previously assumed that both Uralkali and ICL will resume deliveries to 5 India and China from early 2H09. While some supplies to India may indeed 0 Jun-04 Dec-04 Jun-05 Dec-05 Jun-06 Dec-06 Jun-07 Dec-07 Jun-08 Dec-08 Jun-09 Dec-09 Jun-10 start in Jul/Aug if an agreement with IPL is reached at reduced prices, we ICL Uralkali PotashCorp Mosaic Intrepid think that signing of the Chinese contract could be delayed until late Source: Goldman Sachs Research estimates, FactSet 2009/early 2010. According to our Asian fertilizer analyst, China’s potash inventories at the producer/distributor levels amount to c 4-5 mn mt, which RELATED RESEARCH would be sufficient to satisfy consumption needs through spring 2010. We Americas: Agriculture: Potash weakness continues – reduce our estimates for 2H09 potash sales volumes for Uralkali and ICL. nitrogen and phosphates are firming, July 16, 2009 Our volume assumptions for 2010 remain unchanged - we forecast a sharp Europe, Middle East & Africa: Agriculture IPC settles with increase in next year sales as growers should increase application rates India at low US$460/mt; new benchmark or one-off?, July 13, 2009 and global imports should rebound from the 2009 lows. Limited upside for ICL and URKA despite 2010 demand recovery Prices are as of July, 17, 2009 We are using 12-month forward EV/GCI vs. CROCI/WACC which includes 2010 forecasts to derive our price targets. After adjusting our models for revised price and volume assumptions, our 12-month price target for ICL goes down to NIS39 (NIS46) and for Uralkali to US$16 (US$22). On back of revised potash prices both ICL and Uralkali appear fairly valued; both stocks trade at 2010E multiples which are close to historical mid-cycle valuations for the sector. We maintain our Neutral ratings for both stocks. Risks include potash prices, sales volumes, currency moves against the US dollar; potential further mine-flood related damage claims (Uralkali). Vasily Nikolaev The Goldman Sachs Group, Inc. does and seeks to do business with +7(495)645-4011 | [email protected] Goldman Sachs OOO companies covered in its research reports. As a result, investors should Andrei Novikov be aware that the firm may have a conflict of interest that could affect +7(495)645-4228 | [email protected] Goldman Sachs OOO the objectivity of this report. Investors should consider this report as only a single factor in making their investment decision. For Reg AC certification, see the end of the text. Other important disclosures follow the Reg AC certification, or go to www.gs.com/research/hedge.html. Analysts employed by non-US affiliates are not registered/qualified as research analysts with FINRA in the U.S. The Goldman Sachs Group, Inc. Global Investment Research Goldman Sachs Global Investment Research 1 July 20, 2009 Europe, Middle East & Africa: Agriculture Estimate revisions Exhibit 1: Uralkali and ICL sales volumes and ASP assumptions revisions Potash ASP, US$/mt Potash sales volumes, kt New Old % Change New Old % Change Uralkali 2009E 451 518 -13% 2,475 3,062 -19% 2010E 462 533 -13% 4,950 4,950 0% ICL 2009E 514 576 -11% 2,173 2,698 -19% 2010E 450 529 -15% 4,800 4,800 0% Source: Goldman Sachs Research estimates Exhibit 2: Uralkali and ICL financials, mn US$ Revenue EBITDA Net Income New Old % Change New Old % Change New Old % Change Uralkali 2009E 1,116 1,586 -30% 617 1,015 -39% 383 713 -46% 2010E 2,285 2,638 -13% 1,316 1,666 -21% 949 1,265 -25% ICL 2009E 4,439 4,876 -9% 1,336 1,622 -18% 791 1,003 -21% 2010E 6,130 6,511 -6% 2,122 2,458 -14% 1,377 1,639 -16% Source: Goldman Sachs Research estimates Goldman Sachs Global Investment Research 2 July 20, 2009 Europe, Middle East & Africa: Agriculture Exhibit 3: ICL: summary financials Profit model ($ mn) 12/08 12/09E 12/10E 12/11E Balance sheet ($ mn) 12/08 12/09E 12/10E 12/11E Total revenue 6,904.0 4,439.1 6,130.4 6,471.5 Cash & equivalents 215.2 461.9 1,132.3 1,119.7 Operating costs (4,235.3) (3,018.3) (3,885.8) (3,997.9) Accounts receivable 1,197.7 1,049.3 1,258.4 1,348.2 R&D (57.3) (84.7) (122.6) (129.4) Inventory 1,278.0 1,381.2 1,373.8 1,452.5 Lease payments 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Other current assets 271.9 205.3 205.3 205.3 Other operating profit/(expense) (93.8) 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total current assets 2,962.7 3,097.7 3,969.9 4,125.7 EBITDA 2,517.7 1,336.0 2,122.0 2,344.2 Net PP&E 1,907.3 2,019.2 2,019.2 2,019.2 Depreciation & amortisation (182.2) (192.4) (200.4) (207.7) Net intangibles 521.4 510.8 510.8 510.8 EBIT 2,335.5 1,143.6 1,921.6 2,136.5 Total investments 27.2 27.4 27.4 27.4 Net interest income/(expense) (122.1) (61.0) (86.3) (34.8) Other long-term assets 319.2 284.8 284.8 284.8 Associates 13.8 0.6 0.0 0.0 Total assets 5,737.7 5,939.9 6,812.0 6,967.9 Profit/(loss) on disposals 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Others (recurring) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Accounts payable 1,099.3 962.4 1,154.3 1,236.6 Pretax profits 2,227.2 1,083.2 1,835.3 2,101.6 Short-term debt 411.5 399.7 402.4 426.2 Income tax (233.2) (297.8) (458.8) (525.4) Other current liabilities 66.0 56.7 56.7 56.7 Tax rate (%) 10.5 27.5 25.0 25.0 Total current liabilities 1,576.7 1,418.7 1,613.3 1,719.5 Minorities 10.3 5.5 0.0 0.0 Long-term debt 1,022.3 957.7 947.0 208.5 Preferred dividends 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Other long-term liabilities 627.8 601.0 601.0 601.0 Net income (pre-exceptionals) 2,004.2 790.9 1,376.5 1,576.2 Total long-term liabilities 1,650.1 1,558.7 1,548.0 809.5 Other non-recurring items post tax 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total liabilities 3,226.8 2,977.4 3,161.3 2,529.0 Net income 2,004.2 790.9 1,376.5 1,576.2 EPS (underlying) ($) 1.57 0.62 1.08 1.23 Preferred shares 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 EPS (basic, reported) ($) 1.57 0.62 1.08 1.23 Total common equity 2,443.0 2,900.0 3,588.3 4,376.4 Weighted shares outstanding (mn) 1,280.4 1,280.4 1,280.4 1,280.4 Minority interest 68.0 62.5 62.5 62.5 Common dividends declared 966.5 301.8 688.3 788.1 Total liabilities & equity 5,737.7 5,939.9 6,812.0 6,967.9 DPS ($) 0.75 0.24 0.54 0.62 Capitalised leases 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Dividend payout ratio (%) 48.2 38.2 50.0 50.0 Capital employed 3,944.7 4,319.9 5,000.2 5,073.7 Dividend cover (X) 2.1 2.6 2.0 2.0 Growth & margins (%) 12/08 12/09E 12/10E 12/11E Adj for unfunded pensions & GW 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Revenue growth 68.3 (35.7) 38.1 5.6 Adj capital employed 3,944.7 4,319.9 5,000.2 5,073.7 EBITDA growth 177.1 (46.9) 58.8 10.5 Gross cash invested 6,799.5 7,138.6 7,348.9 7,642.7 EBIT growth 214.5 (51.0) 68.0 11.2 Net income growth 262.1 (60.5) 74.0 14.5 Ratios 12/08 12/09E 12/10E 12/11E EPS growth 263.4 (60.5) 74.0 14.5 CROCI (%) 34.5 16.0 22.7 24.1 DPS growth 77.9 (68.8) 128.0 14.5 CROCI/WACC (X) 2.2 1.1 1.4 1.5 EBITDA margin 36.5 30.1 34.6 36.2 ROIC (%) 68.4 23.1 35.0 35.6 EBIT margin 33.8 25.8 31.3 33.0 ROIC/WACC (X) 4.4 1.5 2.2 2.2 ROA (%) 38.4 13.5 21.6 22.9 Cash flow statement ($ mn) 12/08 12/09E 12/10E 12/11E WACC (%) 15.5 15.3 15.7 15.9 Net income 2,004.2 790.9 1,376.5 1,576.2 Inventory days 67.6 113.6 81.8 81.9 D&A add-back (incl.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Dividend Valuation Models Prepared by Pamela Peterson Drake, Ph.D., CFA
    Dividend valuation models Prepared by Pamela Peterson Drake, Ph.D., CFA Contents 1. Overview ..................................................................................................................................... 1 2. The basic model .......................................................................................................................... 1 3. Non-constant growth in dividends ................................................................................................. 5 A. Two-stage dividend growth ...................................................................................................... 5 B. Three-stage dividend growth .................................................................................................... 5 C. The H-model ........................................................................................................................... 7 4. The uses of the dividend valuation models .................................................................................... 8 5. Stock valuation and market efficiency ......................................................................................... 10 6. Summary .................................................................................................................................. 10 7. Index ........................................................................................................................................ 11 8. Further readings .......................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Earnings, Cash Flow, Dividend Payout and Growth Influences on the Price of Common Stocks
    Louisiana State University LSU Digital Commons LSU Historical Dissertations and Theses Graduate School 1968 Earnings, Cash Flow, Dividend Payout and Growth Influences on the Price of Common Stocks. William Frank Tolbert Louisiana State University and Agricultural & Mechanical College Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.lsu.edu/gradschool_disstheses Recommended Citation Tolbert, William Frank, "Earnings, Cash Flow, Dividend Payout and Growth Influences on the Price of Common Stocks." (1968). LSU Historical Dissertations and Theses. 1522. https://digitalcommons.lsu.edu/gradschool_disstheses/1522 This Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by the Graduate School at LSU Digital Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in LSU Historical Dissertations and Theses by an authorized administrator of LSU Digital Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. This dissertation has been microfilmed exactly as received 69-4505 TOLBERT, William Frank, 1918- EARNINGS, CASH FLOW, DIVIDEND PAYOUT AND GROWTH INFLUENCES ON THE PRICE OF COMMON STOCKS. Louisiana State University and Agricultural and Mechanical College, Ph.D., 1968 Economics, finance University Microfilms, Inc., Ann Arbor, Michigan William Frank Tolbert 1969 © _____________________________ ALL RIGHTS RESERVED EARNINGS, CASH FLOW, DIVIDEND PAYOUT AND GROWTH INFLUENCES ON THE PRICE OF COMMON STOCKS A Dissertation Submitted to the Graduate Faculty of the Louisiana State University and Agricultural and Mechanical College in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in The Department of Business Finance and Statistics b y . William F.' Tolbert B.S., University of Oklahoma, 1949 M.B.A., University of Oklahoma, 1950 August, 1968 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT The writer wishes to express his sincere apprecia­ tion to Dr.
    [Show full text]
  • How Does the Market Interpret Analysts' Long-Term Growth Forecasts? Steven A. Sharpe
    How Does the Market Interpret Analysts’ Long-term Growth Forecasts? Steven A. Sharpe Division of Research and Statistics Federal Reserve Board Washington, D.C. 20551 (202)452-2875 [email protected] April, 2004 Forthcoming in the Journal of Accounting, Auditing and Finance. The views expressed herein are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Board nor the staff of the Federal Reserve System. I am grateful for comments and suggestions from Jason Cummins, Steve Oliner, and an anonymous referee, and members of the Capital Markets Section at the Board. Excellent research assistance was provided by Eric Richards and Dimitri Paliouras. How Does the Market Interpret Analysts’ Long-term Growth Forecasts? Abstract The long-term growth forecasts of equity analysts do not have well-defined horizons, an ambiguity of substantial import for many applications. I propose an empirical valuation model, derived from the Campbell-Shiller dividend-price ratio model, in which the forecast horizon used by the “market” can be deduced from linear regressions. Specifically, in this model, the horizon can be inferred from the elasticity of the price-earnings ratio with respect to the long- term growth forecast. The model is estimated on industry- and sector-level portfolios of S&P 500 firms over 1983-2001. The estimated coefficients on consensus long-term growth forecasts suggest that the market applies these forecasts to an average horizon somewhere in the range of five to ten years. -1- 1. Introduction Long-term earnings growth forecasts by equity analysts have garnered increasing attention over the last several years, both in academic and practitioner circles.
    [Show full text]
  • QUESTIONS 3.1 Profitability Ratios Questions 1 and 2 Are Based on The
    140 SU 3: Profitability Analysis and Analytical Issues QUESTIONS 3.1 Profitability Ratios Questions 1 and 2 are based on the following information. The financial statements for Dividendosaurus, Inc., for the current year are as follows: Balance Sheet Statement of Income and Retained Earnings Cash $100 Sales $ 3,000 Accounts receivable 200 Cost of goods sold (1,600) Inventory 50 Gross profit $ 1,400 Net fixed assets 600 Operations expenses (970) Total $950 Operating income $ 430 Interest expense (30) Accounts payable $140 Income before tax $ 400 Long-term debt 300 Income tax (200) Capital stock 260 Net income $ 200 Retained earnings 250 Plus Jan. 1 retained earnings 150 Total $950 Minus dividends (100) Dec. 31 retained earnings $ 250 1. Dividendosaurus has return on assets of Answer (A) is correct. (CIA, adapted) REQUIRED: The return on assets. DISCUSSION: The return on assets is the ratio of net A. 21.1% income to total assets. It equals 21.1% ($200 NI ÷ $950 total B. 39.2% assets). Answer (B) is incorrect. The ratio of net income to common C. 42.1% equity is 39.2%. Answer (C) is incorrect. The ratio of income D. 45.3% before tax to total assets is 42.1%. Answer (D) is incorrect. The ratio of income before interest and tax to total assets is 45.3%. 2. Dividendosaurus has a profit margin of Answer (A) is correct. (CIA, adapted) REQUIRED: The profit margin. DISCUSSION: The profit margin is the ratio of net income to A. 6.67% sales. It equals 6.67% ($200 NI ÷ $3,000 sales).
    [Show full text]
  • Dividend Discount Models
    ch13_p323-350.qxp 12/5/11 2:14 PM Page 323 CHAPTER 13 Dividend Discount Models n the strictest sense, the only cash flow you receive from a firm when you buy I publicly traded stock in it is a dividend. The simplest model for valuing equity is the dividend discount model—the value of a stock is the present value of expected dividends on it. While many analysts have turned away from the dividend discount model and view it as outmoded, much of the intuition that drives discounted cash flow valuation stems from the dividend discount model. In fact, there are compa- nies where the dividend discount model remains a useful tool for estimating value. This chapter explores the general model as well as specific versions of it tailored for different assumptions about future growth. It also examines issues in using the dividend discount model and the results of studies that have looked at its efficacy. THE GENERAL MODEL When an investor buys stock, he or she generally expects to get two types of cash flows—dividends during the period the stock is held and an expected price at the end of the holding period. Since this expected price is itself determined by future dividends, the value of a stock is the present value of dividends through infinity: ∞ t= E(DPS ) Value per share of stock = ∑ t + t t=1 ()1 ke = where DPSt Expected dividends per share = ke Cost of equity The rationale for the model lies in the present value rule—the value of any asset is the present value of expected future cash flows, discounted at a rate appropriate to the riskiness of the cash flows being discounted.
    [Show full text]
  • Determinants of Dividend Payout Ratios
    Determinants of Dividend Payout Ratios A Study of Swedish Large and Medium Caps Authors: Gustav Hellström Gairatjon Inagambaev Supervisor: Catherine Lions Student Umeå School of Business and Economics Spring semester2012 Degree project, 30 hp I Acknowledgments We would firstly like to thank our supervisor Catherine Lions for her support throughout the research process. Secondly, we would like express our gratitude to Umeå School of Business and Economics for providing us the opportunity to conduct the degree project. Gustav Hellström Gairatjon Inagambaev May, 2012 II Abstract The dividend payout policy is one of the most debated topics within corporate finance and some academics have called the company’s dividend payout policy an unsolved puzzle. Even though an extensive amount of research regarding dividends has been conducted, there is no uniform answer to the question: what are the determinants of the companies’ dividend payout ratios? We therefore decided to conduct a study regarding the determinants of the companies’ dividend payout ratios on large and medium cap on Stockholm stock exchange. The purpose of the study is to determine if there is a relationship between a number of company selected factors and the companies’ dividend payout ratios. A second purpose is to determine whether there are any differences between large and medium caps regarding the impact of the company selected factors. We therefore reviewed previous studies and dividend theories in order to conclude which factors that potentially could have an impact on the companies’ dividend payout ratios. Based on the literature, we decided to test the relationship between the dividend payout ratio and six company selected factors: free cash flow, growth, leverage, profit, risk and size.
    [Show full text]
  • Analysis of the Determinants of Dividend Policy: Evidence from Manufacturing Companies in Tanzania
    Corporate Governance and Organizational Behavior Review / Volume 2, Issue 1, 2018 ANALYSIS OF THE DETERMINANTS OF DIVIDEND POLICY: EVIDENCE FROM MANUFACTURING COMPANIES IN TANZANIA Manamba Epaphra *, Samson S. Nyantori ** * Institute of Accountancy Arusha, Tanzania Contact details: P.O. Box 2798, Njiro Hill, Arusha, Tanzania ** Institute of Accountancy Arusha, Tanzania Abstract How to cite this paper: Epaphra, M., & This paper examines the determinants of dividend policy of Nyantori, S. (2018). Analysis of the manufacturing companies listed on the Dar es Salaam Stock determinants of dividend policy: evidence from manufacturing companies Exchange in Tanzania. Two measures of dividend policy namely, in Tanzania. Corporate Governance and dividend yield and dividend payout are examined over the 2008- Organizational Behavior Review, 2(1), 2016 period. In addition, three proxies of profitability namely 18-30. http://doi.org/10.22495/cgobr_v2_i1_p2 return on assets ratio, return on equity ratio, and the ratio of earnings per share are applied in separate specifications. Similarly, Copyright © 2018 Virtus Interpress. investment opportunities are measured using the ratio of retained All rights reserved earnings to total assets and market to book value ratio. Other The Creative Commons Attribution- explanatory variables are liquidity, business risk, firm size, firm NonCommercial 4.0 International growth and gearing ratio. For inferential analysis, 12 regression License (CC BY-NC 4.0) will be activated starting from May, 2019 followed by models are specified and estimated depending on the transfer of the copyright to the authors measurements of dividend policy, profitability, and collinearity between retained earnings to total assets and market to book value ISSN Online: 2521-1889 ratios.
    [Show full text]
  • The Effect of Financial Performance Measured with Rentability Ratio Against Dividend Payout Ratio (Empirical Study on Manufacturing Companies Group Listed on BEI)
    International Journal of Economics, Business and Accounting Research (IJEBAR) Peer Reviewed – International Journal Vol-2, Issue-1, 2018 (IJEBAR) ISSN: 2614-1280, https://jurnal.stie-aas.ac.id/index.php/IJEBAR The Effect of Financial Performance Measured With Rentability Ratio Against Dividend Payout Ratio (Empirical Study on Manufacturing Companies group listed on BEI) Imas Della Fauzi1, Rukmini2 STIE AAS, Central Java, Indonesia Email: [email protected] Abstract: This study aims to examine whether there is a significant effect of the company's financial performance as measured by the ratio of profitability with Return on Assets (ROA), Return On Equity (ROE), Return On Investment (ROI) and Net Profit Margin (NPM) to Dividend Payout Ratio (DPR). The data collected is obtained from the financial statements of manufacturing companies listed on the Indonesia Stock Exchange period 2013-2015. The analysis used to know how big the influence of ROA, ROE, ROI NPM to DPR company, writer do statistical analysis done by using descriptive analysis, doubled linear regression, correlation coefficient and coefficient of determination. While testing the hypothesis using F test for simultaneous test and t test partially, using SPSS 16. Based on the results of data processing, obtained regression equation Y = 31.225 + 1.209 X₁ - 0.106 X₂ + 0.505 X₃ - 0.708 X₄ + ε, analysis results Statistics simultaneously obtained the value of determination coefficient of 28.3%. While the rest equal to 71.7% influenced by other factors. Based on hypothesis test by using significant level α = 0,05 result of F test, show that together regression model can be used to explain the relation between Return on Asset, Return On Equity, Return On Investment and Net Profit Margin to Dividend Payout Ratio.
    [Show full text]
  • Northern Indiana Public Service Company Gas Rate
    NORTHERN INDIANA PUBLIC SERVICE COMPANY GAS RATE CASE Forward Looking Test Year: Twelve months ending December 31, 2018 Base Year: Twelve months ending December 31, 2016 MINIMUM STANDARD FILING REQUIREMENTS (MSFR) TABLE OF CONTENTS 170 IAC Description Part Working Papers and data; rate of return and capital 1-5-13 10 structure 1-5-13(a) An electing utility shall submit the following: 10 Capitalization and capitalization ratios at the end 10 of the test year and at the end of the year beginning 1-5-13(a)(1) twelve (12) months prior to the test year, respectively, including the following information: (A) Year-end interest coverage ratios for the test 10 year and the year ended twelve (12) months prior to 1-5-13(a)(1)(A) the end of the test year, and a pro forma interest coverage under the rates proposed by the utility (B) Year-end preferred stock dividend coverage 10 1-5-13(a)(1)(B) ratios for the test year and the year ended twelve (12) months prior to the end of the test year (C) The supporting calculations for the 1-5-13(a)(1)(C) 10 information described in clauses (A) and (B) The following financial data relating to the utility 1-5-13(a)(2) 10 as of the end of the most recent five (5) fiscal years: 1-5-13(a)(2)(A) (A) Annual price earnings ratio 10 (B) Earnings-book value ratio on a per share basis, 1-5-13(a)(2)(B) 10 using average book value 1-5-13(a)(2)(C) (C) Annual dividend yield 10 1-5-13(a)(2)(D) (D) Annual earnings per share in dollars 10 1-5-13(a)(2)(E) (E) Annual dividends per share in dollars 10 1-5-13(a)(2)(F) (F) A book
    [Show full text]
  • Surprise! Higher Dividends = Higher Earnings Growth Robert D
    Surprise! Higher Dividends = Higher Earnings Growth Robert D. Arnott and Clifford S. Asness We investigate whether dividend policy, as observed in the payout ratio of the U.S. equity market portfolio, forecasts future aggregate earnings growth. The historical evidence strongly suggests that expected future earnings growth is fastest when current payout ratios are high and slowest when payout ratios are low. This relationship is not subsumed by other factors, such as simple mean reversion in earnings. Our evidence thus contradicts the views of many who believe that substantial reinvestment of retained earnings will fuel faster future earnings growth. Rather, it is consistent with anecdotal tales about managers signaling their earnings expectations through dividends or engaging, at times, in inefficient empire building. Our findings offer a challenge to market observers who see the low dividend payouts of recent times as a sign of strong future earnings to come. ince 1995, and until a recent uptick arising D R = ---- + G. (1) from plunging earnings, marketwide divi- P dend-payout ratios in the United States have Expected return, R, equals the dividend yield, D/ S been in the lowest historical decile, reaching P, plus an assumed constant expected growth term, unprecedented low levels from late 1999 to mid- G. Now, the dividend yield itself can be thought of 2001. Alternatively stated, earnings-retention rates as the product of the dividend-payout ratio, D/E have recently been at or near all-time highs. Mean- (the ratio of dividends to earnings), and the earn- while, price-to-earnings ratios and price-to- ings yield, E/P (the inverse of P/E): dividend ratios are high by historical standards, despite the sharp fall in stock prices since early 2000.
    [Show full text]
  • The Influence of the Dividend Payout Ratio (Dpr)
    Volume 3, Issue 5, May – 2018 International Journal of Innovative Science and Research Technology ISSN No:-2456-2165 The Influence of the Dividend Payout Ratio (Dpr) and the Current Ratio (Cr) Against the Growth of Share Prices in the Service Sector Companies the Period 2011 – 215, in Indonesia Hais Dama Doctoral candidate of Economics University of Indonesia Muslim (UMI) in Makassar Masdar Mas’ud Professor programs Economics University of Indonesia Muslim Lukman Chalid Co Promoter, Program Economics University of Indonesia Muslim St. Sukmawati Co Promoter, Program Economics University of Indonesia Muslim Abstract:- The title, the influence of the Dividend Payout Dividend Payout Ratio is determined the company to pay a Ratio and Curren Ratio against the establishment of the dividend to shareholders every year, the determination of the share price on the service sector company perikde 20122 Dividend Payout Ratio based on his little big profit after tax, – 2015. This research aims to find out if the Current are generally dividends paid to shareholders in cash (cash Ratio and Dividend Payout Ratio effect on the growth of dividend), so it can be inferred the higher Dividend Payout service sector Companies stock prices listed on the Ratio set by the company's then increasingly higher amount Indonesia stock exchange. This research data obtained of profit will be paid as a dividend on the share holders. by downloading annual report through the official Dividend Payout Ratio shows the company policy in website so that the data in this study is secondary data. generating and distributing dividends, Dividend Payout The research method used is the method of quantitative Ratio thus reflects the prosperity of the shareholders.
    [Show full text]
  • Chapter 7 -- Stocks and Stock Valuation
    Chapter 7 -- Stocks and Stock Valuation Characteristics of common stock The market price vs. intrinsic value Stock market reporting Stock valuation models Valuing a corporation Preferred stock The efficient market hypothesis (EMH) Characteristics of common stock Ownership in a corporation: control of the firm Claim on income: residual claim on income Claim on assets: residual claim on assets Commonly used terms: voting rights, proxy, proxy fight, takeover, preemptive rights, classified stock, and limited liability The market price vs. intrinsic value Intrinsic value is an estimate of a stock’s “fair” value (how much a stock should be worth) Market price is the actual price of a stock, which is determined by the demand and supply of the stock in the market Figure 7-1: Determinants of Intrinsic Values and Market Prices Intrinsic value is supposed to be estimated using the “true” or accurate risk and return data. However, since sometimes the “true” or accurate data is not directly observable, the intrinsic value cannot be measured precisely. Market value is based on perceived risk and return data. Since the perceived risk and return may not be equal to the “true” risk and return, the market value can be mispriced as well. Stock in equilibrium: when a stock’s market price is equal to its intrinsic value the stock is in equilibrium Stock market in equilibrium: when all the stocks in the market are in equilibrium (i.e. for each stock in the market, the market price is equal to its intrinsic value) then the market is in equilibrium 36 Stock market reporting Provide up-to-date trading information for different stocks Figure 7-2: Stock Quote and Other Data for GE Stock Symbol (GE) Prev close: closing price on Feb.
    [Show full text]