1

Table of Contents EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ...... 1 Columbia Company(CLOM) MACRO ECONOMIC ANALYSIS ...... 2 and Hanesbrands Inc. (HBI): INDUSTRY ANALYSIS ...... 3 FUNDAMENTAL VALUATION ...... 6 AN IN-DEPTH ANALYSIS CORPORATE GOVERNANCE ...... 8 SMIF Newsletter, November 2017 TECHNICAL VALUATION ...... 10

REFERENCES ..... Error! Bookmark not defined. Name, Address

threats to performance, role of international markets as well as an EXECUTIVE SUMMARY evaluation of the companies’ financial aspects such as the Earnings per share, sales, net profit margin etc. In the recent times, there has been a Columbia Sportswear and positive shift towards sportswear Hanesbrands Incorporated are two over traditional retail wear global apparel and In the third section, fundamental observed with the millennial producing companies that have valuation is performed where the generation as they find it built a strong reputation in analysis highlights the financial fashionable to dress in sports supplying high quality , soundness of Hanesbrands Inc. apparel and footwear in the streets sportswear and footwear. compared to Columbia Sportswear. unlike the previous period where Corporate governance proceeds such clothing was the reserve of the This report undertakes an in-depth afterwards where decisions of both sporting track. analysis of the financial reports insider investors and institutional from the two companies in an investors are evaluated. Consequently, the number of attempt to carry out the valuation of players in the supply of such their stock. Consequently, the In the final section, the report undertakes the technical apparel has steadily increased report is divided into five main valuation analysis thereby leading to both improved choice sections as it attempts to achieve and variety for customers, and providing insight into the this objective. historical performance of the increase in profits for the company. companies. To begin with, the report While financial reports indicate that undertakes macroeconomic firms Overall, the report helps point out operating in the apparel analysis of the apparel production industry are fundamental concepts taught in the making substantial industry where it elaborates on the profit investments class in readiness for levels, in depth analysis of influence technology has had on their application in the real world. financial information is the performance of the companies. important for investors seeking to purchase securities from the given The report then undertakes industry companies. analysis where it highlights the current state of the industry, major

2

MACRO ECONOMIC ANALYSIS

Columbia Sportswear Company and Hanesbrands Inc. are apparel successful in the industry. The manufacture of outerwear in producing companies that operate on a global basis. However, an analysis same applies for firms in other Columbia’s case or the of their operations shows that the two companies deal in different aspects diverse industries. manufacture of apparel in of apparel production. Columbia Sportswear was founded in 1938 as a Hanesbrands’ case leads to lowered small regional distributor of hats, however, over time, has grown to be a It can be argued that technology production capacities. On the supply global leader in the distribution of outdoor apparel and footwear. has a double effect in the apparel aspect, technology has a tremendous industry as it influences the impact on the apparel As of the year 2016, the company’s production levels of apparel, effectiveness and efficiency of industry since it influences the manner in which consumers accessories and footwear accounted for over 78.5% whereas footwear manufacturing in the firm on the undertake their shopping activities accounted for 21.5%. The company is the leading manufacturer of one hand while on the other, it as well as their levels of outwear in the world and the largest skiwear seller in the U.S. affects the firms’ ability to supply productivity (Jacob, 2008). Hanesbrands Inc. on the other hand, was initiated from the Sara Lee products to consumers (Harinder, Information technology on the one corporation in 2006 when the corporation contributed its brand apparel Brennan, & Browne, 2004). hand, encourages customers to buy business in the Americas and Asia and decided to distribute all its HBI more products online and on the outstanding shares to stockholders. Unlike Columbia Sportswear, the Technology influences the efficacy of other hand, enables the company deals in the design, manufacture, and sales of clothing for men, apparel production in both firms women and children. as it is viewed as a tool that organizations to offer optimum improves their respective customer service thereby production processes. As such, it improving their competitiveness in Supply variable influences the market. (John & Carroll, 2009). A major supply variable affecting the profitability of the apparel firms is technology. Consequently, this section examines the effect of technological changes on the supply of COLM and HBI products, as well as its impact on the firms’ sales, profits, and cash flow.

Firms that particularly operate in the apparel industry, need to ensure they remain updated with technological advancement and adapt to the new emergent changes in order to stay competitive and Figure 1

the firms’ input costs 3

and their ability to process inputs to finished products. For both Technology is also seen to facilitate environment and changes in social Columbia Sportswear and the rising of supply levels within cultural fashion trends. According to Hanesbrands Inc., this means that firms. A firm that decides to invest Pailwar (2012), changes in the technology facilitates the resources in technological economic environment such as an manufacture of their respective advancement, first, makes its increase in interest rates, inflation rates sports apparel by easing both the production processes more efficient or unemployment rates brings about a product design and manufacturing while reducing its labor costs and decrease in the levels of disposable aspects. facilitating an increase in supply income levels among individuals in levels. However, despite the society. As a result, their buying Consequently, negative benefits accruing from the use of capacity is reduced as they focus on technological changes such as technology in the given apparel purchasing essential products. adoption of cheaper technologies firms, technology is also associated Consequently, since most individuals by competitors adversely affects with various negative influences. consider sportswear to be luxurious their capacities to produce at First, many resources in items, they indulge in them less sufficient capacities. For instance, information technology are leading to lower revenue sales for the sportswear firms. Conversely, an an increase in the prices of associated with significant risks that improvement in interest rates, machinery required to perform could lead to decreased production, employment and inflation rates leads fundamental processes such as the increased costs, and to an increase in demand for luxurious revenue loss. Figure 1 shows consequently led to further items as individuals have higher levels downward trend in the industrial improvement in the marketability of of disposable income. The second production of apparel goods. sportswear. Hence, currently, the main factor of influence is the change Unsuccessful implementation of sportswear apparel industry is at a in consumer tastes and preferences information technology would point where there is increased potential brought about by changes in fashion to be exploited while at the same time, trends. By virtue of being in the the increased number of players has fashion industry, the firms’ led to increased competition levels performance is subject to the influence among firms. Current State of the industry of rapid change in fashion trends. As

trends promote a given product such as Main Threats In the recent times, there has been footwear, demand for the given increased attention in the sportswear product significantly improves. Global sportswear companies such as apparel industry as current fashion However, with changes in preference Columbia Sportswear and Hanesbrands trends promote sportswear over where the customers end up preferring Inc., face various threats as a result of alternative products, the firms’ traditional retail wear (Kell, 2014). operating on a global scale and choice Further, as more individuals embrace performance is compromised as of industry. provide the opposite result demand levels fall. As a result, the proactive healthy lifestyles that and so the firm would produce less, firms need to focus on adapting to include gym membership and firm’s sales would decrease, as well as changes in both fashion trends while increased physical activities such as the profit and cash flows. bike riding, jogging and hiking, the ensuring they remain sensitive to demand for sportswear and apparel has economic changes in order to maintain continued to increase. In addition, INDUSTRY ANALYSIS their stock prices at high levels. improved marketing efforts have brought about the adoption of Role of international markets sportswear as an alternative to retail The performance of such firms’ is wear (Kell, 2014). Consequently, there dependent on diverse factors, some of The role played by has been an increase in the number of which include: changes in political international markets in the players who supply sportswear in an environment; economic environment; performance of retail wear, attempt to fill the current market gap. socio-cultural trends and finally, an sportswear and footwear With the high numbers, there has been increase in competition in the markets products can be argued to an increase in competition among the of operation. Adverse changes in be pivotal as it offers prevalent sportswear firms leading to these factors consequently impacts the significant influence in the the adoption of diverse marketing supply and demand aspects of the value of stocks. Columbia strategies. Most global retailers of firms. While the enumerated factors Sportswear Company was sports apparel such as Nike and have a significant influence on the founded 79 years ago in have been seen to promote their operations of the firms, the main threat Washington County, sportswear by using celebrity sports to the firms’ performance stems from . It operates in more ambassadors, a feat that has adverse changes in the economic than seventy-nine countries 4

and has over thirteen is widely known and has of common stock. As shown in figure thousand retailers. been able to develop a wider 3, both companies have been having Hanesbrands Inc., on the reach in the different their EPS levels increasing steadily other hand, was continents it operates in. over the past six years. However, it is incorporated in 2006 and Further, in the monopolistic also noted that Columbia has recorded has grown to be a global competitive environment, higher EPS values compared to marketer of basic innerwear since the firms deal in Hanesbrands in the same period and active wear apparel in differentiated commodities, despite the trend showing the latter to the Americas, Europe, they have some level of have a higher percentage compared to Australia and Asia. control over the pricing of the former. The outperformance of Consequently, the two their items through the Columbia over Hanesbrands can be firms cannot survive differentiation aspects. For argued to arise from its stronger share without interacting on instance, Nike is able to price levels in addition to its longer global markets as most of charge higher for its apparel tenure of operation of 79 years their customers are located compared to Columbia compared to Hanesbrands’ 12 years. in diverse locations. As Sportswear as a result of its Consequently, stockholders in the such, the values of the brand name despite selling former company stand to receive companies’ stocks vary similar products. As such, it higher profits compared to those in the with the changes is able to assign its prices latter as a result of the higher EPS experienced in the independently despite the levels. international market. influence Market Structure brought about by market factors Net Profit Margin

Given that there are Sales According to Aswath (2013), the net numerous players in the profit margin describes the amount of apparel industry on a global The sales revenue obtained over a profit a company will is able keep scale, the market structure period of six years for both Columbia upon deducting its costs expressed as can be argued to be Sportswear and Hanesbrands Inc. is as a percentage. Figure 4 shows the monopolistic in nature as shown in figure 2. From the figure, it NPM values for both Columbia the different firms produce can be seen that for both companies, Sportswear and Hanesbrands Inc. similar items that are the sales levels have steadily increased From the figure, the NPM values for differentiated by aspects over the past six years. Further, it is Columbia have been steadily such as brand, quality and also noted that Columbia has increasing over the past six years other aspects. Hanesbrands generated higher sales values over the while with Hanesbrands, the NPM Inc. competes with period compared to Hanesbrands values increased steadily for the first companies such as Under despite the trend values showing the five years before decreasing in the Amor, Hugo Boss, Michael latter has higher positive results final year. The figure also shows a Kors, Ted Baker, Gildan compared to the former. Some of the higher NPM average level with the Activewear etc. In such a factors that could be attributed to the Hanesbrands company compared to market structure, the extent observed increase in sales for both Columbia at 3.7% which indicates to which a company is able companies include the global positive that it has outperformed the company to create a sense of brand trend towards the embracement of over the years. loyalty among its consumers sportswear and footwear apparel as an has an overall impact on its alternative to retail apparel. Kell Payout efficacy in marketing its (2014) argues that most individuals are products. Columbia more comfortable dressing in Payout refers to the amount of Sportswear has been able to sportswear in the streets compared to dividend that stock holders create a niche for itself as it traditional retail wear, a trend that is receive on an annual basis. has built a reputation of leading to higher sales of the products. Columbia delivering high quality Similarly, their operations on a global Sales Hanesbrands footwear and sportswear scale in diverse continents has also led over its 79 years of to more sales as the products appeal to 2017 35.25 17.80 operation. Similarly, different types of people. 2016 34.02 15.92 Hanesbrands Inc. has also 2015 33.58 14.63 been significantly Earnings per Share 2014 30.08 13.29 improving its market 2013 24.35 11.63 positioning aspects since its Earnings per share describe the amount 2012 24.50 11.51 parent company, Sara Lee, of profit that is ascribed to each value 5

Trend 7.90% 9.21% Figure 2 In support of this claim is the highly EPS Columbia positive financial soundness observed with both Columbia and Hanesbrands Hanesbrands Inc. as both companies have been 2017 2.80 2.00 61.4% 37.8% seen to steadily increase their net 2016 2.72 1.85 2013 46.0% 15.0% profit margins and sales revenues 2015 2.45 1.66 over time. The review of their 2014 1.94 1.42 financial information showed that over 2013 1.36 0.98 the past six years, sales revenue and Average 2012 1.47 0.66 their net profit margins have been Figure 5 increasing at a steady rate. According to figure 5, 15.08% 25.97% Columbia is seen to Both firms are seen to have high levels have higher average of profitability and liquidity as payout levels at 61.4% Trend Figure 3 illustrated by their earnings per share compared to Hanesbrands and payout levels. Finally, as the P/E NPM Columbia 37.8%. Consequently, this ratios show, their market values are Hanesbrands implies that stockholders in seen to increase steadily over time the former company enjoy thereby leading to higher market higher returns for their stocks valuation levels. However, upon compared to those in the comparison of the financial analysis former company. from the two companies, Columbia is

seen to offer higher sales revenues, net profit margins, payouts, and P/E ratio P/E Ratio which indicates that based on the industry valuation, it has a stronger The P/E ratio describes the value paid competitive edge over Hanesbrands. for each dollar earned in the 7.1% 10.8% company. Figure 6 shows that there has been a steady 2017 8.0% 11.3% P/E Columbia Hanesbrands improvement in the P/E ratio for 2017 2016 8.1% 11.8%Columbia Sportswear compared to 2016 20.9 14.3 Hanesbrands. The steady increase 2015 22.8 18.6 2015 7.5% 11.7%implies that there is a steady 2014 20.8 16.2 improvement in the market valuation 2014 6.5% 10.8% 2013 22.4 13.8 of Columbia compared to that of

2013 5.6% 8.6%Hanesbrands. Further, the average P/E ratio for Columbia is seen to be higher 21.7 15.7 at 21.7 compared to Hanesbrands at 15.7 which indicates that it has a Average Average Figure 4 higher market value. Figure 6 Columbia Payout Hanesbrands Conclusion . 2017 73.0% 60.0%

2016 69.0% 44.0%In conclusion, based on the positive results seen from the increased fashion 2015 62.0% 40.0%trends currently witnessed on a global scale, the apparel industry is 2014 57.0% 30.0%anticipated to grow by higher levels over time.

6

Upon determining the alpha values Further, upon evaluation of for the two companies as shown in Gordon’s growth model values for figure 10, it is seen that Columbia both companies as shown in figure has a negative Alpha while Hanesbrands has a positive value. 8, Columbia has a positive growth

rate while Hanesbrands has a Alpha COLM HI negative rate which indicates that FUNDAMENTAL VALUATION Role of Dividends Required Rate of Return Both companies offer dividends to their shareholders with The required rate of return describes the Hanesbrands’ current dividend at 0.6 while Columbia’s is 0.73. minimum acceptable discount rate than an investor can accept for a given project (Siddaiah, 2015). In the case of the required rate of return is less than Annual - risky investments, investors are keen to the growth model. Required determine the values of the RRR and -0.0893 0.2245 consequently, accept to invest in a given Dividend 0.7300 0.6000 overvalu underval project despite their high risks if the Gordon’s ed ued RRR values are high. In most instances, model 16.3862 -15.2 COLM HBI values above 9% are deemed acceptable overvalu underval by most investors. ed ued Figure 8 the overall RRR value for In addition, investors also consult the Columbia will be lower than that beta values for given stocks they are Expected HPR of Hanesbrands since the alpha interested in. Stocks with beta higher percentage is added to the RRR in than the market value are riskier As Siddaiah (2015) points out, the determining the effective value. In compared to those that are at the market expected HPR describes the return Columbia’s case, the effective level or below it. an investor receives when he holds a RRR will be given by adding 10.2$ given stock for a given period of to -8.93% while for Hanesbrands, Columbia Sportswear has a beta value time. the effective RRR will be given by of 1.10 which is higher than the market As shown in figure 9, both adding 9.5% to 22.45%. while Hanesbrands Inc. has a beta value Columbia and Hanesbrands have of 1.0, exactly at the market. As such, positive HPR values which appeals Sensitivity Analysis the former’s stocks are riskier since they investors to their stocks. However, are higher than the market value. it also indicates that they are Stowe (2006) highlights that Columbia is further seen to have an undervalued which implies that sensitivity analysis is significant in RRR value of 10.2% compared to they are anticipated to be higher showing how well different Hanesbrands Inc. at 9.5% as shown in than the recorded values. variables are able to impact one figure 7. another. Two variables of concern Expected COLM HBI HPR in this analysis are the P/E ratio and Required COLM HBI EPS. Rate of HPR = Figure 10 Return Inflows/Ou k = rf + 0.1020 0.0950 tflows 1.0386 2.2972 By having a negative alpha value, Beta Annual (km -rf) Return 0.0127 0.3195 Figure 7 overval underval ued ued Based on the results, an investor would Figure 9 both P/E and EPS are 20% more, it have to consider the both the beta values would lead to a return of 13.9% and level of RRR before attempting to select his preferred stock. Sensitivity

If P/E is If EPS is 7

Based on results in figure 13 below, both companies are seen to have different In Columbia’s case as future stock prices. In Columbia’s case, the current price is at 59.76 but its future shown in figure 11, the stock price is anticipated at 59.6288 which represents a slight decline. In worst case scenario occurs Hanesbrands case, the future stock price is at 33.6708 from its current stock price when both P/E and EPS of 23.13. The anticipated increase is expected given the company’s recent are 20% less than the initiative to cut costs and build its would earn more if they purchased given expected return brand which is aimed at increasing the company’s securities and held since it would not result in the value of the brand by 2019. them for a given time period. any return. However, in the case In terms of the sensitivity analysis, COLM HBI Hanesbrands as well demonstrated a Future 59.6288 33.6708 Price 20% less 10% less As expected 10% more 20% more EPS 2.8 2.0 20% less -12.088% -8.772% -5.681% -2.780% -0.043% better chart as all its P/E and 10% less -8.772% -5.309% -2.081% 0.946% 3.802% EPS levels had positive returns As unlike Columbia which had expected -5.681% -2.081% 1.272% 4.416% 7.381% more 10% more -2.780% 0.946% 4.416% 7.669% 10.737% 20% more -0.043% 3.802% 7.381% 10.737% 13.900% Figure 13 instances without returns. As such, investors would easily be appealed

to Hanesbrands Inc. compared Figure 11 to Columbia as the sensitivity 20% less 1.100% 4.764% 8.188% 11.407% 14.451% As expected 10% more 10% less 4.764% 8.601% 12.184% 15.552% 18.734% 20% more analysis As expected 8.188% 12.184% 15.914% 19.419% 22.729% guaranteed return on their 10% more 11.407% 15.552% 19.419% 23.050% 26.479% investments in the 20% more 14.451% 18.734% 22.729% 26.479% 30.019% former’s case If P/E is If EPS is Finally, Hanesbrands was seen to have an improved future stock price compared to Columbia which reduced in Conclusion value by 0.131 despite the company In the case of Hanesbrands as shown in In conclusion, fundamental analysis offering higher EPS at 2.8 compared figure 12, the chart shows that at all of the two companies has shown to Hanesbrands offer of levels, that is, from the point P/E and that both stocks have fairly good 2.0. EPS are 20% less to 20% more. As a levels of RRR despite Columbia’s result, the positive returns obtained at beta being above the market level. Consequently, from the each of the levels attracts investors. However, Columbia showed a fundamental valuation, most Further, since the chart shows no negative alpha while Hanesbrands investors would appeal to negative return, investors would be had a positive alpha which led to a Hanesbrands securities despite its easily attracted to it compared to higher overall RRR being observed lower earnings per share and lower Columbia’s case. in the company. stock price as the analysis showed that the company offers returns in If P/E is If EPS is Hanesbrands was also seen to have all conditions comparing P/E to 20% less 10% less higher HPR at 31.95% compared to EPS. Columbia Sportswear at 1.27% which indicated that investors CORPORATE GOVERNANCE

Insiders

Figure 12 Insiders refer to investors who have access to privileged information.

Future price of stocks

8

According to Thompson (2013), the (nasdaq.com) which reiterates the decisions highlighted previously. trade becomes illegal when the traders use the privileged information for their On the other hand, in the case of own benefit in trading while the general Hanesbrands Inc., figure 16 public is yet to receive the same. demonstrates the different decisions made by institutions and Figure 17 However, upon releasing the insiders. An evaluation of the information to public, the trading decisions showed that there was an Institutional Investors becomes legal as all traders have an increase in the number of insider even playing field. options at the beginning of the year Institutional investors are described though insiders declined to either buy as investors who are not affiliated In Columbia Sportswear’s case, figure or sell their stock. with any organization or banks but 14 below demonstrates the different Further it can also be seen that there are able to trade at lower institutional and insider decisions. The was increased activity in the buying commission levels owing to their figure shows that there have been higher and selling decisions from May to huge trade amounts. They are able August with options to sell taking insider decisions to sell the company’s to pool their financial resources to precedence over the buying options. stocks compared to buying decisions. buy securities at higher blocks

Institutional decisions on the other hand which leads to the preferred An analysis of institutional indicate a subsequent drop in both the treatment. They include pension decisions showed that there was an options to buy and sell in the second funds, money managers, hedge quarter of 2017 compared to the 1st increase in the decisions to buy in funds, investment banks, insurance quarter. It also indicates that more the previous two quarters. On the companies, etc. institutional decisions in the two one hand, decisions to buy were quarters favored selling rather than seen to surpass those to sell stock Columbia Sportswear, as shown in purchasing new stock. over the given quarters. On the figure 18 below, has about 39.09% other hand, decisions to sell closely institutional owners with a total outstanding share amount of 70 followed those to buy in the three million. quarters. Despite a decline in the decisions to sell from the last quarter of 2016 to the first quarter of 2017, an improvement was noted afterwards from the first and second quarters of 2017.

sells than buys for the company’s stocks . However, more buys Figure 18 occurred compared to Columbia’s case. Hanesbrands Inc., on the other hand, has an institutional ownership of 99.61% with a total outstanding share amount of 365 million as Figure 15 shown in figure 19 below.

The high levels indicate that the company is owned entirely by Figure 14. Figure 16. the investors leaving about 0.39% for other owners. Similarly, as shown in figure 15 below, Figure 17 from Nasdaq (2017) the report from Nasdaq shows that in shows that in the past 12 months, the past 12 months, more insiders have there have similarly occurred more been selling stock more than buying Figure 19 Adapting Trends Columbia Sportswear has been at the forefront of ensuring they 9

reaction to prevalent market trends. Given the companies serve a global market distributed across several continents, adapting to consumer trends is imperative for their success and survival.

However, an evaluation of the adapt to changing customer that would generate sales operations of the two companies preferences. As Gustafson (2015) throughout the year, the company highlights that Columbia points out, the management of the was in a much better position to Sportswear engages in more company appeal to a wider audience. market responsive initiative deemed it necessary to innovate its thereby being seen as the company production to ensure they have Hanesbrands Inc. has also been that offers a stronger cutting edge. created the assortment that suits all implementing similar initiatives in types of weather, a dramatic change an attempt to serve its customers from their previous focus on winter much better. The company’s apparel and footwear. By reinvestment into its market producing an assortment of items operations has also been seen as a 10

TECHNICAL VALUATION crosses the 200 mark from below in what is referred to By undertaking technical valuation, investors are able as the golden cross. to visualize historical aspects of a given security in On the other hand, a signal they as well rely on in order to inform their investment decisions. Through making a sale is when the price drops below the 50day the valuation process, an investor is able to decide the from above and as well, confirms when the 50-day buying or selling price for a given stock that he should crosses the 200 from above in what is referred to as settle for. Technical valuation as well, disregards the the death cross. financials of a company and seeks to ascertain the influence of supply and demand on the given stock Line Chart price. There are various approaches employed in technical The analysis of Columbia Sportswear, shown by the valuation. One of them considers the evaluation of the figure 19, and Hanesbrands Inc. shown in figure 20 stock price by correlating the same to the moving 50 shows that prices have been moving steadily both up and 200 averages. One signal investors rely on to and down throughout the year. make a purchase, is when the 50-day moving average 11

Columbia Sportswear began the 2017 year with a steady improvement in stock prices but in March, Based on the activity levels, it is noted that experienced a drop in demand. However, from early Hanesbrands generated more activity from June April to late May, stock prices were seen to improve towards October as a spike in demand is seen. before taking yet another nosedive in May. From late Columbia was also seen to have a spike in demand May to early October, the demand levels were seen to from late September to late November. Probable steadily improve highlighting an increase in causes for the spikes in demand stem from investment. From late October to November, its reinvestment of the companies into current operations demand levels were also seen to take a nosedive as in an effort to improve brand awareness and demand levels reduced dramatically. development of its market operations.

On the one hand, the observed movement in Columbia’s stock prices can be attributed to changes in fashion trends and seasonal buyer effects which had an impact on the demand levels of their products throughout the year. However, on the other hand, the movement can also be attributed to the sensitivity of investors to the stock behavior where they were seen to observe how the stock behaves before undertaking either a purchase or a sale of the existent stock.

On the other hand, demand levels of Hanesbrands’ stocks were seen to begin on a low Figure 19 note at the beginning of the year. A sharp increase in demand occurred in early February as the company made a better offer of their stock prices. However, the demand would reduce from late February to early March and steadily increase from late March to May. Analysis of the company’s annual line chart showed that throughout the year, the company has been undergoing both increase and decrease in its stock demand levels attributed to both the impact of market forces and the decisions by investors to buy their stock especially based on the impact of the prevalent seasons. As well, the investor Figure 20 decisions are also attributed to have an impact on demand levels. Bibliography

Aswath D. (2013). The Little book of valuation. Hoboken, N.J.: Wiley.

Gustafson, K. (2015, October 2). Columbia sportswear's plan for $4B in sales. Retrieved December 2, 2017 from CNBC: https://www.cnbc.com/2015/10/09/columbia-sportswear-sets- aggressivegrowth-target.html

Harinder S. J., Brennan, A., & Browne J. (2004). Strategic decision making in modern manufacturing. Boston: Kluwer Academic.

Jakob, K., (2008). Standardization research in information technology. Hershey, PA: Information Science Reference.

John, P. B., & Carroll C. M. (2009). Local economic development. Los Angeles, Calif.: Sage Publications.

12

Kell, J. (2014, December 25). Athletic apparel: Outperforming the competition in 2014. Retrieved December 1, 2017 from Fortune: http://fortune.com/2014/12/25/athletic-apparel- topperformer/

nasdaq.com. (2017, December 1). Columbia Sportswear Company (COLM) insider trading activity (SEC Form 4). Retrieved December 1, 2017 from NASDAQ: http://www.nasdaq.com/symbol/colm/insider-trades

nasdaq.com. (2017, December 1). Hanesbrands Inc. (HBI) insider trading activity (SEC Form 4). Retrieved December 1, 2017 from NASDAQ: http://www.nasdaq.com/symbol/hbi/insidertrades.

Pailwar, V. K. (2012). Economic environment of business. New Delhi: PHI Learning Private Ltd.

Siddaiah, T. (2015). International financial management. New Delhi: Pearson Education India.

Stowe, J. D. (2006). Analysis of equity investments. Chichester: John Wiley.

Thompson, J. H. (2013). A global comparison of insider trading Regulations." International Journal of Accounting and Financial Reporting 3(1), 1.

Sample research paper by www.trustmypaper.com