1 / 16

Advanced Corporate Finance

Advanced Corporate Finance. Lecture 08.1 and 09 Capital Structure and Bond Valuation (Continued) Fall, 2010. Underinvestment Problem. Given risky debt in the capital structure there is a tendency to Reject positive NPV projects Incentive to pay high dividends

hanh
Download Presentation

Advanced Corporate Finance

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Advanced Corporate Finance Lecture 08.1 and 09 Capital Structure and Bond Valuation (Continued) Fall, 2010

  2. Underinvestment Problem • Given risky debt in the capital structure there is a tendency to • Reject positive NPV projects • Incentive to pay high dividends • May simply be impossible to Finance new investment because of debt overhang.

  3. Example of Underinvestment • UHFX International (million) • For simplicity assume all security’s required return is 10% • Risk Neutrality and the probability of each state occurring is 50% • Good State Bad State • Total 110 44 • Debt 66 44 • Equity 44 0 • B = 50 • S = 20 • V = 70

  4. Example of Underinvestment • New investment Option I = 60 Pays off: 77 in good state, 66 in bad state NPV = $? million Finance with junior debt or equity

  5. If adopt, financed with Junior Debt • UHFX International (million) • Good State Bad State • Total 187 110 • Debt 66 66 • Junior Debt 88 44 • Equity 33 0 • B = 60 • JB = 60 • S = 15 ( A LOSS in value of $ 5 million) • V = 135, and NPV is positive but hurts stockholders

  6. Risk Shifting • The Risk shifting problem occurs when it is in the interest of the stockholders to take on a very risky investment even though it has a negative NPV • Example: 77 Investment = 30 • -33

  7. Risk Shifting • Cash Flow Before Investment • Good State Bad State MV • Total 110 44 • Debt 66 44 • Equity 44 0 • CF from Investment 77 -33 • Total Cash Flow 187 11 • Senior Debt 66 11 • Junior Debt 66 0 • Equity 55 0

  8. Risk Shifting • Cash Flow Before Investment • Good State Bad State MV • Total 110 44 70 • Debt 66 44 50 • Equity 44 0 20 • CF from Investment 77 -33 20 • Total Cash Flow 187 11 90 • Senior Debt 66 11 35 • Junior Debt 66 0 30 • Equity 55 0 25

  9. Values • Before After • Firm 70 90 • Snr Debt 50 35 • Jnr Debt -- 30 • Equity 20 25

  10. Firm Value Costs of Financial Distress V = V(u) + PV of Tax Shield Debt Level Static Tradeoff Optimal Debt Level

  11. Pecking Order Hypothesis • Costly Information • Managers know more about the future of the firm than do outsiders • Conclusion • Firm has an ordering under which they will Finance • First, use internal funds • Next least risky security

  12. Announcement Effect of Capital Raising Choices • Common Stock -3.14% • Straight Debt -0.26%* • Internally Financed +1.00% • * Means not statistically significant • What is the rationale (theory)?

  13. So the announcement effect • If the firm announces it intends to issue equity to invest in a project, this is bad news and stock prices will go down. That is the market will ASSUME this is a bad firm. • Therefore the firm will never issue equity if it can avoid it to finance in projects. • Thus pecking order.

  14. Empirical Evidence • We tend to see that firms: 1. Use internal funds to invest in projects if available 2. Use least risky securities as possible if it has to finance these projects externally. 3. Announcement of a new Debt issue has a small negative impact on stockprice 4. Announcement of a new Equity issue has a strong negative impact on stockprice

  15. Empirical Evidence • Schwartz & Aronson: Leverage tends to decline as the proportion of total value of the firm consists of Growth Opportunities. • Information costs: Very strong relationship between type of capital structure change and price change It is difficult to distinguish between tradeoff theory and Pecking Order • Taxes: Leverage increases associated with high taxes

  16. Generalizing • When we look at established Capital Structures we tend to find evidence that supports a static tradeoff theory of capital structure • When we consider changes in capital structure (issuing debt or equity, repurchases, calls, etc.) there tends to be a significant pecking order component

More Related