410 likes | 543 Views
Overview of Corporate Finance. What is Corporate Finance? (Q1). What kind of projects and/or business are you going to invest your firm’s money in? Bayer selling an Alka-Seltzer factory for $1. Annual maintenance: $6-7 million Removal cost: $20 million Capital Budgeting
E N D
What is Corporate Finance? (Q1) • What kind of projects and/or business are you going to invest your firm’s money in? • Bayer selling an Alka-Seltzer factory for $1. • Annual maintenance: $6-7 million • Removal cost: $20 million • Capital Budgeting • process of planning and managing a firm’s investment in physical or intangible assets • capital assets
What is Corporate Finance? (Q2) • Where will you get the money? • Commercial Finance Co issued $750 million in 18 month floating rate (150 BP + 3 month LIBOR) • Stated purpose: Repurchase of AR or Acquisitions • Capital Structure Choice • choosing the mix of debt and equity used by a firm • capital liabilities
What is Corporate Finance? (Q3) • How will you manage your financial activities? • Overnight money markets • Previous example: Issue notes to repurchase AR. • Working Capital Management • managing short-term operating cash flows • short term assets and liabilities
The Goal of a Corporation • Possible Goals • Maximize sales? • Maximize earnings/profits? • Minimize risk/maximize risk? • Maximize the market value of shareholders equity
Wave I: Incoming MBA Wave II: After 1st year Wave III: Graduating MBASurvey by the Aspen Institute
What is the value of any asset? Today’s value of expected future cash flows
What is the appropriate r? • ...that r which reflects the riskiness of the cash flows • Conversion rate across time • Different ways to refers to r • Opportunity cost of capital • Required rate of return • Cost of capital • Appropriate discount rate • Hurdle rate • Capitalization rate • Etc.
Guiding Principle • Capital should be allocated to any project with a positive value • NPV>0: Is it really this simple? • Each investor wants to maximize wealth but is subject to different risk preferences and consumption patterns. • Efficient capital markets allow the investor to choose risk levels and time consumption. • Therefore, the corporate manager should just focus on maximizing wealth.
Is maximizing shareholder wealth optimal? • From a behavioral viewpoint is it a flawed design? • Is this goal sustainable and consistent? • “Maximizing”? • “Shareholder”? • Shareholders are the residual claimant • Risk and reward • “Wealth”?
Is maximizing shareholder wealth optimal? • From a societal point of view, is this a flawed design? • In the eyes of the benevolent social planner? • Is this goal sustainable and consistent? • “Maximizing”? • “Shareholder”? • Do shareholders deserve this right? • “Wealth”?
Value of the Corporation: Perfect World • where NPV is the stand alone, equity financed value of each project (p) and there are P total project(s)
What are other possible sources of value creation/destruction? • Capital structure • Created through market imperfections • Inter-project relationships (NPV’s are correlated) • Synergies • Diversification • Risk Management • Organizational Form/Incentive Structure • Agency issues
Why are there inconsistencies between management and finance? • Different cultures • Accounting numbers are what matters • All diversification is good • Do poor NPV projects for “strategic reasons” • “Greed is good” image • Discounted cash flow (DCF) is not trusted • DCF is not a perfect solution • ???
How can we manage these inconsistencies? • Communication • Intricate knowledge of DCF • Execute and manage DCF effectively • Scenario/Sensitivity analysis • Economics and Statistics • Common sense! • Identify what is causing NPV not to be near zero • Long run NPV should be zero • Manage bias: Cognitive and Motivational
Weakness in Finance Theory • r? • Difficult to estimate but probably the least critical to do with high precision • E(CF)? • Difficult to estimate incremental flows • Understand implications of increasing CF volatility • Time series decision making • DCF assumes nothing changes after the beginning of the project • Improve with real options framework
Organization of Economic FunctionsThe firm is a way of organizing the economic activity of many individuals
Building Blocks: Individuals • REMM (Resourceful, Evaluative, Maximizing Model) • Every individual is an evaluator • Cares about everything • Willing to make tradeoff and substitutions • Are maximizing • Wants are unlimited • Are resourceful • Economic Model: reduced form of REMM, only maximize wealth • Other models: Sociological, Psychological and Political
Building Blocks: Firm • Forms • Sole proprietor • Partnership • Corporation • Nexus of contracts • Debt contracts: Claim on the firm’s assets and/or cash flows • Equity contracts: Claim on the firm’s residual assets and/or cash flows • Other stakeholder contracts: Customers, government, community, employees, etc. • Shareholders (principals) and management team (agents) contract
Corporation: A legal entity composed of one or more individuals or entities • Three distinct interests: separation of ownership and control • Shareholders (ownership, principal) • Board of Directors (control) • Top Management (implementation, agent) • Limited liability • Unlimited life • Transferable ownership • Corporation is a taxable entity • Distributions to shareholders are taxed again at the personal level
Potential Problems: Between Claimants • Information Asymmetry • Methods to manage: • Monitoring • Signaling • Agency Problems: Goals of the parties are not aligned • Agent someone who is hired to represent the principal’s interest • Equity: Potential conflict between shareholders and managers (principal-agent problem) • Traditional: Outside (non-management) shareholders • Overvalued equity • Debt: Potential conflict between shareholders and debt holders
Agency Problem of Outside Equity • Managers expropriate wealth from shareholders • Moral hazard problems • Effort aversion • Excessive perquisite consumption • Underinvestment due to risk aversion/short horizon • Entrenchment • Accept poor investment projects (NPV<0) • Empire building • Hubris • Free Cash Flow (FCF) Hypothesis (Jensen (1986))
Examples of Agency Problems/Costs • Direct expropriation • Take cash out • Looting assets, low transfer pricing • Wide scale looting during Russian privatization • Indirect expropriation by non-optimal investing • Empire building: excess firm expansion • Hubris: incorrectly assessing an investments worth • Underinvestment/Overinvestment • Not maximizing shareholder wealth • Making poor capital budgeting decisions (incorrect method, execution, etc.) • Decision making based on managers wealth maximization not shareholders • Inefficient actions • Shirking (too little effort) • Excess consumption of perks • Illegal actions • Misleading statements • Insider Trading
Ways to Manage Agency Problems • Board of Directors • Outsiders versus insiders, CEO/Chairman role • Size • Composition of audit, nominating and compensation committees • Firm’s voting structure • Dual class stocks • Concentrated versus Disperse Ownership • Outsiders versus Insiders • Incentives • Options, performance shares • Ownership of executive and directors • Takeover market • Antitakeover provisions, regulations • Ownership structure • Going private? • Managerial labor market • Judicial Review • Government: New role of regulators? • Monitoring function: Debt, Institutional Investors, Blockholders
Agency Problem of Overvalued Equity • “Overvalued”: When management knows they can not sustain value • Managers more likely to behave sub-optimally • Target based corporate budgeting systems • Manipulation of both target and realized result • Skew preference for short term cash flows (earnings) • Excessive risk taking: Place high risk bets • Earnings management: More likely and higher error • Jensen (2005)
Earnings Game • CFO’s were asked if they were not on target for earnings which actions would they consider doing (Graham, Harvey & Rajgopal, 2004). • 80% would delay discretionary spending • 55% would sacrifice small value projects • Why do executive play this game? • Favorable market conditions • Stock based compensation • Hubris/Egos • Overvalued equity lets them buy at a “discount” • Analysts have become more of the process • High profile • High compensation/Hubris/Egos • Jensen and Fuller (2002)
Empirical evidence • Enron, Nortel and other companies • M&A’s: Large loss deals (>$1 billion lost) • For every $1 spent, they lost $2.31 in shareholder wealth at the announcement (Moeller, Schlingemann and Stulz (2005))
Manage Agency Problem of Overvalued Equity • Not an obvious, incentive based answer • Can’t buy an overvalued company, drop the stock price and make money • Possible solutions: • Long-run valuation incentives for management • Easier short selling • Improved governance • ????
Agency Problem of Debt • Equityholders expropriate wealth from debtholders • Moral hazard problems • Overinvestment, risk shifting, asset substitution • Debt overhang, underinvestment • Claim dilution • Take the money and run!
Debt can encourage excess risky investments Expected Profit=$200 with two possible outcomesPossible Outcomes: $100 or $300Possible Outcomes: $0 or $400 • Realized Profit = $100 • Debt: $50 • Management: $30 • Employees: $20 • Shareholders: $0 • 100-50-30-20 =0 • Realized Profit = $0 • Debt: $0 • Management: $0 • Employees: $0 • Shareholders: $0 • 0-50-30-20=-100 • BANKRUPT! • Realized Profit = $300 • Debt: $50 • Management: $30 • Employees: $20 • Shareholders: $200 • 300-50-30-20 = 200 • Realized Profit = $400 • Debt: $50 • Management: $30 • Employees: $20 • Shareholders: $300 • 400-50-30-20 = 300
Manage Agency Problem of Debt • Protective Debt covenants • Restrictions on • Investment and disposition of assets • Shareholder payouts • Issuance of more senior debt • Security design • Convertible debt • Callable debt (reduce probability of underinvestment)
Elements of Effective Governance • Ownership and Control: Incentive versus Entrenchment • Monitoring: What makes an effective monitor? • Signaling: What makes the signal more credible? • Costly • Verifiable
Empirical Evidence: Effective Governance • Board Composition: Should have a majority of outside directors, i.e. independent board • For specific events, the firm performs better • Independent board acquirer outperforms (-0.07% compared to -1.86%, announcement return) • Independent board target outperforms (62.3% compared to 40.9%, inception to completion) • CEO/Chairman should be separate role • Only tested in large companies Number of boards a director sits on • Number of boards a director sits on • Reasonable number of boards are fine for directors with strong reputations/skills
Effective Governance • Board committees: audit, nominating, and compensation • Some evidence that independent audit committees make earnings announcements more reliable • Perceived positively when CEO is not influential in director nominations • Board size • Bigger boards are more dysfunctional (<8 outperformed >14 based on multiples) • Announcement of significant size decrease, stock price increases by 2.9% (conversely, size increase, price decreases by 2.8%)
Effective Governance: Compensation • Compensation Structure • Salary: Too High? Too Low? Perverse Incentives? • Bonuses: Fair? Unfair? • Levels • Timing • Option compensation • In general seems to be a good policy (for managers and directors) • There are instances where large option grants appear to be timed before favorable announcements • Firm’s with high option holdings may increase exposure to total risk
Governance: Concentrated Ownership • Large shareholders provide a monitoring function for smaller, disperse shareholders • Large shareholders may behave sub-optimally • May control too much and discourage management from behaving optimally • May control the firm to their personal wealth management • Timing • Assume less risk because they are not well diversified • Higher likelihood of expropriation, capturing private benefits • What if the large shareholders are also top management (insider ownership)? • Entrenchment Effect: Greater likelihood of behaving sub-optimally • Incentive Effect: Goals are aligned with other shareholders
Is there an optimal level of managerial/concentrated ownership? • Ownership level doesn’t affect value • Level of ownership is a joint optimization of ownership and value • For example, 5% ownership is not always better than 10% • Changes will not increase value (et. al., Demsetz, 1983) • All firms are currently at the optimal level so any change, all else being equal, would decrease value • Ownership level affects value • Level and changes in ownership matters • Ownership<5%: Value increases with increase in ownership • 5%>Ownership<25%: Value decreases with increase in ownership • Ownership>25%: Value increase with increase in ownership • Morck, Schleifer and Vishney (1988) • Curvilinear relationship: Value increases in ownership up to a point after which further increases in ownership reduce value • McConnell, Servaes and Lins (2003) http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=470927#PaperDownload
Governance: Too Little, Too Late? • U.S. Markets • Liquidity (Investor Protection) versus Governance (Bhide (1994)) • Insider ownership, disclosure rules • Blockholder and Institutional regulation and constraints don’t allow for concentrated ownership • Other countries: Japan and Germany • Blockholders account for 20% of market capitalization • Close relationship between large shareholders, debtholders and management • Solutions? • Non-public markets • Change regulations