Blaine Kitchenware

Issuing additional debt to finance the company expansion would worsen the company’s debt ratio as it is already more than average. The company envisions to be profitable by raising capital from existing stockholders by issuing common stock through rights offering.

In the open market share repurchase, the firm may or may not declare the repurchase. Depending on the market condition and the firm’s position in the industry, the firm can decide when and how many

Management considering share repurchase program should weigh its benefit of financial discipline, efficient corporate strategy implementation and utilization of tax shield against the downside of cost of financial distress. It’s not the possibility of bankruptcy that causes concerns among equity holders regarding extent of leverage but the direct costs (legal, liquidation, administrative etc.) and indirect costs (deteriorated corporate image, management time and attention, agency costs of value-destructing investment, distress asset sales etc.). Exhibit 4 lists the key assumption inputs of approximating quantitative firm value/ equity value accretion. Levering UST to a larger extent by adding $1,000m does increase firm value.

Andrea Winfield considered issuing bonds was not a good option for financing the acquisition. She was particularly concerned about the increasing long-term debt and annual cash layout of $ 6.25 million for 15 years. We believe that her concerns are justified, because the Company had already significant amount of debt that could result in higher risks and stock price

The repurchase program increases the shareholder’s value. This is because of a rise in the price of the shares of the original shareholders.

The company position is strong enough so its better that company should use debt financing instead of equity financing.

Next what catch my eye was an increase of amount of money owned by the business to the Creditors so this will be money leaving the business within the near future and if this continues to raise then the business will end up in huge debts. I have find out some improvements as well such as an increase in the amount investments in fixed assets, which could mean the business is investing more or more of the assets were sold from last year which is good news for a business.

Hampton decided to buy back their stock because they were confronting many dissident stockholders at the moment. Besides, the company had always maintained a conservative financial policy. Having to spend 3 million on the repurchase affected their cash balance, as well as their payable accounts, that in turn it increases creditors and suppliers claims against the company.

The idea of repurchasing shares was no stranger to Bill Marriott by January 1980. Almost five million shares of common stock had been repurchased on the open market by Marriott Corporation during 1979 at a total cost of $74 million and an average price of $15.16 in the belief that they were undervalued—a belief that still was not fully reflected in the market price. At $19 5/8, the stock was selling at only six times cash flow per share; and its price/earnings ratio of nine was a far cry from historical multiples as high as fifty times as recently as 1973. Its low price seemed to offer once again an obvious opportunity to benefit shareholders. However,

This represents a 7% increase in stock price. Further, the additional leverage and return of excess cash to shareholders will significantly increase ROE. If the market determines that an 80% debt capital structure is feasible for BBBY, then we will expect further capital gains as investors applaud shareholder friendly policies and re-examine EPS estimates. However, if top line growth and same store sales growth continue to trend downward, investors may become skeptical of BBBY management’s ability to continue generating over 30% EPS growth, and thus question the ability of the company to service its debt in the future.

An analysis of a repurchase of stock for $400 million cash, and recapitalization to 80% debt-to-total capital by borrowing $1.27 million reveals that BBBYs return on equity will be 113%, return on assets 61% and an after tax cost of debt of 28%. ROE is > ROA and ROA > after tax cost of debt. With the 80% debt-to-total capital structure ROE exceeds the other two capital structure scenarios of no debt and 40% debt-to-total capital. While all of this looks great there are other considerations. The household and personal products industries debt to total asset ratio is 34.69% while BBBY debt to total asset ratio is at 44% ($1,270,000/$2,865,023). Increasing to this capital structure would also reduce shareholders earnings per share.

How much value do you expect to be created by operating improvements and capital structure changes envisioned by CD&R?

This question is designed to focus the class on the share repurchase program as a critical use of funds for 2006. The primary advantage of share repurchases using dividends is that management can turn share repurchases off and on as allowed by cash flow. The other projected uses of funds, however, are largely driven by business issues that are not as flexible for management. Students should notice that

With this, we can then find each of the costs for equity by averaging them within each of the bond rating categories. This showed a very flat performance in cost of equity. I we compare that to the market beta, our answer for CAPM would change from the 9.89% to the 11.03%. According to exhibit 8 in the case, a cost of equity of 11.03% is between a BBB and BB bond rating. Therefore, if they were to repurchase stock from investors, there share prices would in theory go up because they are investing more and more money into the company.

Repurchasing shares though is not considered an expense. The debit should not have been to an expense account however there should have been a debit to share capital which is the average price paid per share by investors, and the amount paid over the average price should have been debited to retained earnings, and contributed surplus. Repurchasing shares could be a way to distribute cash to investors without paying dividends, a way to increase EPR, or a way for management to communicate to the market that it feels its understating the value of its shares. All this reasons are not justified being an