Essay on First Investments Inc

First of which, is the current ratio. It has been rapidly declining since 2000. To me this indicates that there is a liquidity issue. Each year their trade debt increase exceeds the increase of net income for the company. As a result, the working capital has taken a nosedive from $58,650 in 2002 to only $5,466 in 2003.

- The financial statements for the past three years show a decline trend in both the operation and return on shareholder of the company, so a closer look at the factors contributing to this decline is needed.

Increase in current liabilities Substantial increase in current liabilities weakened the company’s liquidity position. Its current liabilities were US$2,063.94 million at the end of FY2010, a 48.09% increase compared to the previous year. However, its current assets recorded a marginal increase of 25.07% - from US$1,770.02 million at the end of FY2009 to US$2,213.72 million at the end of FY2010. Following this, the company’s current ratio declined from 1.27 at the end of the FY2009 to 1.07 at the end of FY2010. A lower current ratio indicates that the company is in a weak financial position, and it may find it difficult to meet its day-to-day obligations.

Overall regards to liquidity ratios, the higher the number the better; however, a too high also indicates that the firms were not using their resources to their full potential. Current ratio of 1.0 or greater shows that a company can pay its current liabilities with its current assets. JWN’s ratio increased from 2.06 in 2007 to 2.57 in 2010, and slightly decreased to 2.16 in 2011. JWN’s cash ratio increased significantly from 22% in 2007 to 80% in 2010. JWN has a cash ratio of 73% in 2011, which is useful to creditors when deciding how much debt they would be willing to extend to JWN. In addition, JWN also has moderate CFO ratio of 46%, indicating the companies’ ability to pay off their short term liabilities with their operating cash

Rate of Return on equity measures a corporation 's profitability by revealing how much profit a company generates with the money shareholders have invested. It indicates how efficiently the business uses its investment funds. For Tesco, Rate of Return on Shareholders’ Fund has increased from 13.85% in 2004 to 14.91% in 2009. This shows an improvement of 1.06% in five years period. When one examines the Sainsbury’s Rate of Return on Shareholders’ Fund, there is an increase from 7.76% to 8.36%. There is a 0.6% growth in the Rate of Return on Shareholders’ Fund. In comparison with Tesco, Sainsbury’s Rate of Return on Shareholders’ Fund is lower. Shareholders earned 13.85% from their investment (measured in book value

Return on assets ratio declined in 2010. This is due to increased total assets in 2010 due to company's acquisition of assets. In 2011, the company had a higher return on equity, which indicates that Lowe’s was able to generate more profit from the money that shareholder invested. The sales generated relative to total assets decreased in 2010, mainly due to reduced sales in 2009 coupled with increased total assets. Fixed asset turnover has been relatively good for Lowes. The ratio indicates how well the company is able to put fixed assets to use in generating sales. Current ratio has improved over past three years indicating a strong trend for the company in its ability to pay its current liabilities with current assets. The long-term debt forms a major part of company's financing. The company reviews its

Debt Ratios. Mark X’s debt management is also getting worse, increasing from 40% in 1990 to 59% in 1992. The growth of debt outpaces the growth of assets as seen in the debt ratio. The TIE is

The Net profit margin increased in 2001 and 2002 but declined sharply in 2003 and even further in 2004.

Profitability ratios decreasing from 2005 to 2006 although the sales has increased substantially and the net income as well but not in the same percentage of increase due to the high reliance on debt as the interest expense increased as mentioned before.

Change in revenue criteria increased both sales and cost of sales by $ 28 Million. The profit margin was decreased from 1.55% to

Be Our Guest’s balance sheet shows good signs of liquidity. Current Ratios for the past four years have remained above 1 proving that the company can handle its current liabilities. The current ratios are not extremely high (19941.27, 1995- 2.17, 1996- 1.15 and 1997- 1.16), but they can cover the current liabilities. It is important to note that the company is operating on a thin line because the current assets are barely covering the current liabilities. This is particularly unpleasant because we are dealing with a company operating in a seasonal business. It is a concern that the current ratio slightly eroded after 1995, and this is primarily due to Be Our Guest converting the bank line into long term debt in

Clearly, Net profit margin is decreased in 1994. In 1992 it was the highest then it is showing downward trend. It is the only cause which is lowering Return over Equity (ROE).

Landry’s Debt to Asset ratio also increased from year 2002 to 2003. In 2002 Landry had a debt to asset ratio of 0.39. In 2003 Landry’s debt to asset ratio increased to 0.45. While both numbers are acceptable and considerably low, the increase from 2002 to 2003 could influence potential investors to not invest in Landry’s stock. This increase also suggests that Landry’s debt also increased from 2002 to 2003. Overall, while there was a slight increase from 2002 to 2003 Landry’s still had a good debt to asset ratio. We think that a contributing factor to the debt

Abstract : Analysis of financial statement of a company is an important because it is useful to obtain Information

The financial performance of the company over the years six t thirteen is shown in table no 7. The data includes Revenue generated over the years, Earning per share, Return on Investment and Stock Prices. Chart 5 shows that there has been a decline in the revenues generated. Charts 6 to 8 all show a decline in Earnings per Share, Return on Equity and Stock Prices suggesting a poor financial performance by the company.