Hertz Lbo

Key Issue 2: Is $1b appropriate to enhance UST’s firm value and ultimately shareholder value?

Our estimated cost of capital, 20.81%, is lower than Ricketts’ expected return, 30%-50%, thus the investment is worthy. However, it’s higher than other pessimistic members’ expected return, 10%-15%, making the decision more complex and requiring further valuation。

The cost of equity was found using CAPM, with the given market risk premium of 5%, a beta of .88, and risk-free rate of 4.03%. The beta was found by running a regression of Southwest’s percent change in stock price versus the S&P 500’s percent change in stock price for two years (June 28, 2000 to June 28, 2002). The risk-free rate was the return on a ten-year treasury note issued on June 28, 2002, according to the U.S. Treasury’s website. The tax rate of 39% was used to account for tax savings from leverage. In order to calculate the firm’s leverage, the market value of equity was found from the price per share on July 24, 2002 (Yahoo Finance) and the shares outstanding on the balance sheet of the July 10-Q report, as shown in Exhibit X. The debt value was approximated at the book value since data could not be found regarding its market value. This analysis resulted in a debt weight of 11.74% and equity weight of 88.26%. The final approximation for the weighted average cost of capital was 8.64%.

I used WACC as the discount factor, we expect the rate of return to be higher than it, the same at least. The WACC reflects the average risk and overall capital structure of the entire firm [2]. It’s the required return and it presents how much the company pays for the capital it finances. In this case, the cost of equity is 10.33%, the cost of debt is 6.50%. I calculated WACC using those numbers and got a result of 8.49%.

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.

in our calculations, as this company exhibited dramatic value differences to others in the sample, (likely to skew our results and prove misleading). Using the average of the revised sample field for each ratio, we inserted Torrington’s values where appropriate to generate an entity value. The findings generated two values for Torrington, 606 million and 398 million. Taking the average of these two numbers, Torrington exhibited a relative value of 502.41 million. Because of the lack of related information given in the case, and the often large differences in measures amongst competitors, different capital structures, internal management strategies, there remained many unknowns in our model. We decided it would be best to use this valuation to reaffirm our assumptions in our DCF valuation. (Please see exhibits)

IRR is the rate at which the net present value becomes zero (Ross, Westerfield & Jordan, 2013). Additionally, IRR is calculated first by determining the Net Present Value. The Net Present Value is the variance concerning the market value and its cost (Ross, Westerfield & Jordan, 2013). Net present value is calculated by first finding the present value. For instance, 21.83 million (year 1 revenue from above) divided by 1 plus the companies rate of return of 12%. Thus, 21.83/(1+.12)= 19.49 is the present value for year 1. Furthermore, by adding the total revenue over the next 5 years we get 21.85+ 28.025+36.875+30.975+23.6=132.325 million is the expected value of revenue. That amount now needs to be placed into the present value equation previously discussed only this time with the exponent of 5 to cover the next 5 years. 132.325/(1+.12)^5=75.08 (rounded). Moreover, if

Overview: The Hertz buyout is one of the largest private equity deals. It drew criticism in the media and from union members, after the company’s new owners paid themselves $1.3 billion in dividends not long after the transaction closed and ultimately financed the payments by selling stock to the public. The company has realized hundreds of millions of dollars in improved financial results annually, but also has cut thousands of jobs as it has sought to make operations more efficient. Figure 7 provides an overview of the LBO transaction, including a time line of key events. Background: Hertz says it is the world’s largest general use car rental company, with approximately 8,100 locations in about 145

Return on Total Assets was 4.43% which is below five percent. That indicates that the company is not accurately converting its assets into profit. The total for Return on Stockholders’ Equity was 8.89%, however financial analysts prefer ROE to range between 15-20 %. The company’s low ROE indicates that the company is not generating profit with new investments. Lastly, Debt-to-Equity ratio for the company was 1.01 which indicates that investors and creditors are equally sharing assets. In the view of creditors, they see a high ratio as a risk factor because it can indicate that investors are not investing due to the company’s overall performance. The totals of these three ratios demonstrate that the company’s financial state is not as healthy as it should be.

Next, the terminal value at year ten was calculated. The following formula was used to do so: terminal value at year 10 = (FCF at year 11)/(WACC - g). This time we used the long-term growth rate of 7up, which was given by the case as 1% less than the industry rate. This resulted in a terminal value of $848M with its present value calculation being $231M.

Most of the corporations calculate WACC for giving investors an estimate on profitability and for being able to weight future projects. We are presented with Boeing current bonds, which constitute the long term debt portion of capital, and with Boeing’s assets which constitute the equity portion of capital. No other weighted entities (such as preferred shares) are considered. The debt/equity ratio would help with the calculation of weights. Boeing would need to earn at least 15.443% return on its investments (including the 7E7 project) in order to maintain the actual share price.

Based upon the firm’s low target leverage of 5%, low degree of operating leverage, and favorable credit history and financial outlook, the model assumes a cost of debt in line with AAA corporate debt at 7.02%. This estimate seems reasonable and sensitivity analysis shows a 1% decrease in the forecasted share price requires at least a 2.4% increase in the cost of debt.

Once the prevailing WACC rate was found, the target WACC was calculated to be 9.00%. Again the CAPM model was used but a new the required rate of return on equity needed to be calculated. Since there is a change in the capital structure an unlevered beta needed to be determined. The Hamada equation was used to unlever the beta, which had a debt to equity ratio of .70, then to re-lever it again with a debt to equity ratio of 1.5; this changed the beta from

The bidding process for Hertz began when William Ford Jr. announced plans to explore “strategic alternatives” for Hertz in April 2005. Two months later in June, an S-1 registration statement was filed setting up a “dual track process” that would result in a Hertz IPO should other sale prospects fail. This decision affects the bidding process in multiple ways. For one there is less time for the two bidding groups to come up with a price and resulting agreement. They are forced to act quickly and find a price that the Hertz management will agree upon. If they don’t do this, then Hertz will just go through with the IPO. This could lead to a driven up price, since the bidding groups will do whatever it takes to win the bid.

1.a) To value Spyder Active Sports Inc., we decided to use the WACC method since we can easily value its cost of assets with the data immediately available to us in the case. We first unlevered the beta’s of 7 comparable companies and took the average to get a comparable unlevered beta for Spyder (Exhibit 1). Since we are assuming Spyder is entirely equity financed, its unlevered asset beta is equal to the beta of its assets. We now have a rough estimate of Spyder’s asset beta, we can