Vail Resort : Company Debt

3) The interest resulting from the debt also will cost to the company even it is taxable. The interest is fixed base on the level of the debt even the company does not generate profit. This would need to be careful when take on the debt comparing to use its own capital. And the creditor may come to intervene on the business when the company has difficulty to service its debt.

LDDS started with about $650,000 in capital but soon accumulated $1.5 million in debt since it

managers must be careful how they use the money of the firm. Debt creates a

The issuance of convertible debt will result in even more cash holdings for Intel, an additional $1 billion. This, at face value, does not solve Intel’s capital structure dilemma of having too much cash. However, Intel can afford to incur more debt financing, since it has relatively low long-term debt. By doing so, its long term debt ratio (using 1991 figure) would change to:

James Gitanga was not sure about the unusual capital structure of the Company, avoiding the long-term debt. We believe that the long-term capital structure across the industry was pre-determined by the high capital expenditures and steady cash inflows. Thus, issuing long-term debt was more preferable. Besides, by issuing debt they would enjoy the tax shield since interest on long-term debt is tax-deductible.

Going in the opposite direction were two liabilities. Long term debt went down from $1.91 billion during 2004FY to $1.57 billion in 2005FY while accrued expenses dropped from $1.67 billion to $1.52 billion over the same period.

Yes, I think that this company should build a new plant that allows them to grow in the industry, even if they are unable to use the Industrial Revenue Bond, they will have other financing alternatives.

In January 1980, the management of the Marriott Corporation found itself in an interesting dilemma: not only did the corporation have considerable excess debt capacity, but projections of future operations and cash flows indicated that this capacity was on the rise. For Marriott, excess debt capacity was viewed as comparable to unused plant capacity because the existing equity base could support additional productive assets. Management was therefore faced with two problems. First, it needed to determine the amount of funds that would be available if Marriott's full debt capacity were utilized. Second, management needed to decide whether to invest excess funds in new or existing businesses, or to return them to the companies shareholders

With the three debt instruments in the case, hundreds of millions of dollars would become readily available to the company and be at their disposal. Each of the financing opportunities provides their own money in different forms. Great companies need these different financing ideas to

Balance sheet show that Comerica’s total deposits are maintaining a level since 2005, however company’s net loans have increased by almost $10 Billion. Balance sheet clearly shows that these loans are finance from the increase in short-term and long term debt, which cast doubts on the profitability of company going forward.

This case raises many interesting questions concerning the record setting issuance of corporate debt by WorldCom, Inc. (“WorldCom”). Both the surprisingly voluminous structure of the proposed issuance and the foreboding macro-economic climate in which it was slated spark concerns over the risk and cost of the move. One of the first questions that must be addressed is whether WorldCom’s timing was appropriate. Next, the company’s choice of structure for the bond issuance must be analyzed. Finally, the cost of issuing each tranche of debt must be estimated in order to determine how much WorldCom is actually giving up to achieve the $6 billion in funds.

The decrease shows a prudent position particularly in when the world is undergoing economic recession; Rio Tinto Ltd reduced its reliance on debt to finance its assets. This also explained the 22% increase in current portion of long term debt, i.e. the company retired major portion of its debt holdings in the last year.

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

The advantage of debt financing is that interests paid on such debt are tax deductible. If a company has the intention of maintaining a permanent debt, the present value of the tax shield can be obtained by discounting them by the expected rate of return demanded by the investors who hold the debt (this is a perpetuity, where in reality would be the maximum possible present value for the tax shield). This tax shield value reduces the tax bill and increases the cash payment to investors, increasing the value of their investments.

Debt financing is considered the fastest and cheapest method of financing growth of a company, however using debt to finance accelerated and explosive growth can have his drawbacks. The debt financing option enjoyed by Loewen kept shareholders stake in the business constant, and reduced the company’s tax liability. As shown in exhibit 4, from year 1989 to 1996 (excluding the special items regarding the law suits in 1995), the increase in debt (from 79.7 to 1428.6) led to an increase in EBITDA (from 21.4 to 251.9), operating profit(from 17.7 to 195.1) and net income (from 6.2 to 63.9), and led to an increase in the dividends paid throughout these years (from 0 to 11.4), and thus kept the shareholders happy. These results have encouraged investors to invest more in Loewen, and have encouraged Loewen to issue more debt to finance its acquisitions, until they arrived to a point where the debt to equity ratio became too high due to lots of reasons.