Inflation and the Constant Growth Model: Reconciling the Literature

We formulate a generalized constant growth valuation model incorporating inflation and capital maintenance. We find that in general there are two sources of growth: growth due to capital maintenance and growth due to net new investments. The generalized version of the constant growth model allows the reconciliation of the existing literature, particularly the works of Gordon and Shapiro (1956), Lally (1988), and Bradley and Jarrell (2008), which all employ particular definitions of capital maintenance. Evaluating the practical relevance of either model we find that each model is best suited for a very particular company set‐up, which does not necessarily correspond to the commonly observed business models. The generalized version of the constant growth valuation model, however, presents a flexible approach that is capable of capturing various conceptions of capital maintenance.     

An option pricing approach to corporate dividends and the capital investment financing decision

In light of a growing trend toward viewing dividends as an investable asset class, this article opens up a new perspective on their valuation. We show that dividends can be viewed as options on the cash flow of the firm. That is, a firm either pays zero dividends, in which case the option expires out‐of‐the‐money, or it pays a positive dividend, the value of which corresponds to the option's moneyness. The exercise price is determined by the capital budget, the flexibility of the company to use external financing, and whether it has minimum and maximum dividends. The model is also capable of accommodating a stochastic capital budget, which allows for uncertain growth opportunities and their correlation with the firm's cash flows. We also present an application of the model using actual data for a large multinational company.     

Liquidity risk in derivatives valuation: an improved credit proxy method

The models used to calculate post-crisis valuation adjustments, market risk and capital measures for derivatives are subject to liquidity risk due to severe lack of available information to obtain market implied model parameters. The European Banking Authority has proposed an intersection methodology to calculate a proxy CDS or Bond spread. Due to practical issues of this method, Chourdakis et al. introduce a cross-section approach. In this paper, we extend the cross-section methodology using equity returns, and show that our methodology is significantly more accurate compared to both existing methodologies, and produces more reliable, stable and robust market risk and capital measures, and credit valuation adjustment.     

Venture Capital Valuation,Partial Adjustment,and Underpricing: Behavioral Bias or Information Production?

Using a sample of venture capital (VC)‐backed initial public offerings (IPOs), we analyze the role played by perceived valuation changes on IPO underpricing. We find that perceived valuation change from the last pre‐IPO VC round to the IPO affects IPO underpricing in a nonlinear way. Further analysis indicates that information‐based theories, not behavioral biases, explain this nonlinearity. We also find that the previously documented partial adjustment effect and its nonlinear impact on IPO underpricing are related to the trajectory of the perceived valuation changes, which stands in stark contrast to prior evidence of the importance of behavioral biases.     

论国有企业公司改制的若干观念的转变

目前我国在公司制度规定中，公司资本的外延还没有扩展到可变资本；不变资本与可变资本虽然聚合，但始终未能融合。中国国有企业公司改制，必须充分重视人力资本在公司中的价值。公司应逐步从单边治理结构向多边治理结构转变，公司治理结构的创制要体现出公权意志与私权意志的有机结合。     

Private Equity,the Rise of Unicorns,and the Reincarnation of Control‐based Accounting

This article discusses the rise of intangibles‐intensive companies and private equity (PE) since the late 1970s, and the role of both in bringing about the creation of a streamlined, more flexible set of accounting rules that, since their approval by the IASB and FASB in 2009, have been used by private companies and their investors. The PE industry comprises both venture capital (VC) firms that fund high‐growth enterprises and leveraged buyout (LBO) firms that fund more traditional, cash‐generating operations. Mainly because of the greater risks associated with both VC‐backed firms and LBOs—risks that make them ill‐suited for most public investors—such companies tend to require the more direct and active oversight provided by PE investors. And as the author goes on to argue, the more direct and active ownership of PE investors, as compared to the governance provided by most public‐company boards, suggests that financial accounting and reporting play a fundamentally different role in private than in public companies. Whereas the primary role of public‐company GAAP has increasingly (since the creation of the SEC in 1933) been to provide information for outside investors when valuing companies, the most important function of accounting reports in private companies is internal control—more specifically, ensuring that the interests of the managers of their portfolio companies are aligned with those of all the providers of capital. And recognizing this difference in the role of accounting, both the IASB and FASB responded to the requests of various parties (including private companies) by approving in 2009 the use by private companies of a streamlined and more flexible set of accounting standards. To the extent that the workings of PE markets continue to reduce the numbers of U.S. public companies, the author predicts that the resulting increase in the use of private‐company GAAP will continue to shift the primary role of accounting away from valuation and back toward its traditional roots in internal control and corporate governance.     

创业板公司并购价值评估问题研究——基于我国2010、2011年创业板公司并购数据分析

本文以我国2010年和2011年创业板公司并购价值评估案例为研究对象,对其整体评估和交易定价情况进行描述性统计,并从评估技术方面对创业板并购中的资产评估增值度、资产评估方法选择差异、收益法参数确定、关联和非关联交易、重大和非重大并购重组进行分析,提出应综合运用各种评估方法,规范收益法评估参数确定。还从监管方面提出应加大监管力度,进一步运用市场机制,减少置入与置出资产、关联和非关联交易、重大和非重大并购重组之间的评估差异等建议。     

Expected Inflation and the Constant‐Growth Valuation Model*

In the presence of inflation, the standard Constant‐Growth valuation model found throughout the finance literature is not valid in cases where a company either (1) makes no net new investments or (2) invests only in zero Net Present Value projects. If expected inflation is positive, the generally accepted and widely used expression for the value of the firm under either of these two conditions seriously understates the true value of the firm, even with modest levels of inflation. The authors also show that the Weighted Average Cost of Capital (WACC), as developed by Modigliani and Miller (M&M), will be misleading if inflation is positive. They provide an adjustment factor that corrects this deficiency of the M&M model. Finally, the authors show that the WACC formula developed by Miles and Ezzell is correct when the parameters are stated in nominal terms, and therefore no adjustment is necessary.     

我国外部均衡调节中的估值效应分析

世界金融一体化促进各国对外资产与负债迅速增长。资产价格的非预期变化使一国对外净资产更多地暴露于资本收益和损失风险中,因此,如何实现有利于一国外部均衡的估值效应就显得日益重要。本文对估值效应的理论模型和计量方法进行梳理,并对我国对外净资产变化中的估值效应进行实证分析,结果发现存在负的估值效应,表明我国通过经常项目盈余所聚积的大量资源正在不断地向国外无偿转移,这就要求对外资产管理水平稳步提高。     

The Purpose of the Firm,Valuation, and the Management of Intangibles

This article provides a different way of thinking about, and responding to, four important issues that confront most public companies. First, in articulating the overarching corporate purpose, the author suggests a middle ground between shareholder value maximization and stakeholder theory that aims to achieve the end result of value maximization while taking a “holistic” view that meets most of the demands of stakeholder advocates. As described by the author, there are four critical steps for management and boards in creating such companies: (1) communicating a vision of the company and its purpose to employees as well as investors (and other key outsiders); (2) organizing to survive and prosper through efficiency and innovation; (3) working continuously to develop win‐win relationships with stakeholders and other companies; and (4) taking care of the environment and future generations. Second, in thinking about the corporate purpose and how to evaluate success in achieving it, managements and boards need a valuation model that provides a clear and insightful connection between long‐term corporate performance and market valuation, and how both might be expected to change as the firm matures. A strong case is presented for the life‐cycle valuation model, widely used by money management organizations, in which a company's projected cash flows reflect an expected “fade” in both economic returns on capital and reinvestment rates. The potential uses of this model are illustrated using lifecycle corporate performance data for 3M during the past 50 years. Third, in an effort to capture the value of innovation and investment in intangible assets, the author presents an alternative to the accounting approach of capitalizing and amortizing such assets that attempts to capture their expected future benefits by using more favorable forecasts of long‐term fade rates. Fourth, the author shows how incorporating Life‐cycle Reviews for each of a company's business units as part of its Integrated Reporting could improve management's resource allocation decisions, help build a shareholder base of long‐term investors, and provide management with the support and confidence to resist Wall Street's excessive emphasis on quarterly earnings.     

Valuation with Market Multiples: How to Avoid Pitfalls When Identifying and Using Comparable Companies1

An important part of the market multiple valuation process is selecting companies for comparison that are really comparable to the company being valued. The goal of assessing comparability is to align the relevant value drivers—especially risk and growth—of the comparable companies with those of the company being valued. In this paper, the authors examine the relevant value drivers for commonly used market multiples such as EBIT and EBITDA. They show that, in addition to risk and growth, analysts doing market multiple valuations need to take account of differences in variables such as cost structure, working capital, and capital expenditure requirements when assessing comparability. The authors also show that the degree to which different value drivers are important for assessing the comparability of companies differs across commonly used market multiples. In other words, some multiples are more sensitive than others to changes in certain value drivers. For example, when using a multiple like EBITDA in which certain expenditures (such as capital investments, working capital investments, and some expenses) are not deducted in the calculation of the denominator, assessing comparability based on such expenditures is more important than when using a multiple like free cash flow that deducts that expenditure in calculating the denominator. Or to cite another example, since EBIT and EBITDA make no attempt to reflect income taxes, using income tax cost structures to assess comparability is more important for enterprise value multiples based on these measures than for enterprise value multiples based on “after‐tax” measures of income such as unlevered earnings or free cash flow. In addition, not all multiples control for differences in cost structure, such as cost of goods sold or SG&A. If a multiple is affected by differences in those value drivers, the comparable companies must be similar to the company being valued on that dimension. Finally, the authors show that differences in capital expenditure and working capital requirements can also have large effects on certain multiples; and as a result, such value drivers also must be considered when assessing comparability.     

The Contributions of Stewart Myers to the Theory and Practice of Corporate Finance*

In a 40‐plus year career notable for path‐breaking work on capital structure and innovations in capital budgeting and valuation, MIT finance professor Stewart Myers has had a remarkable influence on both the theory and practice of corporate finance. In this article, two of his former students, a colleague, and a co‐author offer a brief survey of Professor Myers's accomplishments, along with an assessment of their relevance for the current financial environment. These contributions are seen as falling into three main categories:

• ? Work on “debt overhang” and the financial “pecking order” that not only provided plausible explanations for much corporate financing behavior, but can also be used to shed light on recent developments, including the reluctance of highly leveraged U.S. financial institutions to raise equity and the recent “mandatory” infusions of capital by the U.S. Treasury.
• ? Contributions to capital budgeting that complement and reinforce his research on capital structure. By providing a simple and intuitive way to capture the tax benefits of debt when capital structure changes over time, his adjusted present value (or APV) approach has not only become the standard in LBO and venture capital firms, but accomplishes in practice what theorists like M&M had urged finance practitioners to do some 30 years earlier: separate the real operating profitability of a company or project from the “second‐order” effects of financing. And his real options valuation method, by recognizing the “option‐like” character of many corporate assets, has provided not only a new way of valuing “growth” assets, but a method and, indeed, a language for bringing together the disciplines of corporate strategy and finance.
• ? Starting with work on estimating fair rates of return for public utilities, he has gone on to develop a cost‐of‐capital and capital allocation framework for insurance companies, as well as a persuasive explanation for why the rate‐setting process for railroads in the U.S. and U.K. has created problems for those industries.

     

Multi‐period Asset Lifetimes and Accounting‐based Equity Valuation: Take Care with Constant‐growth Terminal Value Models!

The merits of accruals in forecasting cash flows or mitigating the volatility of financials shortly after the valuation date are indisputable. However, the usefulness of accounting in equity valuation is very limited if we step beyond a certain forecasting horizon. In this paper, this limitation is emphasized by shedding new light on the accounting‐based value driver model (VDM), a widely used constant‐growth terminal value tool that uses accounting variables as input. The paper shows that, if the lifetime of a firm's assets is, on average, longer than one period, the VDM works accurately only in an idealized academic environment with an even historical corporate investment activity, a single depreciation method for all assets, and no historical inflation volatility. Artificially adjusting real‐world figures to this steady state is possible in principle, but bloats the valuation model and requires exactly the same information that is used in our cash flow‐driven benchmark model (where no adjustment phase is necessary). Beyond these theoretical shortcomings, the VDM is also prone to being misused in valuation practice due to its reliance on book (rather than economic) rates of return, and to its shortcomings in dealing adequately with the assets with an ex ante indefinite lifetime.     

Technological Growth and Asset Pricing

We study the asset‐pricing implications of technological growth in a model with “small,” disembodied productivity shocks and “large,” infrequent technological innovations, which are embodied into new capital vintages. The technological‐adoption process leads to endogenous cycles in output and asset valuations. This process can help explain stylized asset‐valuation patterns around major technological innovations. More importantly, it can help provide a unified, investment‐based theory for numerous well‐documented facts related to excess‐return predictability. To illustrate the distinguishing features of our theory, we highlight novel implications pertaining to the joint time‐series properties of consumption and excess returns.     

Does Family Control Shape Corporate Capital Structure? An Empirical Analysis of Eurozone Firms

This study investigates the relationship between family control and corporate capital structure considering the dynamic nature of the debt policy and the ownership structure of family firms. Our results show that the sensitivity of debt to fluctuations in cash flow is less pronounced in family firms and highlight that family control increases the speed of adjustment toward target debt. Four dimensions of the family business model explain these results: deviations of voting from cash flow rights, the presence of a second blockholder in the company, involvement of family members in management, and the generation in charge of the business. The weaker negative impact of cash flow on debt is driven by family firms with no control‐enhancing mechanisms, companies with active family participation in management and family businesses that are still controlled by the first generation. By contrast, the more severe agency conflicts between owners and creditors in family firms with a second blockholder lead to more pronounced pecking order behaviour. Furthermore, the higher flexibility in corporate decision‐making of family firms managed by the family and under the influence of the first generation explains why family companies are able to rebalance their capital structure faster.     

Real Options Valuation: A Case Study of an E‐commerce Company

This paper presents a real options valuation model with original solutions to some issues that arise frequently when trying to apply these models to real‐life situations. The authors build on existing models by introducing an innovative and intuitive risk neutral adjustment that allows us to work with all the simulated paths. The problem of incorporating real options into each path is solved with a “nearest neighbors” technique, and uncertainty is simulated using a beta distribution that adapts better to company‐specific information. The model is then applied to a real life e‐commerce company to produce the following insights: the expanded present value is higher than the traditional present value; the presence of several real options make them interact so that their values are nonadditive; and part of the expanded present value is explained by the presence of “Jensen's inequality” that stems from the “convexity” between the value of each year's cash flow and the uncertain variables.     

An Honorable Harvest: Universal Owners Must Take Responsibility for Their Portfolios

Despite a maturing industry of ESG professionals and coordinated efforts by shareholders calling for more responsible corporate behavior, we continue to see unabated climate and water crises, growing political instability, and continuing abuses of human rights in supply chains. The founder of a movement called The Shareholder Commons argues that to help business to address these systemic challenges, corporate responsibility must move beyond the company‐by‐company decision‐making model. An economy based on market competition cannot rely on individual businesses to adopt basic sustainability rules that take priority over profit. Critical sustainability boundaries must be implemented collectively to be effective. The crux of the problem is that although shareholder returns derive mainly from efficiency and productivity gains, they can also result from careless exploitation of common resources or powerless workers. And the competition for margin and capital makes it difficult for companies to recognize, let alone forgo, profitable exploitation. A sustainable economy demands that we help companies to distinguish between honorable and dishonorable profits, and to find ways to eliminate or offset the latter. The author holds out a model of capitalism that limits the availability of choices that exploit negative externalities and inequality while preserving the principles and practices that create value and a reasonable sharing of gains among all stakeholders. Universal owners—long‐term diversified investors—appear to be in the best position to formulate and enforce such a model, given the current design and practices of our capital markets. Such global investors have the incentive and power to engage in the collective decision‐making necessary for a sustainable economy. The power exerted by institutional investors through their allocation and stewardship of equity capital can be used to insist on more sustainable business practices. Because they are diversified across thousands of companies, universal owners can bypass the competitive bottleneck for margin and capital that holds sustainability back at the company level. These large investors can work together to establish authentic sustainability boundaries for the companies they invest in; and by so doing, they can allow us to leverage all the good work done to date on disclosure and ESG integration, and so realize a world in which companies continue to compete for profits, but also for a truly honorable harvest.     

How do financial analysts implement the Sum-of-the-Parts (SOTP) valuation framework?

In this study, we investigate how financial analysts implement the Sum-of-the-Parts (SOTP) valuation framework. Although SOTP constitutes a popular valuation approach among sophisticated practitioners and investors, it is mostly ignored by researchers and academics. We adopt a structured content analysis of 265 equity research reports written by 33 investment brokerage houses for 140 UK-based firms. We find that analysts typically use EBITDA multiples to implement SOTP. Furthermore, financial analysts are more likely to consider SOTP the dominant or preferred valuation model in their report. We show that managers disclose a greater quantity of segmental information if their firms are considered difficult to analyze and value by investors and creditors, thereby decreasing the information asymmetry with their capital providers. In specific circumstances, we document that financial analysts identify more segments in their SOTP analysis compared to the reportable segments in the firms' annual reports based on IFRS 8. We argue that the financial analysts' choice to employ a greater number of segments in their SOTP models might be primarily driven by their effort to support their reports' optimistic target prices. Finally, although SOTP seems theoretically ideal to estimate the value of a multi-segment firm, we do not find empirical evidence to support the hypothesis that SOTP significantly outperforms a full-blown Discounted Cash Flow (DCF) model, when the latter is used separately to value the company as a whole.     

参股保险业与企业流动性风险管理:基于货币政策变更背景

现阶段宏观经济政策不断变更给企业经营带来诸多不确定性,从而增加了流动性风险,而通过参股保险公司所建立的产融结合平台能使企业降低制度调整的风险成本。我们对此进行了实证分析,以2006年～2010年上市公司季度数据为样本,利用倾向概率配对模型控制样本内生性问题后实证检验发现:参股保险公司的上市公司日常现金持有水平和调整水平较未参股公司低,且在面对从紧货币政策时,这种流动性风险管理的提升效果更加突出。结论显示,上市公司与保险公司建立产融结合平台具有财务协同效应,部分抵消了货币政策变更不确定性的冲击。这一研究对于企业产融结合实践策略部署有着重要的现实意义,对保险行业引导产融结合趋势也有较强的实践参考价值。     

Personal Taxation in Firm Market Valuation: Theory and Test*

In this paper, I extend Ohlson's 1995 firm market valuation model to incorporate personal taxes: the taxes on dividends and the taxes on capital gains. Without personal taxes, firm market value can be expressed as the present value of future benefits received by the shareholders (dividends, in this case). With personal taxes, the benefits received by the shareholders should be classified into three categories (due to their different tax treatments): dividends, share repurchases, and new share issues (i.e., contributed capital). The extended model shows the effects of personal taxation on firm market valuation: retained earnings are valued less than contributed stocks, both dividends taxes and capital gains taxes affect retained earnings valuation and firm market value, and firms choose cash distribution methods (paying dividends and repurchasing shares) to increase their retained earnings valuation, therefore increasing their market value. An empirical test using a sample from the Disclosure Select Canada and Financial Post Card data bases for the years 1995‐98 supports these personal tax effects.