Answer:
66.67%
Explanation:
A firm has an EPS of $12
The dividend paid is $4
The first step is to calculate the payout
= 4/12
= 0.3333×100
= 33.33
Therefore the Plowback ratio can be calculated as follows
= 1-33.33%
= 0.667×100
= 66.67%
Hence the Plowback ratio is 66.67%
Answer:
We have the comparison below
Explanation:
1 2 3
Expenses for the year 20000 27000 34000
PVIF at 12% 0.89286 0.79719 0.71178
PV of expenses 17857 21524 24201
Cumulative PV of expenses 17857 39381 63582
EOY MV -1000 -1750 -2500
PV of MV -893 -1395 -1779
Total PW (4000+ PV of expenses - PV of MV) 22750 44776 69361
P/A 0.89286 1.69005 2.40183
EUAC 25480 26494 28879
Answer:
more intense the competitive pressures posed by substitute products.
Explanation:
The lower the user's switching costs: the more intense the competitive pressures posed by substitute products.
Switching costs can be defined as the cost of a consumer switching from a product to a substitute good.
Therefore when such switching costs are low, it will be easier to switch from one product to another, implying that the competitive pressure from substitute goods are higher.
Answer: D
Explanation:
Not necessarily. As long as the company follows GAAP (IFRS or ASPE), the format and information should be the same. This is because the accounting standards requires firm to report financial information in a specific way.
Answer:
Explanation:
Assume the initial invest at the beginning is $100.
The investment at end of year 4 is:
100 x 1.16 x 1.11 x 1.1 x 1.1 = 155.80
a) CAGR over the 4 years = (155.8 / 100 ) ^ (1/4) = 11.72%
b) Average annual return over 4 years = (16% +11% + 10% +10%) /4 = 11.75%
c) Since the returns over the 4 year period are not much volatile, average annual return is a better measure.
If the investment's returns are independent and identically distributed, Average annual return will be the better measure because there is no correlation between returns over the years and thus there is no point to take into consideration the compounding effect by using CAGR.
