For a price of $13, Carla will sell you a share paying a dividend of $1 in one year and every year after that forever. The required return of the stock is 10% pa.
For a price of $100, Rad will sell you a 5 year bond paying semi-annual coupons of 16% pa. The face value of the bond is $100. Other bonds with the same risk, maturity and coupon characteristics trade at a yield of 6% pa.
You just bought a nice dress which you plan to wear once per month on nights out. You bought it a moment ago for $600 (at t=0). In your experience, dresses used once per month last for 6 years.
Your younger sister is a student with no money and wants to borrow your dress once a month when she hits the town. With the increased use, your dress will only last for another 3 years rather than 6.
What is the present value of the cost of letting your sister use your current dress for the next 3 years?
Assume: that bank interest rates are 10% pa, given as an effective annual rate; you will buy a new dress when your current one wears out; your sister will only use the current dress, not the next one that you will buy; and the price of a new dress never changes.
Question 337 capital structure, interest tax shield, leverage, real and nominal returns and cash flows, multi stage growth model
A fast-growing firm is suitable for valuation using a multi-stage growth model.
It's nominal unlevered cash flow from assets (##CFFA_U##) at the end of this year (t=1) is expected to be $1 million. After that it is expected to grow at a rate of:
- 12% pa for the next two years (from t=1 to 3),
- 5% over the fourth year (from t=3 to 4), and
- -1% forever after that (from t=4 onwards). Note that this is a negative one percent growth rate.
Assume that:
- The nominal WACC after tax is 9.5% pa and is not expected to change.
- The nominal WACC before tax is 10% pa and is not expected to change.
- The firm has a target debt-to-equity ratio that it plans to maintain.
- The inflation rate is 3% pa.
- All rates are given as nominal effective annual rates.
What is the levered value of this fast growing firm's assets?
Question 381 Merton model of corporate debt, option, real option
In the Merton model of corporate debt, buying a levered company's debt is equivalent to buying risk free government bonds and:
In Australia in the 1980's, inflation was around 8% pa, and residential mortgage loan interest rates were around 14%.
In 2013, inflation was around 2.5% pa, and residential mortgage loan interest rates were around 4.5%.
If a person can afford constant mortgage loan payments of $2,000 per month, how much more can they borrow when interest rates are 4.5% pa compared with 14.0% pa?
Give your answer as a proportional increase over the amount you could borrow when interest rates were high ##(V_\text{high rates})##, so:
###\text{Proportional increase} = \dfrac{V_\text{low rates}-V_\text{high rates}}{V_\text{high rates}} ###
Assume that:
- Interest rates are expected to be constant over the life of the loan.
- Loans are interest-only and have a life of 30 years.
- Mortgage loan payments are made every month in arrears and all interest rates are given as annualised percentage rates (APR's) compounding per month.
Assets A, B, M and ##r_f## are shown on the graphs above. Asset M is the market portfolio and ##r_f## is the risk free yield on government bonds. Assume that investors can borrow and lend at the risk free rate. Which of the below statements is NOT correct?
A firm is about to conduct a 2-for-7 rights issue with a subscription price of $10 per share. They haven’t announced the capital raising to the market yet and the share price is currently $13 per share. Assume that every shareholder will exercise their rights, the cash raised will simply be put in the bank, and the rights issue is completed so quickly that the time value of money can be ignored. Disregard signalling, taxes and agency-related effects.
Which of the following statements about the rights issue is NOT correct? After the rights issue is completed:
Question 925 mean and median returns, return distribution, arithmetic and geometric averages, continuously compounding rate, no explanation
The arithmetic average and standard deviation of returns on the ASX200 accumulation index over the 24 years from 31 Dec 1992 to 31 Dec 2016 were calculated as follows:
###\bar{r}_\text{yearly} = \dfrac{ \displaystyle\sum\limits_{t=1992}^{24}{\left( \ln \left( \dfrac{P_{t+1}}{P_t} \right) \right)} }{T} = \text{AALGDR} =0.0949=9.49\% \text{ pa}###
###\sigma_\text{yearly} = \dfrac{ \displaystyle\sum\limits_{t=1992}^{24}{\left( \left( \ln \left( \dfrac{P_{t+1}}{P_t} \right) - \bar{r}_\text{yearly} \right)^2 \right)} }{T} = \text{SDLGDR} = 0.1692=16.92\text{ pp pa}###
Assume that the log gross discrete returns are normally distributed and that the above estimates are true population statistics, not sample statistics, so there is no standard error in the sample mean or standard deviation estimates. Also assume that the standardised normal Z-statistic corresponding to a one-tail probability of 2.5% is exactly -1.96.
Which of the following statements is NOT correct? If you invested $1m today in the ASX200, then over the next 4 years: