Long-Term Financing Paper
Methods of Long-Term Financing
In today’s business environment, firms must effectively use every strategy possible to remain competitive in their respective markets and maximize investor wealth. This is especially true when considering options for increasing the financial capital required for growth. Although there are many differing methods to raise financial capital, generally speaking, financing instruments fall into one of two categories: debt or equity (Securities Law, p. 1, 2008). Both debt and equity represent opportunities to increase capital and provide a means for business expansion, each instrument has particular advantages and setback that must be successfully managed in order to achieve the firm’s desired result of maximized wealth through growth. One important item to consider when examining methods for raising capital involves the, “dilution of ownership that occurs by using equity instruments versus the obligation to repay which comes with the use of debt instruments” (Evans, p.1, 2005). The ability to manage the ratio of debt to equity in long-term financing, represents a critical decision making process that will determine the success or failure of a firm’s business ventures, as well as, determine who receives the benefits of the expected increase in wealth. When considering avenues for expansion, long-term financing strategies provide the best opportunities to maximize investment dollars for use towards increasing production and or new product development. Long-term financing involves the use of debt and or equity instruments with greater than one-year maturities, and often serve as vehicles to create additional capital. Equity instruments allow for additional freedom with regard to cash flows, they also provide for dilution of ownership. Equity instruments involve the use of stocks to raise funds and are typically calculated using either the Capital Asset Pricing Model (CAPM) or the Discounted Cash Flows Model (DCFM). According to Forbes Magazines’ Investopedia, the CAPM states, “that the expected return of a security or a portfolio equals the rate on a risk-free security plus the premium” (Investopedia, 2008). This model works on the premise that if the expected return does not meet or exceed the required return, the investment should not be undertaken. This principle is commonly attributed to the famed economist, William Sharpe. As noted in article, Revisiting the Capital Asset Pricing Model Theory by Jonathon Burton of Stanford University, Sharpe provided much of the basis for what is now termed the Capital Asset Pricing Model, which explains the relationship between how securities are priced based upon their potential risk and returns. Burton goes on to indicate that Sharpe espoused that every investment carries two distinct risks, the CAPM states. One is the risk of being in the market, which Sharpe called “systematic risk”. This risk, later dubbed "beta", cannot be diversified away. The other “unsystematic risk, and is specific to a company's fortunes”. Since this uncertainty can be mitigated through appropriate diversification, Sharpe figured that a portfolio's expected return hinges solely on its beta—its relationship to the overall market. The CAPM helps measure portfolio risk and the return an investor can expect for taking that risk (Burton p.1, 1998). This relationship can be mathematically described using the following equation as articulated by Block and Hirt in the text Foundations of Financial Management (Chap. 11, p.7): Kj=Rf+B(Km-Rf)
Where: Kj= return on company’s common stock
Rf= risk-free rate of return, usually the current rate on Treasury Notes B= Beta coefficient, usually measuring the historical volatility of an individual stock’s return relative to a stock market index, a beta greater than 1 indicates greater volatility while the reverse would be true for a beta less...