The Bombing Of Pearl Harbor Was Avoidable Or Not - 1382 Words

Many can argue whether the bombing of Pearl Harbor was avoidable or not. There was different importance for the U.S. and Japan when it came to foreign and domestic policies. They both assumed so much negative assets about each other, they made themselves believe their intentions were no good and therefore it was not possible to avoid the attack made upon the United States. Even though they started as allies they both wanted different things and never had an agreement. The one thing that they both wanted was control and dominance in the Pacific. Japan was thirsty for power after the First World War. If they had power in the Pacific they would have ownership of raw materials, which means they would not have to pay anything to have access to them. The Japanese were determined to make this an accomplished goal. The beginning of Japans and Chinas problems can be traced back to the invasion of Manchuria. In 1931the Japanese invaded Manchuria which part of China and rename d it Manchukuo. This was the start of it all and the reason for the Sino-Japanese War. The Sino-Japanese was lasted until the end of the Second World War (Iriye 4). When China made the decision to take on Japan, other countries got involved, the United States being one of them, who took the Chinese side under Chiang Kai-shek. The Japanese had a slogan: â€Å"the Great East Asian Co-Prosperity Sphere† which frightened the United States (Iriye 7). Just because the U.S. was known to be theShow MoreRelatedDropping The Bombs On Hiroshima And Nagasaki1073 Words   |  5 PagesHiroshima and Nagasaki was not necessary. In a brief summary, World War II (WWII) was viewed as one of the bloodiest wars to date. The Japanese belief of fighting to the last man and not surrendering played a large role in the decisions made in warfare (Dietrich). After Japan kamikaze-bombed Pearl Harbor, WWII was officially in place and the U.S. was prepared to retaliate to the fullest extent. The first bomb to be dropped on Japan, also the first atomic bomb ever to be used, was the â€Å"Little Boy† whichRead MoreThe Atomic Bombs in Japan1373 Words   |  6 Pages000. (Weber, â€Å"Was Hiroshima Necessary?†) Three days later, a second atomic bomb stroked the city of Nagasaki which killed approximately 37,000 people and injured 43,000 (Weber, â€Å"Was Hiroshima Necessary?†). These actions of the United States still remain controversial today and the United States’ abuse of power and morality can be questioned. ‘Were the dropping of atomic bombs in the cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki a j ustified way to end World War Two?’. The answer is no, the bombings were not justifiedRead MoreWar I And World War II1392 Words   |  6 PagesWar 2. I will explain how they started, what happened or changed during both, and how they ended. War begins with a conflict, sometimes it can be avoidable but for both of the World Wars, I think they were unstoppable. â€Å"Though it was not the bloodiest nor most prolonged war in history, nor strictly, as it was later termed, the ‘first’ World War, it was the most intensely fought struggle and the greatest in geographical extent to have occurred down to that time† (Roberts Westad, pg. 886). The FirstRead MoreStephen P. Robbins Timothy A. Judge (2011) Organizational Behaviour 15th Edition New Jersey: Prentice Hall393164 Words   |  1573 PagesSaddle River, New Jersey 07458, or you may fax your request to 201-236-3290. Many of the designations by manufacturers and sellers to distinguish their products are claimed as trademarks. Where those designations appear in this book, and the publisher was aware of a trademark claim, the designations have been printed in initial caps or all caps. Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Robbins, Stephen P. Organizational behavior / Stephen P. Robbins, Timothy A. Judge. — 15th ed. p. cm. Includes

Pifzer Inc.’s Cost of Capital and Capital Structure Free Essays

Pfizer Inc. ’S Cost of Capital and Capital structure – Xiaoyue Shi The costs of capital and capital structures for Pfizer Inc. and its two competitors Merck Co. We will write a custom essay sample on Pifzer Inc.’s Cost of Capital and Capital Structure or any similar topic only for you Order Now Inc. and Johnson Johnson in the pharmaceutical industry are analyzed in this memo. When calculating the cost of common stock for the three companies, three different approaches including Capital Asset Pricing Model (CAPM), Discounted Cash Flow (DCF) and the bond yield plus risk premium are applied (Appendix A). For CAPM approach (Figure 1 3), the risk-free rate (rRF) used is the rate on the U. S. 10-year Treasury bonds, which is 1. 66. The market risk premium (RPM) is the required return on the stock market minus rRF. The required market return used here is the average 20 years rates of return on SP 500. With highest beta (0. 71), Merck has the higher estimated cost of equity (6. 167). Pfizer has lower estimated cost of equity (5. 910) with lower beta (0. 67). Because of the lowest beta (0. 48), Johnson Johnson has the lowest estimated cost of equity (4. 697). For DCF approach (Figure 2 4), the stock price used is the current stock price. The expected growth rate (g) is the annualized growth rate based on the dividend growth over the past 10 years. Among the three companies, Johnson Johnson has the highest estimated cost of equity due to its highest expected growth rate in dividends. Pfizer’s estimated cost of equity is much lower than Johnson Johnson. Having the lowest expected growth rate in dividends, Merck has the lowest cost of equity. For bond yield plus risk premium approach (Figure 5), the bond yield (Figure 7) for Pfizer, Merck and Johnson Johnson are 2. 0724, 2. 5553, and 1. 9629 respectively. Since their betas are Pfizer 0. 67, Merck 0. 71 and Johnson Johnson 0. 48, and all below 1, the three companies’ judgmental risk premium estimated as 3. , 3. 4, and 3, respectively. According to the bond yield plus risk premium method, the estimated costs of equity are Pfizer 5. 3724, Merck 5. 9553, Johnson Johnson 4. 9629. The final estimated costs of equity for the three companies in this memo are the averages of the three approaches (Figure 6), and they are Pfizer 5. 83, Merck 4. 44, Johnson Johnson 7. 36. The three companies do not offer preferred stocks in public (Appendix B). Their costs of preferred stock would be zero. Although Pfizer offer Preferred stock for their employees, its costs of preferred stock still estimated as zero. According to the debt-rating organizations such as Moody’s, SP, the three companies’ bond ratings are very high (Figure 7). The tax rates used for calculating the costs of debt are the average tax rates for the last four years (Appendix C, Figure 10). And their after-tax cost of debts are similarly low, for example, Pfizer 1. 657, Merck 1. 991, Johnson Johnson 1. 528 (Figure 9). When calculating the percentage of debt and common equity (Appendix D, Figure 12), the common equity used is the market value of equity, and the book value of company’s debt is used as a proxy of the market value of debt. According to the formula in Appendix D, the weighted average costs of capital (WACC) for the three companies are Pfizer 1. 86, Merck 2. 17, Johnson Johnson 2. 15. The WACCs are quit low for the three companies as pharmaceutical giants. The debt ratios for last four years for the three companies were all around 50% (Appendix E, Figure 13). For example, in 2008, Pfizer’s debt ratio was 48. 1%, Merck was 55. 2%, Johnson Johnson was 49. 9%; in 2009, Pfizer was 57. 5%, Merck was 45. 5%, Johnson Johnson was 46. 6%; in 2010, Pfizer was 54. 7%, Merck was 46. 3%, Johnson Johnson was 45%; in 2011, Pfizer was 56. %, Merck was 45. 8%, Johnson Johnson was 49. 8%. Pfizer’s debt ratios were a little higher than its two competitors. But they all have quite similar capital structures with similar borrowing capacities. The three companies’ assets are financed with around 50% equity, and their risks of bankruptcy are low. Because involved in the pharmaceutical industry, the th ree companies are focusing on RD, innovation and raise productivity, which are very costly for them. The three companies all have a lot borrowings. Drug development needs a lot of resources and quite inefficient. High failure rates cause a lot pharmaceutical companies unable to make profit and went bankruptcy. Based on the circumstances, the three companies all have very good capital structures in the pharmaceutical industry. They may have to figure out a way to cut their costs, and have even better capital structures. Pfizer used accelerated depreciation methods for tax purpose. Its depreciation amortization increased a lot since 2009 (Appendix F, Figure 14). For example, it was $5,090 million in 2008, and $4,757 million in 2009, but it was $8487 million in 2010, and $9026 million in 2011. The huge increase in depreciation was mainly because of the merger with Wyeth in 2009. Merck mainly used accelerated depreciation methods for tax purpose except that its depreciation on intangibles was applied with primarily straight-line methods. Its depreciation amortization also increased since 2009. For instance, it was $1,631. 2 million in 2008, and $2,576 million in 2009, but it was $7,381 million in 2010, and $7,427 million in 2011. The increase in depreciation was also because of the merger. Merck was also involved in a merger with another pharmaceutical company Schering-Plough in 2009. Johnson Johnson had quite stable depreciations. And the straight-line methods were applied in this company. The three companies all paid stable dividends in last four years (Appendix G). Pfizer paid lowest dividends among them. Johnson Johnson paid highest dividends. Only Johnson Johnson performed stock repurchases (Figure 15 16). They (in shares) were 100,970 thousands in 2008, 37,114 thousands in 2009, 45,090 thousands in 2010, 39,741 thousands in 2011. And the money (in millions) used for stock repurchases was $6,651 in 2008, $2,130 in 2009, $2,797 in 2010, $2,525 in 2011. In my point of view, Pfizer and its two competitors – Merck and Johnson Johnson all have low cost of capital. Although they all involved in a lot borrowings , they all have very good capital structures as pharmaceutical companies. The reason is that the costs in RD and innovation are extremely high in the pharmaceutical industry. Reference: 1. Brigham, Eugene F. and Michael C. Ehrhardt. Financial Management Theory and Practice, 13th Edition, Thompson South-Western, ISBN-13# 978-14390-7809-9, ISBN-10#1-4390-7809-2 2. http://www. mergentonline. com/login. php 3. http://www. how. com/how_5833592_determine-target-debt-equity. html 4. http://cxa. gtm. idmanagedsolutions. com/finra/BondCenter/Watchlist. aspx 5. ww. finra. org 6. http://www3. valueline. com/vlquotes/quote. aspx Appendices: Appendix A: Cost of common stock Appendix B: Cost of preferred stock Appendix C: Cost of debt Appendix D: Weighted Average Cost of Capital (WACC) Appendix E: Capital Structure Appendix F: Deprecia tion Appendix G: Yearly dividend and share repurchase Appendix H: Value Line reports Appendix A: Cost of common stock Equations used for calculating cost of common stock: CAPM approach: rS=rRF+(RPM)bi DCF approach: The bond yield plus risk premium approach: rS=Company’s own bond yield + Judgmental risk premium Figure 1 CAPM Equation Variables| Â  | Â  | Â  | | Pfizer| Merck| JJ| Risk Free Rate| 1. 66| 1. 66| 1. 66| Required Rate of Return| 8. 00| 8. 00| 8. 00| Beta| 0. 67| 0. 71| 0. 48| Required Return on Stock| 5. 91| 6. 17| 4. 70| | | | | | | | | | Required Return on Stock| Â  | | Pfizer| Merck| JJ| | 5. 91| 6. 17| 4. 70| Figure 2 Annualized dividend growth rate (g) | Pfizer| Year| Sum dividend| Total growth over 10 years| Annualized growth rate (g)| Next expected dividend| 2011| 0. 8| | | Â  | 2010| 0. 72| | | Â  | 2009| 0. 8| | | Â  | 2008| 1. 28| | | Â  | 2007| 1. 16| | | Â  | 2006| 0. 96| | | Â  | 2005| 0. 76| | | Â  | 2004| 0. 68| | | Â  | 2003| 0. 6| | | Â  | 2002| 0. 52| | | Â  | 2001| 0. 44| 0. 818181818| 6. 16%| $0. 85 | | Merck| Year| Sum dividend| Total growth over 10 years| Annualized growth rate (g)| Next expected dividend| 2011| 1. 56| | | Â  | 2010| 1. 52| | | Â  | 2009| 1. 52| | | Â  | 2008| 1. 52| | | Â  | 2007| 1. 52| | | Â  | 2006| 1. 52| | | Â  | 2005| 1. 52| | | Â  | 2004| 1. 5| | | Â  | 2003| 3. 976| | | Â  | 2002| 1. 3| | | Â  | 2001| 1. 39| 0. 122302158| 1. 16%| $1. 58 | | JJ| Year| Sum dividend| Total growth over 10 years| Annualized growth rate (g)| Next expected dividend| 2011| 2. 25| | | Â  | 2010| 2. 11| | | Â  | 2009| 1. 93| | | Â  | 2008| 1. 795| | | Â  | 2007| 1. 62| | | Â  | 2006| 1. 455| | | Â  | 2005| 1. 275| | | Â  | 2004| 1. 095| | | Â  | 2003| 0. 925| | | Â  | 2002| 0. 795| | | Â  | 2001| 0. 7| 2. 214285714| 12. 39%| $2. 53 | Figure 3 CAPM | CAPM| Â  | Â  | Â  | Â  | Â  | | Risk Free Rate (1)| Required Market Return (2)| Market Risk Premium (3)=(2)-(1)| Beta (4)| Estimated cost of Equity (1)+(3)? (4)| Pfizer| 1. 66| 8. 00| 6. 34| 0. 67| 5. 10| Merck| 1. 66| 8. 00| 6. 34| 0. 71| 6. 167| JJ| 1. 66| 8. 00| 6. 34| 0. 48| 4. 697| | | | | | | Figure 4 DCF | DCF| Â  | Â  | Â  | Â  | | | Stock Price (1)| Next Expected Dividend (2)| Expected Growth Rate (3)| Estimated cost of Equity (2)/(1)+(3)| | Pfizer| 25. 12| $0. 85 | 6. 16| 6. 194| | Merck| 45. 62| $1. 58 | 1. 16| 1. 195| | JJ| 67. 97| $2. 53 | 12. 39| 12. 427| | | | | | | | Figure 5| | | | | | Bond Yield plus Risk Premium| Â  | Â  | | | | Company’s Bond Yield (1)| Judgmental Risk Premium (2)| Estimated cost of Equity (1)+(2)| | | Pfizer| 2. 0724| 3. 3| 5. 3724| | | Merck| 2. 5553| 3. 4| 5. 9553| | | J J| 1. 629| 3| 4. 9629| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Figure 6 Estimated Cost of Equity| Estimated Cost of Equity| | | | | Pfizer| 5. 83| | | | | Merck| 4. 44| | | | | JJ| 7. 36| | | | | Figure 7 Bond Data| Bond Data| Â  | Â  | Â  | Â  | Â  | Â  | Â  | Â  | Â  | Bond Symbol| Issuer Name| Coupon| Maturity| Callable| Moody’s| S;P| Fitch| Price| Yield| PFE. GF| PFIZER INC| 4. 65| 3/1/18| No| A1| AA| A+| 116. 189| 1. 501| PFE. GI| PFIZER INC| 4. 5| 2/15/14| No| A1| AA| A+| 105. 468| 0. 367| PFE. GM| PFIZER INC| 7. 2| 3/15/39| Yes| A1| AA| A+| 159. 019| 3. 685| PFE. GO| PFIZER INC| 6. 2| 3/15/19| Yes| A1| AA| A+| 127. 5| 1. 66| PFE. GQ| PFIZER INC| 5. 5| 3/15/15| Yes| A1| AA| A+| 111. 554| 0. 521| PFE3666215| AMERICAN HOME PRODS CORP| 7. 25| 3/1/23| No| A1| AA| A+| 139. 65| 2. 819| PFE3667744| WYETH| 5. 5| 2/15/16| Yes| A1| AA| A+| 115. 705| 0. 715| PFE3667745| WYETH| 6| 2/15/36| Yes| A1| AA| A+| 134| 3. 791| PFE3667909| PHARMACIA CORP| 6. 5| 12/1/18| Yes| A1| AA| A+| 128. 1 4| 1. 677| PFE3667915| PHARMACIA CORP| 6. 75| 12/15/27| No| A1| AA| A+| 137. 221| 3. 552| PFE3667927| PHARMACIA CORP| 6. 6| 12/1/28| Yes| A1| AA| A+| 138. 179| 3. 484| PFE3670301| WYETH| 5. 45| 4/1/17| Yes| A1| AA| A+| 119. 153| 1. 044| PFE3670315| WYETH| 5. 95| 4/1/37| Yes| A1| AA| A+| 135| 3. 5| PFE3702946| WYETH| 5. 5| 3/15/13| Yes| A1| AA| A+| 101. 977| 0. 706| PFE3703979| PHARMACIA CORP| 8. 7| 10/15/21| No| A1| AA| A+| 142. 03| -| PFE3704635| WYETH| 5. 5| 2/1/14| Yes| A1| AA| A+| 106. 52| 0. 421| PFE3704636| WYETH| 6. 45| 2/1/24| Yes| A1| AA| A+| 138. 004| 2. 553| PFE3704637| WYETH| 6. 5| 2/1/34| Yes| A1| AA| A+| 139. 025| 3. 807| PFE3706578| PHARMACIA CORP| 8. 2| 4/15/25| Yes| A1| AA| A+| 101. 5| -| PFE3739069| KING PHARMACEUTICALS INC| 1. 25| 4/1/26| Yes| NR| NR| NR| 99. 99| 1. 25| | | | | | | | | Average| 2. 072388889| MRK. GA| MERCK ; CO INC| 6. 3| 1/1/26| No| Aa3| AA| A+| 138. 945| 2. 76| MRK. GB| MERCK ; CO INC| 6. 4| 3/1/28| Yes| Aa3| AA| A+| 137. 464| 3. 278| MRK. GC| MERCK ; CO INC| 5. 95| 12/1/28| Yes| Aa3| AA| A+| 133. 211| 3. 28| MRK. GF| MERCK ; CO INC MTN BE| 5. 76| 5/3/37| No| Aa3| AA| A+| 131| 3. 808| MRK. GG| MERCK ; CO INC MTN BE| -| 11/27/40| No| Aa3| AA| A+| 98. 25| -| MRK. GH| MERCK ; CO INC MTN BE| -| 12/21/40| Yes| Aa3| AA| A+| 98| -| MRK. GI| MERCK ; CO INC MTN BE| -| 12/27/40| No| Aa3| AA| A+| 98. 5| -| MRK. GJ| MERCK ; CO INC MTN BE| -| 2/6/41| No| Aa3| AA| A+| 98| -| MRK. GK| MERCK ; CO INC MTN BE| -| 6/21/41| Yes| Aa3| AA| A+| 100| -| MRK. GL| MERCK amp; CO INC MTN BE| -| 7/18/41| No| Aa3| AA| A+| 97. 75| -| MRK. GM| MERCK ; CO INC MTN BE| -| 12/21/41| Yes| Aa3| AA| A+| 100| -| MRK. GN| MERCK ; CO INC MTN BE| -| 11/28/41| No| Aa3| AA| A+| 98. 25| -| MRK. GQ| MERCK ; CO INC MTN BE| -| 8/22/42| Yes| Aa3| AA| A+| 98. 275| -| MRK. GR| MERCK ; CO INC MTN BE| -| 2/18/43| Yes| Aa3| AA| A+| 99. 875| -| MRK. GT| MERCK ; CO INC MTN BE| -| 2/12/44| Yes| Aa3| AA | A+| 100| -| MRK. GU| MERCK ; CO INC| 4. 75| 3/1/15| Yes| Aa3| AA| A+| 109. 512| 0. 699| MRK. GV| MERCK ; CO INC| 5. 75| 11/15/36| Yes| Aa3| AA| A+| 135. 683| 3. 536| MRK. GW| MERCK ; CO INC| 4. 8| 2/15/13| No| Aa3| AA| A+| 101. 369| 0. 194| MRK. GX| MERCK ; CO INC NEW| 3. 88| 1/15/21| Yes| A1| AA| A+| 114. 717| 1. 883| MRK3671638| SCHERING PLOUGH CORP| 6. 55| 9/15/37| Yes| Aa3| AA| A+| 149. 11| 3. 56| | | | | | | | | Average| 2. 555333333| JNJ. GA| ALZA CORP DEL| -| 7/14/14| Yes| Aa1| AAA| AAA| 152. 8| -| JNJ. GC| ALZA CORP| -| 7/28/20| Yes| Aa1| AAA| AAA| 98. 75| -| JNJ. GH| JOHNSON ; JOHNSON| 6. 73| 11/15/23| No| Aaa| AAA| AAA| 145. 758| 2. 083| JNJ. GI| -| | 11/1/24| No| NR| NR| NR| 104. 36| -| JNJ. GJ| JOHNSON ; JOHNSON| 6. 95| 9/1/29| No| Aaa| AAA| AAA| 144. 925| 3. 422| JNJ. GL| JOHNSON ; JOHNSON| 3. | 5/15/13| No| Aaa| AAA| AAA| 102. 04| 0. 263| JNJ. GM| JOHNSON ; JOHNSON| 4. 95| 5/15/33| No| Aaa| AAA| AAA| 121. 154| 3. 499| JNJ. GO| JOHNSON ; JOHNSON| 5. 55| 8/15/17| Yes| Aaa| AAA| AAA| 121. 81| 0. 932| JNJ. GP| JOHNSON ; JOHNSON| 5. 95| 8/15/37| Yes| Aaa| AAA| AAA| 143. 163| 3. 369| JNJ. GQ| JOHNSON ; JOHNSON| 5. 15| 7/15/18| Yes| Aaa| AAA| AAA| 123. 223| 0. 982| JNJ. GR| JOHNSON ; JOHNSON| 5. 85| 7/15/38| Yes| Aaa| AAA| AAA| 143. 093| 3. 341| JNJ. GS| JOHNSON ; JOHNSON| 2. 95| 9/1/20| Yes| Aaa| AAA| AAA| 107. 12| 1. 969| JNJ. GT| JOHNSON ; JOHNSON| 4. 5| 9/1/40| Yes| Aaa| AAA| AAA| 123. 32| 3. 229| JNJ. GU| JOHNSON ; JOHNSON| -| 5/15/13| No| Aaa| AAA| AAA| 100. 154| -| JNJ. GV| JOHNSON ; JOHNSON| -| 5/15/14| No| Aaa| AAA| AAA| 100. 322| -| JNJ. GW| JOHNSON ; JOHNSON| 2. 15| 5/15/16| Yes| Aaa| AAA| AAA| 105. 523| 0. 588| JNJ. GX| JOHNSON ; JOHNSON| 4. 85| 5/15/41| Yes| Aaa| AAA| AAA| 125. 764| 3. 428| JNJ. GY| JOHNSON ; JOHNSON| 1. 2| 5/15/14| Yes| Aaa| AAA| AAA| 101. 399| 0. 311| JNJ. GZ| JOHNSON ; JOHNSON| 3. 55| 5/15/21| Yes| Aaa| AAA| AAA| 113. 786| 1. 807| JNJ. HA| JOHNSON ; JOHNSON| 0. 7| 5/15/13| No| Aaa| AAA| AAA| 100. 278| 0. 22| | | | | | | | | Average| 1. 62866667| Appendix B: Cost of preferred stock Figure 8 Cost of Preferred Stock| Cost of Preferred Stock| Â  | Â  | Â  | | Preferred Dividend (1)| Preferred Stock Price (2)| Floatation Cost (3)| Component cost of Preferred Stock(1)/[(2)*(1-(3))]| Pfizer| N/A| N/A| N/A| #VALUE! | Merk| N/A| N/A| N/A| #VALUE! | J;J| N/A| N/A| N/A| #VALUE! | Appendix C: Cost of debt After-tax cost of debt=rd(1-T) Figure 9 After-tax cost of debt| After Tax Component Cost of Debt| Â  | | Interest Rate| Tax Rate| Cost of Debt| Pfizer| 2. 072388889| 0. 2003| 1. 657289394| Merck| 2. 555333333| 0. 221| 1. 990604667| J;J| 1. 962866667| 0. 2218| 1. 2750284| Figure 10 Marginal tax rate Company| Pfizer| Merck| J;J| Year| 2011| 2010| 2009| 2008| 2011| 2010| 2009| 2008| 2011| 2010| 2009| 2008| Income before tax| 12,764| 9,282| 10,674| 9,694| 7,334| 1,653| 15,290| 9,931| 12,361| 16,947| 15,755| 16,929| Provision for tax| 4,023| 1,071| 2,145| 1,645| 942| 671| 2,268| 1,999| 2,689| 3,613| 3,489| 3 ,980| Tax rate| 0. 3152| 0. 1154| 0. 2010| 0. 1697| 0. 1284| 0. 4059| 0. 1483| 0. 2013| 0. 2175| 0. 2132| 0. 2215| 0. 2351| Average tax rate| 0. 2003| 0. 2210| 0. 2218| Appendix D: Weighted Average Cost of Capital (WACC) Figure 11 WACC| | | | | | | | WACC| Â  | Â  | Â  | Â  | Â  | Â  | Â  | % of Debt| Cost of Debt| % of Preferred Stock| Cost of Preferred Stock| % of Common Equity| Cost of Common Equity| WACC| Pfizer| 95. 15%| 1. 66 | – | – | 4. 85%| 5. 83 | 1. 86 | Merck| 92. 50%| 1. 99 | – | – | 7. 50%| 4. 44 | 2. 17 | J;J| 89. 26%| 1. 53 | – | – | 10. 74%| 7. 36 | 2. 15 | % of Debt, and % of Common Equity are the target proportions. Figure 12 Calculating the percentage of debt and common equity | | | | Pfizer| Merck| J;J| Shares outstanding (million)| 7,470| 3,050| 2,750| Market value per share | | 26. 03| 47. 96| 72. 52| Market value of equity ($ million), E| 194,444. | 146,278. 0 | 199,430. 0 | | | | | | | Book value of equity per share| 10. 64| 18. 16| 20. 95| Total book value of equity| | 79,480. 8 | 55,388. 0 | 57,612. 5 | Debt/Equity ratio| | 48. 26| 32. 91| 29. 07| Book value of debt| | 3,835,743. 41 | 1,822,819. 08 | 1,674,795. 38 | Cash on hand| | 24,340| 17,450| 16,920| Net debt ($ million), D| | 3,811,403| 1,805,369| 1,657,875| | | | | | | Percentage of debt, D/(E+D)| | 95. 15%| 92. 50%| 89. 26%| Percentage of equity, E/(E+D)| 4. 85%| 7. 50%| 10. 74%| Appendix E: Capital Structure Figure 13 Capital Structure| | | | | Capital Structure| Â  | Â  | Â  | Â  | | Pfizer| 2011| 2010| 2009| 2008| Long Term Debt*| 34,931,000. 00 | 38,410,000| 43,193,000| 7,963,000| Common Stock*| 445,000| 444,000| 443,000| 443,000| Retained Earnings*| 46,210,000| 42,716,000| 40,426,000| 49,142,000| Redeemable Preferred Stock*| 45,000| 52,000| 61,000| 73,000| Total| 81,631,000. 00 | 81,622,000. 00 | 84,123,000. 00 | 57,621,000. 00 | | | | | | % of Debt| 42. 79%| 47. 06%| 51. 35%| 13. 82%| % of Preferred Stock| 0. 06%| 0. 06%| 0. 07%| 0. 13%| % of Common Equity| 57. 15%| 52. 88%| 48. 58%| 86. 05%| Total %| 100. 00%| 100. 00%| 100. 00%| 100. 00%| | | | | | Average/Target % of Debt| | 38. 75%| 95. 15%| | Average/Target % of Preferred Stock| | 0. 08%| 0. 00%| | Average/Target % of Common Equity| | 61. 17%| 4. 85%| | | | | | | Total Debt*| 105,381,000| 106,749,000| 122,503,000| 53,408,000| Total Assets*| 188,002,000| 195,014,000| 212,949,000| 111,148,000| Total Debt/Total Assets| 56. 1%| 54. 7%| 57. 5%| 48. 1%| | | | | | | | | | | | Merck| | 2011| 2010| 2009| 2008| Long Term Debt*| 15,525,000| 15,482,000| 16,074,900| 3,943,300| Common Stock*| 1,788,000| 1,788,000| 1,781,300| 29,800| Retained Earnings*| 38,990,000| 37,536,000| 41,404,900| 43,698,800| Redeemable Preferred Stock*| – | – | – | – | Total| 56,303,000. 0 | 54,806,000. 00 | 59,261,100. 00 | 47,671,900. 00 | | | | | | % of Debt| 27. 57%| 28. 25%| 27. 13%| 8. 27%| % of Preferred Stock| 0. 00%| 0. 00%| 0. 00%| 0. 00%| % of Common Equity| 72. 43%| 71. 75%| 72. 87%| 91. 73%| Total %| 100. 00%| 100. 00%| 100. 00%| 100. 00%| | | | | | Average/Target % of Debt| | 22. 81%| 92. 50%| | Average/Target % of Pref erred Stock| | 0. 00%| 0%| | Average/Target % of Common Equity| | 77. 19%| 7. 50%| | | | | | | Total Debt*| 48,185,000| 48,976,000| 50,597,100| 26,028,600| Total Assets*| 105,128,000| 105,781,000| 112,089,700| 47,195,700| Total Debt/Total Assets| 45. %| 46. 3%| 45. 1%| 55. 2%| | | | | | | | | | | | J;J| | 2011| 2010| 2009| 2008| Long Term Debt*| 12,969,000| 9,156,000| 8,223,000| 8,120,000| Common Stock*| 3,120,000| 3,120,000| 3,120,000| 3,120,000| Retained Earnings*| 81,251,000| 77,773,000| 70,306,000| 63,379,000| Redeemable Preferred Stock*| – | – | – | – | Total| 97,340,000. 00 | 90,049,000. 00 | 81,649,000. 00 | 74,619,000. 00 | | | | | | % of Debt| 13. 32%| 10. 17%| 10. 07%| 10. 88%| % of Preferred Stock| 0. 00%| 0. 00%| 0. 00%| 0. 00%| % of Common Equity| 86. 68%| 89. 83%| 89. 93%| 89. 12%| Total %| 100. 00%| 100. 0%| 100. 00%| 100. 00%| | | | | | Average/Target % of Debt| | 11. 11%| 89. 26%| | Average/Target % of Preferred Stock| | 0. 00%| 0%| | Ave rage/Target % of Common Equity| | 88. 89%| 10. 74%| | | | | | | Total Debt*| 56,564,000| 46,329,000| 44,094,000| 42,401,000| Total Assets*| 113,644,000| 102,908,000| 94,682,000| 84,912,000| Total Debt/Total Assets| 49. 8%| 45. 0%| 46. 6%| 49. 9%| * $ in thousands Appendix F: Depreciation Figure 14 Depreciation | | | | | | Depreciation| Â  | Â  | Â  | Â  | Â  | | USEFUL LIVES| Pfizer| | (YEARS)| Â  | | | 2011| 2010| 2009| 2008| Type| | Accelerated depreciation methods| Classes of Assets and Depreciation Ranges | | | | | | Land | – | | | | | Buildings| 33 1/3-50| | | | | Machinery and equipment| 8-20| | | | | Furniture, fixtures and other| 3-12 1/2| | | | | Construction in progress| – | | | | | | | | | | | Depreciation ; Amortization**| | 9,026 | 8,487 | 4,757 | 5,090 | | | | | | | | | Merck| | USEFUL LIVES| Â  | | (YEARS)| 2011| 2010| 2009| 2008| Type| | Accelerated depreciation methods| Classes of Assets and Depreciation Ranges | | | | | | Buildings| 10-50| | | | | Machinery ; Equipment| 3-15| | | | | Capitalized software| 3-5| | | | | Construction in progress| – | | | | | Products and product rights, trade names and patents| 3-40| Primarily straight- line methods| | | | | | | Depreciation ; Amortization**| | 7,427| 7,381| 2,576| 1,631. 2| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | J;J| | USEFUL LIVES| Â  | | (YEARS)| 2011| 2010| 2009| 2008| Type| | Straight- line methods| Classes of Assets and Depreciation Ranges | | | | | | Building and building equipment| 20–40| | | | | Land and leasehold improvements| 10–20| | | | | Machinery and equipment| 2–13| | | | | Capitalized software| 3-8| | | | | | | | | | | Depreciation ; Amortization**| | 3,158| 2,939| 2,774| 2,832| | | | | | | | | | | | ** $ in millions| | | | | | Appendix G: Yearly dividend and share repurchase Figure 15 Stock repurchase (in shares) and dividends| Stock Repurchaces and Dividends| Â  | Â  | Â  | | Pfizer| | 2011| 2010| 2009| 2008| Stock Repurchaces*| N/A | N/A | N/A | N/A | Dividends ($)| 0. 8| 0. 72| 0. 8| 1. 28| | | | | | | Merck| | 2011| 2010| 2009| 2008| Stock Repurchaces* | N/A | N/A | N/A | N/A | Dividends ($)| 1. 56| 1. 52| 1. 52| 1. 52| | | | | | | J;J| | 2011| 2010| 2009| 2008| Stock Repurchaces*| 39,741 | 45,090 | 37,114 | 100,970| Dividends ($)| 2. 25| 2. 11| 1. 93| 1. 795| | | | | | Number of Shares (Thousands)| | | | | | | | | | Figure 16 Stock repurchase (in U. S. dollars) and dividends| Stock Repurchaces and Dividends| Â  | Â  | Â  | | Pfizer| | 2011| 2010| 2009| 2008| Stock Repurchaces*| N/A | N/A | N/A | N/A | Dividends ($)| 0. 8| 0. 72| 0. 8| 1. 28| | | | | | | Merck| | 2011| 2010| 2009| 2008| Stock Repurchaces*| N/A | N/A | N/A | N/A | Dividends ($)| 1. 56| 1. 52| 1. 52| 1. 52| | | | | | | J;J| | 2011| 2010| 2009| 2008| Stock Repurchaces*| (2,525)| (2,797)| (2,130)| (6,651)| Dividends ($)| 2. 25| 2. 11| 1. 93| 1. 795| | | | | | * $ in millions| | | | | Appendix H: Value Line reports How to cite Pifzer Inc.’s Cost of Capital and Capital Structure, Essay examples

My Personal Philosophy free essay sample

My Personal Philosopy My Personal Philosophy A teachers personal philosophy of education is a critical element in his or her approach to guiding children along the path of enlightenment. † Barbara Wilt Opportunity abounds for elementary education in the twenty-first century, given the multitude of academic theorists who pioneered a number of indispensable approaches. The extent to which elementary education must be tailored to a combination of ones cultural and social environment is both grand and far-reaching; hat no single teaching method can purport to reach each and every child speaks to the need for incorporating the benefits of more than one approach in any given classroom environment. My lifelong desire is to teach all levels at some point in my career. To me, teaching has no age limits, as we all need to learn and grow. In the beginning I would always focus on early childhood education because I felt that this stage in life was the most important due to the developing growth of the brain. We will write a custom essay sample on My Personal Philosophy or any similar topic specifically for you Do Not WasteYour Time HIRE WRITER Only 13.90 / page But this course has definitely given me a better outlook on education in its entirety. To better understand ones philosophy of education, one must first understand the meaning of philosophy itself. Philosophy is the love of wisdom and the search for it (Webb, Metha, Jordan, 2010, pg. 50). I adapted to my personal philosophy by recognizing educational principles that rests upon the learner, the school, and myself as the teacher. In this essay I will explain the purpose of education, examine the educational philosophy that matches my belief, show the roles of the student as well as the teacher, and discuss my ideal curriculum. Education is a means of reaching out to individuals and instilling them with the love of learning. It is striving to delight excitement in the minds of students, by making their learning experience both fun and engaging. This enthusiasm about learning will drive students to develop an intellectual curiosity and to become lifelong learners. I truly believe that the overall purpose of education is to create productive and balanced members of society. Education consists of acquiring knowledge, learning skills and imparting culture through socialization.