返回列表发帖

Rank: 2

UID: 223370
帖子: 289
主题: 47
注册时间: 2011-7-11
最后登录: 2014-7-24

1^# 跳转到 » 倒序看帖

打印

字体大小: tT

发表于 2011-7-13 15:45 | 只看该作者

Equity: PVGO

should

when calculate PVGO, use E/r, should we use E1 or E0? Thanks.

busterbluth

CFA Candidates

Rank: 2

UID: 223413
帖子: 356
主题: 7
注册时间: 2011-7-11
最后登录: 2016-4-19

2^#

发表于 2011-7-13 15:45 | 只看该作者

E1...
I had to check my formula sheet to be sure, but think of it this way. You are looking for growth. Trailing E, or E0, does not show growth - E1 does.
P0 + E1/Rce

TOP

stalkey

CFA Candidates

Rank: 2

UID: 223459
帖子: 302
主题: 9
注册时间: 2011-7-11
最后登录: 2014-8-4

3^#

发表于 2011-7-13 15:45 | 只看该作者

disagree.

the value of a firm = e/r plus pvgo

e/r is the value of a no growth firm.

TOP

kkn006

CFA Candidates

Rank: 2

UID: 223404
帖子: 321
主题: 23
注册时间: 2011-7-11
最后登录: 2014-7-31

4^#

发表于 2011-7-13 15:45 | 只看该作者

Ahh, LincolnLogs you are right. I incorrectly added E1/Rce, it should be subtracted.
So...
PVGO = P0 - E1/Rce
OR,
P0 = PVGO + E1/Rce
Which then means,
P0 = E1/Rce (if PVGO = 0)

Need to take a break...

TOP

Kapie

游客

UID: 223384
帖子: 638
主题: 62
注册时间: 2011-7-11
最后登录: 2014-8-6

5^#

发表于 2011-7-13 15:45 | 只看该作者

Ya there is a discrepancy there. They tell you the equation you guys are referencing where they say it must be E1, however, they then say you can use this to equate P/E, which is E0, and when you divide through by E0, the E's cancel leaving you with 1/R. So I don't think they will get you with that and if they do we can email them with our counter argument.

TOP

kickthatcfa

CFA Candidates

Rank: 2

UID: 223439
帖子: 318
主题: 7
注册时间: 2011-7-11
最后登录: 2014-8-7

6^#

发表于 2011-7-13 15:45 | 只看该作者

I'm disagreeing with using earnings one period ahead. You are looking to separate no growth value from the value of the company's growth opportunities.

Therefore, value of no growth plus value of growth opps equals present value of the firm. Or:

e sub 0/ req rate plus pvgo

TOP

maryli

CFA Candidates

Rank: 2

UID: 217999
帖子: 298
主题: 148
注册时间: 2011-5-25
最后登录: 2012-9-12

7^#

发表于 2011-7-13 15:45 | 只看该作者

LL I agree. Only thing that your logic points out is it is no growth value, so technically E0=E1. So both are right. I wouldn't waste last week focusing on this or writing post about it, oh shtt. Back to swaps.

TOP

redskins44

CFA Candidates

Rank: 2

UID: 223432
帖子: 312
主题: 12
注册时间: 2011-7-11
最后登录: 2016-4-19

8^#

发表于 2011-7-13 15:45 | 只看该作者

wrong. there is growth in the coming year since the firm retained some NI..(retention ratio of 0.86), which is why you need to find E1 as 2.45(1.15284)= 2.84
then it's asking what percent of the forecasted share price is attributable to PVGO (i.e., without any growth going forward compared to growth)...similar to wondering whether the firm should pay dividends or not, which is all about whether ROE is greater than cost of equity (not necessary for this question though)

TOP

tarunajwani