Thursday, August 14, 2014

CSFB: Capital Allocation Whitepaper

[Why should value determine whether a management team is living up to its responsibility? There are two

reasons. The first is that companies must compete. A company that is allocating its resources wisely will

ultimately prevail over a competitor that is allocating its resources foolishly. The second is that inputs have an

opportunity cost, or the value of the next best alternative. Unless an input is going to its best and highest use,

it is underperforming relative to its opportunity cost.

 

Capital allocation is a dynamic process, so the correct answer to most questions is, “It depends.” Sometimes

acquiring makes sense and other times divesting is the better alternative. There are times to issue equity and

times to retire it. Because the components that determine price and value are changing constantly, so too

must the assessments that a CEO makes. As Buffett says, “The first law of capital allocation—whether the

money is slated for acquisitions or share repurchases—is that what is smart at one price is dumb at another.”3

 

The message here should be clear. A decision isn’t good just because someone in the organization can justify

it or because some other company is doing it. Proper capital allocation requires a sharp analytical framework

and independence of mind.

 

Internal financing represents a larger percentage of the total source of capital for companies in the U.S. than

for companies in other developed countries. For example, internal financing has been about 70 percent of the

total source for the United Kingdom, 66 percent for Germany, 55 percent for France, and 50 percent for

Japan.9 The ratio of internal financing to the total source of capital tends to correlate with the underlying return

on invested capital for the country. A country with a high ROIC can fund a higher percentage of its

investments with internally-generated cash than a country with a low ROIC.

 

The academic research supports the notion that capital allocation is challenging and that growth is not

inherently good. But we must keep in mind that context is very important. Recall that the correct answer to

almost every capital allocation question is, “It depends.”

 

How should companies assess the merit of an M&A deal? Mark Sirower, a consultant at Deloitte, suggests

that acquirers use the following formula:

Net present value of the deal = present value of the synergies – premium

 

Cost synergies are much more reliable than revenue synergies. About one-third of the executives surveyed

said that their company achieved all or more of the anticipated cost synergy, while one-quarter of the

companies overestimated their cost synergy by 25 percent or more. But roughly 70 percent of mergers fail to

deliver the anticipated revenue synergy. The most common challenges companies cite for synergy realization

include delays in implementing planned actions, underestimation of costs and complexities, and flat-out

overestimation of synergies]

 

 

 

via: CS