Ansell Limited and Azure Healthcare Limited Financial Analysis - Case Study Example

Ansell Limited and Azure Healthcare Limited Financial analysis for the three years ending 2013 Course Code Course Name Lectures Name Students Name Date Table of contents Introduction 2 Ansell Business Models 3 Financial ratio analysis 4 Profitability ratios 4 Return on assets 4 Gross profit margin 6 Return on equity 7 Profit margin 9 Expense ratio 10 Assets turnover ratio 12 Liquidity ratios 13 Current ratio 14 Quick asset ratio 15 Inventory turn over 17 Days debtors turn over 18 Gearing ratio 19 Interest Coverage Ratio 20 Debt-to-Total Assets Ratio 21 Conclusion 23 Appendixes 28 Executive summary Financial analysis is the process of examining the company's operations to determine if they are suitable or viable to invest in. Financial analysis is used to determine the stability of an entity, its solvency situation, the liquidity situation or how profitable the company is for an investor to invest in that company (Haugen, 2001). When carrying out financial analysis of a company, the main areas of attention are the cash flow statement, income statement and the balance sheet. Financial analysis uses historic data as a basis for future prediction. Financial statement analysis is categorized into profitability analysis, liquidity analysis, and capital structure analysis. Profitability analysis ratios include return on equity, return on assets, gross profit margin, profit margin payout ratio and expense ratio (Paul, 2007). When analyzing asset efficiency, asset turnover ratio, times inventory turnover and times debtors turn over ratios are used. Current ratio, quick asset ratio, and cash flow ratio indicates the liquidity position of the company (White, 2004). Capital structure ratios include debt to equity ratio, debt ratio, equity ratio, interest coverage ratio and debt coverage ratio. Ratios used to analyze the market performance of a company include net tangible assets per share, earnings per share, and price earnings ratio. Introduction Ansell Limited is a global healthcare barrier and protection solutions leader operating in Europe America, and Asia Pacific. Ansell Ltd is an Australian base public company which is listed under Australian stock exchange and has its operational headquarters located in Red Bank, NJ USA. Ansell has globally more than 13,000 people in over 33 countries operating under the four major business segments including Specialty Markets, Medical Solutions, Sexual Wellness and Industrial Solutions with more than $1.35 billion annual turnover. Ansell Company conceptualizes its manufacturing framework that simplifies the logistics and condenses the operational carbon footprint. Ansell designs, develops, manufactures and markets a wide range of surgical, examination, industrial and household gloves and condoms. Ansell (ANN) executive’s focuses in developing new innovative products, with advance product distribution channels that meets the dynamic market share by cutting cost, rationalizations of manufacturing process while shifting the portfolio products towards higher profitability in offsetting input cost pressures. Ansell Business Models Business model refers to a paradigm of organizational assumptions that create value by ensuring that organizational incentives are efficiently performed. Sustainable business model depicts how business resources and its environment are allied together in creating customer value and to generate a profitability of the business. It defines the business most favorable mode operations within market structure (Stewart Myers, 2007). Ansell business models recognize the economic development requirement of aligning the health and wellbeing of people, thus enhancing sound business management that addresses the social, environmental and economic performance. Ansell being the global leader in health measure and safety protection has defines it business model profile by delivering long-term social benefits, environmental and sustainable returns to the stakeholders. Ansell faces competition from medical suppliers including Azure Healthcare Limited in consumer division. Financial ratio analysis Profitability ratios Profitability ratios are ratios used to determine the company’s aptitude in making profits in relative of the equity, turnover and assets (Robin Coope, 2002). Profitability ratios measure the business entity’s ability in generating earnings and the cash flows in relative to the company’s investment. The higher value in profitability ratios describes the fact that the company is in a better position in generating revenues, cash flows and earnings attributable to shareholders. Profitability ratios give the company’s significant financial information based on the analysis with the previous financial period Return on assets Return on assets ratio is used in assessing the company’s profits relative to the average total assets employed in making profits. This ratio compares company’s earnings generated to the total assets that the company owns (Altman, 2002). The higher return on assets ratios indicate that the company operates efficiently in generating earnings while lower ratios discloses poor efficiency or the competitors efficiency in strategic ways that earnings as compared to the company’s profitability on the assets Return on assets = Col Ansell Limited umn1 2013 2012 2011 Earnings before interest and tax 156.7 144.5 134.7 Total Assets 1835.4 1348.3 1216.3 ROA 8.5% 10.7% 11.1% Azure Ltd 2013 2012 2011 Earnings before interest and tax 1024 321 (2,652) Total Assets 16724 15351 12602 ROA 6.12% 2.09% -21.04% As portrayed in the table above, Ansell Ltd return on assets ratio shows a decreasing trend from financial year 2011 to 2013 with 11.1%, 10.7% and 8.5% correspondingly. The decrease of Ansell Ltd returns on asset ratio result from the lesser company’s ability in making use of its asset to generate shareholders earnings. Increase in total assets does not correspond to the increase in the company’s earning therefore the company’s return on assets ratio will however decrease with the varying trends. According to Azure Healthcare Limited the company shows a relative increase from a deficit of 21.04% in 2012, 2.09% and 6% in 2013 fiscal year. Azure Healthcare Limited earnings per company’s assets increases from – 23 cent in 2011, 2 cents in 2012 and 6 cents in 2013 while Ansell Ltd shows that for every asset invested it earning earnings decreases from 11 cents to 8cents from 2011 to 2013 fiscal year. This shows that the company’s competitors including Azure Healthcare Limited have taken over in the market competitiveness thus redressing the Ansell Company’s profitability. Gross profit margin Gross profit margin portrays the company's gross profit in relation to the sales revenue. It shows how well the company converts inventory into income through sales. The higher values of gross profit margin portrays that the company earns more income for every dollar of revenue which is more favourable since extra earnings will be available to meet operating costs (White, 2004). Gross profit margin shows the amount of earnings from revenue without accounting of indirect cost that reduces the company’s contribution margin. Gross profit margin = C Ansell Limited 2013 2012 2011 Gross Profit 945.6 507.0 483.0 Sales Revenue 1340.0 1225.1 1228.2 G.P 70.56% 41.38% 39.33% Azure LtdColumn1 2013 2012 2011 Gross Profit 11918 9621 8481 Sales Revenue 22504 18224 16833 G.P 52.96% 52.79% 50.38% As portrayed in the table above, Ansell Ltd gross profit margin shows an increasing trend from 2011 to 2013 fiscal year with 39.3%, 41.4% and 70.6% correspondingly. The increasing trend of the company revenue in relative to the company gross margin accentuates the increasing trend of the company’s earning in each dollar of net sales revenue from 39 cent in 2011 to 70 cent in fiscal year 2013. Azure Healthcare Limited gross profit ratio unveils an increasing trend from 50.38% in 2011, 52.79% in 2012 and slight increase of 52.96% in 2012. The increasing trend demonstrates that Ansell Ltd as better performance from fiscal year 2011 towards 2013. Based on the gross profit breakdown Ansell management has unveils better dynamic approaches to deem the market competitiveness as compared to Azure Healthcare Limited. Return on equity Return on equity ratio is used in evaluating the company’s state of profitability in relative to the shareholders equity (Altman, 2002). It reveals the percentage of the company’s profits earned in relation to the net assets which is equal to shareholder equity provided on the balance sheet statement. Return on equity ratio is of great essence in company’s profitability metrics and financial ratios since it provide ultimate evaluation on how the company is profitable in relation to the owner’s investment. The company’s prospective investors and the stakeholders have interest in the company’s viability of generating earnings in relative to the invested equity. Return on Equity= Co Ansell Limited 1 2013 2012 2011 Profit after Tax 140.8 133.0 125.9 Shareholder’s Equity 833.2 720.8 667.6 ROE 16.90% 18.45% 18.86% Azure Ltdolumn1 2013 2012 2011 Profit after Tax 1040 744 (11050) Shareholder’s Equity 10635 9464 6749 ROE 9.78% 7.86% -163.73% Azure Ltd As portrayed in the table above, Ansell Ltd equity shows dilapidating financial trend in utilizing its shareholder’s equity to generate income. Ansell Ltd return on equity ratio shows a decrease from fiscal year 2011 towards 2013 from 18.9%, 18.5% and 16.9% correspondingly. Ansell Ltd unveils that the company’s executive did not install control measures towards the decreasing trend of shareholders equity returns from 2012 to 2013. Azure Healthcare Limited return on equity ration unveils an increasing trend from a deficit of 163.73% in 2011, 7.86% in 2012 and 9.78% in 2o13 fiscal year. This describes an increasing earnings on equity invested from – 163 cent to 7 cent and 9 cents in 2011 to 2013 fiscal years. The Ansell Ltd dilapidated returns on equity invested shows that prospective investors need to choose in investing in Azure Healthcare Limited since the company’s returns shows improving returns on shareholders’ investment. Profit margin The company’s profit margin is an accounting tool that assesses the company’s financial health in regards to earning capacity. The profit margin ratio is used to assessing the amount of profit that accrues from the company sale of the services or products (Paul, 2007). This ratio shows the company’s inbuilt that indicates the efficiency of capturing the amount of surplus which is generated for every unit of the product or services the company sales. Profit Margin= Ansell Limited lumn1 2013 2012 2011 Operating Profit 140.8 133.0 125.9 Sales Revenue 1340.0 1225.1 1228.2 P.M 10.51% 10.86% 10.25% Azure Ltdolumn1 2013 2012 2011 Operating Profit 1040 744 (11050) Sales Revenue 22504 18224 16833 P.M 4.62% 4.08% -65.64% As portrayed in the table above, Ansell Ltd profit margin shows an average profitability in the three financial years. The company shows a consequential middling profitability from fiscal year 2011 by 10.3%, 10.9% in 2012 and 10.5% in fiscal year 2013. The consequential slight increase from 10.25% in 2011 to 10.9% in the 2012 and slight decrease in 2013 to 10.5% accentuates the normal financial constrains of the company. Azure Healthcare Limited profit margin ratio unveils an increasing profitability from -65.64% in 2011, 4.08% in 2012 and slight increase to 4.62% in 2013 fiscal year. The average earning capacity of the both companies’ income generated from turnover heightens that it has same returns but the higher Ansell Ltd profit margin ratio shows more profitability enough for prospective investors to invest and the company shareholders than Azure Healthcare Limited. Expense ratio Expense ratio (ER) provides the comparisons between the ascertained expenses for analogous properties (Robin Coope, 2002). This ratio signifies the property’s operating cost and its returns to the company. Potential investors use this ratio in determining the viability of expenses incurred by the firm. In case where expense ratio is high then the company is at risk of higher expenses than the income earned. Expense Ratio= l Ansell Limited olumn1 2013 2012 2011 Expense less Tax 156.7 144.5 134.7 Sales Revenue 1340.0 1225.1 1228.2 E.R 11.69% 11.79% 10.96% Azure Ltdolumn1 2013 2012 2011 Expense less Tax 10894 9300 11133 Sales Revenue 22504 18224 16833 E.R 48.41% 51.03% 66.14% As portrayed in the table above, Ansell Ltd expense ratio shows that the company operating expense increases from 2011towards 2013 fiscal year by 10.96% in 2011, 11.79% in 2012 and 11.9% in 2013 correspondingly. This describes that the Ansell company returns is sufficient enough in generating sales income since its marginal ratio increases. Azure Healthcare Limited Expense ratio unveils a increasing trend from 66.14% in 2011, 51.03% in 2012 and 48.41% in fiscal year 2013. The lower the expense ratio defines the higher the efficiency in generating income. However, the prospective investors should consider investing in Ansell Company since the company’s expense ratio is lower and shows an improving hence denoting better competitiveness in the market as compared to Azure Healthcare Limited hence higher returns in generating revenue income. Assets turnover ratio Total turnover ratio shows the company’s general efficiency of the in utilizing its assets to make profits for the business (Reilly, 2011). This ratio unveils the company’s efficiency in generating profit that eases the company’s in meeting their expenses in relation to the sales revenue. Assets turnover ratio unveils the company potentiality in making profits from the company’s net assets invested. Asset turnover ratio = Ansell Limited olumn1 2013 2012 2011 Sales revenue 1340.0 1225.1 1228.2 Net assets 833.2 720.8 667.6 Assets turnover 1.6 1.7 1.8 Azure Ltdolumn1 2013 2012 2011 Sales revenue 22504 18224 16833 Net assets 10635 9464 6749 Assets turnover 2.12 1.93 2.49 As portrayed in the table above, Ansell Ltd divulges a sturdy trend of the company’s assets effectiveness in generating income. Ansell Ltd unveils a dilapidating company’s efficiency ingenerating earnings attributable to the invested assets. In 2011 the assets turnover ratio is 1.8, in fiscal year 2012 Ansell shows 1.7 and in 2013 the Ansell Company unveils an insignificant decrease in to 1.6. Azure Healthcare Limited assets turnover ratio unveils a fluctuating efficiency in utilizing its assets to generate revenue. The company’s assets turnover ratio unveils 2.49 in 2011 and decreases to 1.93 in 2012 while in 2013 Azure Healthcare Limited increase to 2.12. This denotes that Ansell Ltd is becoming inefficient in utilizing its assets to generate revenue towards fiscal year 2013 from 2011 as compared to Azure Healthcare Limited. Liquidity ratios Liquidity ratios describe the ratios that assess the company aptitude in meeting its short term financial liabilities. It depicts the company’s capability of a company to settling off its short-term liabilities on the time of payment (Stewart Myers, 2007). The company’s liquidity ratio unveils the number of times that short term financial obligations are gathered for by the company’s assets and cash. When the liquidity ratio is more than one it unveils that the company’s has financial state since it is less expected to fall into financial difficulties when short term obligation fall due to be paid The higher the liquidity ratios indicates better company’s margin of safety that the company’s has in paying the financial outstanding debt. Current ratio The current ratio assesses the company's capability to pay off short-term debt obligations using the current assets (James, 2009). The current ratio measures whether or not a firm has enough current assets to pay its current obligation over the fiscal year. The company’s creditors utilize this ratio to evaluate on the viability of offering short term loan to the company. The current ratio provides the sagacity of the company's efficiency and its capability in changing its product to cash (James Mao, 1999). Current ratio does not emphasize the timing factor of the company’s cash flows thus this ratio can give the wrong impression about the company’s solvency state in meeting short term obligations. Current Ratio = Col Ansell Limited Column1 2013 2012 2011 Current Assets 892.5 663.3 618.8 Current Liabilities 410.2 253.4 424.8 C.R 2.2 2.6 1.4 Azure Ltdolumn1 2013 2012 2011 Current Assets 12033 10689 7870 Current Liabilities 5707 5455 5365 C.R 2.11 1.96 1.47 As portrayed in the table above, Ansell Ltd divulges a fluctuating company’s liquidity in settling the outstanding company’s obligations. The differing ratios corresponds to the company current assets and the current obligation commensurate a proportionate increase and slight decrease from 2011 to 2013 fiscal years. Ansell current ratio unveils 1.4 in 2011 and relative increase to 2.6 in 2012 describing that the company has improves its capability in settling current obligations using current assets. Ansell Ltd consequently unveils a decrease in company capability in meeting it shorter obligation from 2.6 on 2012 to 2.2 in 2013. Azure Healthcare Limited has a defined sturdy increase from 1.47% in 2011, 1.965 in 2012 and 2.11 in fiscal year 2013. This shows that Ansell Company’s capability in meeting current outstanding obligations reduce in comparison Azure Healthcare Limited. Quick asset ratio Quick asset ratio is a demanding ratio since it endows the analysis of company’s aptitude in meeting its current financial obligation using its current assets without making use of the company’s inventory (Haugen, 2001). Quick asset ratio unveils the essence of financial state in meeting a threshold of settling obligation in absence of company’s inventory. Quick asset Ratio = C Col Ansell Limited olumn1 2013 2012 2011 Current Assets - Inventory 892.5-280.0 663.3-212.5 618.8-185.4 Current Liabilities 410.2 253.4 424.8 Quick asset Ratio 1.5 1.8 1.02 Azure Ltdolumn1 2013 2012 2011 Current Assets - Inventory 12033-4229 10689-2742 7870-2357 Current Liabilities 5707 5455 5365 Quick asset Ratio 1.37 1.46 1.03 As portrayed in the table above, Ansell Ltd divulges a fluctuating ratio from fiscal year 2011 to 2013. Ansell quick asset taste ratio unveils an increasing trend of the company’s viability in meeting the current obligation from, 1.02 in 2011 to 1.8 in 2012 and on the subsequent year 2013 the company’s efficiency in meeting liabilities decreases to 1.5. Azure Healthcare Limited quick asset ratio unveils a fluctuating ability in meeting its current obligation without using inventory from 1.03 in 2011, 1.46 in 2012 and slight decrease in fiscal year 2013. However, the fluctuating quick asset ratio unveils that company’s s is not stable paying off the current outstanding liabilities without utilizing its inventory. The prospective investors should invest in Ansell Ltd since the company is more stable enough in meeting its current liabilities in absence of the inventory as compared to Azure Healthcare Limited. Inventory turn over Inventory turnover ratio is a elementary ratio that assesses the period of time a company takes to sale the inventory in a financial period. The company will efficiently pay the short term financial obligation using revenue from sale of their inventories when inventory turnover will be higher (Altman, 2002). The predilection describe in the quick asset ratio defines that firm who keep slow moving inventory have a greater of meeting its financial short term liability. Inventory turnover = C Col Ansell Limited olumn1 2013 2012 2011 Inventory 280.0 212.5 185.4 Cost of goods sold 778.4 718..1 745.2 Inventory turnover (days) 131 108 91 Azure Ltdolumn1 2013 2012 2011 Inventory 4229 2742 2357 Cost of goods sold 10586 8607 8252 Inventory turnover (days) 146 116 104 As portrayed in the table above, Ansell Ltd has an increasing inventory turnover rate from 91days in 2011, 108 days in 2012 and subsequently Ansell unveils 131 days to convert its inventory to cash. Ansell Company viability of selling its inventory is worsening thus this unveils that Ansell as poor efficiency and stability in meeting the firms obligations since higher amount is tied up in inventory and more over the longer duration of selling inventory leads to higher risk of inventory shortage and increase in the cost of storing such inventory. Thus shows that the company’s management has install poor models in comparison with SSL International plc. Days debtors turn over Day’s debtors evaluates the average time range it takes for a firm to receive money for their trade payables in a financial year. Company’s need to collecting the amount tied up in debtors in a short period of time so as to enhance its financial stability in meeting the business liabilities (Paul, 2007). The effectiveness of the company’s collections if amount tied up in debtors signify the increase in cash flows resulting to proper realization of debt from accounts receivable that can be used in settling financial liabilities (Robin Coope, 2002). The lesser the number of days unveils that the company is more efficient in collecting cash tied up in debtors. Ansell Ltd will be inefficient if the primary debtors are not efficient in paying their company dues. Receivable turnover = Col Ansell Limited 2013 2012 2011 Receivables / debtors 253.2 191.5 180.6 Sales Revenue 1340.0 1225.1 1228.2 Receivable turnover 69 57 54 Azure Ltdolumn1 2013 2012 2011 Receivables / debtors 5365 4575 2274 Sales Revenue 22504 18224 16833 Receivable turnover 78 92 49 As portrayed in the table above, Ansell Ltd shows an increasing inefficiency in the company collection of amount tied in debtors from fiscal year 2011 towards 2013. Ansell unveils that it takes 54 days to collect the outstanding liability from debtors in 2011 where in the subsequent years 2012 and 2013 Ansell efficiency decreases from 57 days to 69 day correspondingly. However this denotes that the company’s efficiency in collecting owing tied up in debtors is worsening thus it faces financial difficulties, risk of stock loss and higher cost of storing the inventory. Gearing ratio Gearing ratio reveals the percentage ratio of the debt and firm's equity and gives a benchmark on the extent to which the firm utilizes its long term debt (Hausman, 2006). Higher gearing ratio describes an elevated debt to equity proportion while low gearing ratio represents a low proportion of debt to equity. Gearing ratios evaluate the companies’ long term financial strength which is delineated by the coverage and structural ratios. Interest Coverage Ratio The interest coverage ratio assesses the company's ability to gather its interest payments using the company’s income. The interest coverage ratio evaluates the number of times a company makes the interest payments on its income using its earnings before interest and tax. It determines efficiency of the company in paying its interest expenses on outstanding financial obligation (Reilly, 2011). Whilst interest coverage ratios are close to 1, it unveils that the company is having financial difficulty generating income enough cash flow to settling its interest obligation. Preferably interest coverage ratio should be over 1.5 for a company to be efficient enough in meeting its interest liabilities Interest coverage ratio = Col Ansell Limited 2013 2012 2011 EBITDA 156.7 144.5 134.7 Expense 394.4 777.8 798.4 Interest coverage ratio 39.7% 18.6% 16.9% Azure Ltdolumn1 2013 2012 2011 EBITDA 1024 321 (2,652) Expense 10894 9300 11133 Interest coverage ratio 9.40% 3.45% -23.82% As portrayed in the table above, Ansell Ltd Interest coverage ratio unveils an increasing company’s ability in meeting its interest obligation using its business income. Thus describing the company’s efficiency in meeting its interest liability in utilizing income is increasing. In 2011 Ansell unveils 16.9% subsequently 18.6% in 2012 and in 2013 the company shows an improved viability in meeting it interest liability to 39.7% thus signifies good company’s financial performances. The company’s stature in meeting the interest coverage unveils better performances in relation to AZURE HEALTHCARE LIMITED and other competitors. Debt-to-Total Assets Ratio Debt-to total assets ratio is comparison between the total debt financing the firm and the totals assets. This ratio is used in determining the amount of total liabilities which exist per dollar of assets invested in the firm (James Mao, 1999). Usually if debt ratio is more than 50%, it is considered that the company’s finance its investments in assets by using debt than the equity available in the firm. Debt to total assets ratio = Col Ansell Limited 2013 2012 2011 Liabilities 1002.1 627.5 538.7 Total assets 1835.4 1348.3 1216.3 Debt to asset ratio 54.6% 46.5% 44.3% Azure Ltdolumn1 2013 2012 2011 Liabilities 6089 5887 5853 Total assets 16724 15351 12602 Debt to asset ratio 54.6% 46.5% 44.3% Conclusion Apart from the company’s sophisticated valuation methods such as internal rate of return (IRR), Cash Flow Return on Investment (CFROI), and the discounted cash flow (DCF) analysis, Ansell Ltd preferably measures its performances Return on Equity (ROE) since it focuses on the company’s return to the shareholders thus giving a quick and easy to understand metric to shareholders. According to company’s disclosures, Ansell LtdLimited recognizes the short term obligations payable within one year a disclosed according to requirement of IAS 37 and IASB. The company classifies the current financial obligation under differed tax, provisions and the interest bearing liabilities. Ansell Limited competitors’ including Azure Healthcare Limited and other competitors discloses their financial issues according to the requirement of AASB and IAS standards. They constitute management accounting expertise that enhances control the company’s financial transaction by following the stipulation laid down under the Corporation Act 2001 which exhaustively gives need of disclosures in judging the going concern of the company. The profitability ratios described by return on assets showing a decreasing trend from financial year 2011 to 2013 with 11.1%, 10.7% and 8.5% correspondingly unveils that the company’s is not worth investing. Return on assets and profit margin shows that Azure Healthcare Limited and other competitors defines it competitiveness over the Ansell Ltd thus decreasing profitability and impracticable investments for prospective investors. The company’s liquidity defined by current ratio unveils that Ansell Ltd as decreasing in company capability in meeting it shorter obligation from 2.6 on 2012 to 2.2 in 2013 thus showing a reduction in company’s viability in meeting current outstanding obligations. Quick asset ratio practicably unveils that Ansell has decreasing liquidity condition thus the company in not in a better condition for inventing since it cannot settle it liabilities when they fall due. Inventory turnover it is inappropriate for prospective investors to invest since company assets are inconsiderably productive in converting their inventory as compared to competitors such Azure Healthcare Limited and other competitors defines it competitiveness over the Ansell Ltd. Debt asset ratio unveils an increasing liabilities in each asset invested thus shows that company finances its investment in assets by debt as compared to the company’s equity hence not for investing. This describes that Azure Healthcare Limited and other competitors gas more competitive over the Ansell Ltd thus the prospective investors need to consider investing in more viable and competitive firms. Recommendation Ansell has several competitive advantages that includes portfolio of strong brands and low production cost that mutually make up a narrow economic moat. However Ansell Ltd needs to conceptualize in consistently in generates returns on invested shareholders capital and enhances continual refreshment of the product portfolio through innovation program that sustains brand strength in the market to win over Azure Healthcare Limited. References Altman, E.I., 2002. Financial ratios, discriminant analysis and the prediction of corporate bankruptcy. The journal of finance, 23, pp. 589-609. Haugen, R.A..a.R.A.H., 2001. Modern investment theory. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice Hall. Hausman, D.M., 2006. Economic Analysis and investment decisions. Cambridge University Press. p.96. James Mao, C., 1999. Quantitative analysis of financial decisions.. Prentice Hall,. James, D., 2009. Accounting: Concepts & Application of financial analysis. Cengage Learning. p.402. Paul, B., 2007. The analysis and use of financial ratios:. Journal of Business Finance & Accounting, (14), pp.449-461. Reilly, F.K..a.K.C.B., 2011. Investment analysis and portfolio management.. Cengage Learning. Robin Coope, 2002. Implementing Investment treats: Invetors decision making. Stewart Myers, a.N.S.M., 2007. Corporate financing and investment decisions when firms have information that investors do not have. Journal of financial economics, pp.187-221. White, G.I..A.C.S.a.D.F., 2004. The analysis and use of financial statements. Wiley. Appendixes Read More