13.01.2015 Views

Gap Inc. Equity Valuation and Analysis Valued at November 1, 2006

Gap Inc. Equity Valuation and Analysis Valued at November 1, 2006

Gap Inc. Equity Valuation and Analysis Valued at November 1, 2006

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

<strong>Gap</strong> <strong>Inc</strong>. <strong>Equity</strong> <strong>Valu<strong>at</strong>ion</strong> <strong>and</strong> <strong>Analysis</strong><br />

<strong>Valued</strong> <strong>at</strong> <strong>November</strong> 1, <strong>2006</strong><br />

Brian Vance: brian.vance@ttu.edu<br />

Jon<strong>at</strong>han Appleg<strong>at</strong>e: jon<strong>at</strong>han.r.appleg<strong>at</strong>e@ttu.edu<br />

Kyle Reynolds: kingsfan0@yahoo.com<br />

Chance Baucum: chance0203@aol.com<br />

M<strong>at</strong>t Loyd: m<strong>at</strong>t.loyd@ttu.edu<br />

1


Table of Contents<br />

Executive Summary…………………………………………………6<br />

Industry Overview <strong>and</strong> <strong>Analysis</strong>…………………………………8<br />

Company Overview………………………………………………….8<br />

Competitive Advantage <strong>Analysis</strong>…………………………………15<br />

Accounting Flexibility………………………………………………..23<br />

Accounting Str<strong>at</strong>egy Evalu<strong>at</strong>ion…………………………………..24<br />

Quality of disclosure…………………………………………………………………………………..25<br />

Potential “Red flags”………………………………………………………………………………...26<br />

2


R<strong>at</strong>io <strong>Analysis</strong> <strong>and</strong> Forecast Financials…………………………28<br />

Liquidity <strong>Analysis</strong>……………………………………………………..29<br />

Profitability <strong>Analysis</strong>…………………………………………………30<br />

Capital Structure <strong>Analysis</strong>………………………………………….31<br />

Benchmark <strong>Analysis</strong>………………………………………………....31<br />

Liquidity…………………………………………………………………………………………………...32<br />

Profitability ………………………………………………………………………………………………35<br />

Capital structure………………………………………………………………………………………..38<br />

Financial St<strong>at</strong>ement Forecasting…………………………………39<br />

<strong>Valu<strong>at</strong>ion</strong> <strong>Analysis</strong>……………………………………………………42<br />

Method of comparables <strong>Valu<strong>at</strong>ion</strong>…………………………………………………………….43<br />

Cost of Capital Estim<strong>at</strong>ion………………………………………………………………………..44<br />

Summary of <strong>Valu<strong>at</strong>ion</strong>s…………………………………………….45<br />

Altman’s Z-Score……………………………………………………..49<br />

References…………………………………………………………….51<br />

Appendices…………………………………………………………….52<br />

3


GAP INC.<br />

Ticker Symbol: (NYSE:GPS) <strong>Valu<strong>at</strong>ion</strong>s (As of Nov. 1st, 2005)<br />

Actual<br />

S&P 500 Price 20.8<br />

Price 20.64<br />

52 week range 15.91 - 21.39 AEG Model 97<br />

Market Cap 15.53B RI Model 797<br />

Sales $Mil<br />

15,837<br />

FCF 1,230<br />

DPS $0.18<br />

SHS OS 822.00M Beta 0.86<br />

Div. Yld 1.5 Stnd Dev. 0.56<br />

GPS<br />

Industry<br />

ROE 16.95% 22.50% Earnings Per Share:<br />

P/E 17.77% 20.80% 2004 2005 <strong>2006</strong>e 2007e<br />

P/B 3% 4.50% 0.65 0.74 0.97 1.1<br />

LT D/E 0.10% 0.30%<br />

Total Return% 2003 2004 2005 YTD<br />

Stock 50.3 -8.6 -15.6 8.9<br />

+/- Industry 0.8 -42.7 -34.7 -5.4<br />

+/- S&P 500 23.9 -17.6 -18.6 -4<br />

4


Executive Summary<br />

Recommend<strong>at</strong>ion: Overvalued firm<br />

Through detailed research <strong>and</strong> valu<strong>at</strong>ion, we have concluded th<strong>at</strong> we are<br />

a selling opportunity. The clothing retail industry is very competitive with a high<br />

number of competitors. This large number of competitors cre<strong>at</strong>es strong<br />

earnings potential compared to other industries. The industry is characterized by<br />

emphasizing differenti<strong>at</strong>ion <strong>and</strong> not cost leadership, which results in the firms not<br />

having to have a price war. Along with differenti<strong>at</strong>ion, most of the competitors<br />

within this industry tend to rely on their br<strong>and</strong> image. The biggest firms within<br />

the industry also tend to cre<strong>at</strong>e subsidiaries in order to compete with rival firms.<br />

The thre<strong>at</strong> of new competitors is rel<strong>at</strong>ively low due to the high start up costs of<br />

entering the market. Since <strong>Gap</strong> <strong>Inc</strong>. <strong>and</strong> other firms in this industry tend to have<br />

a high quality br<strong>and</strong> image, most firms have power over their suppliers, due to<br />

manufacturers competing for business.<br />

After analysis, <strong>Gap</strong>’s accounting practices <strong>and</strong> policies were found to be<br />

fairly aggressive. However, their disclosure <strong>and</strong> reporting of relevant m<strong>at</strong>erial is<br />

seemingly very transparent. <strong>Gap</strong> discloses all accounting methods concerning<br />

everything from leases <strong>and</strong> pension plans to inventory <strong>and</strong> tax methods. They<br />

also outline all accounting st<strong>at</strong>ements <strong>and</strong> opinions affecting their business. We<br />

found no distortions or discrepancies in their accounting.<br />

5


After computing our firm’s core r<strong>at</strong>ios, we felt we were able to grasp <strong>Gap</strong>’s<br />

overall performance as compared to its competitors within the industry.<br />

Inventory turnover tended to be lower while gross profit was high throughout<br />

the industry. This is most likely due to the fact th<strong>at</strong> most firms in our industry<br />

compete with differenti<strong>at</strong>ion <strong>and</strong> br<strong>and</strong> name.<br />

To underst<strong>and</strong> wh<strong>at</strong> the future holds for <strong>Gap</strong> <strong>Inc</strong>., we forecasted the<br />

company’s financial st<strong>at</strong>ements through 2015. By analyzing trends, we have<br />

concluded th<strong>at</strong> <strong>Gap</strong> will continue to grow <strong>at</strong> a current r<strong>at</strong>e; much like the firm<br />

has been doing the last 3 years without any unforeseen abnormalities. It was<br />

extremely important th<strong>at</strong> our forecasts be calcul<strong>at</strong>ed as accur<strong>at</strong>ely as possible<br />

due to the fact th<strong>at</strong> forecasting was the base upon which all valu<strong>at</strong>ion methods<br />

rested.<br />

After thorough evalu<strong>at</strong>ion, we have found th<strong>at</strong> <strong>Gap</strong> <strong>Inc</strong>. is overvalued in<br />

the market. All of our valu<strong>at</strong>ion models showed <strong>Gap</strong> <strong>Inc</strong>.’s stock to be<br />

considerably overvalued. The most accur<strong>at</strong>e valu<strong>at</strong>ion model for us was the free<br />

cash flows valu<strong>at</strong>ion. Using our free cash flow model, we found an estim<strong>at</strong>ed<br />

price per share <strong>at</strong> the end of 2005 to be $15.72 while our actual price per share<br />

was $17.64. The only model which we considered to be unreliable was the<br />

discounted dividend valu<strong>at</strong>ion. We feel this was due to our low dividend payout<br />

r<strong>at</strong>e in forecasted years. The discounted dividends valu<strong>at</strong>ion model is flawed<br />

because it values companies based on wh<strong>at</strong> they pay per dividend, <strong>and</strong> many<br />

companies pay little or no dividends <strong>at</strong> all. Based on this all-inclusive, in-depth<br />

6


analysis <strong>and</strong> valu<strong>at</strong>ion, we find <strong>Gap</strong> <strong>Inc</strong>. to be overvalued <strong>and</strong> strongly<br />

recommend selling.<br />

Business <strong>and</strong> Industry <strong>Analysis</strong><br />

Firm Overview<br />

<strong>Gap</strong> <strong>Inc</strong>. is one of the largest specialty retailers while leading the world in<br />

specialty retail clothing. <strong>Gap</strong> <strong>Inc</strong>. owns Banana Republic, Old Navy, <strong>and</strong> Forth &<br />

Towne. They specialize in apparel design while offering clothing <strong>and</strong> accessories<br />

for the whole family. <strong>Gap</strong> <strong>Inc</strong>. owns more than 3,000 stores <strong>and</strong> is reported to<br />

have accumul<strong>at</strong>ed $16 billion in fiscal year 2005. Their main headquarters is<br />

loc<strong>at</strong>ed in the San Francisco Bay Area but their product design offices are loc<strong>at</strong>ed<br />

in New York City, San Francisco, <strong>and</strong> London. As far as wh<strong>at</strong> the company does,<br />

<strong>Gap</strong>.com says, “We try to put out affordable, casual designs of shirts <strong>and</strong> jeans<br />

while providing value to the shareholders <strong>and</strong> making a positive impact in the<br />

community.” Abercrombie <strong>and</strong> Fitch, American Eagle, <strong>and</strong> Buckle are some of<br />

<strong>Gap</strong>’s competitors within the industry. They all aim to design their clothing<br />

around the younger crowds, ages 18-35. Here is a table showing the Total<br />

Assets, Price, Sales, <strong>and</strong> Net <strong>Inc</strong>ome for <strong>Gap</strong> <strong>Inc</strong>. <strong>and</strong> their direct competitors.<br />

2004 2005 <strong>2006</strong><br />

Total Assets<br />

GAP <strong>Inc</strong>. $10,343,000 $10,048,00 $8,821,000<br />

Abercrombie&Fitch $1,383,000 $1,347,000 $1,789,000<br />

Buckle $356,222 $405,543 $374,266<br />

Price<br />

<strong>Gap</strong> <strong>Inc</strong>. $21.37 $17.64 $18.96<br />

7


Abercrombie&Fitch $47.15 $65.25 $68.00<br />

Buckle $29.90 $32.40 $45.91<br />

Sales<br />

<strong>Gap</strong> <strong>Inc</strong>. $15,854,000 $16,267,000 $16,023,000<br />

Abercrombie&Fitch $1,707,000 $2,021,000 $2,784,000<br />

Buckle $422,820 $470,937 $501,101<br />

Net <strong>Inc</strong>ome<br />

<strong>Gap</strong> <strong>Inc</strong>. $1,030,000 $1,150,000 $1,113,000<br />

Abercrombie&Fitch $204,830 $216,376 $333,986<br />

Buckle $33,679 $43,229 $51,906<br />

As you can see in the table above, <strong>Gap</strong> <strong>Inc</strong>. has separ<strong>at</strong>ed itself from its<br />

competitors in the industry by claiming a huge portion of the market share. This<br />

can be seen by the huge Net <strong>Inc</strong>ome compared to industry competitors. <strong>Gap</strong><br />

aims to sell to the whole family with a cost-leading <strong>at</strong>titude. Market capitaliz<strong>at</strong>ion<br />

or net worth of the company is 14.85 billion. They have more net worth than any<br />

of their competitors. They have owned from 8 to 10 million in assets over the<br />

past five years. The current price of <strong>Gap</strong> <strong>Inc</strong>. Stock is $17.92 per share.<br />

Five Forces Model<br />

The five forces model can help a company in a number of ways. It can<br />

determine the <strong>at</strong>tractiveness of a particular market. It can also show the<br />

rel<strong>at</strong>ionship between competitors, suppliers, <strong>and</strong> buyers within an industry. With<br />

this inform<strong>at</strong>ion, investors can develop a broad <strong>and</strong> sophistic<strong>at</strong>ed analysis of<br />

competitive position which can be used when cre<strong>at</strong>ing str<strong>at</strong>egy, plans, or<br />

investing decisions to use within the business world.<br />

Rivalry Among Existing Firms<br />

8


Some aspects of rivalry among firms th<strong>at</strong> make this model so important<br />

would be the number <strong>and</strong> size of firms, industry size <strong>and</strong> trends, product/service<br />

range, <strong>and</strong> differenti<strong>at</strong>ion <strong>and</strong> str<strong>at</strong>egy. The clothing stores industry, which has<br />

done extremely well over the last 5-10 years, has a large number of competitors.<br />

A few of the competing companies include American Eagle, Abercrombie & Fitch,<br />

<strong>and</strong> TJ Maxx. This large number of competitors cre<strong>at</strong>es strong earnings potential<br />

compared to other industries. In the clothing store industry there is room to<br />

grow, but start up costs can be high. While <strong>Gap</strong> is definitely looking to gain a<br />

larger share of the market, switching costs for consumers is low. This is<br />

especially true with one of <strong>Gap</strong>’s top competitors TJ Maxx. TJ Maxx competes<br />

solely on price. In response, <strong>Gap</strong> is looking to reestablish a larger core of<br />

consumers who are br<strong>and</strong> loyalists. To compete with all these different<br />

competitors in the market, <strong>Gap</strong> <strong>Inc</strong>. cre<strong>at</strong>ed such higher end clothing lines as<br />

Banana Republic, Old Navy, <strong>and</strong> Forth & Towne. In an industry where the right<br />

mix of product differenti<strong>at</strong>ion <strong>and</strong> price play a key role, these three br<strong>and</strong>s allow<br />

them to be competitive.<br />

Thre<strong>at</strong> of New Entrants<br />

Some important factors surrounding the thre<strong>at</strong> of new entrants section of<br />

the five forces model include: barriers to entry, br<strong>and</strong> equity, switching costs,<br />

access to distribution <strong>and</strong> government policies. Underst<strong>and</strong>ing these concepts<br />

will help a firm underst<strong>and</strong> the industry <strong>at</strong> a higher level. The popularity of the<br />

internet has brought more sales opportunities for all companies within this<br />

9


industry, which in turn, has increased the development of online marketing.<br />

While <strong>Gap</strong> <strong>and</strong> its competitors compete in the clothing store industry, they also<br />

have a number of competitors in the fashion industry which includes br<strong>and</strong>s such<br />

as Polo, Tommy Hilfiger, <strong>and</strong> Lacoste. These industries differ slightly because<br />

these fashion companies sell their clothing to department stores like Dillard’s,<br />

while <strong>Gap</strong> <strong>Inc</strong>. oper<strong>at</strong>es their own stores. They compete with these companies<br />

because switching costs are so low. However, within their own industry, start up<br />

costs can be high. Even though there is room to grow within the industry, the<br />

thre<strong>at</strong> of new entrants is rel<strong>at</strong>ively low. This is largely due to large economies of<br />

scale in this industry in which new entrants will initially suffer from a cost<br />

disadvantage from existing firms such as GAP <strong>Inc</strong>. The risk of investing so much<br />

to start up deters most new entrants. In conclusion, there will always be the<br />

thre<strong>at</strong> of new entrants, but it will be extremely hard <strong>and</strong> expensive to m<strong>at</strong>ch<br />

<strong>Gap</strong>’s share in the market.<br />

Thre<strong>at</strong> of Substitute Products<br />

Some key concepts th<strong>at</strong> go along with the thre<strong>at</strong> of substitute products<br />

are buyer propensity to substitute, rel<strong>at</strong>ive price performance of substitutes,<br />

buyer switching cost, <strong>and</strong> perceived level of product differenti<strong>at</strong>ion.<br />

Underst<strong>and</strong>ing this section will allow a firm to know how to h<strong>and</strong>le any substitute<br />

products th<strong>at</strong> is thrown <strong>at</strong> them by competitors. The thre<strong>at</strong> of substitute<br />

products for <strong>Gap</strong> is very real. This is the main reason they are trying to<br />

reestablish a larger group of br<strong>and</strong> loyalists with their “back to basics” simplistic<br />

10


style th<strong>at</strong> consumers had known <strong>and</strong> loved. Another way <strong>Gap</strong> <strong>Inc</strong>. can overcome<br />

this problem is with their other br<strong>and</strong>s, especially Old Navy. Br<strong>and</strong> loyalists will<br />

generally buy a particular br<strong>and</strong> regardless of the price. However, consumers<br />

who are not br<strong>and</strong> loyal tend to seek out substitute products largely because of<br />

high prices. This is where Old Navy is able to tap into the industry. Old Navy<br />

offers trendier styles with a lower cost, which lessens the thre<strong>at</strong> of substitute<br />

products. In an industry as diverse as the clothing industry, every move you<br />

make determines when <strong>and</strong> how many substitute products could possibly enter<br />

your market. This is why having more than one line of clothing, an online shop,<br />

<strong>and</strong> sales in more than just the United St<strong>at</strong>es is so important.<br />

Bargaining Power of Buyers/Customers<br />

Underst<strong>and</strong>ing the bargaining power of your customers will help a firm<br />

decide on the price it wants to sell its products for. Since our industry is, on<br />

average, not a price competitive industry, this section is not as important as<br />

others in the five forces model. Simply due to the low switching costs of the<br />

industry, buyers do have some power. Price sensitivity plays a small role but the<br />

majority of buyers are willing to pay for <strong>Gap</strong>’s moder<strong>at</strong>ely priced clothing. Sales<br />

<strong>at</strong> retail loc<strong>at</strong>ions tend to <strong>at</strong>tract customers with less spending power, but<br />

customers generally know wh<strong>at</strong> to expect with regard to prices in the industry.<br />

On the average, <strong>Gap</strong> <strong>Inc</strong>.’s prices are lower than both Abercrombie & Fitch, <strong>and</strong><br />

Buckle. The <strong>Gap</strong> br<strong>and</strong> or Banana Republic may lose a few customers due to<br />

prices, but Old Navy was cre<strong>at</strong>ed to appease the price shoppers. In this market,<br />

11


it is important to compete on both quality <strong>and</strong> br<strong>and</strong> name, as well as price. This<br />

is why, for example, Abercrombie & Fitch launched Abercrombie Kids, Hollister<br />

Co., <strong>and</strong> RUEHL 925 campaigns. In conclusion, the customers do not have much<br />

bargaining power within this industry. An example of an industry th<strong>at</strong> would have<br />

high bargaining power of customers would be lower quality outlets such as K-<br />

mart, Payless, <strong>and</strong> Wal-Mart.<br />

Bargaining Power of Suppliers<br />

Bargaining power of suppliers is an extremely important aspect of our<br />

firm, <strong>and</strong> the industry in general. If not properly calcul<strong>at</strong>ed, excess cost <strong>and</strong> high<br />

inventory can occur. There are numerous suppliers of fabrics <strong>and</strong> other m<strong>at</strong>erials<br />

like cotton to choose from. Most firms actually shop for manufacturers of clothes<br />

<strong>and</strong> h<strong>and</strong> their designs over to them. Since the firms in our industry have a high<br />

quality br<strong>and</strong> image, most have real power over their suppliers, due to<br />

manufacturer’s vying for their business.<br />

In conclusion, there is an extremely high degree of competition within this<br />

clothing retail industry. Since these br<strong>and</strong>s rely on the l<strong>at</strong>est fashions, quarterly<br />

changes in seasonal products must happen as much as possible. Technology,<br />

including online shopping, must be up to d<strong>at</strong>e. Branching out to places other<br />

than the United St<strong>at</strong>es is important. Overall, these firms are relying on br<strong>and</strong><br />

image <strong>and</strong> differenti<strong>at</strong>ion to gain as much market share as possible.<br />

Key Success Factors<br />

12


Every firm in America has to decide, when it first starts, how it wants to<br />

position itself in the industry. Our firm, <strong>Gap</strong> <strong>Inc</strong>., is no different. <strong>Gap</strong> had to<br />

make the decision of how it wanted to gain a competitive advantage over other<br />

firms in its field. There are two str<strong>at</strong>egies a firm can follow. It can either choose<br />

a cost leadership plan or a differenti<strong>at</strong>ion plan. Cost leadership is essentially just<br />

competing with other firms only on cost. A cost leader can offer the same<br />

product as a competitor, only <strong>at</strong> a lower price. Differenti<strong>at</strong>ion on the other h<strong>and</strong><br />

is competing by offering a product th<strong>at</strong> is different in some way. These plans are<br />

important because a firm can gain an advantage over its competitors based on<br />

either of these str<strong>at</strong>egies. It is also important th<strong>at</strong> a firm choose one or the other<br />

<strong>and</strong> not get stuck in the middle. Not taking one side or the other can cause a<br />

firm to earn low profits.<br />

The objective of product differenti<strong>at</strong>ion is to develop a position th<strong>at</strong><br />

potential customers will underst<strong>and</strong> to be unique. There are two mechanisms for<br />

which differenti<strong>at</strong>ion affects performance. First, differenti<strong>at</strong>ion will reduce price<br />

sensitivity. This means th<strong>at</strong> consumers might be willing to pay a higher price for<br />

the differenti<strong>at</strong>ing factor(s). Second, differenti<strong>at</strong>ion should reduce directness of<br />

competition. This can be defined by st<strong>at</strong>ing th<strong>at</strong> the more your product differs<br />

from the industry’s products, c<strong>at</strong>egoriz<strong>at</strong>ion becomes more difficult thus your<br />

product draws fewer comparisons to competition.<br />

At the market level, differenti<strong>at</strong>ion can be defined as improving the quality<br />

of goods over time due to innov<strong>at</strong>ion. In an evolutionary sense, differenti<strong>at</strong>ion is<br />

13


more of a str<strong>at</strong>egy th<strong>at</strong> is important in adapting to a moving environment <strong>and</strong> its<br />

social groups. Since almost all the firms in our industry have name recognition,<br />

success in this market must be achieved by adapting to a moving environment<br />

th<strong>at</strong> is obsessed with the l<strong>at</strong>est trends, while producing comfortable <strong>and</strong> casual<br />

styles of dress.<br />

Competitive <strong>Analysis</strong><br />

<strong>Gap</strong> <strong>Inc</strong>. is in the highly competitive, ever changing, clothing retail<br />

industry. The <strong>Gap</strong> is implementing technology into its stores which contain<br />

certain intrinsic competitive advantages which give the corpor<strong>at</strong>ion a head up on<br />

the competition. Not only does this new technology allow for more cost effective<br />

distribution, but it also offers a more time-efficient experience for both the<br />

consumer <strong>and</strong> the employee. Instead of spending large amounts of money yearly<br />

by manually taking inventory, The GAP will now be able to access inventory d<strong>at</strong>a<br />

quickly <strong>and</strong> easily through a h<strong>and</strong>held device. If there is a situ<strong>at</strong>ion where<br />

merch<strong>and</strong>ise is out of stock <strong>at</strong> a particular loc<strong>at</strong>ion, it can be dealt with quickly<br />

<strong>and</strong> effectively, by communic<strong>at</strong>ing with other GAP stores to replenish the missing<br />

units.<br />

These measures taken to provide technological advantages over other<br />

companies will pay off, simply because it is a more convenient way of shopping.<br />

It literally bridges inventories from multiple stores in a region, giving the<br />

customer a larger selection of sizes <strong>and</strong> styles. This allows for customers to try<br />

14


on clothing <strong>at</strong> the store, as well as offer the large inventory the internet has<br />

been able to offer for many years. These new ways of business improves The<br />

GAP with an entirely different shopping experience. This experience in time will<br />

increase customer retention <strong>and</strong> rapport, gener<strong>at</strong>ing profits. The <strong>Gap</strong> Web<br />

advancements will provide the base for more company expansion. If the GAP can<br />

hold their customer base through outst<strong>and</strong>ing customer s<strong>at</strong>isfaction, then people<br />

will be drawn to the unique shopping experience.<br />

<strong>Gap</strong> <strong>Inc</strong>. has chosen a differenti<strong>at</strong>ion str<strong>at</strong>egy. “Know who you are <strong>and</strong> be<br />

it. Celebr<strong>at</strong>e your uniqueness with passion <strong>and</strong> conviction.” Th<strong>at</strong> phrase has been<br />

the philosophy th<strong>at</strong> has driven GAP for the last three decades. <strong>Gap</strong>’s purpose has<br />

been to appeal to people of all ages, not just teens <strong>and</strong> young adults in their<br />

twenties. This process starts with <strong>Gap</strong> designers who travel to such fashion <strong>and</strong><br />

cultural capitals as New York, Paris, London, Milan, <strong>and</strong> Tokyo. Here, the<br />

designers partake in fashion shows <strong>and</strong> get a feeling for wh<strong>at</strong> the target<br />

audience’s preferences are. Once these concepts have been developed, the<br />

merchants <strong>and</strong> designers work extremely close together to transl<strong>at</strong>e this<br />

inspir<strong>at</strong>ion into reality. This process of cre<strong>at</strong>ivity <strong>and</strong> innov<strong>at</strong>ion is very much<br />

necessary to differenti<strong>at</strong>e The <strong>Gap</strong>’s clothing line from such top competitors as<br />

Abercrombie & Fitch <strong>and</strong> American Eagle.<br />

Investment in br<strong>and</strong> image has had a huge impact on GAP <strong>Inc</strong>. For<br />

around thirty years, GAP specialized in basic clothing <strong>and</strong> had a consistent core<br />

group of customers. Around 2000, GAP launched a new campaign to start<br />

15


making a newer, trendier style of clothing. GAP also cre<strong>at</strong>ed flashy commercials<br />

th<strong>at</strong> included choreographed dance numbers <strong>and</strong> singing. This change alien<strong>at</strong>ed<br />

many of <strong>Gap</strong>’s core customers <strong>and</strong> as a result, the company lost a sufficient<br />

amount of money. Around 2002, then CEP Millard Drexler launched a “back to<br />

basic” campaign. This campaign consisted of going back to <strong>Gap</strong>’s roots <strong>and</strong><br />

specializing in items such as denim, T-shirts, hooded swe<strong>at</strong>ers, <strong>and</strong> basic pants.<br />

This has improved sales, but it has been an uphill b<strong>at</strong>tle. Essentially, <strong>Gap</strong>’s br<strong>and</strong><br />

image tries to differenti<strong>at</strong>e itself from competitors by offering very high quality,<br />

basic, casual clothing.<br />

Differenti<strong>at</strong>ion companies require heavy investments in research <strong>and</strong><br />

development. At GAP <strong>Inc</strong>., each item is sold <strong>and</strong> then registered for analysis by<br />

planners <strong>and</strong> distribution analysts. These analysts monitor weekly sales trend<br />

reports <strong>and</strong> determine which stores need to be stocked with wh<strong>at</strong> products.<br />

These “replenishment shipments” usually occur one to three times per week.<br />

This process continues until the season ends. At this point, all customer<br />

feedback, performance notes, <strong>and</strong> suggested improvements are analyzed so GAP<br />

is ready to being this cycle again.<br />

As far as differenti<strong>at</strong>ion goes, <strong>Gap</strong>’s investment in br<strong>and</strong> image is by far<br />

the most important aspect of value chain management. A bad decision, such as<br />

the one made in 2000, can cripple a company. GAP is just now recovering <strong>and</strong> it<br />

has been a slow process. In order to achieve <strong>and</strong> sustain competitive advantage,<br />

16


GAP <strong>Inc</strong>. needs to stick to its roots <strong>and</strong> structure its supply chain in a way th<strong>at</strong> is<br />

consistent.<br />

Even with The <strong>Gap</strong> implementing a polished product differenti<strong>at</strong>ion<br />

str<strong>at</strong>egy, with strong focus on br<strong>and</strong> development <strong>and</strong> unique advertisement, it<br />

is still not <strong>at</strong> the top of the market. Popul<strong>at</strong>ion groups like the baby boomers are<br />

not tailored to by <strong>Gap</strong> <strong>Inc</strong>. or any of its subsidiaries. Expansion of <strong>Gap</strong> <strong>Inc</strong>. would<br />

open up a whole new, highly lucr<strong>at</strong>ive, market share.<br />

Although The <strong>Gap</strong> has gone from being a corner shop in California, to a<br />

worldwide corpor<strong>at</strong>ion, they have experienced many peaks <strong>and</strong> valleys. The<br />

company has learned many lessons. First, when cre<strong>at</strong>ing marketing campaigns,<br />

they learned to cre<strong>at</strong>e their own image <strong>and</strong> not rely on celebrity st<strong>at</strong>us. Second,<br />

they have learned how to cre<strong>at</strong>e their own image. Their image is broad, but<br />

specific. It adheres strictly to high quality, basic, casual clothing. Third, The <strong>Gap</strong><br />

has learned to cre<strong>at</strong>e sub-br<strong>and</strong>s to tailor to various classific<strong>at</strong>ions of people.<br />

Fourth, The <strong>Gap</strong> realizes th<strong>at</strong> they oper<strong>at</strong>e within a niche where customers care<br />

about fashion but only so long as it can be delivered <strong>at</strong> a moder<strong>at</strong>e price. The<br />

<strong>Gap</strong> has also learned early th<strong>at</strong> they have to outsource labor in order to keep<br />

costs down <strong>and</strong> remain competitive. The <strong>Gap</strong>’s commitment to customer<br />

s<strong>at</strong>isfaction <strong>and</strong> ability to reinvent themselves in the vol<strong>at</strong>ile fashion industry<br />

provides for an expected strong future for the company.<br />

17


Accounting <strong>Analysis</strong><br />

In the section we analyzed <strong>Gap</strong> <strong>Inc</strong>.’s accounting quality by six steps.<br />

First, by identifying the key accounting policies th<strong>at</strong> are used. Then, Assess<br />

Accounting Flexibility for the firm, <strong>and</strong> evalu<strong>at</strong>ing the accounting str<strong>at</strong>egy. Next,<br />

we had to evalu<strong>at</strong>e how easy or less easy managers made it analyst to look <strong>at</strong><br />

it’s financial st<strong>at</strong>ements, <strong>and</strong> point out any potential “red flags”. Finally, based on<br />

this analyzes; we felt th<strong>at</strong> there was no accounting distortions to undo. <strong>Gap</strong> <strong>Inc</strong>.<br />

has disclosed all of its m<strong>at</strong>erial very well, <strong>and</strong> we feel th<strong>at</strong> their accounting<br />

practices are not misleading or distorted based off of the r<strong>at</strong>io analyzes of <strong>Gap</strong><br />

<strong>Inc</strong>.’s financial results.<br />

Key Accounting Policies<br />

The <strong>Gap</strong>’s key success factors are <strong>at</strong>tributed to their strict accounting<br />

polices which coordin<strong>at</strong>e with each other to cre<strong>at</strong>e the present <strong>and</strong> future<br />

financial performance of the company. The financial st<strong>at</strong>ements are consolid<strong>at</strong>ed<br />

to include the accounts of the company <strong>and</strong> all its subsidiaries. All inter-company<br />

transactions <strong>and</strong> balances have been elimin<strong>at</strong>ed. Transl<strong>at</strong>ion adjustments result<br />

from transl<strong>at</strong>ing foreign subsidiaries’ financial st<strong>at</strong>ements into U.S. dollars.<br />

Balance sheet accounts are transl<strong>at</strong>ed <strong>at</strong> exchange r<strong>at</strong>es in effect <strong>at</strong> the balance<br />

sheet d<strong>at</strong>e. <strong>Inc</strong>ome st<strong>at</strong>ement accounts are transl<strong>at</strong>ed <strong>at</strong> average exchange r<strong>at</strong>es<br />

during the year. The resulting transl<strong>at</strong>ion adjustments are included in<br />

accumul<strong>at</strong>ed other comprehensive earnings in the Consolid<strong>at</strong>ed St<strong>at</strong>ements of<br />

Shareholders’ <strong>Equity</strong> (<strong>Gap</strong> 10-K).<br />

18


Fiscal year for <strong>Gap</strong> <strong>Inc</strong>. ends on the S<strong>at</strong>urday closest to January 31. The<br />

last three years have consisted of 52 weeks while fiscal <strong>2006</strong> will consist of 53<br />

weeks.<br />

Revenue <strong>and</strong> the rel<strong>at</strong>ed cost of goods sold (including shipping costs) is<br />

recognized <strong>at</strong> the time the products are received by the customers in<br />

compliance with the rules of Staff Accounting Bulletin No. (“SAB”) 101, “Revenue<br />

Recognition in Financial St<strong>at</strong>ements” as amended by SAB 104 (<strong>Gap</strong> 10-K). The<br />

point <strong>at</strong> which the customer receives <strong>and</strong> pays for the merch<strong>and</strong>ise is when the<br />

revenue is accounted for by means of either cash or credit card. The <strong>Gap</strong> is in<br />

the retail clothing sales industry where transactions are processed very rapidly<br />

<strong>and</strong> easily, explaining their non-reporting of Accounts Receivable. Amounts<br />

rel<strong>at</strong>ed to shipping <strong>and</strong> h<strong>and</strong>ling th<strong>at</strong> are billed to customers are reflected in net<br />

sales <strong>and</strong> the rel<strong>at</strong>ed costs are shown in cost of goods sold <strong>and</strong> occupancy<br />

expenses. The <strong>Gap</strong> uses the historical return gross profit p<strong>at</strong>terns to record its<br />

allowances for estim<strong>at</strong>ed returns.<br />

Cash <strong>and</strong> equivalents represent cash <strong>and</strong> short-term, highly liquid<br />

investments with original m<strong>at</strong>urities of three months or less. Cash <strong>and</strong><br />

equivalents are accumul<strong>at</strong>ed by finding all accounts in-transit from banks for<br />

customer credit card, debit card <strong>and</strong> electronic transfer transactions th<strong>at</strong> go<br />

through or clear in less than a week, which are then classified as cash <strong>and</strong><br />

equivalents in the Consolid<strong>at</strong>ed Balance Sheets. Checks outst<strong>and</strong>ing are classified<br />

in accounts payable on the Consolid<strong>at</strong>ed Balance Sheets. The restricted cash<br />

account serves as coll<strong>at</strong>eral for the insurance oblig<strong>at</strong>ions <strong>and</strong> recently in 2005<br />

held $55 million (<strong>Gap</strong> 10-K).<br />

Property <strong>and</strong> equipment are st<strong>at</strong>ed <strong>at</strong> cost. Depreci<strong>at</strong>ion <strong>and</strong> amortiz<strong>at</strong>ion<br />

are computed using the straight-line method over the estim<strong>at</strong>ed useful lives of<br />

the rel<strong>at</strong>ed assets. The cost of assets sold or rendered useless <strong>and</strong> the<br />

19


accumul<strong>at</strong>ed depreci<strong>at</strong>ion or amortiz<strong>at</strong>ion are removed from the accounts with<br />

any records of gain or loss shown in net earnings.<br />

The St<strong>at</strong>ement of Financial Accounting St<strong>and</strong>ards No. (“SFAS”) 133,<br />

“Accounting for Deriv<strong>at</strong>ive Instruments <strong>and</strong> Hedging Activities,” establishes the<br />

accounting <strong>and</strong> reporting principles for hedging activities <strong>and</strong> deriv<strong>at</strong>ive<br />

instruments (<strong>Gap</strong> 10-K). <strong>Gap</strong> measures all deriv<strong>at</strong>ive instruments <strong>at</strong> fair value<br />

<strong>and</strong> distinguishes them as either other current assets or accrued expenses <strong>and</strong><br />

additional current liabilities in their Consolid<strong>at</strong>ed Balance Sheets.<br />

Merch<strong>and</strong>ise inventory is calcul<strong>at</strong>ed using the first-in, first-out method<br />

(“FIFO”) to determine cost. By means of the cost method the inventory is valued<br />

<strong>at</strong> the lower of the actual cost or market. They also estim<strong>at</strong>e <strong>and</strong> accrue<br />

shortage for the period between the last physical inventory count <strong>and</strong> the<br />

balance sheet d<strong>at</strong>e.<br />

<strong>Gap</strong> inc. leases most of their store premises <strong>and</strong> some headquarter<br />

facilities <strong>and</strong> distribution centers. These oper<strong>at</strong>ing leases expire <strong>at</strong> various d<strong>at</strong>es<br />

through 2033. Most store leases are for a five year base period <strong>and</strong> include<br />

options th<strong>at</strong> allow <strong>Gap</strong> to extend the lease term beyond the initial base period,<br />

subject to terms agreed to <strong>at</strong> lease birth. Some leases also include early<br />

termin<strong>at</strong>ion options, which can be exercised under specific conditions. <strong>Gap</strong> inc.<br />

recognizes the rel<strong>at</strong>ed rental expense on a straight-line basis <strong>and</strong> records the<br />

difference between the recognized rental expense <strong>and</strong> amounts payable under<br />

the leases as deferred rent liability. Deferred rent liability was approxim<strong>at</strong>ely<br />

$342 million <strong>at</strong> January 28, <strong>2006</strong> <strong>and</strong> $361 million <strong>at</strong> January 29, 2005. As st<strong>at</strong>ed<br />

in the initial terms of the lease, the minimal lease payment has no dependency<br />

on factors such as future sales volume <strong>and</strong> contingent rentals. Future payments<br />

for maintenance, insurance <strong>and</strong> taxes to which the Company is oblig<strong>at</strong>ed are<br />

excluded from minimum lease payments.<br />

20


<strong>Gap</strong> <strong>Inc</strong>. has acquired three different pension plans for its employees, all<br />

with different types of defined benefit or defined contribution plans. The First,<br />

“<strong>Gap</strong>Share,” is a qualified defined contribution plan, available to employees who<br />

meet certain age <strong>and</strong> service requirements. This plan allows employees to make<br />

contributions up to a maximum limit <strong>and</strong> <strong>Gap</strong> m<strong>at</strong>ches the contribution total<br />

amount or a portion of it according to a predetermined formula. <strong>Gap</strong>s’<br />

contributions to this plan averaged $30 million over the last three years.<br />

Another pension plan of <strong>Gap</strong> is known as the (“Plan”). This is a nonqualified<br />

executive deferred compens<strong>at</strong>ion plan. It allows eligible employees to<br />

defer compens<strong>at</strong>ion up to a maximum amount. <strong>Gap</strong> does not m<strong>at</strong>ch any<br />

contributions under this plan. Established on January 1, 1999, the asset <strong>and</strong><br />

liability concerning the Plan was approxim<strong>at</strong>ely $24 million <strong>and</strong> $30 million,<br />

respectively. As of December 31, 2005 the plan was frozen for additional<br />

contributions.<br />

In January of <strong>2006</strong> a nonqualified Supplemental Deferred Compens<strong>at</strong>ion<br />

Plan replaced the (“Plan”).This new nonqualified Supplemental Deferred<br />

Compens<strong>at</strong>ion Plan now allows for employees <strong>and</strong> non-employees on the Board<br />

of Directors to defer compens<strong>at</strong>ion up to a limit. However under this new plan<br />

the employee members on the Board of Directors will have their contributions<br />

m<strong>at</strong>ched under a predetermined formula.<br />

Accrued expenses <strong>and</strong> other current liabilities consist of payroll <strong>and</strong><br />

rel<strong>at</strong>ed benefits, deferred rent liability <strong>and</strong> other current liabilities. They use a<br />

combin<strong>at</strong>ion of insurance <strong>and</strong> self-insurance for a number of risk management<br />

activities including workers’ compens<strong>at</strong>ion, general liability,<br />

automobile liability <strong>and</strong> employee-rel<strong>at</strong>ed health care benefits, some of which is<br />

paid by their employees (GPS 2005 Annual Report).<br />

21


<strong>Inc</strong>ome taxes are recorded using the asset <strong>and</strong> liability method in<br />

compliance with SFAS 109 “Accounting for <strong>Inc</strong>ome Taxes” (<strong>Gap</strong> 10-K). Deferred<br />

income taxes come from temporary differences between the tax part of assets<br />

plus the liabilities under this method. The reported amounts from the calcul<strong>at</strong>ions<br />

are then shown in the Consolid<strong>at</strong>ed Financial St<strong>at</strong>ements.<br />

Accounting Flexibility<br />

<strong>Gap</strong> <strong>Inc</strong> has a significant amount of flexibility in choosing their key<br />

accounting policies. <strong>Gap</strong> <strong>Inc</strong>. prepares financial st<strong>at</strong>ements in accordance with<br />

accounting principles commonly accepted in the United St<strong>at</strong>es of America.<br />

Management is required to use accounting policies in order to make significant<br />

judgments <strong>and</strong> estim<strong>at</strong>es to develop amounts reflected <strong>and</strong> disclosed in the<br />

financial st<strong>at</strong>ements. <strong>Gap</strong> <strong>Inc</strong>. has shown accounting flexibility in many areas on<br />

the financial st<strong>at</strong>ements.<br />

Merch<strong>and</strong>ise Inventory is valued using the cost method. Cost method<br />

values inventory <strong>at</strong> the lower of the actual cost or market. <strong>Gap</strong> <strong>Inc</strong>. determines<br />

cost using FIFO method, <strong>and</strong> the market cost is estim<strong>at</strong>ed by the net realizable<br />

value. Also, depreci<strong>at</strong>ion <strong>and</strong> amortiz<strong>at</strong>ion are calcul<strong>at</strong>ed using straight-line<br />

method. Cost of assets sold or retired <strong>and</strong> rel<strong>at</strong>ed accumul<strong>at</strong>ed depreci<strong>at</strong>ion or<br />

amortiz<strong>at</strong>ion are removed from the accounts with any resulting gain or loss<br />

included in net earnings. Under Financial Accounting St<strong>and</strong>ards No.133,<br />

“Accounting Instruments <strong>and</strong> Hedging Activities”, establishes the accounting <strong>and</strong><br />

reporting st<strong>and</strong>ards for deriv<strong>at</strong>ive instruments <strong>and</strong> hedging activities. <strong>Gap</strong> <strong>Inc</strong>.<br />

recognizes all deriv<strong>at</strong>ives instruments as either other current assets or accrued<br />

expenses <strong>and</strong> other current liabilities in <strong>Gap</strong>’s Consolid<strong>at</strong>ed Balance Sheets <strong>and</strong><br />

measures those instruments <strong>at</strong> fair value.<br />

22


managers.<br />

<strong>Gap</strong> <strong>Inc</strong>.’s accounting reports seem to have a lot of flexibility for<br />

Accounting Str<strong>at</strong>egy Evalu<strong>at</strong>ion<br />

<strong>Gap</strong>’s prepar<strong>at</strong>ion of financial st<strong>at</strong>ements is in conformity with accounting<br />

principles generally accepted in the U.S. Managements is responsible to make<br />

estim<strong>at</strong>es <strong>and</strong> assumptions th<strong>at</strong> affect the reported amounts of assets <strong>and</strong><br />

liabilities. <strong>Gap</strong> <strong>Inc</strong>. reports any accounting methods they use or any areas in their<br />

consolid<strong>at</strong>ed st<strong>at</strong>ements th<strong>at</strong> might seem unclear to investors in the footnotes.<br />

For example, during the fiscal year of 2005, <strong>Gap</strong> <strong>Inc</strong>. accounted for stock-based<br />

awards to employees <strong>and</strong> directors using the intrinsic value method of<br />

accounting required by APM, Accounting Principles Board Opinion. Under this<br />

method when price of employee stock options equals the market price of the<br />

stock on the day it was issued, no compens<strong>at</strong>ion expense is recognized in the<br />

Consolid<strong>at</strong>ed St<strong>at</strong>ements of Oper<strong>at</strong>ions. Stock options th<strong>at</strong> are less than fair<br />

market value are amortized to oper<strong>at</strong>ing expenses over the vesting period of the<br />

stock award, using the straight-line method.<br />

In the clothing retail industry, they all record Gift cards <strong>at</strong> different times.<br />

For example, American Eagle, one of <strong>Gap</strong> <strong>Inc</strong>.’s competitors, records a gift card<br />

as a current liability upon purchase <strong>and</strong> recognized when the gift card is<br />

redeemed for merch<strong>and</strong>ise. AE gives customers 24 months to redeem the gift<br />

card or the Company assesses the holder of the card a one dollar per month<br />

service fee, which is deducted from the value of the gift card. The fee is<br />

recorded in selling, general <strong>and</strong> administr<strong>at</strong>ive expenses. Unlike <strong>Gap</strong> <strong>Inc</strong>., who<br />

tre<strong>at</strong>s gift certific<strong>at</strong>es or gift cards as a liability <strong>and</strong> income is recorded as net<br />

sales upon redemption or as other income, but up to sixty months. After sixty<br />

23


months is up, the redemption is remote, <strong>and</strong> the liability for gift cards <strong>and</strong> gift<br />

certific<strong>at</strong>es is recorded in accounts payable on the consolid<strong>at</strong>ed balance sheets.<br />

Quality of Disclosure throughout Financial St<strong>at</strong>ements<br />

Every manager in a firm has the discretion to disclose inform<strong>at</strong>ion.<br />

Accounting rules require a certain amount of disclosure, but beyond th<strong>at</strong> it is up<br />

to the manager how much inform<strong>at</strong>ion the firm will disclose. Quality of<br />

disclosure is very important to an investor. A manager can make it easy for an<br />

analyst to gain an insight into the firm by disclosing a lot of inform<strong>at</strong>ion. On the<br />

other h<strong>and</strong> they can make it quite difficult to assess the business reality by only<br />

disclosing the minimum amount required. As an investor you want as much<br />

disclosure as possible without thre<strong>at</strong>ening the firm’s competitive advantage. If<br />

you disclose too much inform<strong>at</strong>ion the competitors will be able to look through<br />

the glass <strong>and</strong> see your strengths <strong>and</strong> weaknesses, of which they can then turn<br />

around <strong>and</strong> use against you or copy your strengths <strong>and</strong> gain a profit like yours.<br />

GAP does a good job of disclosing its’ business str<strong>at</strong>egy. In the Letter to<br />

Shareholders they do not try to sugar co<strong>at</strong> their performance. They are quite<br />

liberal in disclosing bad news. Paul Pressler, CEO of GAP, makes no <strong>at</strong>tempt to<br />

explain the drop in Net Sales for 2005. Instead of excuses he clearly lays out a<br />

plan to return to growing sales <strong>and</strong> to regain <strong>Gap</strong> <strong>Inc</strong>.’s competitive position.<br />

One criticism of disclosure is th<strong>at</strong> there is no real explan<strong>at</strong>ion of <strong>Gap</strong> <strong>Inc</strong>.’s<br />

performance from 2005. Their net sales were down 2% from 2004. <strong>Gap</strong> <strong>Inc</strong>.<br />

did not try to explain this decrease to any reason. They basically just said they<br />

can do better <strong>and</strong> have a plan in place to return to its’ increased earnings.<br />

Another good quality of <strong>Gap</strong> <strong>Inc</strong>.’s disclosure is th<strong>at</strong> they break up their<br />

finances by different companies. <strong>Gap</strong> <strong>Inc</strong>. owns Banana Republic, Old Navy, <strong>and</strong><br />

Forth <strong>and</strong> Towne. In their annual report they separ<strong>at</strong>e these businesses out so<br />

24


all their performances aren’t lumped together. This can show the investor or<br />

analyst which companies are doing well <strong>and</strong> which aren’t.<br />

<strong>Gap</strong> <strong>Inc</strong>. is also very good with disclosing numbers th<strong>at</strong> they think are<br />

important. Free cash flow is a subject they spend a lot of time on in their<br />

financial report. They believe th<strong>at</strong> free cash flow is important because it<br />

represents how much cash a company has after the deduction of capital<br />

expenditures. <strong>Gap</strong> <strong>Inc</strong>. goes above <strong>and</strong> beyond disclosure for their cash flows to<br />

show the analyst how important they feel these cash flows are. They also<br />

explain in their footnotes all the forward looking st<strong>at</strong>ements th<strong>at</strong> they include in<br />

their annual report. In <strong>Gap</strong> <strong>Inc</strong>.’s report they use numbers <strong>and</strong> str<strong>at</strong>egies with<br />

forward looking st<strong>at</strong>ements th<strong>at</strong> basically anticip<strong>at</strong>e future effects on cash flows,<br />

dividend payouts, cash balances vs. cash flows, <strong>and</strong> new store openings. They<br />

explain how they came to these numbers, which makes it easier for the analyst<br />

to determine if these numbers are accur<strong>at</strong>e.<br />

In conclusion, <strong>Gap</strong> <strong>Inc</strong>. does a gre<strong>at</strong> job of disclosing inform<strong>at</strong>ion for an<br />

analyst or investor. This level of disclosure makes it very easy to determine the<br />

reality of <strong>Gap</strong> <strong>Inc</strong>.’s position in the industry <strong>and</strong> to forecast future financial<br />

results<br />

Identific<strong>at</strong>ion of Potential “ Red Flags”<br />

As far as identifying red flags, we were unable to find any flags in GAP<br />

<strong>Inc</strong>.’s financials st<strong>at</strong>ements. Even when performance was down, there were no<br />

unexplained changes in the accounting process. There were no unexplained<br />

transactions to boost profits. There were no unusual increases in accounts<br />

receivable with respect to sales increases. There were no large fourth-quarter<br />

adjustments. Inventories did not increase in rel<strong>at</strong>ion to an increase in sales. After<br />

25


analysis, GAP <strong>Inc</strong>.’s accounting is legitim<strong>at</strong>e with no questionable accounting<br />

quality.<br />

Quantit<strong>at</strong>ive Indic<strong>at</strong>ors<br />

When you study the quantit<strong>at</strong>ive indic<strong>at</strong>ors you can then effectively<br />

analyze the past performance of <strong>Gap</strong> inc. The sales manipul<strong>at</strong>ion diagnostics<br />

shows how sales rel<strong>at</strong>e to cash from sales, accounts receivable, <strong>and</strong> inventory.<br />

The core expense manipul<strong>at</strong>ion diagnostics shows earnings rel<strong>at</strong>ed to expenses.<br />

Sales Manipul<strong>at</strong>ion Diagnostics<br />

GPS<br />

2001 2002 2003 2004 2005<br />

Net Sales/<br />

Cash from<br />

Sales<br />

Net Sales/ Net<br />

Accounts<br />

Receivable<br />

Net Sales/<br />

Inventory<br />

10.51 11.63 7.34 10.04 10.33<br />

N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A<br />

8.26 7.05 9.3 8.97 9.45<br />

Sales for <strong>Gap</strong> have been steady over the last few years. However, their<br />

Net Sales/ Cash from Sales r<strong>at</strong>io has declined a little, meaning they have been<br />

getting less cash from sales. Net sales to accounts receivables were N/A due to<br />

the fact th<strong>at</strong> the accounts receivable amounts for <strong>Gap</strong> <strong>Inc</strong>. were reported as<br />

imm<strong>at</strong>erial. <strong>Gap</strong>’s r<strong>at</strong>io of sales to inventory has increased from 2001 <strong>and</strong> 2002.<br />

This shows th<strong>at</strong> GAP has been making more profits while spending less on<br />

inventory. This is a good sign for the future of the firm.<br />

26


Core Expense Manipul<strong>at</strong>ion Diagnostics<br />

GPS<br />

2001 2002 2003 2004 2005<br />

Asset Turnover 1.82 1.46 1.48 1.62 1.82<br />

(Sales/Assets)<br />

CFFO/ OI 3.1 1.22 1.16 0.78 0.89<br />

CFFO/ NOA 0.65 0.45 0.36 0.76 0.69<br />

<strong>Gap</strong>’s asset turnover r<strong>at</strong>io shows th<strong>at</strong> for every $1 of assets, GAP made<br />

$1.82 in sales. GAP has increased its asset turnover after down years of 2002<br />

<strong>and</strong> 2003. This shows th<strong>at</strong> they are more efficiently using their assets CFFO/OI<br />

for the most part remains steady aside from a decrease in 2002. If the CFFO/OI<br />

number is smaller, more of the Cash Flow from Oper<strong>at</strong>ions can be explained by<br />

Oper<strong>at</strong>ing <strong>Inc</strong>ome. CFFO/NOA starts off rel<strong>at</strong>ively high, then dips for a couple<br />

years, <strong>and</strong> finally levels off starting in 2004. The two years in which this figure is<br />

low can be explained by GAP using more of their Oper<strong>at</strong>ing Assets to bring about<br />

their Oper<strong>at</strong>ing Cash Flow.<br />

R<strong>at</strong>io <strong>Analysis</strong> & Forecast Financial<br />

In the next step of evalu<strong>at</strong>ing <strong>Gap</strong> <strong>Inc</strong>., we have calcul<strong>at</strong>ed financial r<strong>at</strong>ios<br />

to measure the performance of the company. We will <strong>at</strong>tempt to forecast the<br />

financial st<strong>at</strong>ements of the company for the next ten years. We will compare <strong>Gap</strong><br />

<strong>Inc</strong>. with the industry average as a whole in r<strong>at</strong>io analysis. By doing calcul<strong>at</strong>ing<br />

financial r<strong>at</strong>ios we able to get a more in depth look into the companies,<br />

profitability, liquidity, <strong>and</strong> capital structure. This could prove to be very valuable<br />

to investors in the company.<br />

Financial R<strong>at</strong>io <strong>Analysis</strong><br />

27


In order to analyze financial st<strong>at</strong>ements of a company we have to<br />

calcul<strong>at</strong>e different r<strong>at</strong>io. These r<strong>at</strong>ios can help determine where the cash comes<br />

from <strong>and</strong> where it goes. We have calcul<strong>at</strong>ed the financial r<strong>at</strong>ios of <strong>Gap</strong> <strong>Inc</strong>. over<br />

the last five year <strong>and</strong> compared them to three of our top competitors in the<br />

industry. R<strong>at</strong>io analysis can also provide us with background in figuring out<br />

future performances. With this analysis we can predict future profitability for the<br />

company <strong>and</strong> its shareholders. Financial R<strong>at</strong>io <strong>Analysis</strong> is split into three parts.<br />

First, we analyze the liquidity r<strong>at</strong>ios, which determine the quick cash from assets<br />

<strong>and</strong> the ability of a firm to turn assets into cash to meets its debt. Then, we<br />

analyze profitability r<strong>at</strong>ios, which tell us how much profit is earned from our sales<br />

<strong>and</strong> assets, <strong>and</strong> how much of th<strong>at</strong> profit goes to the shareholders. Finally, we<br />

analyze the capital structure of a company, which determine where <strong>and</strong> how<br />

much financing for a company is provided.<br />

Liquidity <strong>Analysis</strong><br />

2001 2002 2003 2004 2005<br />

Current r<strong>at</strong>io 0.146 1.48 2.11 2.6842 2.8<br />

Quick asset r<strong>at</strong>io 0.146 0.5 1.24 1.88 1.82<br />

Accounts recevable turnover 113.95 153.63 125.69 226.48 242.79<br />

Days supply of inventory 3.2 2.38 2.9 1.612 1.5<br />

Inventory turnover 4.52 5.79 4.66 5.8 5.45<br />

Days supply of receivables 80.75 63 78 63 67<br />

Working capital turnover -90.496 14 4.79 3.77 4<br />

Profitability <strong>Analysis</strong><br />

2001 2002 2003 2004 2005<br />

Gross profit margin 37.10% 30% 34% 37.64% 39.22%<br />

Oper<strong>at</strong>ing expense r<strong>at</strong>io 26.5% 27.50% 27% 25.79% 26.4<br />

Net profit margin 6.40% -5.61% 3.30% 6.49% 7.06%<br />

Asset turnover 1.95 1.82 0.146 1.53 1.62<br />

Return on Assets 12.51% -0.10% 4.80% 9.95% 11.44%<br />

Return on equity 29.97% -0.26% 13% 21.50% 23.29%<br />

Debt to equity r<strong>at</strong>io 1.39 15.22 1.7 1.16 1.03<br />

Capital Structure<br />

<strong>Analysis</strong><br />

2001 2002 2003 2004 2005<br />

Times interest earned 19.29 3.09 4.07 8.02 11.856<br />

Debt service margin 1.66 31.46 N/A N/A N/A<br />

28


Liquidity <strong>Analysis</strong><br />

2001 2002 2003 2004 2005<br />

Current r<strong>at</strong>io 0.146 1.48 2.11 2.6842 2.8<br />

Quick asset r<strong>at</strong>io 0.146 0.5 1.24 1.88 1.82<br />

Accounts receivables turnover 113.95 153.63 125.69 226.48 242.79<br />

Days supply of receivables 80.75 63 78 63 67<br />

Inventory turnover 4.52 5.79 4.66 5.8 5.45<br />

Days supply of inventory 3.2 2.38 2.9 1.612 1.5<br />

Working capital turnover (90.5) 14 4.79 3.77 4<br />

From 2001 to 2005, <strong>Gap</strong> <strong>Inc</strong>.’s current r<strong>at</strong>io has risen. Their current assets have<br />

increased over the last five years, which is allowing them to pay off more of their<br />

liabilities. Their quick asset r<strong>at</strong>io has also risen, which means they have more<br />

quick cash on h<strong>and</strong> to pay for every liability they owe. <strong>Gap</strong> <strong>Inc</strong>.’s account<br />

receivables turnover has increased over five year, which is reducing the number<br />

of days accounts are collected. Account receivables have decreased <strong>and</strong> could be<br />

the cause for the reduction in the number of days receivables are collected.<br />

Inventory turnover has improved as well <strong>and</strong> fewer inventories are hanging<br />

around, which means less expense for the company. Over the last five years,<br />

<strong>Gap</strong> <strong>Inc</strong>. has shown more money coming out of the production cycle due to the<br />

increase in inventory turnover. Cost of goods sold has also increased, which can<br />

be the cause for the increase in Inventory turnover. Working capital has<br />

improved a little but recently has fallen. In 2001 they had more liabilities than<br />

asset, making the r<strong>at</strong>io neg<strong>at</strong>ive for working capital. A neg<strong>at</strong>ive working capital<br />

implies th<strong>at</strong> they could not pay for all their liabilities from sales <strong>and</strong> assets. <strong>Gap</strong><br />

<strong>Inc</strong>. has continued to improve though <strong>and</strong> overall they appear to be more liquid<br />

<strong>and</strong> oper<strong>at</strong>ing efficient over the last five years.<br />

29


Profitability <strong>Analysis</strong><br />

2001 2002 2003 2004 2005<br />

Gross profit margin 37.10% 30.00% 34% 37.64% 39.22%<br />

Oper<strong>at</strong>ing expense r<strong>at</strong>io 26.5% 27.50% 27% 25.79% 26.4<br />

Net profit margin 6.40% -5.61% 3.30% 6.49% 7.06%<br />

Asset turnover 1.95 1.82 0.146 1.53 1.62<br />

Return on Assets 12.51% -0.10% 4.80% 9.95% 11.44%<br />

Return on equity 29.97% -0.26% 13% 21.50% 23.29%<br />

SGR 29.96% -26.99% 13% 21.50% 23.29%<br />

Sales Growth 1.28% 4.38% 9.68% 2.61% 4.49%<br />

Oper<strong>at</strong>ing efficiency is wh<strong>at</strong> we will measure next. To do this we have to look <strong>at</strong><br />

gross profit margin, oper<strong>at</strong>ing expense r<strong>at</strong>io, <strong>and</strong> net profit margin. <strong>Gap</strong> <strong>Inc</strong>.’s<br />

overall profit efficiency has stayed constant through the years. In 2002, they<br />

suffered a profit loss, due to an increase in cost of goods sold <strong>and</strong> oper<strong>at</strong>ing<br />

expenses. Although, they have managed expenses well the last five years <strong>and</strong><br />

made substantial profit, <strong>and</strong> they seem to constant on oper<strong>at</strong>ing efficiency. Next<br />

we look <strong>at</strong> how much <strong>Gap</strong> <strong>Inc</strong>. made on their assets, from sales <strong>and</strong> net income.<br />

To measure this we look <strong>at</strong> asset turnover, which measure sales against assets,<br />

<strong>and</strong> return on assets, which measures net income against assets. Once again,<br />

<strong>Gap</strong> <strong>Inc</strong>. has kept constant on earning from assets compared to sales. They had<br />

their lowest turnover in 2003, because they acquired more assets over the year.<br />

On the other h<strong>and</strong>, their return on assets has fluctu<strong>at</strong>ed the past five years. In<br />

2002, <strong>Gap</strong> <strong>Inc</strong>. suffered a loss in net income, which caused them to have a<br />

neg<strong>at</strong>ive return on assets. Finally we looked <strong>at</strong> how much profit shareholders<br />

received, by calcul<strong>at</strong>ing return on equity. <strong>Gap</strong> <strong>Inc</strong>. has been pretty profitable for<br />

shareholders over the years, except in 2002, when they suffered a loss on net<br />

income. Overall, <strong>Gap</strong> <strong>Inc</strong>. has made constant profits over the years.<br />

Capital Structure <strong>Analysis</strong><br />

30


Capital Structure<br />

<strong>Analysis</strong><br />

2001 2002 2003 2004 2005<br />

Debt to equity r<strong>at</strong>io 1.39 15.22 1.7 1.16 1.03<br />

Times interest earned 19.29 3.09 4.07 8.02 11.856<br />

Debt service margin 1.66 31.46 N/A N/A N/A<br />

The last r<strong>at</strong>io we looked <strong>at</strong> was the capital structure for <strong>Gap</strong> <strong>Inc</strong>. Capital<br />

structure analyzes the financing of a company. To do this we calcul<strong>at</strong>e three<br />

r<strong>at</strong>ios, which are debt to equity, times interest earned, <strong>and</strong> debt service margin.<br />

<strong>Gap</strong> <strong>Inc</strong>.’s debt to equity r<strong>at</strong>io has been pretty low, except in 2002, where they<br />

had a lot more debt than equity. Next we measure times interest earned r<strong>at</strong>io,<br />

which measures how much income comes from oper<strong>at</strong>ions to pay for interest<br />

charges. Companies usually like to keep a r<strong>at</strong>io between four <strong>and</strong> twelve, <strong>and</strong><br />

the higher the r<strong>at</strong>io the more creditworthy a company is. <strong>Gap</strong> <strong>Inc</strong>. has had a<br />

pretty high times interest earned r<strong>at</strong>io the past five years, except in 2002, where<br />

they had more interest expense th<strong>at</strong> year. Finally we calcul<strong>at</strong>ed debt service<br />

margin, which measures how much cash from oper<strong>at</strong>ions was paid to service<br />

debt. The higher this r<strong>at</strong>io is the less pressure to use oper<strong>at</strong>ing cash flows for<br />

debt. <strong>Gap</strong> <strong>Inc</strong>. has listed notes payable only for two years. In those two years<br />

they show a high debt service margin. Overall <strong>Gap</strong> <strong>Inc</strong>. has been able to pay off<br />

their debt the past five years <strong>and</strong> shows to be very creditworthy.<br />

Sustainable Growth R<strong>at</strong>e<br />

2001 2002 2003 2004 2005<br />

29.96% -26.99% 13% 21.50% 23.29%<br />

The sustainable growth r<strong>at</strong>e measures how much a firm can grow without its<br />

financial policies unchanged. This is a way to put all the r<strong>at</strong>ios together <strong>and</strong><br />

measure them. A firm’s return on equity <strong>and</strong> its dividend payout policy help<br />

determine the funds for growth. <strong>Gap</strong> <strong>Inc</strong>. has continued to grow the last five<br />

31


years. They suffered a loss in 2002, which caused them to not grow. Overall they<br />

have kept a constant growth r<strong>at</strong>e around 20 % each year.<br />

Benchmark <strong>Analysis</strong><br />

Liquidity<br />

Current r<strong>at</strong>io<br />

Total<br />

3.5<br />

3<br />

2.5<br />

2<br />

1.5<br />

1<br />

0.5<br />

0<br />

2001 2002 2003 2004 2005<br />

Years<br />

<strong>Gap</strong> <strong>Inc</strong>.<br />

American Eagle<br />

ANF<br />

Industry Avg.<br />

<strong>Gap</strong> <strong>Inc</strong>.’s current r<strong>at</strong>io has been increasing the past five years <strong>and</strong> appears to<br />

have risen above the industry average in 2005. Over the years their current<br />

assets have increased more than any of their competitors.<br />

Quick asset r<strong>at</strong>io<br />

Total<br />

2.5<br />

2<br />

1.5<br />

1<br />

0.5<br />

0<br />

2001 2002 2003 2004 2005<br />

Years<br />

<strong>Gap</strong> <strong>Inc</strong>.<br />

American Eagle<br />

ANF<br />

Industry Avg.<br />

<strong>Gap</strong> <strong>Inc</strong>.’s quick asset r<strong>at</strong>io has increased more than the industry average. They<br />

have been able to pay for the liabilities with quick cash on h<strong>and</strong> more than any<br />

of their competitors.<br />

32


Acct. Receivables Turnover<br />

300<br />

250<br />

200<br />

150<br />

100<br />

50<br />

<strong>Gap</strong> <strong>Inc</strong>.<br />

American Eagle<br />

ANF<br />

Industry Avg.<br />

0<br />

2001 2002 2003 2004 2005<br />

Years<br />

They appear to be able to turn more account receivables over then anyone in<br />

their industry. They have received more accounts receivables than anyone in the<br />

industry.<br />

Days supply of receivables<br />

35<br />

30<br />

25<br />

20<br />

15<br />

10<br />

5<br />

0<br />

2001 200 200 200 2005<br />

Y ears<br />

<strong>Gap</strong> <strong>Inc</strong>.<br />

American Eagle<br />

ANF<br />

Industry Avg<br />

<strong>Gap</strong> <strong>Inc</strong>. has decreased in the number of days it takes to turnover those<br />

accounts receivables into money. More money is coming from those accounts<br />

receivables in less days.<br />

33


Inventory turnover<br />

Total<br />

30<br />

25<br />

20<br />

15<br />

10<br />

5<br />

0<br />

2001 2002 2003 2004 2005<br />

Years<br />

<strong>Gap</strong> <strong>Inc</strong>.<br />

American Eagle<br />

ANF<br />

Industry Avg<br />

<strong>Gap</strong> <strong>Inc</strong>. appears of turnover less inventory than their competitors. This is due to<br />

a decrease in Sales over the years.<br />

Days supply of inventory<br />

Days<br />

100<br />

80<br />

60<br />

40<br />

20<br />

0<br />

2001 2002 2003 2004 2005<br />

Years<br />

<strong>Gap</strong> <strong>Inc</strong>.<br />

American Eagle<br />

ANF<br />

Industry Avg<br />

<strong>Gap</strong> <strong>Inc</strong>. has not been able to turn its inventory over so quickly. The industry<br />

appears to be able to turn their inventory over faster.<br />

Working capital turnover<br />

60<br />

40<br />

20<br />

0<br />

-20<br />

-40<br />

-60<br />

-80<br />

-100<br />

2001 2002 2003 2004 2005<br />

Years<br />

<strong>Gap</strong> <strong>Inc</strong>.<br />

American Eagle<br />

ANF<br />

Industry Avg<br />

34


Working capital has been very low in the past few years. In 2001, sales were<br />

neg<strong>at</strong>ive, providing a neg<strong>at</strong>ive working capital r<strong>at</strong>io. <strong>Gap</strong>’s competitors have<br />

seem to have accumul<strong>at</strong>ed more sales.<br />

Profitability<br />

Gross profit margin<br />

Percentage<br />

70.00%<br />

60.00%<br />

50.00%<br />

40.00%<br />

30.00%<br />

20.00%<br />

10.00%<br />

0.00%<br />

2001 2002 2003 2004 2005<br />

Years<br />

<strong>Gap</strong> <strong>Inc</strong>.<br />

American Eagle<br />

ANF<br />

Industry Avg<br />

<strong>Gap</strong>’s Gross Profit margin has always been low due to increasing cost of goods<br />

sold. They have always been below the industry average the past five years .<br />

35


Oper<strong>at</strong>ing exp r<strong>at</strong>io<br />

30<br />

25<br />

20<br />

15<br />

10<br />

5<br />

0<br />

2001 2002 2003 2004 2005<br />

Years<br />

<strong>Gap</strong> <strong>Inc</strong><br />

American Eagle<br />

ANF<br />

Industry Avg.<br />

Oper<strong>at</strong>ing expenses has always been low for the industry. <strong>Gap</strong> has followed with<br />

the trend, until 2004. Their oper<strong>at</strong>ing expenses seem to have increased while<br />

their sales have decreased.<br />

Net profit margin<br />

15.00%<br />

10.00%<br />

5.00%<br />

0.00%<br />

-5.00%<br />

2001 2002 2003 2004 2005<br />

<strong>Gap</strong> <strong>Inc</strong>.<br />

American Eagle<br />

ANF<br />

Industry Avg<br />

-10.00%<br />

Years<br />

<strong>Gap</strong> has gener<strong>at</strong>ed a lower net profit than any of its competitors, due to<br />

decreasing Net income <strong>and</strong> increasing sales. In 2002 they reported a loss in<br />

sales.<br />

36


Asset Turnover<br />

Total<br />

2.5<br />

2<br />

1.5<br />

1<br />

0.5<br />

0<br />

2001 2002 2003 2004 2005<br />

Years<br />

<strong>Gap</strong> <strong>Inc</strong>.<br />

American Eagle<br />

ANF<br />

Industry Avg<br />

They appear to turnover less assets than their competitors. This will cause a<br />

decrease in total sales<br />

Return on assets<br />

Percentage<br />

35.00%<br />

30.00%<br />

25.00%<br />

20.00%<br />

15.00%<br />

10.00%<br />

5.00%<br />

0.00%<br />

-5.00%<br />

2001 2002 2003 2004 2005<br />

Years<br />

<strong>Gap</strong> <strong>Inc</strong>.<br />

American Eagle<br />

ANF<br />

Industry Avg<br />

From this graph you can tell th<strong>at</strong> gap has made less profit on assets than the<br />

industry. They have reported lower net income than any of their competitors.<br />

Return <strong>Equity</strong><br />

Percentage<br />

50.00%<br />

40.00%<br />

30.00%<br />

20.00%<br />

10.00%<br />

0.00%<br />

-10.00%<br />

2001 2002 2003 2004 2005<br />

Years<br />

<strong>Gap</strong> <strong>Inc</strong><br />

American Eagle<br />

ANF<br />

Industry Avg.<br />

Once again, due to lower net income <strong>Gap</strong> <strong>Inc</strong> has a lower return on equity than<br />

the industry.<br />

37


Capital Structure<br />

Debt to equity<br />

20<br />

Total<br />

15<br />

10<br />

5<br />

<strong>Gap</strong> <strong>Inc</strong>.<br />

American Eagle<br />

ANF<br />

Industry Avg<br />

0<br />

2001 2002 2003 2004 2005<br />

Years<br />

In 2002, <strong>Gap</strong> <strong>Inc</strong>. accumul<strong>at</strong>ed more debt than equity compared to its<br />

competitors. This caused a huge reduction in net sales.<br />

Times Interest earned<br />

200<br />

Total<br />

150<br />

100<br />

50<br />

<strong>Gap</strong> <strong>Inc</strong>.<br />

American Eagle<br />

ANF<br />

Industry Avg<br />

0<br />

2001 2002 2003 2004 2005<br />

Years<br />

<strong>Gap</strong>’s Interest expense has always been higher than the industry, which causes a<br />

lower time interest earned r<strong>at</strong>io.<br />

38


Debt service margin<br />

35<br />

30<br />

25<br />

20<br />

15<br />

10<br />

5<br />

0<br />

2001 2002 2003 2004 2005<br />

Years<br />

<strong>Gap</strong> <strong>Inc</strong>.<br />

American Eagle<br />

ANF<br />

Industry Avg<br />

Some competitors, along with <strong>Gap</strong> <strong>Inc</strong>. did not report any notes payable from<br />

2003 to 2005. This graph only compares two accur<strong>at</strong>e years of numbers.<br />

Financial Forecasting<br />

In this section, we are doing a financial analysis of GAP <strong>Inc</strong>. The goal of a<br />

financial analysis is to evalu<strong>at</strong>e the performance of a firm by using their financial<br />

st<strong>at</strong>ements. In a financial analysis you can determine the value of a firm by<br />

looking <strong>at</strong> it’s profitability <strong>and</strong> it’s growth. We will be using r<strong>at</strong>io analysis <strong>and</strong><br />

cash flow analysis to assess GAP’s performance. After analyzing GAP we will<br />

forecast the next ten years based on our findings.<br />

In r<strong>at</strong>io analysis we examine our firm’s balance sheet <strong>and</strong> income<br />

st<strong>at</strong>ement. We can either look <strong>at</strong> r<strong>at</strong>ios for GAP over several years to determine<br />

the success of the firm or we can compare the r<strong>at</strong>ios of GAP to other firms in the<br />

same industry. These r<strong>at</strong>ios allow us to rel<strong>at</strong>e the financial numbers to the<br />

business reality. Looking <strong>at</strong> r<strong>at</strong>ios for our firm over several years is called time<br />

series comparison. This allows us to hold some factors constant <strong>and</strong> determine<br />

the firm’s str<strong>at</strong>egy <strong>and</strong> how well they are implementing this str<strong>at</strong>egy. If we<br />

compare the r<strong>at</strong>ios to other firms’ r<strong>at</strong>ios we are doing a cross sectional<br />

comparison. This allows us to see how GAP compares to other firms in the same<br />

39


industry. This lets us determine in wh<strong>at</strong> areas they are lacking <strong>and</strong> wh<strong>at</strong> areas<br />

they are excelling in compared to firms in the same industry.<br />

In cash flow analysis we study the firm’s cash flow st<strong>at</strong>ements to get<br />

further insights into the firm’s policies. By looking <strong>at</strong> the cash flow we can find a<br />

number of things th<strong>at</strong> are important to valuing our firm. We can see if our firm<br />

has the ability to pay its interest <strong>and</strong> long term debt payments from the cash<br />

gener<strong>at</strong>ed from oper<strong>at</strong>ions. We can also find if GAP is making a cash surplus<br />

from oper<strong>at</strong>ions or making enough cash to invest in long term growth. These<br />

things can give us a better idea of the risk of our firm.<br />

Finally after analyzing GAP’s financial st<strong>at</strong>ements, we can forecast the<br />

future for the firm. It is important to forecast so we can determine the future of<br />

the firm <strong>and</strong> if the firm is currently undervalued or overvalued. We can use a<br />

number of methods to determine our forecasting values. You can average past<br />

performances of the firm <strong>and</strong> assume this past performance will continue.<br />

Sometimes this can provide inaccur<strong>at</strong>e numbers. So values are mean-reverting,<br />

which means th<strong>at</strong> over time they go back to the industry average.<br />

Our financial analysis <strong>and</strong> forecast of GAP should provide a clearer picture<br />

of the performance of GAP then just scanning their financial st<strong>at</strong>ement. This will<br />

allow us to determine the success th<strong>at</strong> GAP has had in implementing str<strong>at</strong>egies<br />

<strong>and</strong> gaining profitability <strong>and</strong> growth.<br />

Balance Sheet Forecasting<br />

The accounts on the balance sheet th<strong>at</strong> we feel are the most important to<br />

forecast are accounts payable, total current liabilities, total liabilities, common<br />

stock, total shareholder’s equity, <strong>and</strong> sales growth. Accounts payable, current<br />

liabilities, <strong>and</strong> total liabilities show us our debt. Common stock, <strong>and</strong> total<br />

shareholder’s equity shows us how we are financing our firm through equity.<br />

Sales growth is important because it is wh<strong>at</strong> drives our firm. We need a high<br />

40


sales growth to continue cre<strong>at</strong>ing value for our shareholders. We took the<br />

averages of values off the common size balance sheet to forecast for our actual<br />

balance sheet. The only account forecasted using another method was the total<br />

current liabilities. For this account, we used the current r<strong>at</strong>io to forecast. While<br />

these projections can prove to be extremely helpful, we realize th<strong>at</strong> these<br />

numbers may not be 100% accur<strong>at</strong>e. If there are any major changes within the<br />

company, the forecasts will devi<strong>at</strong>e from the projections made when forecasted.<br />

Even with the weaknesses in our forecasting method, we feel th<strong>at</strong> the methods<br />

used were the most appropri<strong>at</strong>e for GAP <strong>Inc</strong>.( Refer to Exhibit B)<br />

<strong>Inc</strong>ome St<strong>at</strong>ement Forecasting<br />

We were able to forecast every account in our income st<strong>at</strong>ement. The<br />

most important ones for GAP are net sales, Cost of Goods Sold, Oper<strong>at</strong>ing<br />

Expenses, <strong>and</strong> Net <strong>Inc</strong>ome. Net sales show us how much GAP is selling<br />

throughout its many stores. Cost of Goods sold <strong>and</strong> oper<strong>at</strong>ing expenses give us<br />

an overview of the cost of doing business for GAP. We can analyze this <strong>and</strong> see<br />

where their costs are too high. Net income is also important because it gives us<br />

our final dollar amount th<strong>at</strong> we earned for the year. All of the accounts were<br />

forecasted by taking the average off the common size income st<strong>at</strong>ement. As<br />

always the case with forecasting these numbers could be changed by any<br />

change in GAP’s oper<strong>at</strong>ions.<br />

Cash Flow Forecasting<br />

The accounts used in forecasting some of <strong>Gap</strong>’s Cash Flows were net<br />

earnings, depreci<strong>at</strong>ion <strong>and</strong> amortiz<strong>at</strong>ion, loss on disposable <strong>and</strong> other, accounts<br />

payable, deferred lease credits <strong>and</strong> other long term liabilities, net cash provided<br />

by oper<strong>at</strong>ing activities, net purchase of property <strong>and</strong> equipment, net cash used<br />

for investing activities, net increase/ decrease in cash <strong>and</strong> equivalents, <strong>and</strong> cash<br />

<strong>and</strong> equivalents for beginning <strong>and</strong> year end. The majority of the values derived<br />

41


upon forecasting cash flows come simply from the balance sheet <strong>and</strong> income<br />

st<strong>at</strong>ements; either through subtraction of the trailing year, or an average of the<br />

percentage change multiplied by a corresponding number in the balance sheet or<br />

income st<strong>at</strong>ement. However, the loss on disposable <strong>and</strong> other account was<br />

derived through <strong>and</strong> average of the trailing three years for each year forecasted.<br />

Just as the methods used to forecast the balance sheet, the methods used to<br />

forecast the cash flows can be helpful for figuring ballpark numbers <strong>and</strong> aid in<br />

decision making. However this forecasting method is based mainly on recent<br />

inform<strong>at</strong>ion <strong>and</strong> is not always a good predictor to future performance.<br />

<strong>Valu<strong>at</strong>ion</strong> <strong>Analysis</strong><br />

So far we have calcul<strong>at</strong>ed the financial r<strong>at</strong>ios <strong>and</strong> forecasted financial<br />

st<strong>at</strong>ements for the next ten years, which was the first stage of prospective<br />

analysis. In this is section we will complete prospective analysis by valuing <strong>Gap</strong><br />

<strong>Inc</strong>. through different methods. <strong>Valu<strong>at</strong>ion</strong> is important because we can price an<br />

initial public offering <strong>and</strong> be able to inform parties involved with <strong>Gap</strong> <strong>Inc</strong>. on their<br />

actual sales, credit <strong>and</strong> other business concerns. In order to evalu<strong>at</strong>e a company<br />

we use many different methods, because one method alone cannot provide a<br />

sound basis for a firm valu<strong>at</strong>ion. Intrinsic methods along with comparable r<strong>at</strong>ios<br />

must be calcul<strong>at</strong>ed for the firm in order to get a true picture of wh<strong>at</strong> the<br />

company is worth. Also, we need to cre<strong>at</strong>e a sensitivity analysis which will make<br />

sure th<strong>at</strong> miscalcul<strong>at</strong>ed costs of capital <strong>and</strong> growth r<strong>at</strong>es will not give us bad<br />

results. The cost of capital <strong>and</strong> equity will give us a weighted average cost of<br />

42


capital, which is used in many of our intrinsic valu<strong>at</strong>ion models. The following<br />

sections will demonstr<strong>at</strong>e how we use each intrinsic valu<strong>at</strong>ion method to value<br />

<strong>Gap</strong> <strong>Inc</strong>.<br />

Method of Comparables<br />

This method values <strong>Gap</strong> <strong>Inc</strong>. by taking the average multiple of<br />

competitors in the industry. The r<strong>at</strong>ios used in this valu<strong>at</strong>ion include: earnings<br />

per share, book value per share, price per share, dividends per share, P/E, PEG<br />

<strong>and</strong> P/B r<strong>at</strong>ios. The r<strong>at</strong>ios used in this model to value <strong>Gap</strong> <strong>Inc</strong>. <strong>and</strong> its<br />

competitors were very helpful. The r<strong>at</strong>ios were combin<strong>at</strong>ions of stock price <strong>and</strong><br />

earnings to shares outst<strong>and</strong>ing. They help us value a company in terms of how<br />

much equity is being provided. We compared <strong>Gap</strong> <strong>Inc</strong>. to two of its main<br />

competitors, which are American Eagle <strong>and</strong> ANF. In most of the r<strong>at</strong>ios <strong>Gap</strong> <strong>Inc</strong>.<br />

has a low percentage than its competitors. <strong>Gap</strong> <strong>Inc</strong>. has lower Earnings per<br />

share than any of its competitors.<br />

EPS DPS BPS PPS P/E PEG P/B<br />

<strong>Gap</strong> <strong>Inc</strong> 1.29 2.09 6.16 17.64 17.86 1.33 3<br />

American Eagle 2.27 2.02 8.973 22.98 21.23 1.16 5.36<br />

ANF 4.217 N/A 13.765 65.18 16.11 0.86 4.96<br />

Avg. 2.592 2.055 9.632667 35.267 18.4 1.116667 4.44<br />

Our averages only have two competitors in it, so it may not be the best<br />

comparison for <strong>Gap</strong> <strong>Inc</strong>.<br />

Cost of Capital<br />

We calcul<strong>at</strong>ed <strong>Gap</strong> <strong>Inc</strong>.’s cost of equity to be .0874. This is the return<br />

shareholder for <strong>Gap</strong> <strong>Inc</strong>. require. <strong>Gap</strong> <strong>Inc</strong>.’s cost of debt is .05499, which is the<br />

43


<strong>at</strong>e <strong>Gap</strong> <strong>Inc</strong>. is paying on all of its debt. Our before tax WACC is .14 <strong>and</strong> we<br />

calcul<strong>at</strong>ed our after tax WACC to be .12. This is the average expected return on<br />

<strong>Gap</strong> <strong>Inc</strong>.’s securities.<br />

Variables<br />

2 year Beta, R-<br />

Squared 0.025614<br />

3 year Beta, R-<br />

Squared 0.004444<br />

5 year Beta, R-<br />

Squared 0.006917<br />

Published Beta 0.91<br />

Cost of <strong>Equity</strong> 0.107<br />

Before Tax WACC 0.14<br />

After Tax WACC 0.12<br />

Cost of Debt 0.05449<br />

We needed to compare <strong>Gap</strong> <strong>Inc</strong>.’s stock performance with a benchmark index<br />

such as S&P 500. The R- Squared will measure this from a range of 0-1. No<br />

correl<strong>at</strong>ion is 0 <strong>and</strong> perfect correl<strong>at</strong>ion is 1. <strong>Gap</strong> <strong>Inc</strong>.’s R-Squared shows no<br />

correl<strong>at</strong>ion with the market.<br />

Annual Yield<br />

In order to calcul<strong>at</strong>e the average risk free r<strong>at</strong>e to get cost of equity, we<br />

decided to use a five year treasury m<strong>at</strong>urity r<strong>at</strong>e as our annual yield. Most<br />

investments are made over this period of time r<strong>at</strong>her than three or six months.<br />

44


Intrinsic <strong>Valu<strong>at</strong>ion</strong> Methods<br />

Free Cash Flow<br />

Free cash flows will give us an estim<strong>at</strong>ed share price for the firm. This<br />

model uses the WACC based on a flow of free cash flows. We calcul<strong>at</strong>ed the free<br />

cash flows by adding the cash flow from oper<strong>at</strong>ions <strong>and</strong> investing activities. We<br />

discounted are WACC back to 2005. We calcul<strong>at</strong>ed the total present value of<br />

annual free cash flows to be $ 6,971,364,299.14. Next, we had to find the<br />

present value of the continuing terminal value, <strong>and</strong> with no growth we found it<br />

to be $ 19,710,569,476.92. To find the value of the firm we added the present<br />

value of the annual cash flows <strong>and</strong> the present value of terminal value<br />

perpetuity. We found the value of the firm for 2005 to be $ 13,532,713,935.34.<br />

Finally, we needed to find the estim<strong>at</strong>ed price per share <strong>at</strong> the end of 2005. To<br />

do this we first needed to find the market value of equity, which is calcul<strong>at</strong>ed by<br />

subtracting the estim<strong>at</strong>ed value of the firm by the liabilities. Our estim<strong>at</strong>ed<br />

market value of equity came out to be $ 13,527,601,935.34. Finally, divide our<br />

estim<strong>at</strong>ed market value of <strong>Equity</strong> by the number of outst<strong>and</strong>ing shares, to find<br />

an estim<strong>at</strong>ed price per share <strong>at</strong> the end of 2005 to be $15.72. <strong>Gap</strong> <strong>Inc</strong>.’s<br />

observed share price <strong>at</strong> the end of 2005 was 17.64, which tells us th<strong>at</strong> <strong>Gap</strong> <strong>Inc</strong>.<br />

was slightly overvalued. (Refer to 1.8)<br />

45


Sensitivity <strong>Analysis</strong><br />

WACC<br />

0.095 0.1 0.105 0.11 0.115 0.12 0.125 0.13<br />

G 0 17.41 15.94 14.67 13.5 12.4 11.48 10.59 9.79<br />

0.01 19.04 17.37 15.89 14.56 13.37 12.29 11.31 10.42<br />

0.02 21.1 19.13 17.39 15.85 14.49 13.27 12.17 11.17<br />

0.03 23.8 21.38 19.29 17.47 15.87 14.46 13.2 12.07<br />

0.04 27.48 24.39 21.78 19.55 17.63 15.95 14.48 13.17<br />

The sensitivity analysis shows varying WACC <strong>and</strong> growth estim<strong>at</strong>es. This shows<br />

th<strong>at</strong> as WACC increases with zero growth the share price decreases. The higher<br />

the growth r<strong>at</strong>e the higher the share price varies. <strong>Gap</strong> <strong>Inc</strong>.’s observed share<br />

price <strong>at</strong> the end of 2005 was 17.64, which tells us th<strong>at</strong> <strong>Gap</strong> <strong>Inc</strong>. was slightly<br />

overvalued.<br />

Discounted Dividends<br />

This method of valu<strong>at</strong>ion uses Ke <strong>and</strong> the forecasted dividends to value the<br />

firm <strong>at</strong> a certain time. <strong>Gap</strong> <strong>Inc</strong>. kept there dividends constant <strong>at</strong> $.18 <strong>and</strong> used a<br />

growth r<strong>at</strong>e of zero, because dividends have not changed. Then, we discounted<br />

back the dividends to 2005 using Ke. We calcul<strong>at</strong>ed a share value of $0.17 <strong>at</strong> the<br />

end of 2005. The observed price per share for <strong>Gap</strong> <strong>Inc</strong>., <strong>at</strong> end of 2005, was<br />

$17.64. Using the discounted dividends method, <strong>Gap</strong> <strong>Inc</strong>. is way over-valued.<br />

The reason for this maybe th<strong>at</strong> <strong>Gap</strong> <strong>Inc</strong>. pays low dividends <strong>and</strong> this model only<br />

values a company by their dividends. This is not a good model to value <strong>Gap</strong> <strong>Inc</strong>.<br />

46


Ke<br />

g 0.07 0.08 0.0874 0.095 0.105 0.115<br />

0.000 2.5714 1.2857 2.05 1.894 1.714 1.565<br />

0.040 6 1.3846 4 3.27 2.769 2.4<br />

0.060 18 1.5 6.569 5.14 4 3.27<br />

0.080 -18 4.5 24.32 12 7.2 5.14<br />

0.100 -6 -9 -14.3 -36 36 12<br />

0.120 -3.6 -4.5 -5.52 -7.2 -12 -36<br />

0.130 -3 -3.6 -4.225 -5.14 -7.2 -12<br />

From the sensitivity analysis you can see the growth r<strong>at</strong>e cannot be very high.<br />

Just to get to price per share, the growth r<strong>at</strong>e would have to be than 1 %. This<br />

model is not very accur<strong>at</strong>e in valuing <strong>Gap</strong> <strong>Inc</strong>., <strong>and</strong> should not be considered in<br />

the final valuing of this company. (Refer to 1.7)<br />

Residual <strong>Inc</strong>ome<br />

In this model we calcul<strong>at</strong>ed a stream of residual incomes for the next 10<br />

years, including a terminal value, <strong>and</strong> then discounted all the numbers back to<br />

the present time. First we had to find the ending book value of equity which we<br />

found by adding the book value of equity with the earning per share, then<br />

subtracting the dividends per share. Then we needed to find the normal income,<br />

which we did by multiplying Ke with the beginning book value of equity from the<br />

previous years. The difference between earnings per share <strong>and</strong> normal income is<br />

the residual income. We then discounted the residual income from forecast <strong>and</strong><br />

found present value of residual income. Adding the book value of equity, present<br />

value of RI, <strong>and</strong> present value of terminal value <strong>at</strong> the end 2005 we estim<strong>at</strong>ed a<br />

47


share price of $7.97. The actual share price was $17.64. Using this model, <strong>Gap</strong><br />

<strong>Inc</strong>. is way over valued. (Refer to 1.9)<br />

The sensitivity analysis for residual income measures Ke <strong>and</strong> growth r<strong>at</strong>e.<br />

The more growth <strong>and</strong> higher Ke the lower the share price.<br />

0 0.05 0.1 0.15<br />

Ke 0.08 $7.59 $7.54 $7.44 $7.29<br />

0.1 $5.49 $5.44 $5.34 $5.19<br />

0.12 $4.16 $4.11 $4.01 $3.86<br />

0.14 $3.26 $3.21 $3.11 $2.96<br />

0.16 $2.63 $2.58 $2.48 $2.33<br />

This analysis does not have extreme changed in share price when<br />

changing the growth r<strong>at</strong>e. On the other h<strong>and</strong>, if our Ke increases by a lot then<br />

<strong>Gap</strong> <strong>Inc</strong>. will have a lower share price.<br />

Abnormal Earnings Growth<br />

The abnormal earnings growth valu<strong>at</strong>ion involves calcul<strong>at</strong>ing the<br />

book value of equity plus the present value of expected future abnormal<br />

earnings. Abnormal earnings are expected net income minus the normalized<br />

income multiplied by the discount r<strong>at</strong>e. The stock will be overvalued or<br />

undervalued depending on whether expected earnings are more or less than<br />

normal income. If there is a low value for abnormal earnings, then a firm shows<br />

neg<strong>at</strong>ive future stock returns. If there is a high value for abnormal earnings,<br />

48


then the complete opposite, positive future stock returns, occurs. In our case,<br />

GAP <strong>Inc</strong>. has a low value for AEG; therefore we can predict th<strong>at</strong> there will be<br />

neg<strong>at</strong>ive future stock returns. ( Refer to 2.1)<br />

Sensitivity analysis for AEG looks <strong>at</strong> growth r<strong>at</strong>e <strong>and</strong> Ke. The higher the<br />

growth r<strong>at</strong>e <strong>and</strong> Ke, the less the share price.<br />

Sensitivity <strong>Analysis</strong><br />

g<br />

0 0.05 0.1 0.15<br />

Ke 0.08 $7.02 $6.97 $6.92 $6.87<br />

0.1 $4.99 $4.94 $4.89 $4.84<br />

0.12 $3.71 $3.66 $3.61 $3.56<br />

0.14 $2.86 $2.81 $2.76 $2.71<br />

0.16 $2.27 $2.22 $2.17 $2.12<br />

Altman’s Z score<br />

Banks often prefer to look <strong>at</strong> a company’s Altman Z-Score when<br />

determining credit risk before issuing a loan or starting an investment. <strong>Gap</strong> <strong>Inc</strong>.’s<br />

debt risk for the previous year, according to Altman's Z-score model, is 3.1. This<br />

high debt risk is a good sign for investors because it shows <strong>Gap</strong> <strong>Inc</strong>. knows how<br />

to h<strong>and</strong>le their credit <strong>and</strong> there fore this lowers the interest r<strong>at</strong>e they will pay on<br />

future loans. One of the major incentives to decrease the Z-Score is to rely less<br />

on capitol leases <strong>and</strong> more upon oper<strong>at</strong>ional leases. <strong>Gap</strong> <strong>Inc</strong>. strives in this<br />

49


department because they use mainly oper<strong>at</strong>ional leases for there stores <strong>and</strong><br />

warehouses.<br />

Z score:<br />

1.2(5239-1942/8821)+ 1.4(1113/8821)+<br />

3.3(1745/8821)+<br />

0.6(14.6/3396)+<br />

1.0(16023/8821)<br />

= 3.1<br />

Summary of valu<strong>at</strong>ions<br />

For <strong>Gap</strong> <strong>Inc</strong>., some of the intrinsic valu<strong>at</strong>ions do not resemble the<br />

valu<strong>at</strong>ion for the company. The company appears to be way over valued by each<br />

method. Free Cash Flow method comes the closest to valuing <strong>Gap</strong> <strong>Inc</strong>.<br />

Estim<strong>at</strong>ed share<br />

price<br />

Free Cash flow 11.48<br />

Residual <strong>Inc</strong>ome 7.97<br />

Abnormal Earnings<br />

Growth 6.97<br />

LR ROI 11<br />

Actual Price 17.64<br />

Free Cash Flows is clearly the best method to use when valuing <strong>Gap</strong> <strong>Inc</strong>. The<br />

other methods valu<strong>at</strong>e to much on dividends paid or earnings r<strong>at</strong>her than cash<br />

from oper<strong>at</strong>ions or investments.<br />

50


References<br />

1. www.finance .yahoo.com<br />

2. www.morngstar.com<br />

3. www.edgarscan.pwcglobal.com<br />

4. www.gapinc.com/public/Investors/investors.shtml<br />

51


Appendix<br />

1.1 R<strong>at</strong>io Forecast<br />

1.2 Balance Sheet<br />

1.3 Proforma Balance Sheet<br />

1.4 <strong>Inc</strong>ome St<strong>at</strong>ement<br />

1.5 Proforma <strong>Inc</strong>ome St<strong>at</strong>ement<br />

1.6 Cash Flows<br />

1.7 Discounted Dividends<br />

1.8 Free Cash Flows<br />

1.9 Residual <strong>Inc</strong>ome<br />

2.0 LR ROI<br />

2.1 AEG<br />

2.2 Weighted Avg. cost of equity<br />

2.3 Weighted Avg. cost of debt<br />

52


Exhibit 1.1 R<strong>at</strong>io Forecast<br />

GAP INC.<br />

Liquidity <strong>Analysis</strong><br />

2001 2002 2003 2004 2005<br />

Current r<strong>at</strong>io 0.146 1.48 2.11 2.6842 2.8<br />

Quick asset r<strong>at</strong>io 0.146 0.5 1.24 1.88 1.82<br />

Accounts recevable turnover 113.95 153.63 125.69 226.48 242.79<br />

Days supply of receivables 3.2 2.38 2.9 1.612 1.5<br />

Inventory turnover 4.52 5.79 4.66 5.8 5.45<br />

Days supply of inventory 80.75 63 78 63 67<br />

Working capital turnover -90.5 14 4.79 3.77 4<br />

Profitability <strong>Analysis</strong><br />

2001 2002 2003 2004 2005<br />

Gross profit margin 37.10% 30% 34% 37.64% 39.22%<br />

Oper<strong>at</strong>ing expense r<strong>at</strong>io 26.5% 27.50% 27% 25.79% 26.4<br />

Net profit margin 6.40% -5.61% 3.30% 6.49% 7.06%<br />

Asset turnover 1.95 1.82 0.146 1.53 1.62<br />

Return on Assets 12.51% -0.10% 4.80% 9.95% 11.44%<br />

Return on equity 29.97% -0.26% 13% 21.50% 23.29%<br />

Capital Structure <strong>Analysis</strong><br />

2001 2002 2003 2004 2005<br />

Debt to equity r<strong>at</strong>io 1.39 15.22 1.7 1.16 1.03<br />

Times interest earned 19.29 3.09 4.07 8.02 11.856<br />

Debt service margin 1.66 31.46 N/A 0 0<br />

Substainable Growth R<strong>at</strong>e<br />

2001 2002 2003 2004 2005<br />

29.96% -26.99% 13% 21.50% 23.29%<br />

American Eagle<br />

Liquidity <strong>Analysis</strong><br />

2001 2002 2003 2004 2005<br />

Current R<strong>at</strong>io 2.34 2.51 2.44 3.06 2.99<br />

Quick Asset R<strong>at</strong>io 1.61 1.8 1.91 2.18 2.16<br />

Accounts Receivable Turnover 72.12 101.7 62.9 71.17 79.23<br />

Days supply of Receivables 5.06 3.59 5.8 5.13 4.6<br />

Inventory Turnover 9.05 7.38 7.34 5.88 5.86<br />

Days supply of Inventory 40.33 49.46 49.73 62.07 62.29<br />

Working capital turnover 5.81 5.08 4.46 3.23 3.2<br />

Profitability <strong>Analysis</strong><br />

2001 2002 2003 2004 2005<br />

Gross profit margin 41% 39% 38% 47% 46%<br />

Oper<strong>at</strong>ing expense r<strong>at</strong>io 27% 25% 25% 24% 23%<br />

Net Profit Margin 8% 6% 4% 11% 13%<br />

Asset Turnover 1.76 1.7 1.52 1.42 1.44<br />

53


Return on Assets 15% 11% 6% 16% 18%<br />

Return on <strong>Equity</strong> 21% 16% 9% 22% 25%<br />

Capital structure <strong>Analysis</strong><br />

2001 2002 2003 2004 2005<br />

Debt to <strong>Equity</strong> R<strong>at</strong>io 0.24 0.29 0.35 0.38 0.39<br />

Times Interest Earned 53.9 50.74 55.04 188.75 0<br />

Debt Service Margin 1.36 0.82 1.79 3.15 4.25<br />

ANF<br />

Liquidity <strong>Analysis</strong><br />

2001 2002 2003 2004 2005<br />

Current r<strong>at</strong>io 1.58 2.42 2.57 2.48 1.94<br />

Quick asset r<strong>at</strong>io 0.91 1.69 1.79 1.59 0.98<br />

Accounts recevable turnover 13.19 11.84 161.54 78.1 86.23<br />

Days supply of inventory 27.7 30.8 2.3 4.7 4.2<br />

Inventory turnover 25.5 22.7 4.4 8.6 6.7<br />

Days supply of receivables 14.3 16 82.9 42.4 54.5<br />

Working capital turnover 41.14 29.64 21.4 28.13 21.1<br />

Profitability <strong>Analysis</strong><br />

Gross profit margin 66.50% 66.40% 63.4% 41.1% 40.9%<br />

Oper<strong>at</strong>ing expense r<strong>at</strong>io 17.2% 19.4% 19.6% 19.9% 20.5%<br />

Net profit margin 10.71% 12.01% 12.22% 12.36% 12.78%<br />

Asset turnover 1.59 1.56 1.81 2.01 2.37<br />

Return on Assets 16.99% 18.70% 22.08% 24.84% 30.24%<br />

Return on equity 28.8% 25.3% 28.95% 33.34% 43.30%<br />

Capital Structure<br />

<strong>Analysis</strong><br />

Debt to equity r<strong>at</strong>io 1.01 0.61 0.40 0.29 0.395<br />

Times interest earned 82.3 67.6 90.3 83.9 54.6<br />

Debt service margin 13.4 9.1 0 0 0<br />

Industry Avg.<br />

Liquidity <strong>Analysis</strong><br />

2001 2002 2003 2004 2005<br />

Current r<strong>at</strong>io 1.96 2.465 2.505 2.77 2.465<br />

Quick asset r<strong>at</strong>io 1.26 1.745 1.85 1.885 1.57<br />

Accounts recevable turnover 42.655 56.77 112.22 74.635 82.73<br />

Days supply of inventory 16.38 17.195 4.05 4.915 4.4<br />

Inventory turnover 17.275 15.04 5.87 7.24 6.28<br />

Days supply of receivables 27.315 32.73 66.315 52.235 58.395<br />

Working capital turnover 23.475 17.36 12.93 15.68 12.15<br />

Profitability <strong>Analysis</strong><br />

2001 2002 2003 2004 2005<br />

Gross profit margin 54% 53% 51% 44% 43%<br />

Oper<strong>at</strong>ing expense r<strong>at</strong>io 22% 22% 22% 22% 22%<br />

54


Net profit margin 9% 9% 8% 12% 13%<br />

Asset turnover 1.675 1.63 1.665 1.715 1.905<br />

Return on Assets 16% 15% 14% 20% 24%<br />

Return on equity 25% 21% 19% 28% 34%<br />

Capital Structure<br />

<strong>Analysis</strong><br />

2001 2002 2003 2004 2005<br />

Debt to equity r<strong>at</strong>io 0.625 0.45 0.375 0.335 0.3925<br />

Times interest earned 68.1 59.17 72.67 136.325 27.3<br />

Debt service margin 7.38 4.96 0.895 1.575 2.125<br />

55


Figure 1.2 Balance sheet<br />

Actual Balance Sheet<br />

Forecasted Balance Sheet<br />

2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 <strong>2006</strong> 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015<br />

Assets<br />

Current Assets<br />

Cash <strong>and</strong> Equivalents 408,794,000 1,035,749,000 3,388,514,000 2,261,000,000 2,245,000,000 2,431,616,000 2,674,777,600 2,942,255,360 3,236,480,896 3,560,128,986 3,916,141,884 4,307,756,073 4,738,531,680 5,212,384,848 5,733,623,333<br />

Merch<strong>and</strong>ise Inventory 1,904,153,000 1,677,116,000 2,047,879,000 1,704,000,000 1,814,000,000 2,156,081,000 2,418,088,000 2,711,934,000 3,041,488,000 3,411,090,000 3,825,606,000 4,290,493,000 4,811,875,000 5,396,614,000 6,052,410,000<br />

Other Current Assets 335,103,000 331,685,000 303,332,000 300,000,000 368,000,000<br />

Total Current Assets 2,648,050,000 3,044,550,000 5,739,725,000 6,689,000,000 6,304,000,000 7,040,633,600 7,744,696,960 8,519,166,656 9,371,083,322 10,308,191,654 11,339,010,819 12,472,911,901 13,720,203,091 15,092,223,400 16,601,445,740<br />

Property <strong>and</strong> Equipment<br />

Leasehold Improvements 1,899,820,000 2,127,966,000 2,241,831,000 2,224,000,000 N/A<br />

Furniture <strong>and</strong> Equipment 2,826,863,000 3,327,819,000 3,438,805,000 3,591,000,000 N/A<br />

L<strong>and</strong> <strong>and</strong> Buildings 558,832,000 917,055,000 942,845,000 1,033,000,000 N/A<br />

Construction on Progress 615,722,000 246,691,000 202,839,000 131,000,000 N/A<br />

Accumul<strong>at</strong>ed Depreci<strong>at</strong>ion <strong>and</strong> Amortiz<strong>at</strong>io ($1,893,552,000) ($2,458,241,000) ($3,049,477,000) ($3,611,000,000) N/A<br />

Propertry <strong>and</strong> Equipment Net 4,007,685,000 4,161,290,000 3,776,843,000 3,368,000,000 3,376,000,000 3,647,424,000 4,012,166,400 4,413,383,040 4,854,721,344 5,340,193,478 5,874,212,826 6,461,634,109 7,107,797,520 7,818,577,272 8,600,434,999<br />

Lease Rights <strong>and</strong> other Assets 357,173,000 385,486,000 385,486,000 286,000,000 N/A<br />

Total Assets 7,012,908,000 7,591,326,000 9,902,004,000 10,343,000,000 10,048,000,000 11,052,800,000 12,158,080,000 13,373,888,000 14,711,276,800 16,182,404,480 17,800,644,928 19,580,709,421 21,538,780,363 23,692,658,399 26,061,924,239<br />

Liabilities <strong>and</strong> Shareholder's <strong>Equity</strong><br />

Current Liabilities<br />

Notes Payable 779,904,000 41,889,000 N/A N/A N/A<br />

Current M<strong>at</strong>urities of Long Term Debt 250,000,000 N/A 499,979,000 283,000,000 N/A<br />

Accounts Payable 1,067,207,000 1,105,117,000 1,159,301,000 1,178,000,000 1,240,000,000 1,351,218,000 1,486,339,800 1,634,973,780 1,798,471,158 1,978,318,274 2,176,150,101 2,393,765,111 2,633,141,622 2,896,455,785 3,186,101,363<br />

Accrued Expenses <strong>and</strong> other Current Liab 684,209,000 909,227,000 1,067,294,000 872,000,000 924,000,000<br />

<strong>Inc</strong>ome Taxes Payable 17,824,000 N/A 193,000,000 159,000,000 78,000,000<br />

Total Current Liabilities 2,799,144,000 2,056,233,000 2,726,574,000 2,492,000,000 2,242,000,000 3,826,431,304 4,209,074,435 4,629,981,878 5,092,980,066 5,602,278,073 6,162,505,880 6,778,756,468 7,456,632,115 8,202,295,326 9,022,524,859<br />

Long-term Debt 780,246,000 1,961,397,000 1,515,794,000 1,107,000,000 513,000,000<br />

Deferred Lease Credits <strong>and</strong> other Liabilitie 505,279,000 564,115,000 621,424,000 581,000,000 984,000,000<br />

Total Liabilites 4,084,669,000 4,581,745,000 4,863,792,000 4,180,000,000 3,739,000,000 4,484,975,000 4,933,472,500 5,426,819,750 5,969,501,725 6,566,451,898 7,223,097,087 7,945,406,796 8,739,947,476 9,613,942,223 10,575,336,445<br />

Shareholder's <strong>Equity</strong><br />

Common Stock 46,961,000 47,430,000 48,401,000 49,000,000 49,000,000 49,000,000 49,000,000 49,000,000 49,000,000 49,000,000 49,000,000 49,000,000 49,000,000 49,000,000 49,000,000<br />

Additional Paid-In-Capital 294,967,000 461,408,000 638,306,000 732,000,000 904,000,000<br />

Retained Earnings 4,974,773,000 4,890,375,000 5,289,480,000 6,241,000,000 7,181,000,000<br />

Accumul<strong>at</strong>ed Other Comprehensive Losse (20,173,000) (61,824,000) (16,766,000) 31,000,000 48,000,000<br />

Deferred Compens<strong>at</strong>ion (12,162,000) (7,245,000) (13,574,000) (9,000,000) (8,000,000)<br />

Treasury Stock, <strong>at</strong> Cost (2,356,127,000) (2,320,563,000) (2,287,635,000) (2,261,000,000) (3,238,000,000)<br />

Total Shareholder's <strong>Equity</strong> 2,928,239,000 3,009,581,000 3,658,212,000 4,783,000,000 4,936,000,000 5,057,525,000 5,563,277,500 6,119,605,250 6,731,565,775 7,404,722,353 8,145,194,588 8,959,714,047 9,855,685,451 10,841,253,996 11,925,379,396<br />

Total Liabilites <strong>and</strong> Shareholder's <strong>Equity</strong> 7,012,908,000 7,591,326,000 8,522,004,000 8,963,000,000 8,675,000,000 9,542,500,000 10,496,750,000 11,546,425,000 12,701,067,500 13,971,174,250 15,368,291,675 16,905,120,843 18,595,632,927 20,455,196,219 22,500,715,841<br />

Figure 1.3 Proforma Balance sheet<br />

Actual Common Size Balance Sheet<br />

Forecasted Common Size Balance Sheet<br />

Assets<br />

Current Assets<br />

Cash <strong>and</strong> Equivalents 5.83% 13.64% 34.22% 21.86% 22.34% 22.00% 22.00% 22.00% 22.00% 22.00% 22.00% 22.00% 22.00% 22.00% 22.00%<br />

Merch<strong>and</strong>ise Inventory 27.10% 22.10% 20.70% 16.50% 18.10% 19.51% 19.89% 20.28% 20.67% 21.08% 21.49% 21.91% 22.34% 22.78% 23.22%<br />

Other Current Assets 4.80% 3.10% 3.10% 2.90% 3.70%<br />

Total Current Assets 37.80% 40.10% 58.00% 64.70% 62.70% 64% 64% 64% 64% 64% 64% 64% 64% 64% 64%<br />

Property <strong>and</strong> Equipment<br />

Leasehold Improvements 27.10% 28.00% 22.60% 21.50% N/A<br />

Furniture <strong>and</strong> Equipment 40.30% 53.80% 34.70% 34.70% N/A<br />

L<strong>and</strong> <strong>and</strong> Buildings 8.00% 12.10% 9.50% 10.00% N/A<br />

Construction on Progress 8.80% 3.20% 2.00% 1.30% N/A<br />

Accumul<strong>at</strong>ed Depreci<strong>at</strong>ion <strong>and</strong> Am ($0.27) ($0.32) ($0.31) ($0.35) N/A<br />

Propertry <strong>and</strong> Equipment Net 57.15% 54.82% 38.14% 32.56% 33.60% 33.00% 33.00% 33.00% 33.00% 33.00% 33.00% 33.00% 33.00% 33.00% 33.00%<br />

Lease Rights <strong>and</strong> other Assets 5.09% 5.08% 3.89% 2.77% N/A<br />

Total Assets 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%<br />

Liabilities <strong>and</strong> Shareholder's <strong>Equity</strong><br />

Current Liabilities<br />

Notes Payable 11.12% 0.55% N/A N/A N/A<br />

Current M<strong>at</strong>urities of Long Term D 3.56% N/A 5.87% 3.16% N/A<br />

Accounts Payable 15.22% 14.56% 13.60% 13.14% 14.29% 14.16% 14.16% 14.16% 14.16% 14.16% 14.16% 14.16% 14.16% 14.16% 14.16%<br />

Accrued Expenses <strong>and</strong> other Curr 9.76% 11.98% 12.52% 9.73% 10.65%<br />

<strong>Inc</strong>ome Taxes Payable 0.25% N/A 2.26% 1.77% 0.90% 40.10% 40.10% 40.10% 40.10% 40.10% 40.10% 40.10% 40.10% 40.10% 40.10%<br />

Total Current Liabilities 39.91% 27.09% 31.99% 27.80% 25.84%<br />

Long-term Debt 11.13% 25.84% 17.79% 12.35% 5.91%<br />

Deferred Lease Credits <strong>and</strong> other 7.20% 7.43% 7.29% 6.48% 11.34%<br />

Total Liabilities 58.25% 60.36% 57.07% 46.64% 43.10% 47.00% 47.00% 47.00% 47.00% 47.00% 47.00% 47.00% 47.00% 47.00% 47.00%<br />

Shareholder's <strong>Equity</strong><br />

Common Stock 0.67% 0.62% 0.57% 0.55% 0.56% 0.51% 0.47% 0.42% 0.39% 0.35% 0.32% 0.29% 0.26% 0.24% 0.22%<br />

Additional Paid-In-Capital 4.21% 6.08% 7.49% 8.17% 10.42%<br />

Retained Earnings 70.94% 64.42% 62.07% 69.63% 82.78%<br />

Accumul<strong>at</strong>ed Other Comprehensiv -0.29% -0.81% -0.20% 0.35% 0.55%<br />

Deferred Compens<strong>at</strong>ion -0.17% -0.10% -0.16% -0.10% -0.09%<br />

Treasury Stock, <strong>at</strong> Cost -33.60% -30.57% -26.84% -25.23% -37.33%<br />

Total Shareholder's <strong>Equity</strong> 41.75% 39.64% 42.93% 53.36% 56.90% 53.00% 53.00% 53.00% 53.00% 53.00% 53.00% 53.00% 53.00% 53.00% 53.00%<br />

Total Liabilites <strong>and</strong> Shareholder's 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%<br />

56


Figure 1.4 <strong>Inc</strong>ome St<strong>at</strong>ement<br />

The <strong>Gap</strong> <strong>Inc</strong>: Actual <strong>Inc</strong>ome St<strong>at</strong>ement<br />

Forecast <strong>Inc</strong>ome St<strong>at</strong>ement<br />

2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 <strong>2006</strong> 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015<br />

Net Sales 13,673,500,000 13,847,900,000 14,454,700,000 15,854,000,000 16,267,000,000 18,243,765,840 20,460,748,265 22,947,138,394 25,735,674,652 28,863,073,835 32,370,514,568 36,304,179,498 40,715,863,391 45,663,655,110 51,212,702,479<br />

COGS 8,599,400,000 9,704,400,000 9,541,600,000 9,886,000,000 9,886,000,000 11,858,447,796 13,299,486,372 14,915,639,956 16,728,188,524 18,760,997,993 21,040,834,469 23,597,716,674 26,465,311,204 29,681,375,821 33,288,256,611<br />

Gross Profit 5,074,000,000 4,143,500,000 4,913,200,000 5,968,000,000 6,381,000,000 6,385,318,044 7,161,261,893 8,031,498,438 9,007,486,128 10,102,075,842 11,329,680,099 12,706,462,824 14,250,552,187 15,982,279,288 17,924,445,868<br />

Oper<strong>at</strong>ing Expenses (Selling & Other) 3,629,030,000 3,806,000,000 3,900,500,000 4,089,000,000 4,296,000,000 4,860,139,220 5,450,743,338 6,113,117,668 6,855,983,727 7,689,122,870 8,623,505,081 9,671,433,418 10,846,706,007 12,164,797,721 13,643,063,940<br />

Oper<strong>at</strong>ing <strong>Inc</strong>ome 1,444,080,000 337,500,000 1,012,600,000 1,879,000,000 2,085,000,000 1,525,178,824 1,710,518,555 1,918,380,770 2,151,502,401 2,412,952,973 2,706,175,018 3,035,029,406 3,403,846,179 3,817,481,567 4,281,381,927<br />

Net Int <strong>Inc</strong> & Other (62,900,000) (95,900,000) (211,800,000) (196,000,000) (213,000,000) (155,920,000) (155,920,000) (155,920,000) (155,920,000) (155,920,000) (155,920,000) (155,920,000) (155,920,000) (155,920,000) (155,920,000)<br />

EBT 1,381,900,000 241,600,000 800,900,000 1,683,000,000 1,872,000,000 1,369,258,824 1,554,598,555 1,762,460,770 1,995,582,401 2,257,032,973 2,550,255,018 2,879,109,406 3,247,926,179 3,661,561,567 4,125,461,927<br />

<strong>Inc</strong>ome Taxes 504,400,000 249,400,000 323,400,000 653,000,000 722,000,000 537,434,089 610,179,933 691,765,852 783,266,092 885,885,442 1,000,975,095 1,130,050,442 1,274,811,025 1,437,162,915 1,619,243,806<br />

Net <strong>Inc</strong>ome 877,497,000 (7,764,000) 478,000,000 1,031,000,000 1,150,000,000 831,824,736 944,418,622 1,070,694,918 1,212,316,309 1,371,147,531 1,549,279,923 1,749,058,964 1,973,115,154 2,224,398,652 2,506,218,121<br />

Sustainable Growth R<strong>at</strong>e = 29.96% -26.99% 13% 21.50% 23.29% Skepticism 112%<br />

Average Growth<br />

Sales Growth R<strong>at</strong>e 1.28% 4.38% 9.68% 2.61% 4.49% 104.49%<br />

COGS Percent of sales<br />

65.00% Plus Growth<br />

GP=Sales-COGS<br />

Average<br />

2003-2005 <strong>Inc</strong>ome Tax Provision of NI Average last 3y 39.25% 25.96% 38.80% 38.57% 39.25%<br />

Shares Outst<strong>and</strong>ing in 2005 10,158,300<br />

Figure 1.5 Proforma <strong>Inc</strong>ome St<strong>at</strong>ement<br />

The <strong>Gap</strong> <strong>Inc</strong>: Common-size <strong>Inc</strong>ome St<strong>at</strong>ement Forecast Financial St<strong>at</strong>ements<br />

2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 <strong>2006</strong> 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015<br />

Revenue 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%<br />

COGS 62.90% 70.10% 66.00% 62.40% 60.80% 65.00% 65.00% 65.00% 65.00% 65.00% 65.00% 65.00% 65.00% 65.00% 65.00%<br />

Gross Margin 37.10% 29.90% 34.00% 37.60% 39.20% 35.00% 35.00% 35.00% 35.00% 35.00% 35.00% 35.00% 35.00% 35.00% 35.00%<br />

Other Expenses (Selling & other) 26.50% 27.50% 27.00% 25.80% 26.40% 26.64% 26.64% 26.64% 26.64% 26.64% 26.64% 26.64% 26.64% 26.64% 26.64%<br />

Oper<strong>at</strong>ing Margin 10.60% 2.40% 7.00% 11.90% 12.80% 8.36% 8.36% 8.36% 8.36% 8.36% 8.36% 8.36% 8.36% 8.36% 8.36%<br />

Net Int <strong>Inc</strong> & Other -0.50% -0.70% -1.50% -1.20% -1.30% -1.04% -1.04% -1.04% -1.04% -1.04% -1.04% -1.04% -1.04% -1.04% -1.04%<br />

EBT Margin 16.10% 1.70% 5.50% 10.60% 11.50% 7.32% 7.32% 7.32% 7.32% 7.32% 7.32% 7.32% 7.32% 7.32% 7.32%<br />

Tax R<strong>at</strong>e 36.50% 103.20% 40.40% 38.80% 38.60% 2.95% 2.98% 3.01% 3.04% 3.07% 3.09% 3.11% 3.13% 3.15% 3.16%<br />

Net Margin 6.42% 0.06% 3.30% 6.50% 65.70% 4.37% 4.34% 4.31% 4.28% 4.25% 4.23% 4.21% 4.19% 4.17% 4.16%<br />

Average Growth<br />

Sales (Sustainable Growth R<strong>at</strong>e) 112.00%<br />

COGS Growth R<strong>at</strong>e 11.45% -5.85% -5.45% -2.56% -0.61% 99.96% 26.64%<br />

GP=Sales-COGS<br />

Selling Growth R<strong>at</strong>e 3.77% -1.82% -4.44% 2.33% -0.04%<br />

Figure 1.6 Cash Flows<br />

57


2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 <strong>2006</strong> 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015<br />

Cash Flows from Oper<strong>at</strong>ing Activities<br />

Net earnings (loss) $877,497,000 ($7,764,000) $478,000,000 $1,031,000,000 $1,150,000,000 $ 831,824,736 $ 944,418,622 $ 1,070,694,918 $ 1,212,316,309 $ 1,371,147,531 $ 1,549,279,923 $ 1,749,058,964 $ 1,973,115,154 $ 2,224,398,652 $ 2,506,218,121<br />

:<br />

Depreci<strong>at</strong>ion <strong>and</strong> amortiz<strong>at</strong>ion $590,365,000 $810,486,000 $706,000,000 $675,000,000 $620,000,000 $510,639 $561,703 $617,873 $679,660 $747,627 $822,389 $904,628 $995,091 $1,094,600 $1,204,060<br />

Tax benefit from exercise of stock options <strong>and</strong> vesting o $130,882,000 $58,444,000 $44,000,000 $7,000,000 $31,000,000<br />

Deferred income taxes ($38,872,000) ($28,512,000) $5,000,000 $101,000,000 ($80,000,000)<br />

Loss on disposable <strong>and</strong> other $117,000,000 $72,000,000 $21,000,000 $70,000,000 $54,333,333 $48,444,444 $57,592,593 $53,456,790 $53,164,609 $54,737,997 $53,786,465 $53,896,357 $54,140,273<br />

Change in oper<strong>at</strong>ing assets <strong>and</strong> liabilities:<br />

Merch<strong>and</strong>ise inventory ($454,595,000) $213,067,000 ($258,000,000) $385,000,000 ($90,000,000)<br />

Prepaid expenses <strong>and</strong> other ($61,096,000) ($13,303,000) $33,000,000 $5,000,000 ($18,000,000)<br />

Accounts payable $249,545,000 $42,205,000 $47,000 $10,000 $42,000,000 $62,000 $111,218 $135,122 $148,634 $163,497 $179,847 $197,832 $217,615 $239,377 $263,314<br />

Accrued expenses ($56,541,000) $220,826,000 $55,000 ($42,000,000) ($3,000,000)<br />

Deferred lease credits <strong>and</strong> other long-term liabilities $54,020,000 $22,390,000 $108,000,000 ($38,000,000) ($112,000,000) ($342,081) ($262,007) ($293,846) ($329,554) ($369,602) ($414,516) ($464,887) ($521,382) ($584,739) ($655,796)<br />

Net cash provided by oper<strong>at</strong>ing activities $1,291,205,000 $1,317,839,000 $2,000,000 ($26,000,000) $59,000,000 $ 902,055,294 $ 999,162,869 $ 1,119,598,511 $ 1,270,407,641 $ 1,425,145,843 $ 1,603,032,252 $ 1,804,434,534 $ 2,027,592,944 $ 2,279,044,247 $ 2,561,169,972<br />

Cash Flows from Investing Activities<br />

Net purchase of property <strong>and</strong> equipment $1,291,205,000 ($940,078,000) $1,243,000,000 $2,160,000,000 $1,620,000,000 ($510,639) ($561,703) ($617,873) ($679,660) ($747,627) ($822,389) ($904,628) ($995,091) ($1,094,600) ($1,204,060)<br />

Proceeds from sale of property <strong>and</strong> equipment ($308,000,000) ($261,000,000) ($442,000,000)<br />

Purcase of short term investments $9,000,000 $1,000,000 $0<br />

M<strong>at</strong>ur<strong>at</strong>ies <strong>and</strong> sale of short term investments ($472,000,000) ($1,202,000,000) ($1,813,000,000)<br />

Restricted cash $159,000,000 $442,000,000 $2,072,000,000<br />

Acquisition of lease rights <strong>and</strong> other assets ($16,252,000) ($10,549,000) ($20,000,000) ($1,303,000,000) $337,000,000<br />

Net cash used for investing activities ($1,874,914,000) ($950,627,000) $3,000,000 $5,000,000 $6,000,000 ($510,639) ($561,703) ($617,873) ($679,660) ($747,627) ($822,389) ($904,628) ($995,091) ($1,094,600) ($1,204,060)<br />

Cash Flows from Financing Activities<br />

Net increase (decrease) in notes payable $621,420,000 ($734,927,000) ($629,000,000) ($2,318,000,000) $160,000,000<br />

Proceeds from issuance of long-term debt $250,000,000 $1,194,265,000 ($42,000,000) $0 $0<br />

Payments of long-term debt $0 ($250,000,000) $1,346,000,000 $0 $0<br />

Issuance of common stock $152,105,000 $139,105,000 $0 ($668,000,000) ($871,000,000)<br />

Reissuance of treasury stock ($392,558,000) ($785,000) $120,000,000 $85,000,000 $130,000,000<br />

Net purchase of treasury stock ($75,488,000) ($76,373,000) $33,000,000 $26,000,000 ($976,000,000)<br />

Cash dividends paid $555,479,000 $271,285,000 ($78,000,000) ($79,000,000) ($79,000,000)<br />

Net cash provided by (used for) financing activities ($13,328,000) ($11,542,000) $1,379,000,000 ($636,000,000) ($1,796,000,000)<br />

Effect of exchange r<strong>at</strong>e fluctu<strong>at</strong>ions on cash ($41,558,000) $626,955,000 $27,000,000 $28,000,000 $0<br />

Net increase (decrease) in cash <strong>and</strong> equivalents $450,352,000 $408,794,000 $2,020,000,000 ($766,000,000) ($16,000,000) $2,242,568,384 $ (186,616) $ (243,162) $ (267,478) $ (294,226) $ (323,648) $ (356,013) $ (391,614) $ (430,776) $ (473,853)<br />

Cash <strong>and</strong> equivalents <strong>at</strong> beginning of year $408,794,000 $1,035,749,000 $1,007,000,000 $3,027,000,000 $2,261,000,000 $2,245,000,000 $ 2,245,000 $ 2,431,616 $ 2,674,778 $ 2,942,255 $ 3,236,481 $ 3,560,129 $ 3,916,142 $ 4,307,756 $ 4,738,532<br />

Cash <strong>and</strong> equivalents <strong>at</strong> end of year $1,035,749,000 $408,794,000 $3,027,000,000 $2,261,000,000 $2,245,000,000 $ 2,431,616 $ 2,431,616 $ 2,674,778 $ 2,942,255 $ 3,236,481 $ 3,560,129 $ 3,916,142 $ 4,307,756 $ 4,738,532 $ 5,212,385<br />

58


Figure 1.7 Discounted Dividends<br />

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10<br />

2005 <strong>2006</strong> 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015<br />

EPS (Earnings Per Share) $0.97 $1.10 $1.25 $1.41 $1.60 $1.81 $2.04 $2.30 $2.60<br />

DPS (Dividends Per Share) $0.18 $0.18 $0.18 $0.18 $0.18 $0.18 $0.18 $0.18 $0.18 $<br />

0.18<br />

BPS (Book Value <strong>Equity</strong> per Share) 6.16<br />

Cash From Oper<strong>at</strong>ions $ 902,055,294.00 $ 999,162,869.00 $ 1,119,598,511.00 $ 1,270,407,641.00 $ 1,425,145,843.00 $ 1,603,032,252.00 $ 1,804,434,534.00 $ 2,027,592,944.00 $ 2,279,044,247.00 $ 2,561,169,972.00<br />

Cash Investments $ (510,639.00) $ (561,703.00) $ (617,873.00) $ (679,660.00) $ (747,627.00) $ (822,389.00) $ (904,628.00) $ (995,091.00) $ (1,094,600.00) $ (1,204,060.00)<br />

PV Factor 0.919624793<br />

PV of Dividends 0.1655<br />

Total PV of Annual Dividends 0.165532463<br />

Continuing (Terminal) Value Perpetuity<br />

PV of Terminal Value Perpetuity 0 2.059496568<br />

Estim<strong>at</strong>ed share value <strong>at</strong> the end of 2005 0.166 Ke<br />

g 0.07 0.08 0.0874 0.095 0.105 0.115<br />

0.000 2.5714 1.2857 2.05 1.894 1.714 1.565<br />

Value of Firm 12,035,917,819.49 0.040 6 1.3846 4 3.27 2.769 2.4<br />

Book Value of Liabilities 5112000000 0.060 18 1.5 6.569 5.14 4 3.27<br />

Estim<strong>at</strong>ed Market Value of <strong>Equity</strong> 13,527,601,935.34 0.080 -18 4.5 24.32 12 7.2 5.14<br />

Number of Shares 860,559,000.00 0.100 -6 -9 -14.3 -36 36 12<br />

Observed Price per Share (end of 2005) 17.64 0.120 -3.6 -4.5 -5.52 -7.2 -12 -36<br />

Assume Dividend Perpetuity Grows <strong>at</strong> 2% per year 20.05 0.130 -3 -3.6 -4.225 -5.14 -7.2 -12<br />

for initial perpetuity g 0 Overvalued (< 90%) 15.876<br />

. Undervalued (> 110%) 19.404<br />

Vf Vd Ve<br />

Market Value 14,039,601,935.34 512000000 13,527,601,935.34<br />

Market Value Weights 100% 4% 96%<br />

WACC Kd Ke<br />

Solve for Ke given previous inform<strong>at</strong>ion 12 6<br />

Figure 1.8 Free Cash Flows<br />

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10<br />

2005 <strong>2006</strong> 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015<br />

EPS (Earnings Per Share) $0.97 $1.10 $1.25 $1.41 $1.60 $1.81 $2.04 $2.30 $2.60<br />

DPS (Dividends Per Share) $0.18 $0.18 $0.18 $0.18 $0.18 $0.18 $0.18 $0.18 $0.18 $<br />

0.18<br />

BPS (Book Value <strong>Equity</strong> per Share) 6.16<br />

Cash From Oper<strong>at</strong>ions $ 902,055,294.00 $ 999,162,869.00 $ 1,119,598,511.00 $ 1,270,407,641.00 $ 1,425,145,843.00 $ 1,603,032,252.00 $ 1,804,434,534.00 $ 2,027,592,944.00 $ 2,279,044,247.00 $ 2,561,169,972.00<br />

Cash Investments $ (510,639.00) $ (561,703.00) $ (617,873.00) $ (679,660.00) $ (747,627.00) $ (822,389.00) $ (904,628.00) $ (995,091.00) $ (1,094,600.00) $ (1,204,060.00)<br />

Cash Flow to Firms Assets (Free Cash Flow) $ 902,565,933.00 $ 999,724,572.00 $ 1,120,216,384.00 $ 1,271,087,301.00 $ 1,425,893,470.00 $ 1,603,854,641.00 $ 1,805,339,162.00 $ 2,028,588,035.00 $ 2,280,138,847.00 $ 2,562,374,032.00<br />

PV Factor 0.892857143 0.797193878 0.711780248 0.6355 0.56743 0.50663 0.4523 0.4039 0.3606 0.3220<br />

PV of Free Cash Flows 805862440.2 796974308 797347895.4 807798959 809090248.3 812562675 816643753.3 819312683.8 822240926.6 825015860.4<br />

Total PV of Annual Free Cash Flows $ 7,287,833,889.63<br />

Continuing (Terminal) Value Perpetuity WACC $<br />

21,353,116,933.33<br />

PV of Terminal Value Perpetuity $ 7,700,148,030.76<br />

0.095 0.1 0.105 0.11 0.115 0.12 0.125 0.13<br />

Value of Firm $ 14,987,981,920.39 G 0 17.41 15.94 14.67 13.5 12.4 11.48 10.59 9.79<br />

Book Value of Liabilities $ 5,112,000,000.00<br />

0.01 19.04 17.37 15.89 14.56 13.37 12.29 11.31 10.42<br />

Estim<strong>at</strong>ed Market Value of <strong>Equity</strong> $ 9,875,981,920.39<br />

0.02 21.1 19.13 17.39 15.85 14.49 13.27 12.17 11.17<br />

Number of Shares 860559000 0.03 23.8 21.38 19.29 17.47 15.87 14.46 13.2 12.07<br />

Estim<strong>at</strong>ed Price per Share (end of 2005) $ 11.48<br />

0.04 27.48 24.39 21.78 19.55 17.63 15.95 14.48 13.17<br />

Observed Share Price $ 17.64<br />

5.73581 Overvalued (110%) 19.404<br />

g 0<br />

59


Figure 1.9 Residual <strong>Inc</strong>ome<br />

(0.06) (0.06) (0.06) (0.06) (0.06) (0.06) (0.06) (0.06)<br />

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 perp<br />

Forecast Years<br />

2005 <strong>2006</strong> 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015<br />

Beginning BE (per share) 6.16 6.95 7.74 8.53 9.32 10.11 10.90 11.69 12.48<br />

Earnings Per Share $0.97 $0.97 $0.97 $0.97 $0.97 $0.97 $0.97 $0.97 $0.97<br />

Dividends per share $0.18 $0.18 $0.18 $0.18 $0.18 $0.18 $0.18 $0.18 $0.18<br />

Ending BE (per share) 6.16 6.95 7.74 8.53 9.32 10.11 10.90 11.69 12.48 13.27<br />

Ke 0.08<br />

"Normal" <strong>Inc</strong>ome 0.49 0.56 0.62 0.68 0.75 0.81 0.87 0.94 1.00<br />

Residual <strong>Inc</strong>ome (RI) 0.48 0.41 0.35 0.29 0.22 0.16 0.10 0.03 (0.03) (0.03)<br />

Discount Factor 0.926 0.857 0.794 0.735 0.681 0.630 0.583 0.540 0.500<br />

Present Value of RI 0.44 0.35 0.28 0.21 0.15 0.10 0.06 0.02 (0.01)<br />

ValuePercent<br />

BV <strong>Equity</strong> (per share) 2005 6.16 77.33%<br />

Total PV of RI (end 2005) 1.60 20.12%<br />

Continu<strong>at</strong>ion (Terminal) Value Sensitivity <strong>Analysis</strong> 0.41<br />

PV of Terminal Value (end 2005) 0.20 2.55% g avg gr 14.5%<br />

Estim<strong>at</strong>ed Value (2005) $7.97 100.00% 0 0.05 0.1 0.15<br />

Ke 0.08 $7.59 $7.54 $7.44 $7.29<br />

0.1 $5.49 $5.44 $5.34 $5.19<br />

0.12 $4.16 $4.11 $4.01 $3.86<br />

Actual Price per share $22.01 0.14 $3.26 $3.21 $3.11 $2.96<br />

Growth 0.15 0.16 $2.63 $2.58 $2.48 $2.33<br />

Figure 2.0 LR ROI Perp<br />

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 perp<br />

Forecast Years<br />

2005 <strong>2006</strong> 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015<br />

Beginning BE (per share) 6.16 6.95 7.87 8.94 10.17 11.59 13.22 15.08 17.20<br />

Earnings Per Share $0.97 $1.10 $1.25 $1.41 $1.60 $1.81 $2.04 $2.30 $2.60<br />

Dividends per share $0.18 $0.18 $0.18 $0.18 $0.18 $0.18 $0.18 $0.18 $0.18<br />

Ending BE (per share) 6.16 6.95 7.87 8.94 10.17 11.59 13.22 15.08 17.20 19.62<br />

Ke 0.0874<br />

ROE 15.75% 15.83% 15.88% 15.77% 15.73% 15.62% 15.43% 15.25% 15.12%<br />

Growth inBVE 12.82% 13.24% 13.60% 13.76% 13.96% 14.06% 14.07% 14.06% 14.07%<br />

Actual Price per share $17.64 g<br />

0 10.9932<br />

Average ROE 15.60% 0.01 11.6177<br />

Average Growth in BVE 13.74% 0.02 12.4274<br />

0.03 13.5193<br />

LRRes<strong>Inc</strong> Perp Value -2.2921367 0.04 15.0719<br />

0.05 17.4548<br />

Estim<strong>at</strong>ed Value 0.06 21.577<br />

0.07 30.4373<br />

0.08 63.2444<br />

60


Figure 2.1 Abnormal Earnings Growing<br />

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10<br />

Forecast Years<br />

Perp<br />

2005 <strong>2006</strong> 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014<br />

EPS $1.29 $0.97 $0.97 $0.97 $0.97 $0.97 $0.97 $0.97 $0.97 $0.97<br />

DPS $0.18 $0.18 $0.18 $0.18 $0.18 $0.18 $0.18 $0.18 $0.18 $0.18<br />

DPS invested <strong>at</strong> 17% (Drip) $0.01 $0.01 $0.01 $0.01 $0.01 $0.01 $0.01 $0.01 $0.01<br />

Cum-Dividend Earnings $0.98 $0.98 $0.98 $0.98 $0.98 $0.98 $0.98 $0.98 $0.98<br />

Normal Earnings $1.40 $1.05 $1.05 $1.05 $1.05 $1.05 $1.05 $1.05 1.05<br />

Abnormal Earning Growth (AEG) ($0.41) ($0.06) ($0.06) ($0.06) ($0.06) ($0.06) ($0.06) ##### ($0.06) $0.00<br />

PV Factor 0.924 0.855 0.790 0.730 0.675 0.624 0.577 0.534 0.493 0.456<br />

PV of AEG ($0.38) ($0.06) ($0.05) ($0.05) ($0.04) ($0.04) ($0.04) ##### ($0.03) $0.00<br />

Core EPS $1.29<br />

Total PV of AEG ($0.72)<br />

Continuing (Terminal) Value $0.00<br />

PV of Terminal Value $0.00 Sensitivity <strong>Analysis</strong><br />

Total PV of AEG ($0.72) g<br />

Total Average EPS Perp (t+1) $0.57 0 0.05 0.1 0.15<br />

Capitaliz<strong>at</strong>ion R<strong>at</strong>e (perpetuity) 0.0817 Ke 0.08 $7.02 $6.97 $6.92 $6.87<br />

0.1 $4.99 $4.94 $4.89 $4.84<br />

Value Per Share $6.97 0.12 $3.71 $3.66 $3.61 $3.56<br />

0.14 $2.86 $2.81 $2.76 $2.71<br />

Ke 0.0817 0.16 $2.27 $2.22 $2.17 $2.12<br />

g 0<br />

Actual Price per share$17.64<br />

Figure 2.2 Weighted Avg. Cost of <strong>Equity</strong><br />

5-Year Constant M<strong>at</strong>urity Risk Free R<strong>at</strong>e<br />

Months Beta R^2 Ke<br />

60 -0.24 -0.0108 0.0265<br />

48 -0.31<br />

-<br />

0.00876 0.0216<br />

36 -0.24 -0.0248 0.0265<br />

24 0.63 -0.0188 0.0874<br />

Yahoo Finance 0.91 0.107<br />

61


Figure 2.3 Weighted Avg. Cost of Debt<br />

LIABILITIES AND STOCKHOLDERS'<br />

EQUITY<br />

Short-term borrowings **<br />

Interest<br />

R<strong>at</strong>e weight 2005<br />

Current m<strong>at</strong>urities of long-term debt 0.0456 0 0 0<br />

Accounts payable 0.0524 0.24256651 0.012710485 $1,240,000,000<br />

Accrued expenses <strong>and</strong> other current<br />

liabilites 0.07 0.180751174 0.012652582 $924,000,000<br />

Other current liabilities (income taxes pay.) 0.054 0.015258216 0.000823944 $78,000,000<br />

TOTAL CURRENT LIABILITIES<br />

$<br />

2,242,000,000<br />

Long-term debt 0.0256 0.100352113 0.002569014 $513,000,000<br />

Senior convertible notes 0.0497 0.268583725 0.013348611 $1,373,000,000<br />

Lease incentives <strong>and</strong> other liabilities 0.067 0.192488263 0.012883881 $984,000,000<br />

Total Non-Current Liabilities $2,870,000,000<br />

Total Liabilities<br />

$<br />

5,112,000,000<br />

WACD 0.054988517<br />

62

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!