The DeAngelos present companies should maintain moderate cash balances while M&M suggest proud balances are required to maximise pecuniary flexibility. M&M take hold ofs cash as the dish out for managers to take advantage of positive NPV projects without raising capital. The DeAngelos believe moderate balances will provide flexibility and control agency be by limiting the assets subject to managerial decisions.
Other authors view high leverage as a good thing. Jensen sees high leverage as a way to force cash disgorgement, while the DeAngelos view low leverage as a way to preserve debt capacity for possible future use.
Critics argue high leverage has legal advantages as a cash disgorgement mechanism, but the DeAngelos find high leverage restricts political partys flexibility. Firms may be financially unable to report unanticipated earnings shortfalls or new investment opportunities if they are highly levered.
To illustrate some of DeAngelos points, we can look at the three automakers current situation as they oblige maximized their debt, have another(prenominal) payout commitments (UAW), and are running out of cash. In other words, they have reduced their financial flexibility DeAngelos describe and now face possible bankruptcy. The DeAngelos instead suggest the optimal financial policy should be low leverage with substantial ongoing equity payouts.
Equity payouts and capital infusions is where the DeAngelos differ...If you want to get a full essay, order it on our website: Orderessay
If you want to get a full essay, wisit our page: write my essay .
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.