Who Wrote the Bible Dissertation Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 3000 words

Who Wrote the Bible - Dissertation Example For instance, because it was during his lifetime that King James had the Bible translated into English, many have long believed that William Shakespeare actually wrote the book itself. There have many television programs on that subject and believers point to the 46th Psalm as their evidence. â€Å"God is our refuge and strength, a very present help in trouble. Therefore will not we fear, though the earth be removed, and though the mountains be carried into the midst of the sea; Though the waters thereof roar and be troubled, though the mountains shake with the swelling thereof. Selah. There is a river, the streams whereof shall make glad the city of God, the holy place of the tabernacles of the most High. God is in the midst of her; she shall not be moved: God shall help her, and that right early. The heathen raged, the kingdoms were moved: he uttered his voice, the earth melted. The LORD of hosts is with us; the God of Jacob is our refuge. Selah. Come, behold the works of the LORD , what desolations he hath made in the earth. He maketh wars to cease unto the end of the earth; he breaketh the bow, and cutteth the spear in sunder; he burneth the chariot in the fire. Be still, and know that I am God: I will be exalted among the heathen, I will be exalted in the earth. The LORD of hosts is with us; the God of Jacob is our refuge. Selah.† Their â€Å"evidence† consists of the fact is the word â€Å"shakes† is forty-six words from the beginning of the verse and â€Å"spear† is forty-six words from the end. Because Shakespeare was forty-six when this passage was printed, that is proof! Therefore, a book was first published in 1987 by Richard Elliott Friedman (updated in 1997) entitled Who Wrote the Bible? Many consider Friedman, a professor of Jewish studies at the University of Georgia, somewhat of an expert on Jewish history and culture and he has studied extensively in Israel, with excerpts of his works published in the Jerusalem Post. He is also a prolific author, for along with Who Wrote the Bible?, Friedman has also published such works as The Disappearance of God and The Bible Now (Friedman). Authors such as Dan Brown and Richard Leigh have concentrated on the New Testament for hidden authorship and meaning (such as Brown’s claim in the Da Vinci Code that Jesus Christ married Mary Magdalene and fathered a child). Interestingly enough, it appears that Friedman has concentrated most of his writings on what Christians call the Old Testament, especially in the first few books of the Bible, what the Jewish people refer to as the Tanakh. As the author himself said in the 1997 preface, he wrote Who Wrote the Bible? as a scholarly work to set his research apart from what he calls the â€Å"popular† works, a thinly veiled references to such authors as Brown. Indeed, he revealed in the decade since he published the original book, many professors and students alike had communicated with him to reveal they h ad used the book in their studies. Friedman humbly dismisses those who compare his findings to that of the rediscovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls or Darwin’s conclusions. However, he does admit that the book should be looked on as a something of a puzzle whose conclusions are somewhat irrefutable (Friedman II, 15). He begins his introduction to Who Wrote the Bible? by asking that very question, concentrating on three areas, the Five Books of Moses (Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers and Deuteronomy) was supposedly written by Moses himself and Lamentations is considered authored by Jeremiah. The third area is considered indisputable by Jews and Christians alike, whether King David wrote most of Psalms. He also mentions that the Bible is such a sacred book in most parts of the

Common Size Financial Statement Analysis Essay Example for Free

Common Size Financial Statement Analysis Essay When all the items of a financial statement are expressed on a common basis, it is known as a common-size financial statement. Common-sizing of balance sheet is done generally by expressing its all items as a percentage of its total assets or total equities. Similarly, income statement is common-sized when its all items are expressed as percentage of total sales. PROCEDURE OF COMMON SIZING In preparing common-size income statement, the following procedure is to be followed : †¢Total sales revenue or total revenue is taken as hundred. †¢Each item of cost or expenses is represented as a percentage of total revenue. †¢Profit or loss also shown as a percentage of revenue. Similarly, balance sheet is common-sized as follows : †¢Total of assets side or total of liability side is taken as hundred. †¢Each item of asset is expressed as percentage of total asset total of capital and liabilities. †¢Each item of the liability side is also expressed as a percentage of total assets or total of capital and liabilities. USEFULNESS OF COMMON-SIZE FINANCIAL STATEMENT ANALYSIS †¢Inter-firm comparison becomes more meaningful when financial statement of the firms under comparison is common-sized. †¢Common-size financial statement analysis is most suitable to evaluate the performance of a company over a period of time. †¢It is useful in understanding the relative importance of different sources of financing. †¢It helps the analyst to formulate hypothesis about the most efficient business model by means of effective inter-firm comparisons. †¢Common-size financial analysis can be used to compare a company’s financial data with industry norms or average. COMMON-SIZE FINANCIAL STATEMENT ANALYSIS When all the items of a financial statement are expressed on a common basis, it is known as a common-size financial statement. Common-sizing of balance sheet is done generally by expressing its all items as a percentage of its total assets or total equities. Similarly, income statement is common-sized when its all items are expressed as percentage of total sales. PROCEDURE OF COMMON SIZING In preparing common-size income statement, the following procedure is to be followed : †¢Total sales revenue or total revenue is taken as hundred. †¢Each item of cost or expenses is represented as a percentage of total revenue. †¢Profit or loss also shown as a percentage of revenue. Similarly, balance sheet is common-sized as follows : †¢Total of assets side or total of liability side is taken as hundred. †¢Each item of asset is expressed as percentage of total asset total of capital and liabilities. †¢Each item of the liability side is also expressed as a percentage of total assets or total of capital and liabilities. USEFULNESS OF COMMON-SIZE FINANCIAL STATEMENT ANALYSIS †¢Inter-firm comparison becomes more meaningful when financial statement of the firms under comparison is common-sized. †¢Common-size financial statement analysis is most suitable to evaluate the performance of a company over a period of time. †¢It is useful in understanding the relative importance of different sources of financing. †¢It helps the analyst to formulate hypothesis about the most efficient business model by means of effective inter-firm comparisons. †¢Common-size financial analysis can be used to compare a company’s financial data with industry norms or average.

Sainsbury Plc Is The Leading Food Retailer Marketing Essay

Sainsbury Plc Is The Leading Food Retailer Marketing Essay Business environment: The business environment is the external and internal environment in which company works and which help in company to run the business and help it to face the various situations which affect the organization and their operations. According to (J. Kew, J.Stredwick, 2005) Environment is situational and is unique to each organization. The external environment consists of changes that takes place outside organization and are external factors and the changes taking place within the company are called as internal factors. The objectives and strategies are based on this and they can be affected by this external and internal factor. Pest analysis tool help to understand the framework of the external and internal factor of the company which helps company to survive and establish in market. The scan of external macro environment can be expressed in following terms Political, Economic, Social, and Technology sometimes two additional factors environmental and legal make it a PESTEL analysis. The increase globalization is opportunity and a good challenge to Sainsbury. The challenge is to get the best quality/financially viable products from all over the world. It can enter the markets of the existing companies through joint ventures and enter into new markets but they do not have such plans in horizon. The ongoing investigation of price fixing among the big retailers and Sainsbury being in forefront of this allegation can have negative impact on industries and Sainsbury (Rigby 2008). Sainsbury has good consumer relationship but although this could lead to negative public image and consumers could feel cheated. HBOS is on with whom the financial service of the Sainsbury works or run with (Annual Report 2007). The recession may end up people buying more of the essentials than the luxury items on which Sainsbury has its greater profit margin. Credit crunch also affects the Sainsbury bank credit directly as it does not have established name in financial services. The prices of food have increased all around the world as there is crisis of food globally, that has result in increasing purchasing cost of Sainsburys (economist.com 2008[online]). That has lead in increase of most of the price of products in Supermarket. Rising fuel cost will also lead to the increase in overall supply chain of Sainsbury and leading to increase in prices. The increase competition will lead to let of incentives to consumers which again affect the Sainsbury as it has to driven down its prices most of the time. Social Environment The social environment includes all the demographics and socio-cultural issues that is population based on age, income classification and distributions, community works and different view to work. The government has stressed on eating healthy food and this has been promoted by it [eatwell.gov.uk 2008]. This can help Sainsbury to stock up healthy food in cheaper price than other manufacturers and get benefit with this new trend. Sainsbury follows the responsibility of the society and its surroundings. It operates affective charities, sponsor games, arrange social activities, raise fund for animal and many more. As UK has aging population Sainsbury has started to recruit older employees to strike into this ongoing labor pool. Technological Environment The technological environment comprises of modern and new product innovation, invention and improvement. Its been predicted that by 2011 the UK online sales will be reaching Eur263bn, of which British shoppers would be their third in whole income. The 8% of the advertisement globally is through internet expense and these are rapidly growing (The Economist, 2007). The supermarkets have disadvantages of long queue holding for customers specially those who have fewer items to buy the self checkout machine like Asda and Tesco has helped the customers. If Sainsbury develops the self checkout service and its stores for 24 hrs can help boost the sales. The RFID can be used significantly to supply chain for Sainsbury although not in use if applied it can lead to most profit organizations [directions magazine 2008]. Legal Environment The stringent laws on food and drinks will lead to ever increase cost on packaging and labeling of the food item which is an additional financial burden on the Sainsbury. Even with respect to their interest in financial services there is more legal scrutiny in operations with the Sainsbury bank that is there is more responsibilities regarding the legal compliance and other risks. Sainsburys is in the boundaries of the legal forces locally, nationally and globally and are very close to enforcement in which firm operate. The company maintains different type of legal laws including Consumer laws, Competition laws, Employment laws and health and safety laws. Environmental Environment A lot of emphasis has been on big companies to increase their efficiency by reducing the carbon footprint [Bream 2008]. That is to go green issues and to reduce an impact on the environment the Sainsbury has to invest more on the green issues. Other like organic food and their sales and treatment of animals, affects Sainsbury on various levels. The importance given to this issues means they have to provide to consumers that are priced govern. It is a sensitive issue which Sainsbury has to cover with respect to bearing their consumers. Analysis of Porters Five Forces Porters Five Forces: By porters five forces we are going to investigate the threats of substitutes from supermarkets, the buying capability of purchasing groceries, buying capability of suppliers regarding groceries, last but not the least the buying power of customers. www.321books.co.uk, (2010) [online] 1) Barriers for Entry: The food retail market have a very high barrier to their entry , firstly because it is the most sophisticated sectors in the UK and it needs lot of investment and a significant brand which take years to establish (Doyle 2002). And retail is also not on advanced stage in UK and most of the other western world that is there is a scope for new entrants to develop in market is very scarce. It is necessary to know the basic and local things in food market. They have a certain support from few of their global markets in UK. 2) Power of buyer: Since the competitors sell the same product the power of buyer if high in this industry. The only difference is in their consumer loyalty and differentiation in price. As economy goes down due to recession consumer needs are going to be more concern and their power will be more. The strategy of Tesco was to cut prices in order to increase the sales. The reason for the success of its competitor like Asda and Tesco was high as they were not only handling price cut but also expanding on home wears. Asda adopted the strategy of high volume non-food strengths and MS went with the strategy of top-end luxury food. 3) Power of suppliers: Suppliers power is equally distributed and they are the huge companies like Unilever, Cadbury, PG which has huge brand appeal. If supermarkets do not sell their products the consumer will shift their loyalties and suppliers will be more powerful. If product of big companies as well doesnt reach supermarket stores their sales volume could be hampered. There is no consideration of small suppliers as it depends on the supermarkets. The low price platform of the retailers have given the customer the platform to buy from the stores with less or promotional price. 4) Threat of Substitute: Threat of substitute in food retail industry is low as it is a necessity especially in emerging market and developed world. The retail market tries to bring new updates and promotions so that shopping can be pleasurable experience which makes it difficult to be replaced in market. The major treat comes from the internal substitute where one supermarket lap up business of other. 5. Rivalry: There is a very stiff competition to grab the market shares from all supermarkets. The market share of Sainsbury was 14.9% in 2007 and has increased gradually. SWOT Analysis Strength, weakness, Threat and Opportunities Various companies need several business strategies to run their business in a smooth manner. They follow various methods to do so. One of the major is to analysis the strengths weakness of the company along with the opportunities it has and which may arise in future and the threats which they may face. STRENGTHS WEAKNESS THREATS OPPORTUNITIES Strengths The great turnaround in Sainsbury business is through its growth of thirteen straight quarters (Rigby and Braithwaite 2008). The turnover in 2007 was 7% with an increase in profit was around 450% P.A. It consists of good environmental issues due to its recently taken steps of buying fair-trade goods.  It is one supermarket chain which has a celebrity endorsing products leading to increased sales. The Jamie Oliver has helped in uplift in sales and it can be seen in various ad campaigns. There positive consumer brand is liked by both green activities and consumers. The key strengths of the company are marketing and branding has distinguished them in minds of customers. The orange color used by Sainsbury is very traditional to the campaign. Weakness 1. It has been recently overtaken by some private firm called as Qataris, Sainsbury being governed by the firms can lead to the consumer switching loyalties. 2. Except U.K. Sainsbury is not present elsewhere unlike Tesco expansion plan [economist.com 2008]. This can lead to problem if there is some problem in food retailing in U.K or if there needs to be source of extra growth. 3. The differentiating competitive advantages are missing. 4. Their infrastructure change in their stores was a weak attempt which only ended up confusing customer in stores. Opportunities: Sainsbury has many other businesses that have a great future opportunity. Their investment in property and pound 40 million profits through its bank seems good strategy to follow. The organization has resources and capabilities to improve with technology and new applications. They can win back the customer trust by improving their customer service especially through loyalty programs. Threats: 1. Supply chain of Sainsbury is directly affected by the bio-fuel consumption which is important tool for green environment effects. 2. Its operations are subjected many regulatory requirements related in planning, pension plans, employment and employment in terms of products and services. [www.guardian.co.uk 2010] The market share pie chart shows that Sainsbury has slipped down in recent year in the market drastically. Tesco leads with 30.6%, Asda ranks 2 with 16.8% and Sainsbury was out spaced with 4.4% [www.guardian.co.uk, 2010] Bowman strategy Clock: C:My DocumentsWEBSITEbowmans_lesson.gif C.Bowman, D.Faulkner, (1996) The Bowmans clock is analyses competitive position of the markets as compared to other competitors. The first step is competitor analysis, the process of identifying, assessing and selecting the key competitors. The second step is developing competitive e marketing strategies that strongly position the company against competitors and give it the greatest possible competitive advantage {P.Kotler, et-al, (2008)}. There are eight options: 1) High Price: Sainsbury being the old brand they have their price on products very much more which mean high margin. Sainsbury has high price for all its products but it does focus more on pricing then to focus on customers. Sainsbury has a high price and hence is a cost Leadership. They have high price and value products. Increased price/standard: Sainsbury has the marketing tool of high pricing hence it has higher margin than most of its competitors, but it is not only the high price it is also the quality and exclusivity that they offer. The Sainsbury is brand hence is followed by the people who are endorsed with brands and it does have most of its target customers as the loyal customers who are stuck with them due to its high value and brand image. www.brandingstrategyinsider.com, (2010) [Online] 2) Differentiator: Sainsbury Differentiates itself with their main objective of high price offered to customers with an added value services provided as it has value and brand image associated with it. a) Focused differentiation: The Sainsbury is the cost differentiator as it has its loyal customers and is in UK market upholder of its brand image as compared to other competitors it does not focus on lowering the price. In order to gain back its position the Sainsbury should focus on following differentiator factor It should focus to be successful internationally, as Sainsbury is only in UK. It should develop new market and new product to gain its position. Focus on its customer service: Sainsbury has lost their customers because they were not getting good products in higher values as compared to Tesco and Asda rates. It should focus on unique product and service. Developing retail service: Sainsbury has resources which they should use and develop the self checkout on 24 hours stores and develop its IT services it will help in increasing their sale. Earning Customer loyalty back through various nectar points and loyalty cards giving customers offers and benefits and hence being committed to customer and developing the bond of loyal customers. It should maintain long term customer relationship management. In year 200 the organization realized that they were not gaining success and their share price fell by 23.3% which needed some drastic changes to overcome the business performance. Sir Peter had through its supervision concentrated on Stores, Customer service and maintaining their supply chain and also enabling the development of its IT solution to improve their performance. In 200o the store had undergone the strategic programs to overcome their store faults. The steps which were taken were as follows To increase their share holder value store needed to be placed in new market position The target customers needed to be focused and the stores management and service needs to be improved. Focus on customer shopping experience through its team members and managers work in the store. The infrastructure needs to be focused as in accordance with customer and the commodity and employee performance should be raised. The advantage of synergic group should be taken and focus on B2B,B2C and e-commerce These were the strategic measures taken by the company but it still needed a deep organization and customer development with respect to competition in market [www.universityessays.com]. 2) Focused differentiation: Sainsbury strategy is not their customers but they focus more and their products and hence always have them as high priced. Their target customers are those who have image of high price means high quality and since its mainly in Britain there most of the loyal customers are their own people who prefer the brands, on other hand their competitor like Tesco and Asda targets customers by control on pricing. It does focus on its product value and high price but Sainsbury should know that the price is a marketing tool which attracts people the most. The most important reason for the fall of Sainsbury from top supermarket in UK market to number three, is as stated by their CEO (J. King 2004) We have not stayed as sharp on pricing as we should have done. www.allbusiness.com, (2010) [Online] www.brandingstrategyinsider.com, (2010) [Online] Performance Sainsburys reports slowest sales growth in five years Sainsbury has reported slowest growth in past five years and has been forecasted to have tough year ahead. Their like for like sales excluding the fuel rise 1.7% in fourth quarter compared to third quarter 3.7%. In 2009 sales were 2.3% ahead [www.guardian.co.uk]. Sales of general merchandise like clothes grew three times than the rate of food. It had swung a profit before tax of pound 19 million from loss of pound 48.6 million [www.guardian.co.uk.]. According to news and media it expects to sell its independent titles in UK shortly, after having 39%drop in full year operating profits. It had made loss of euro 31.4m down from 161.4m in 2008[www.guardian.co.uk.] The five year operating margin of Sainsbury 1. Underlying operating margin5  (%) Underlying operating margin (%) 2. Underlying profit before tax6  ( £m) Underlying profit before tax ( £m) 3. Underlying basic earnings per share7  (pence) Underlying basic earnings per share (pence) [www.j-sainsbury.com 2010] http://www.j-sainsbury.com/ar10/businessreview/keyfinancialperformanceindicators.shtml From the above figure 3 figure of five year plan of Sainsbury performance can be seen that the Sainsbury had a significantly slow sales growth of margin in these years. Conclusion: The Sainsbury has slipped down in UK market in past five years which can be proved from the evidence collected in porters five forces and SWOT analysis. The business environment study of Sainsbury shows that the main reason of the slipped down of Sainsbury was its not concentrating on the price factor but tits more emphasis in changing and developing the stores which had made customers more complicated about their store locations. Also Sainsbury overtaken by the Qataris the other foreign body has raised the question to their customers and hence switching their customer loyalty. The other competitors of Sainsbury were always on the market increasing their sales and attracting customers through low price like Tesco and Asda but Sainsbury enjoyed its leadership. They should focus on more of its strengths but being threat by the competition through price competition they are becoming weak and hence it has slipped down in market. In order to remain in competition Sainsbury should focus more on its customers and make their products look different from those of others. They should keep up with the technology and always be updated and be in pace with others. They should focus on their price strategy and support the environmental issues to compete in the market they have to bear in mind the customer likes and change according to their tastes.

Children Immigrants Essay -- Immigration History Italian Child Labor E

Children Immigrants Immigrant children did not live an easy life in the nineteenth century. Most children were never educated. Italian children immigrants were rarely put through schooling. However, Eastern European Jewish immigrants looked at public schooling as their best way to help their children enhance their potential in life. Chicago, Detroit, and New York City had large populations of Jewish and Italian immigrants. The conditions of the children in all three cities were similar yet different with cities in which they lived in. Jewish and Italian immigrant children had to overcome many obstacles during their adjustment to American life in the nineteenth century. Italian immigrants' children were cast into adult life at a very early age. Many of these children worked in their homes. 'They 'take out' work from sweatshops to their homes, where at times they work twelve, fourteen and sixteen hours a day finishing pants, or overalls, or children's jackets and knee pants for fifty or sixty cents a day'(The Italian girl in Chicago). An average day of work was usually like this with grueling twelve to sixteen hours. Italian children in the city of Chicago were likely to marry at a young age. Italian children also seemed to question their father?s authority and their religion. ?Children of Italian parentage seem to repudiate the language, religion, and customs of their fathers more often than do the children of other foreign groups? (The second generation). It is prevalent that the Italian culture is carried in their children. These Italian children formed a generation gap. ?Though as rule they do not mix with their American schoolmates outside the classroom, they quickly acquire an Americanism which is in violent contrast to the customs of their parents? (The second generation). Italian children often found themselves caught between their culture and authority of the schools and their families. School had a way of causing Italian children to feel inferior to those who spoke English as their first language. Italians who could master English had enable them to break free from their Italian neighborhoods and venture into Chicago. There were different expectations that pertained to boys and girls of Italian decent. Southern Italian girls in Chicago were guarded more strictly than the same Italian immigrant girls from the north side. Italian immig... ...ntity Explorer: Immigrations and Migration CD-ROM. New York: McGraw-Hill/Primis, 1998. ?Tenement Homework, New York, 1912? New York/Italian/At home. American Identity Explorer: Immigrations and Migration. Kenneth Waltzer and Kathleen Geissler, Curators. CD-ROM. New York: McGraw-Hill/Primis, 1998. ?Girls on the street, 1979? New York/East European Jewish/Inter group relations. American Identity Explorer: Immigrations and Migration. Kenneth Waltzer and Kathleen Geissler, Curators. CD-ROM. New York: McGraw-Hill/Primis, 1998. ?Bishop School Class, 1906? New York/East European Jewish/ Socialization. American Identity Explorer: Immigrations and Migration. Kenneth Waltzer and Kathleen Geissler, Curators. CD-ROM. New York: McGraw-Hill/Primis, 1998. ?The Second Generation, 1939? Chicago/Italian/ Socialization. American Identity Explorer: Immigrations and Migration. Kenneth Waltzer and Kathleen Geissler, Curators. CD-ROM. New York: McGraw-Hill/Primis, 1998. ?Italian Neighborhoods in Detroit, 1939? Detroit/Italian/In the streets. American Identity Explorer: Immigrations and Migration. Kenneth Waltzer and Kathleen Geissler, Curators. CD-ROM. New York: McGraw-Hill/Primis, 1998.

The Responsibility of a Catholic Citizen in a Free Society Essay

The Responsibility of a Catholic Citizen in a Free Society   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Before we start to talk about our responsibilities we should be grateful that we are able to practice our own faith and we can stand up for our religion and speak up about it. We are here to be an example for the rest of the people out there who do not know any better and are falling in there lives. It is our responsibility to help them. We also have responsibilities of our own - respecting authority of both the church and government, evangelizing or spreading the word, donating time and money to church and those in need, tolerance and many more.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  We are surrounded by challenges like abortions, poverty, and violence which all destroy the lives of people that were put here by God and were not able to live because of our choices. It is our responsibility to help and support people who fall into these categories. We should now defend human life and dignity, to make people practice justice and peace, and maintain family life and moral values.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Abortion is a major issue today in our world. Thousands of people out there do it today. Our teachings call us to protect human life and here we are killing it just because we don’t want it. Violence also is sort of the same thing. We are hurting another human just because we don’t like them or are mad at something else and we take our anger out on them. We need to set an example for the people that are doing it so they start to realize that this isn’t what everyo...

Land Rover North America, Inc. Case Analysis :: LRNA Business Marketing Case Study, solution

Land Rover North America, Inc. Case Analysis I. Executive Summary   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Charles Hughes, president and CEO of Land Rover North America (LRNA), and his executive committee want to expand LRNA’s reach within North America. Based on the growing strength of the U.S. SUV market, research which suggests consumers are seeking vehicles that can help them have â€Å"experiences† while being practical, safe, reliable and luxurious, the success of the Discovery in the U.K. and near doubling of the Land Rover brand worldwide, LNRA is seeking to become the â€Å"world’s premier 4x4 specialty company† through effective brand, product and retail strategies. LNRA’s success hinges on making the correct positioning, marketing mix and retailing decisions. II. Problems and Recommendations   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  LRNA needs to determine a positioning strategy for the Discovery and itself in North America to entice its two distinct target markets. LRNA is aware that it has two distinct target markets whose purchasing decisions are impacted by various drivers but also knows that factors such as quality, safety, reliability, comfort, off-road capability and aesthetics overlap. When compared with other SUVs or SUV alternatives, we believe the following differences should be highlighted to develop a distinctive niche for the Discovery and Land Rover brand in the target audience’s mind. The Discovery and Land Rover brand should be positioned as luxury car alternatives with rich histories and superb off-road capabilities designed for the crà ¨me-de-la-crà ¨me of consumers: affluent, intelligent, practical, unique, full of character, and seeking to empower themselves through adventure and exploration during their driving experiences. The Discovery and Land Rover brand sho uld, in effect, convey the following message: you are what you drive.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  LRNA must also determine what marketing mix to utilize and how much of its marketing budget should be allocated to each media strategy. First, we would advocate increasing the marketing budget to approximately $30 million to better position LRNA against our competitors. Since our target consumers are educated, married males in the 35-64 age group with annual incomes of $100K or above, we would suggest allocating sixty percent of our budget to advertising through television and print ads with a 65-35 split between the two. Ads should present the dual nature of the Discovery and Land Rover brand as rugged, exciting, but safe vehicles equally adept at handling the challenge of the jungles of Madagascar and the challenge of the city highway with your children onboard. Print ads would be placed in business and news magazines as well as national newspapers such as The New York Times, Wall Street Journal, Financial Times and Washington Post.

Pifzer Inc.’s Cost of Capital and Capital Structure

Pfizer Inc. ’S Cost of Capital and Capital structure – Xiaoyue Shi The costs of capital and capital structures for Pfizer Inc. and its two competitors Merck & Co. Inc. and Johnson & Johnson in the pharmaceutical industry are analyzed in this memo. When calculating the cost of common stock for the three companies, three different approaches including Capital Asset Pricing Model (CAPM), Discounted Cash Flow (DCF) and the bond yield plus risk premium are applied (Appendix A). For CAPM approach (Figure 1 & 3), the risk-free rate (rRF) used is the rate on the U. S. 10-year Treasury bonds, which is 1. 66.The market risk premium (RPM) is the required return on the stock market minus rRF. The required market return used here is the average 20 years rates of return on S&P 500. With highest beta (0. 71), Merck has the higher estimated cost of equity (6. 167). Pfizer has lower estimated cost of equity (5. 910) with lower beta (0. 67). Because of the lowest beta (0. 48), Johnson & Johnson has the lowest estimated cost of equity (4. 697). For DCF approach (Figure 2 & 4), the stock price used is the current stock price. The expected growth rate (g) is the annualized growth rate based on the dividend growth over the past 10 years.Among the three companies, Johnson & Johnson has the highest estimated cost of equity due to its highest expected growth rate in dividends. Pfizer’s estimated cost of equity is much lower than Johnson & Johnson. Having the lowest expected growth rate in dividends, Merck has the lowest cost of equity. For bond yield plus risk premium approach (Figure 5), the bond yield (Figure 7) for Pfizer, Merck and Johnson & Johnson are 2. 0724, 2. 5553, and 1. 9629 respectively. Since their betas are Pfizer 0. 67, Merck 0. 71 and Johnson & Johnson 0. 48, and all below 1, the three companies’ judgmental risk premium estimated as 3. , 3. 4, and 3, respectively. According to the bond yield plus risk premium method, the estimated costs of e quity are Pfizer 5. 3724, Merck 5. 9553, Johnson & Johnson 4. 9629. The final estimated costs of equity for the three companies in this memo are the averages of the three approaches (Figure 6), and they are Pfizer 5. 83, Merck 4. 44, Johnson & Johnson 7. 36. The three companies do not offer preferred stocks in public (Appendix B). Their costs of preferred stock would be zero. Although Pfizer offer Preferred stock for their employees, its costs of preferred stock still estimated as zero.According to the debt-rating organizations such as Moody’s, S&P, the three companies’ bond ratings are very high (Figure 7). The tax rates used for calculating the costs of debt are the average tax rates for the last four years (Appendix C, Figure 10). And their after-tax cost of debts are similarly low, for example, Pfizer 1. 657, Merck 1. 991, Johnson & Johnson 1. 528 (Figure 9). When calculating the percentage of debt and common equity (Appendix D, Figure 12), the common equity used i s the market value of equity, and the book value of company’s debt is used as a proxy of the market value of debt.According to the formula in Appendix D, the weighted average costs of capital (WACC) for the three companies are Pfizer 1. 86, Merck 2. 17, Johnson & Johnson 2. 15. The WACCs are quit low for the three companies as pharmaceutical giants. The debt ratios for last four years for the three companies were all around 50% (Appendix E, Figure 13). For example, in 2008, Pfizer’s debt ratio was 48. 1%, Merck was 55. 2%, Johnson & Johnson was 49. 9%; in 2009, Pfizer was 57. 5%, Merck was 45. 5%, Johnson & Johnson was 46. 6%; in 2010, Pfizer was 54. 7%, Merck was 46. 3%, Johnson & Johnson was 45%; in 2011, Pfizer was 56. %, Merck was 45. 8%, Johnson & Johnson was 49. 8%. Pfizer’s debt ratios were a little higher than its two competitors. But they all have quite similar capital structures with similar borrowing capacities. The three companies’ assets are financed with around 50% equity, and their risks of bankruptcy are low. Because involved in the pharmaceutical industry, the three companies are focusing on R&D, innovation and raise productivity, which are very costly for them. The three companies all have a lot borrowings. Drug development needs a lot of resources and quite inefficient.High failure rates cause a lot pharmaceutical companies unable to make profit and went bankruptcy. Based on the circumstances, the three companies all have very good capital structures in the pharmaceutical industry. They may have to figure out a way to cut their costs, and have even better capital structures. Pfizer used accelerated depreciation methods for tax purpose. Its depreciation & amortization increased a lot since 2009 (Appendix F, Figure 14). For example, it was $5,090 million in 2008, and $4,757 million in 2009, but it was $8487 million in 2010, and $9026 million in 2011.The huge increase in depreciation was mainly because of the merger with Wyeth in 2009. Merck mainly used accelerated depreciation methods for tax purpose except that its depreciation on intangibles was applied with primarily straight-line methods. Its depreciation & amortization also increased since 2009. For instance, it was $1,631. 2 million in 2008, and $2,576 million in 2009, but it was $7,381 million in 2010, and $7,427 million in 2011. The increase in depreciation was also because of the merger. Merck was also involved in a merger with another pharmaceutical company Schering-Plough in 2009.Johnson & Johnson had quite stable depreciations. And the straight-line methods were applied in this company. The three companies all paid stable dividends in last four years (Appendix G). Pfizer paid lowest dividends among them. Johnson & Johnson paid highest dividends. Only Johnson & Johnson performed stock repurchases (Figure 15 & 16). They (in shares) were 100,970 thousands in 2008, 37,114 thousands in 2009, 45,090 thousands in 2010, 39,741 thousands in 2011. And the money (in millions) used for stock repurchases was $6,651 in 2008, $2,130 in 2009, $2,797 in 2010, $2,525 in 2011.In my point of view, Pfizer and its two competitors – Merck and Johnson & Johnson all have low cost of capital. Although they all involved in a lot borrowings , they all have very good capital structures as pharmaceutical companies. The reason is that the costs in R&D and innovation are extremely high in the pharmaceutical industry. Reference: 1. Brigham, Eugene F. and Michael C. Ehrhardt. Financial Management Theory and Practice, 13th Edition, Thompson South-Western, ISBN-13# 978-14390-7809-9, ISBN-10#1-4390-7809-2 2. http://www. mergentonline. com/login. php 3. http://www. how. com/how_5833592_determine-target-debt-equity. html 4. http://cxa. gtm. idmanagedsolutions. com/finra/BondCenter/Watchlist. aspx 5. ww. finra. org 6. http://www3. valueline. com/vlquotes/quote. aspx Appendices: Appendix A: Cost of common stock Appendix B: Cost of preferred s tock Appendix C: Cost of debt Appendix D: Weighted Average Cost of Capital (WACC) Appendix E: Capital Structure Appendix F: Depreciation Appendix G: Yearly dividend and share repurchase Appendix H: Value Line reports Appendix A: Cost of common stock Equations used for calculating cost of common stock:CAPM approach: rS=rRF+(RPM)bi DCF approach: The bond yield plus risk premium approach: rS=Company’s own bond yield + Judgmental risk premium Figure 1 CAPM Equation Variables| Â  | Â  | Â  | | Pfizer| Merck| J&J| Risk Free Rate| 1. 66| 1. 66| 1. 66| Required Rate of Return| 8. 00| 8. 00| 8. 00| Beta| 0. 67| 0. 71| 0. 48| Required Return on Stock| 5. 91| 6. 17| 4. 70| | | | | | | | | | Required Return on Stock| Â  | | Pfizer| Merck| J&J| | 5. 91| 6. 17| 4. 70| Figure 2 Annualized dividend growth rate (g) | Pfizer|Year| Sum dividend| Total growth over 10 years| Annualized growth rate (g)| Next expected dividend| 2011| 0. 8| | | Â  | 2010| 0. 72| | | Â  | 2009| 0. 8| | | Â  | 2008| 1. 28| | | Â  | 2007| 1. 16| | | Â  | 2006| 0. 96| | | Â  | 2005| 0. 76| | | Â  | 2004| 0. 68| | | Â  | 2003| 0. 6| | | Â  | 2002| 0. 52| | | Â  | 2001| 0. 44| 0. 818181818| 6. 16%| $0. 85 | | Merck| Year| Sum dividend| Total growth over 10 years| Annualized growth rate (g)| Next expected dividend| 2011| 1. 56| | | Â  | 2010| 1. 52| | | Â  | 2009| 1. 52| | | Â  | 2008| 1. 52| | | Â  | 2007| 1. 52| | | Â  | 2006| 1. 52| | | Â  | 2005| 1. 52| | | Â  | 2004| 1. 5| | | Â  | 2003| 3. 976| | | Â  | 2002| 1. 3| | | Â  | 2001| 1. 39| 0. 122302158| 1. 16%| $1. 58 | | J&J| Year| Sum dividend| Total growth over 10 years| Annualized growth rate (g)| Next expected dividend| 2011| 2. 25| | | Â  | 2010| 2. 11| | | Â  | 2009| 1. 93| | | Â  | 2008| 1. 795| | | Â  | 2007| 1. 62| | | Â  | 2006| 1. 455| | | Â  | 2005| 1. 275| | | Â  | 2004| 1. 095| | | Â  | 2003| 0. 925| | | Â  | 2002| 0. 795| | | Â  | 2001| 0. 7| 2. 214285714| 12. 39%| $2. 53 | Figure 3 CAPM | CAPM| Â  | Â  | Â  | Â  | Â  | | Risk Free Rate (1)| Required Market Return (2)| Market Risk Premium (3)=(2)-(1)| Beta (4)| Estimated cost of Equity (1)+(3)? (4)| Pfizer| 1. 66| 8. 00| 6. 34| 0. 67| 5. 10| Merck| 1. 66| 8. 00| 6. 34| 0. 71| 6. 167| J&J| 1. 66| 8. 00| 6. 34| 0. 48| 4. 697| | | | | | | Figure 4 DCF | DCF| Â  | Â  | Â  | Â  | | | Stock Price (1)| Next Expected Dividend (2)| Expected Growth Rate (3)| Estimated cost of Equity (2)/(1)+(3)| | Pfizer| 25. 12| $0. 85 | 6. 16| 6. 194| | Merck| 45. 62| $1. 58 | 1. 16| 1. 195| | J&J| 67. 97| $2. 53 | 12. 39| 12. 427| | | | | | | | Figure 5| | | | | | Bond Yield plus Risk Premium| Â  | Â  | | | | Company’s Bond Yield (1)| Judgmental Risk Premium (2)| Estimated cost of Equity (1)+(2)| | | Pfizer| 2. 0724| 3. 3| 5. 3724| | | Merck| 2. 5553| 3. 4| 5. 9553| | | J&J| 1. 629| 3| 4. 9629| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Figure 6 Estimated Cost of Equity| Estimated Cost of Equity| | | | | Pfizer| 5. 83| | | | | Merck| 4. 44| | | | | J&J| 7. 36| | | | | Figure 7 Bond Data| Bond Data| Â  | Â  | Â  | Â  | Â  | Â  | Â  | Â  | Â  | Bond Symbol| Issuer Name| Coupon| Maturity| Callable| Moody's| S;P| Fitch| Price| Yield| PFE. GF| PFIZER INC| 4. 65| 3/1/18| No| A1| AA| A+| 116. 189| 1. 501| PFE. GI| PFIZER INC| 4. 5| 2/15/14| No| A1| AA| A+| 105. 468| 0. 367| PFE. GM| PFIZER INC| 7. 2| 3/15/39| Yes| A1| AA| A+| 159. 019| 3. 685| PFE. GO| PFIZER INC| 6. 2| 3/15/19| Yes| A1| AA| A+| 127. 5| 1. 66| PFE. GQ| PFIZER INC| 5. 5| 3/15/15| Yes| A1| AA| A+| 111. 554| 0. 521| PFE3666215| AMERICAN HOME PRODS CORP| 7. 25| 3/1/23| No| A1| AA| A+| 139. 65| 2. 819| PFE3667744| WYETH| 5. 5| 2/15/16| Yes| A1| AA| A+| 115. 705| 0. 715| PFE3667745| WYETH| 6| 2/15/36| Yes| A1| AA| A+| 134| 3. 791| PFE3667909| PHARMACIA CORP| 6. 5| 12/1/18| Yes| A1| AA| A+| 128. 14| 1. 677| PFE3667915| PHARMACIA CORP| 6. 75| 12/15/27| No| A1| AA| A+| 137. 221| 3. 552| PFE3667927| PHARMACIA CORP| 6. 6| 12/1/28| Yes| A1| AA| A+| 138. 179| 3. 484| PFE3670301| WYETH| 5. 45| 4/1/17| Yes| A1| AA| A+| 119. 153| 1. 044| PFE3670315| WYETH| 5. 95| 4/1/37| Yes| A1| AA| A+| 135| 3. 5| PFE3702946| WYETH| 5. 5| 3/15/13| Yes| A1| AA| A+| 101. 977| 0. 706| PFE3703979| PHARMACIA CORP| 8. 7| 10/15/21| No| A1| AA| A+| 142. 03| -| PFE3704635| WYETH| 5. 5| 2/1/14| Yes| A1| AA| A+| 106. 52| 0. 421| PFE3704636| WYETH| 6. 45| 2/1/24| Yes| A1| AA| A+| 138. 004| 2. 553| PFE3704637| WYETH| 6. 5| 2/1/34| Yes| A1| AA| A+| 139. 025| 3. 807| PFE3706578| PHARMACIA CORP| 8. 2| 4/15/25| Yes| A1| AA| A+| 101. 5| -| PFE3739069| KING PHARMACEUTICALS INC| 1. 25| 4/1/26| Yes| NR| NR| NR| 99. 99| 1. 25| | | | | | | | | Average| 2. 072388889| MRK. GA| MERCK ; CO INC| 6. 3| 1/1/26| No| Aa3| AA| A+| 138. 945| 2. 76| MRK.GB| MERCK ; CO INC| 6. 4| 3/1/28| Yes| Aa3| AA| A+| 137. 464| 3. 278| MRK. GC| MERCK ; CO INC| 5. 95| 12/1/28| Yes| Aa3| AA| A+| 133. 211| 3. 28| MRK. GF| MERCK ; CO INC MTN BE| 5. 76| 5/3/37| No| Aa3| AA| A+| 131| 3. 808| MRK. GG| MERCK ; CO INC MT N BE| -| 11/27/40| No| Aa3| AA| A+| 98. 25| -| MRK. GH| MERCK ; CO INC MTN BE| -| 12/21/40| Yes| Aa3| AA| A+| 98| -| MRK. GI| MERCK ; CO INC MTN BE| -| 12/27/40| No| Aa3| AA| A+| 98. 5| -| MRK. GJ| MERCK ; CO INC MTN BE| -| 2/6/41| No| Aa3| AA| A+| 98| -| MRK. GK| MERCK ; CO INC MTN BE| -| 6/21/41| Yes| Aa3| AA| A+| 100| -| MRK. GL| MERCK amp; CO INC MTN BE| -| 7/18/41| No| Aa3| AA| A+| 97. 75| -| MRK. GM| MERCK ; CO INC MTN BE| -| 12/21/41| Yes| Aa3| AA| A+| 100| -| MRK. GN| MERCK ; CO INC MTN BE| -| 11/28/41| No| Aa3| AA| A+| 98. 25| -| MRK. GQ| MERCK ; CO INC MTN BE| -| 8/22/42| Yes| Aa3| AA| A+| 98. 275| -| MRK. GR| MERCK ; CO INC MTN BE| -| 2/18/43| Yes| Aa3| AA| A+| 99. 875| -| MRK. GT| MERCK ; CO INC MTN BE| -| 2/12/44| Yes| Aa3| AA| A+| 100| -| MRK. GU| MERCK ; CO INC| 4. 75| 3/1/15| Yes| Aa3| AA| A+| 109. 512| 0. 699| MRK. GV| MERCK ; CO INC| 5. 75| 11/15/36| Yes| Aa3| AA| A+| 135. 683| 3. 536| MRK. GW| MERCK ; CO INC| 4. 8| 2/15/13| No| Aa3| AA| A+| 101. 369| 0. 194| MRK. GX| MERCK ; CO INC NEW| 3. 88| 1/15/21| Yes| A1| AA| A+| 114. 717| 1. 883| MRK3671638| SCHERING PLOUGH CORP| 6. 55| 9/15/37| Yes| Aa3| AA| A+| 149. 11| 3. 56| | | | | | | | | Average| 2. 555333333| JNJ. GA| ALZA CORP DEL| -| 7/14/14| Yes| Aa1| AAA| AAA| 152. 8| -| JNJ. GC| ALZA CORP| -| 7/28/20| Yes| Aa1| AAA| AAA| 98. 75| -| JNJ. GH| JOHNSON ; JOHNSON| 6. 73| 11/15/23| No| Aaa| AAA| AAA| 145. 758| 2. 083| JNJ. GI| -| | 11/1/24| No| NR| NR| NR| 104. 36| -| JNJ. GJ| JOHNSON ; JOHNSON| 6. 95| 9/1/29| No| Aaa| AAA| AAA| 144. 925| 3. 422| JNJ. GL| JOHNSON ; JOHNSON| 3. | 5/15/13| No| Aaa| AAA| AAA| 102. 04| 0. 263| JNJ. GM| JOHNSON ; JOHNSON| 4. 95| 5/15/33| No| Aaa| AAA| AAA| 121. 154| 3. 499| JNJ. GO| JOHNSON ; JOHNSON| 5. 55| 8/15/17| Yes| Aaa| AAA| AAA| 121. 81| 0. 932| JNJ. GP| JOHNSON ; JOHNSON| 5. 95| 8/15/37| Yes| Aaa| AAA| AAA| 143. 163| 3. 369| JNJ. GQ| JOHNSON ; JOHNSON| 5. 15| 7/15/18| Yes| Aaa| AAA| AAA| 123. 223| 0. 982| JNJ. GR| JOHNSON ; JOHNSON| 5. 85| 7/15/38| Yes| Aaa | AAA| AAA| 143. 093| 3. 341| JNJ. GS| JOHNSON ; JOHNSON| 2. 95| 9/1/20| Yes| Aaa| AAA| AAA| 107. 12| 1. 969| JNJ. GT| JOHNSON ; JOHNSON| 4. 5| 9/1/40| Yes| Aaa| AAA| AAA| 123. 32| 3. 229| JNJ. GU| JOHNSON ; JOHNSON| -| 5/15/13| No| Aaa| AAA| AAA| 100. 154| -| JNJ. GV| JOHNSON ; JOHNSON| -| 5/15/14| No| Aaa| AAA| AAA| 100. 322| -| JNJ. GW| JOHNSON ; JOHNSON| 2. 15| 5/15/16| Yes| Aaa| AAA| AAA| 105. 523| 0. 588| JNJ. GX| JOHNSON ; JOHNSON| 4. 85| 5/15/41| Yes| Aaa| AAA| AAA| 125. 764| 3. 428| JNJ. GY| JOHNSON ; JOHNSON| 1. 2| 5/15/14| Yes| Aaa| AAA| AAA| 101. 399| 0. 311| JNJ. GZ| JOHNSON ; JOHNSON| 3. 55| 5/15/21| Yes| Aaa| AAA| AAA| 113. 786| 1. 807| JNJ. HA| JOHNSON ; JOHNSON| 0. 7| 5/15/13| No| Aaa| AAA| AAA| 100. 278| 0. 22| | | | | | | | | Average| 1. 62866667| Appendix B: Cost of preferred stock Figure 8 Cost of Preferred Stock| Cost of Preferred Stock| Â  | Â  | Â  | | Preferred Dividend (1)| Preferred Stock Price (2)| Floatation Cost (3)| Component cost of Preferred Stock (1)/[(2)*(1-(3))]| Pfizer| N/A| N/A| N/A| #VALUE! | Merk| N/A| N/A| N/A| #VALUE! | J;J| N/A| N/A| N/A| #VALUE! | Appendix C: Cost of debt After-tax cost of debt=rd(1-T) Figure 9 After-tax cost of debt| After Tax Component Cost of Debt| Â  | | Interest Rate| Tax Rate| Cost of Debt| Pfizer| 2. 072388889| 0. 2003| 1. 657289394| Merck| 2. 555333333| 0. 221| 1. 990604667| J;J| 1. 962866667| 0. 2218| 1. 2750284| Figure 10 Marginal tax rate Company| Pfizer| Merck| J;J| Year| 2011| 2010| 2009| 2008| 2011| 2010| 2009| 2008| 2011| 2010| 2009| 2008| Income before tax| 12,764| 9,282| 10,674| 9,694| 7,334| 1,653| 15,290| 9,931| 12,361| 16,947| 15,755| 16,929| Provision for tax| 4,023| 1,071| 2,145| 1,645| 942| 671| 2,268| 1,999| 2,689| 3,613| 3,489| 3,980| Tax rate| 0. 3152| 0. 1154| 0. 2010| 0. 1697| 0. 1284| 0. 4059| 0. 1483| 0. 2013| 0. 2175| 0. 2132| 0. 2215| 0. 2351| Average tax rate| 0. 2003| 0. 2210| 0. 2218| Appendix D: Weighted Average Cost of Capital (WACC) Figure 11 WACC| | | | | | | | WACC| Â  | Â  | Â  | Â  | Â  | Â  | Â  | % of Debt| Cost of Debt| % of Preferred Stock| Cost of Preferred Stock| % of Common Equity| Cost of Common Equity| WACC| Pfizer| 95. 15%| 1. 66 | – | – | 4. 85%| 5. 83 | 1. 86 | Merck| 92. 50%| 1. 99 | – | – | 7. 50%| 4. 44 | 2. 17 | J;J| 89. 26%| 1. 53 | – | – | 10. 74%| 7. 36 | 2. 15 | % of Debt, and % of Common Equity are the target proportions. Figure 12 Calculating the percentage of debt and common equity | | | | Pfizer| Merck| J;J| Shares outstanding (million)| 7,470| 3,050| 2,750| Market value per share | | 26. 03| 47. 96| 72. 52| Market value of equity ($ million), E| 194,444. | 146,278. 0 | 199,430. 0 | | | | | | | Book value of equity per share| 10. 64| 18. 16| 20. 95| Total book value of equity| | 79,480. 8 | 55,388. 0 | 57,612. 5 | Debt/Equity ratio| | 48. 26| 32. 91| 29. 07| Book value of debt| | 3,835,743. 41 | 1,822,819. 08 | 1,674,795. 38 | Cash on hand| | 24,340| 17,450| 16, 920| Net debt ($ million), D| | 3,811,403| 1,805,369| 1,657,875| | | | | | | Percentage of debt, D/(E+D)| | 95. 15%| 92. 50%| 89. 26%| Percentage of equity, E/(E+D)| 4. 85%| 7. 50%| 10. 74%| Appendix E: Capital Structure Figure 13 Capital Structure| | | | | Capital Structure| Â  | Â  | Â  | Â  | | Pfizer| 2011| 2010| 2009| 2008| Long Term Debt*| 34,931,000. 00 | 38,410,000| 43,193,000| 7,963,000| Common Stock*| 445,000| 444,000| 443,000| 443,000| Retained Earnings*| 46,210,000| 42,716,000| 40,426,000| 49,142,000| Redeemable Preferred Stock*| 45,000| 52,000| 61,000| 73,000| Total| 81,631,000. 00 | 81,622,000. 00 | 84,123,000. 00 | 57,621,000. 00 | | | | | | % of Debt| 42. 79%| 47. 06%| 51. 35%| 13. 82%| % of Preferred Stock| 0. 06%| 0. 06%| 0. 07%| 0. 13%| % of Common Equity| 57. 15%| 52. 88%| 48. 58%| 86. 05%| Total %| 100. 00%| 100. 00%| 100. 00%| 100. 00%| | | | | | Average/Target % of Debt| | 38. 75%| 95. 15%| |Average/Target % of Preferred Stock| | 0. 08%| 0. 00%| | Average/ Target % of Common Equity| | 61. 17%| 4. 85%| | | | | | | Total Debt*| 105,381,000| 106,749,000| 122,503,000| 53,408,000| Total Assets*| 188,002,000| 195,014,000| 212,949,000| 111,148,000| Total Debt/Total Assets| 56. 1%| 54. 7%| 57. 5%| 48. 1%| | | | | | | | | | | | Merck| | 2011| 2010| 2009| 2008| Long Term Debt*| 15,525,000| 15,482,000| 16,074,900| 3,943,300| Common Stock*| 1,788,000| 1,788,000| 1,781,300| 29,800| Retained Earnings*| 38,990,000| 37,536,000| 41,404,900| 43,698,800| Redeemable Preferred Stock*| – | – | – | – | Total| 56,303,000. 0 | 54,806,000. 00 | 59,261,100. 00 | 47,671,900. 00 | | | | | | % of Debt| 27. 57%| 28. 25%| 27. 13%| 8. 27%| % of Preferred Stock| 0. 00%| 0. 00%| 0. 00%| 0. 00%| % of Common Equity| 72. 43%| 71. 75%| 72. 87%| 91. 73%| Total %| 100. 00%| 100. 00%| 100. 00%| 100. 00%| | | | | | Average/Target % of Debt| | 22. 81%| 92. 50%| | Average/Target % of Preferred Stock| | 0. 00%| 0%| | Average/Target % of Common Equity| | 77. 19%| 7. 50%| | | | | | | Total Debt*| 48,185,000| 48,976,000| 50,597,100| 26,028,600| Total Assets*| 105,128,000| 105,781,000| 112,089,700| 47,195,700| Total Debt/Total Assets| 45. %| 46. 3%| 45. 1%| 55. 2%| | | | | | | | | | | | J;J| | 2011| 2010| 2009| 2008| Long Term Debt*| 12,969,000| 9,156,000| 8,223,000| 8,120,000| Common Stock*| 3,120,000| 3,120,000| 3,120,000| 3,120,000| Retained Earnings*| 81,251,000| 77,773,000| 70,306,000| 63,379,000| Redeemable Preferred Stock*| – | – | – | – | Total| 97,340,000. 00 | 90,049,000. 00 | 81,649,000. 00 | 74,619,000. 00 | | | | | | % of Debt| 13. 32%| 10. 17%| 10. 07%| 10. 88%| % of Preferred Stock| 0. 00%| 0. 00%| 0. 00%| 0. 00%| % of Common Equity| 86. 68%| 89. 83%| 89. 93%| 89. 12%| Total %| 100. 00%| 100. 0%| 100. 00%| 100. 00%| | | | | | Average/Target % of Debt| | 11. 11%| 89. 26%| | Average/Target % of Preferred Stock| | 0. 00%| 0%| | Average/Target % of Common Equity| | 88. 89%| 10. 74%| | | | | | | Total Debt*| 56,564,000| 46,329,000| 44,094,000| 42,401,000| Total Assets*| 113,644,000| 102,908,000| 94,682,000| 84,912,000| Total Debt/Total Assets| 49. 8%| 45. 0%| 46. 6%| 49. 9%| * $ in thousands Appendix F: Depreciation Figure 14 Depreciation | | | | | | Depreciation| Â  | Â  | Â  | Â  | Â  | | USEFUL LIVES| Pfizer| | (YEARS)| Â  | | | 2011| 2010| 2009| 2008| Type| | Accelerated depreciation methods|Classes of Assets and Depreciation Ranges | | | | | | Land | – | | | | | Buildings| 33 1/3-50| | | | | Machinery and equipment| 8-20| | | | | Furniture, fixtures and other| 3-12 1/2| | | | | Construction in progress| – | | | | | | | | | | | Depreciation ; Amortization**| | 9,026 | 8,487 | 4,757 | 5,090 | | | | | | | | | Merck| | USEFUL LIVES| Â  | | (YEARS)| 2011| 2010| 2009| 2008| Type| | Accelerated depreciation methods| Classes of Assets and Depreciation Ranges | | | | | | Buildings| 10-50| | | | | Machinery ; Equipment| 3-15| | | | | Capitalized software| 3- 5| | | | | Construction in progress| – | | | | |Products and product rights, trade names and patents| 3-40| Primarily straight- line methods| | | | | | | Depreciation ; Amortization**| | 7,427| 7,381| 2,576| 1,631. 2| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | J;J| | USEFUL LIVES| Â  | | (YEARS)| 2011| 2010| 2009| 2008| Type| | Straight- line methods| Classes of Assets and Depreciation Ranges | | | | | | Building and building equipment| 20–40| | | | | Land and leasehold improvements| 10–20| | | | | Machinery and equipment| 2–13| | | | | Capitalized software| 3-8| | | | | | | | | | | Depreciation ; Amortization**| | 3,158| 2,939| 2,774| 2,832| | | | | | | | | | | | ** $ in millions| | | | | | Appendix G: Yearly dividend and share repurchase Figure 15 Stock repurchase (in shares) and dividends| Stock Repurchaces and Dividends| Â  | Â  | Â  | | Pfizer| | 2011| 2010| 2009| 2008| Stock Repurchaces*| N/A | N/A | N/A | N/A | Dividends ($)| 0. 8| 0. 72| 0. 8| 1. 28| | | | | | | Merck| | 2011| 2010| 2009| 2008| Stock Repurchaces*| N/A | N/A | N/A | N/A | Dividends ($)| 1. 56| 1. 52| 1. 52| 1. 52| | | | | | | J;J| | 2011| 2010| 2009| 2008| Stock Repurchaces*| 39,741 | 45,090 | 37,114 | 100,970| Dividends ($)| 2. 25| 2. 11| 1. 93| 1. 795| | | | | | Number of Shares (Thousands)| | | | | | | | | | Figure 16 Stock repurchase (in U. S. dollars) and dividends| Stock Repurchaces and Dividends| Â  | Â  | Â  | | Pfizer| | 2011| 2010| 2009| 2008| Stock Repurchaces*| N/A | N/A | N/A | N/A | Dividends ($)| 0. 8| 0. 72| 0. 8| 1. 28| | | | | | | Merck| | 2011| 2010| 2009| 2008| Stock Repurchaces*| N/A | N/A | N/A | N/A | Dividends ($)| 1. 56| 1. 52| 1. 52| 1. 52| | | | | | | J;J| | 2011| 2010| 2009| 2008| Stock Repurchaces*| (2,525)| (2,797)| (2,130)| (6,651)| Dividends ($)| 2. 25| 2. 11| 1. 93| 1. 795| | | | | | * $ in millions| | | | | Appendix H: Value Line reports