The purpose of this report is to compare the market performance of two companies belonging to the same industry on the basis of which provide investment advice to Stephan Curry. The companies are namely ‘Games Workshop PLC’ and ‘Hornby PLC’. Both companies belong to the ‘House, Leisure and Personal Goods’ industry. Stephen does not have much exposure to the games retailing sector and needs help in making up his mind as to which company to invest in. In this report the following topics will be discussed:- An analysis of the ‘House, Leisure and Personal Goods’ industry to assess how the industry as a whole is performing in the market. A comparative financial analysis of both the companies in order figure out which of the two companies is a better candidate for future investment. An understanding of the client’s attitude to risk and the reasons for advising him to invest in mentioned company.
ROCE is calculated to find out the performance of a company in terms of capital employed to profit earned or generated during the specified periods. It is calculated on the basis of PBIT and Capital Employed. Where, PBIT is the operating profit that is, the profit before paying interest and tax and Capital Employed is the amount invested in the business and it express the relation between total fixed assets, current assets and the current liabilities. Calculation of ROCE is very relevant in assessing the funds employed in order to know the efficiency in utilizing it. Return on Capital Employed (ROCE) While benchmarking with time, Games workshop has shown excellent growth and returns on Capital employed. While comparing it with Hornby PLC it can be seen that while Hornby PLC is giving good returns they are in a downward trend, while Games workshop though it gave bad returns in 2008 has improved and has been consistent in its growth of returns. Now let’s benchmark with expectation of how good the return should be. The minimum acceptable reward to the investor for risk is 10% which is double that of how much they would get if they invest in fixed deposits in a bank. Hornby PLC has for all three years given return above the minimum acceptable rate. Games workshop in 2008 has been disappointing but they have done a fairly better job in the next two years while compared to Hornby PLC.
Net profit margin or operating profit margin conveys the relationship between operating profit and sales revenue. Both, operating profit and sales revenue are output from business transactions and therefore, this ratio highlight the performance of the company in relation to cost incurred in operating the business and selling goods. Higher the net profit margin greater the profitability to the company. Net Profit Margin When benchmarking both companies with time we can see that they have been on more or less equal footing. Though on an average Hornby PLC has a better NPM than Games workshop we must note that while performance of Hornby is declining that of Games workshop is increasing every year. This means that according to horizontal analysis Games workshop has a better probability of doing well the next year than Hornby PLC.
Cash which remains even after the company reinvests it into the business is called Free Cash Flows. The higher the free cash flow the more secure the company is against economic distress. Free Cash Flows The above chart shows the amount of free cash flow the companies had between the years 2008 and 2010. Games Workshop over the last 3 years has had increased amounts of free cash flows indicating reliability in consistency. It also means that high enough cash flow to reinvest in its business in 2011 and distributes among the securities holders in case the business does not do well. Hornby on the other hand shows both a negative cash flow and increased cash flows in the years 2009 and 2010 respectively.
Now if we can assess the free cash flow margin we will be able to determine the amount of sales that can be turned into excess cash by a company. The stronger the Free Cash Flow Margin the stronger its competitive advantage. Free Cash Flow Margin Games Workshop has stronger cash flow margins suggesting that it has an economic competitive advantage when compared to Hornby PLC. As we can see clearly in the above chart the Hornby cash flow margins have been much lower than those of Games workshop. It also shows a negative cash flow margin in the year 2009 when the global meltdown happened showing that it is not very stable and is susceptible to market failure.
When net profit is calculated as a percentage of the assets of the company we get the value earned for every pound spent on the assets. To calculate how efficient a company really is how it effectively it uses its assets is very important. If the company is not able to get all returns on its assets then it shows that the company is not doing very well. Return on Assets (ROA) Again according benchmarking with time Games workshop shows better results by increasing the ROA percentage per year. Hornby PLC is not able to convert all the assets into profits. It shows a big drop in return in the year 2008-2009 and does not get better in the next year either. After calculating several variables in order to determine the profitability of the company Games Workshop is proving to be a more profitable company than Hornby PLC.
Liquidity ratio measures the performance of a company by covering the aspects of operating cost and the efficiency of utilizing capital available for fixed assets. This ratio focuses on how well the company is keeping short term assets to cover short term liability.
Current asset ratio measures the liquidity by linking work-in-progress to stock and debtors to cash, comparing that to current liabilities. The value 2:1 is considered as satisfactory level of performance that is, company should able to cover current liabilities incurred with its current assets. In-other words, current assets should be more than the current liabilities. Current Ratio Here both companies are not maintaining satisfactory level of liquidity in the last two years even though the current assets have shown an increasing trend. Among two companies, Hornby is showing a low level of liquidity because of the increase in borrowings and allocation of funds to provisions and also increase in derivative financial instruments affected the current ratio in the year 2009. On the other hand, the main cause for increasing trend of liquidity of Games Workshop is because they reduced their borrowings and allocated provision to minimum level. Hence Games Workshop is comparatively better performing.
Acid test ratio also measures the liquidity position of a company on the basis of current assets to current liabilities but it does not take stock or inventory into account of current assets. The reason for excluding stock from current assets is that, often it will take time to convert sales into cash. That is, sometimes goods which are sold on credit will take much time to convert it into cash. The ratio 2:1 is also considered as a good level of liquidity both in the computation of current ratio and acid or liquid ratio. A 1:1 ratio is also considered as a satisfactory level of liquidity, since the stock is excluded from the current asset which implies that the firm has immediate cash to settle its current liability. Acid Test Ratio Both the companies have maintained a marginal level of liquidity in 2010 with current assets of 1.38 (Hornby) and 1.48 (Games Workshop) to current liability of 1 and also in 2009, Games Workshop continued a marginal level of 1.14. In the year 2009, Hornby has shown an insufficient liquidity (0.72) when compared to Games Workshop (0.90). The reason for the increase in ratio for both the companies in the year 2010 was due to the increase in cash and cash equivalents. Further, in the same year trade receivables also increased. Since liquidity ratio is calculated by deducting stock from current assets, it reflect the current assets in the sense that companies which maintain high stock will have low current assets to current liability and therefore the liquidity will be minimum to cover the current liability. Here, it can be seen that Hornby have maintained high level of stock through out last three years. Where as Games Workshop continued to keep same levels of stock, which reflected in the liquidity and therefore be considered for making investment. To maintain high liquidity both the companies have to reduce their current liabilities and should focus on the liquid assets.
Efficiency ratios review the management of a company’s resources. The efficiency ratios that have been reviewed for the analysis are Stock turnover or Inventory turnover ratio, Trade receivable ratio or Debtor collection period.
Ratio indicates the number of times the stock or inventories are replaced. It is measured as Cost of sales divided by the number of stock. The ratio indicates the number times the inventory has to be turned over. The stock turnover ratio when further divided by 365 days provides the number of days it took, for a particular stock to be sold. The bar graph below indicates the inventory turnover period for 3 years for Games workshop and Hornby. Any business will always prefer to have the shortest inventory turnover period since holding inventories involves cost. For an investor it is important to know whether the company is wasting money with too many inventories and if too less, then probably loosing its customers to other competitors. Therefore it is a key management ratio to be reviewed. Inventory Turnover Period In the year 2010 Games Workshop had a marginal increase in turnover period, at approximately 120 days, where as 2008 and 2009 remained more or less the same. Hornby had considerable decrease in 2010 to approximately 137 days as compared to other two years especially in the year 2008 where though cost of sales was low stock was high. For games workshop the year 2010 proved beneficial because cost of sales was considerably low as compared to other two years. Games Workshop seems better prepared when it comes to inventory turnover period because its stock has minimum variations over the past 3 years and made efforts to reduce its cost of sales.
This ratio provides information on how long does the customer take to pay back for goods taken on credit. The debtors or trade receivables is usually divided by credit sales however that information is unavailable on the financial statements of both companies, therefore it is being divided by revenue from sales and then multiplied by 365. Debtor collection gives an investor an insight of how many days in year does company’s customer take to repay. Debtor collection is important to an investor because provides details on whether the funds are being tied up because the customer is taking longer period to pay. Debtor Collection Period The bar chart above indicates that Games Workshop has the lowest Debtor collection period where as Hornby, comparatively has the highest. Both companies have marginal increments for all three years. However, though Games Workshop has less debtors, it has considerably high revenue from sales as compared to Hornby. On the other Hornby’s debt are a few hundreds more than Games Workshops Debt but has lower Revenue from sales. Thus Games Workshop proves to be the one with better cash inflow.
It is the companies’ ability to repay unpaid portion of debt to outsiders. Interest cover ratio explains that the operating profit should be higher to cover interest payable. Decrease in operating profit means, company have repayment problem to its lenders and shareholders. Interest cover ratio below 1.5 or 1 is a sign that the company is not producing sufficient profit to payoff its debts or interest. Interest Cover ratio Hornby for past three years has had acceptable cover. However, it has been following a downward trend. Hornby saw 2008 as better year in terms of interest ratio cover. It had the highest PBIT and the least interest. As of 2010 it has had the least PBIT and high Interest payable. Games Workshop has had tremendous improvement in 2010 in terms of profits and least tax paid. PBIT for Games Workshop was twice more than what it had been in the year 2009.
The portion of the company profits allocated to each outstanding share of common stock. EPS is considered a very important variable in determining a share’s price. It is also required to calculate the price earnings ratio which helps in determining the future growth of the company. Earnings per Share From the above chart we can see that the EPS in 2008 was the lowest. This could be because the net income of the company was very low at that time. By the increasing the net income and reducing the variable costs in between the company has increased its earnings per share. The EPS for Hornby was highest when its net income was high. In the following years they were not able to maintain the net income as their costs increased. This led to the fall of the EPS. This shows that Hornby is not able perform as well as Games Workshop.
The price earnings ratio shows the current investor demand for a company share. By finding the reciprocal of this ratio we will know the earnings yield, which is nothing but the estimate of the expected return gained by holding the stock. Price Earnings Ratio The PE ratio is the market’s estimate of future earnings potential. The higher the PE ratio of a company the more its future earnings is estimated to be. One of the reasons that a company’s earnings may be expected to grow is if it has a good amount of free cash flows that it can reinvest back in the business for growth purposes. We have seen under profitability ratios when calculating free cash flow for both the companies that Games Workshop had higher amount of free cash flow than Hornby PLC. Therefore Games workshop is expected to have better growth prospects for the coming year even with a high dividend pay-out.
Hornby PLC is a patent granted to Frank Hornby and soon after he got the patent he put that into production and it is Under the Name “Mechanics Made Easy” which help and formed the Meccano Ltd in the year 1907 and then the Factory is moved to New and larger Premises and came into the lead of Classic toys of all time. Games workshop Plc Belongs to British games production and retailing company, this company is listed in London Stock Exchange and the symbol of this is GAW.L, This Company is founded in the year 1975 by John Peake. This is one of the world’s largest and very successful tabletop fantasy and battle games manufacturer. This Company is more into helping the mighty armies on the battle field. Games Workshop Public Limited Company and Hornby Public Limited Company are part of the House, Leisure and Personal goods industry. They are engaged in designing, manufacturing and whole selling and also distribution of games, miniature figures and recreational products in United Kingdom and few other parts of the world like America, Europe Continental and Asia Pacific. This particular field of recreational products or Miniature Figures manufacturing and distrusting industry is growing better every year there are many brands that are into this Industry from different parts of the world and they come around 446 in number, The United states market revenue in this field is around $57 billion, Customers who are buying this type of products are growing day by day and it’s now a new era of Hobbies, though it is an expensive one there are few brands who are making the products for cheaper price and growing the revenue for this market and the value for the share market, The Games workshop Individually had a very good gross margin by the means of one man stores and they also promoted metal figures and started avoiding plastic for making the products, Analysts’ had estimated the pre-tax Profit for the year 2010 may is around 9 Million Pounds, as of the year 2009 sales this company made a profit of 7.5 Million Pounds on the sales of 125.7 Million pounds. In the year 2008 the company profit is not good as expected because of the less effort putting by the employers back on easy way of success. Hornby plc is also good in this market and as of the announced on 31st of march 2010 the sales of horn by plc had a very good improvement and that lead it to increased share values and the company is very much happy with the analysis expected as this brand is famous for the toy train making and they are also improving the product sales by making the products featuring Michael Schumacher and this states the new way of the sales promotion and profit maximization which will also create a very good interested for the investors to invest in Hornsby Plc. In the year 2009 the company’s sales grew to 5% i.e.: 61.6 Million Pounds and the sales were up for 20% in the year 2008. Basing on the yearend financial statement the miniatures industry is showing its growth every year and the investors are also showing there interests to invest money into this type of new markets This particular products come under household and consumer goods industry and in this includes all the electronics applications used in house and other general goods as of the year 2009 the consumer electronics industry performed very well and the annual gain in more than 130% among the 23 applications and the expected growth for the year 2010 is about 15% and the sell volume crossed 9.0 billion and this market is growing in rural areas also. This industry has an emerging market and the growth is rapidly increasing and moving towards a strong economic growth. In United States the EMES (emerging market economies) had a very good result and the growth rate is 66.0% in 2000 and 2009 and reaching the figure 7.5 trillion by 2010. China is one of the best progressive countries in terms of this market and it had driven the US profits to it and that made the US market Sluggish. This Industry is not restricted to one country alone but bridges the gamming gap between nations. Since this a growing market it would be an industry which can be invested in.
The following conclusions were drawn after calculating all the ratios.
Hornby PLC has not performed up to the expectations of the company or the industry. The company did not have good probability in the year 2009. A negative cash flow and free cash flow margin and also lower returns on Capital employed and total assets show that the company is not able to generate the sales it intends on generating. In terms of efficiency Hornby yet again has performed poorly. Apart from having a higher turnover period we also see that takes a longer time to receive it payments showing less cash in hand for the company. Hornby is not maintaining adequate level of liquidity position since its current liabilities are showing increased borrowings and high allocation for provisions. Increased level of stock positioning caused Hornby’s a decrease in current assets thereby affecting its performance. Coming to investment, though the company did well in years 2008 and 2010 its drastic dip in 2009 is a cause for concern. Its shows that the company is not stable and is more susceptible to a further dip in its performance.
Games workshop started the year 2008 very poorly but fast improved its performance in 2009 and 2010. It has increases its free cash flows and has very good cash flow margins in comparison to Hornby PLC and its previous years. It also has been showing to have good return both on Capital Employed and total assets indicating that the company is indeed a profitable one. Games Workshop has reduced its cost of sales resulting in shorter turnover period. The debtor collection period for Games workshop is lower compared to Hornby since it generated high revenue in sales and has maintained a consistency in sales generation. Games Workshop has increased sales, profit and reduces its costs therefore it proves to be more efficient and profitable than Hornby. Games workshop has maintained current liabilities like borrowings and provisions at a minimum level so that its liquidity position is higher than Hornby’s. Moreover, Games workshop has kept its stock level more or less the same throughout all three years. When we come to investment Games Workshop shows an opposite trend than that of Hornby. GW did very badly in the year 2008 but increased its performance for the next two years with high profits and higher revenue. The company has had an upward trend showing that it is more stable when compared to Hornby. Games workshop also has higher PE ratios which indicate higher future earnings for the company. Overall Games Workshop has better performance, efficiency, liquidity, gearing and better investment prospects than Hornby PLC. Therefore on behalf of Bresil Investments we would recommend Stephen Curry to invest in Games Workshop Plc for higher returns.
Return on Capital Employed (ROCE) = PBIT (profit before interest and tax) *100 Capital employed Hornby YEAR PBIT CAPITAL EMPLOYED ROCE (%) 2010 6004 47456 12.65 2009 6899 39036 17.67 2008 9386 31849 29.47 Games Workshop Year PBIT CAPITAL EMPLOYED ROCE (%) 2010 16120 57327 57327 57327 27.99 2009 7458 52209 17.27 2008 1059 46567 5.48 Net Profit Margin (NPM) = Operating Profit *100 Sales Revenue Hornby YEAR OPERATING PROFIT SALES REVENUE NET PROFIT MARGIN (%) 2010 6004 64736 9.27 2009 6899 61569 11.20 2008 9386 55692 17 Games Workshop YEAR OPERATING PROFIT SALES REVENUE NET PROFIT MARGIN (%) 2010 16045 126511 12.68 2009 9014 125706 7.17 2008 2552 110345 2.31 Free Cash Flows = Cash Flows from Operating Activities – Capital Expenditure Hornby YEAR Cash Flows from Operating activities Capital Expenditure Free Cash Flows 2010 11934 3825 8109 2009 8005 13256 -5251 2008 7253 3414 3839 Games Workshop YEAR Cash Flows from Operating activities Capital Expenditure Free Cash Flows 2010 26568 7974 18594 2009 18119 8960 9159 2008 10685 9019 1666 Free Cash Flow Margin = [Free Cash Flow] * 100 Sales Hornby YEAR Free Cash Flow Sales Free Cash Flow Margins (%) 2010 8109 64736 12.53 2009 -5251 61569 -8.53 2008 3839 55692 6.89 Games Workshop YEAR Free Cash Flow Sales Free Cash Flow Margins (%) 2010 18594 126511 14.7 2009 9159 125706 7.29 2008 1666 110345 1.51 Return on Assets = [Operating Profit] * 100 Total Assets Hornby YEAR Operating Profit Total Assets ROA (%) 2010 6004 64290 9.34 2009 6899 57941 11.91 2008 9386 44493 21.1 Games Workshop YEAR Operating Profit Total Assets ROA (%) 2010 16045 75752 21.18 2009 8933 70132 12.74 2008 2552 67489 3.78
Current Ratio= Current Assets Current Liability Hornby YEAR CURRENT ASSETS CURRENT LIABILITY CURRENT RATIO (in factor) 2010 35487 16834 2.10 2009 28038 18905 1.48 2008 23681 12644 1.87 Games workshop YEAR CURRENT ASSETS CURRENT LIABILITY CURRENT RATIO (in factor) 2010 37571 18425 2.03 2009 31234 17923 1.74 2008 29320 20920 1.40 Acid Test Ratio= Current Assets – Inventory Current Liability Hornby YEAR CURRENT ASSETS INVENTORY CURRENT LIABITITY ACID TEST RATIO (in factor) 2010 35487 12273 16834 1.38 2009 28038 14368 18905 .72 2008 23681 11890 12644 .93 Games Workshop Year CURRENT ASSETS INVENTORY CURRENT LIABILITY ACID TEST RATIO (in factor) 2010 37571 10138 18425 1.48 2009 31234 10678 17923 1.14 2008 29320 10392 20920 0.90
Stock Turnover Ratio= Cost of Goods Sold or Cost of Sales Stock or Inventory Hornby YEAR COST OF SALES STOCK STOCK TURN OVER RATIO (in times) 2010 32636 12273 2.66 2009 32168 14368 2.24 2008 26297 11890 2.21 Games Workshop YEAR COST OF SALES STOCK STOCK TURNOVER RATIO (in times) 2010 30683 10138 3.02 2009 35919 10678 3.36 2008 33731 10392 3.24 Stock Conversion Period= 365 days Stock Turnover Ratio Hornby YEAR NO. OF DAYS STOCK TURNOVER RATIO STOCK CONVERSION PERIOD (in days) 2010 365 2.66 137.21 2009 365 2.24 162.94 2008 365 2.21 165.15 Games Workshop YEAR NO. OF DAYS STOCK TURNOVER RATIO Stock Conversion Period (in days) 2010 365 3.02 120.86 2009 365 3.36 108.63 2008 365 3.24 112.65 Trade Receivable Collection Period= Debtors* 365 Revenue from Sales Hornby YEAR DEBTORS REVENUE FROM SALES NO. OF DAYS TRADE REC. COLL.Period (in days) 2010 13291 64736 365 74.93 2009 13119 61569 365 77.77 2008 10699 55692 365 70.12 Games Workshop YEAR DEBTORS REVENUE FROM SALES NO. OF DAYS TRADE REC. COLL.PERIOD (in days) 2010 10043 126511 365 28.97 2009 9959 125706 365 28.91 2008 9870 110345 365 32.64
Interest Cover Ratio = PBIT or Operating Profit Interest Payable or Finance Cost Hornby Year PBIT Interest Payable Interest Cover Ratio 2010 6004 809 7.42 2009 6899 805 8.57 2008 9386 374 25.09 Games Workshop Year PBIT Interest Payable Interest Cover Ratio 2010 16045 315 50.93 2009 8933 1258 7.10 2008 2552 1681 1.51
Earnings per Share = Earnings Available to Ordinary Shareholders Number of Ordinary Shares in issue Hornby YEAR Earnings available to ordinary shareholders Number of Ordinary Shares in issue Earnings per Share 2010 3685 37772 9.76 2009 4212 37724 11.17 2008 6077 37637 16.15 Games Workshop YEAR Earnings available to ordinary shareholders Number of Ordinary Shares in issue Earnings per Share 2010 15080 31131 48.4 2009 5469 31129 17.6 2008 -740 31123 -2.4 Price Earnings Ratio = Market Price per Share Earnings per Share Hornby Year MARKET PRICE PER SHARE EARNINGS PER SHARE (Pence) PRICE EARNINGS RATIO 2010 126 9.76 12.91 2009 68 11.17 6.08 2008 189 16.15 11.70 Games Workshop Year MARKET PRICE PER SHARE EARNINGS PER SHARE (Pence) PRICE EARNINGS RATIO 2010 346 48.4 7.15 2009 209 17.6 11.88 2008 174 -2.4 N/A
A professional writer will make a clear, mistake-free paper for you!Get help with your assigment
Please check your inbox
I'm Chatbot Amy :)
I can help you save hours on your homework. Let's start by finding a writer.Find Writer