2.6 s.kalaiselvi Cost of Component Analysis

8/2/2019 2.6 s.kalaiselvi Cost of Component Analysis

1/19

APJRBM Volume 2, Issue 1 (JANUARY 2011) ISSN 2229-4104

COST OF COMPONENT ANALYSISA STUDY IN INDIAN

SOFTWARE INDUSTRY

Dr (Mrs.) D.KamalaveniM.Com., Ph.D., PGDCA

Reader in Commerce,

Vellalar College for Women,

Erode-12.E-mail id:[email protected]

Dr.(Mrs.)S.KALAISELVIM.Com., M.Phil., PGDCA., Ph.D., M.B.A.

Asst. Professor & Head,

Department of Commerce with Computer Applications,Vellalar College for Women,

Erode-12.

E-Mail id:[email protected]

Abstract

Th f i l f fi i h i i d b i li


2/19


INTRODUCTION

The financial decisions affect the market value of a firm. Generally, the objective of financialdecisions is to maximize the market price of shares and to minimize the cost of capital which

leads to increase in earnings per share and return on capital employed.

The cost of a particular source of finance is the minimum return expected by its suppliers.

The expected return depends on the degree of risk assumed by the suppliers. A high degree of

risk is assumed by shareholders than debt holders. Debt is a cheaper source of fund than

equity capital and preference capital because the interest payment on debt is fixed. Thus, acompany borrows capital in order to maximize the profits for its shareholders and it would

continue to use this source of finance until the incremental return on it is higher than its

incremental cost.

Measuring the cost of various sources of funds is a complex subject. In deciding the capital

structure of a company, it is very necessary to consider the cost of each source of capital to

calculate the overall weighted average cost of capital, which in turn can be used to compare

against earnings so as to maximize the wealth of shareholders.

A firmscost of capital may be defined. The rate that must be earned on net proceeds to

provide the cost elements of the burden at the time they are due.

Significance Of Cost Of Capital


3/19


Research ObjectivesThe study is focused on the following specific objectives.

To analyse the debt and equity component of capital structure To study the significant variation in averages of cost of debt of different sub-

groups.

To discuss the perceptible and distinctive difference in cost of equity amongsub-groups of sampled companies.

To study the significant variation in WACC among the sub-groups of sampledcompanies.

Sample Selection

The data used in this study relate to those software companies listed in the Bombay Stock

Exchange (BSE) for which the data are available in the Capitaline database. The analysis is

confined to the BSE listed Indian software companies only.

Capitaline database contained data relating to 465 BSE listed software companies. Stratified

sampling technique was used and hence the total population was sub-divided into three

standard sub-groups namely Large (Turnover greater than Rs.900 Crores), Small-Medium

(Turnover less than Rs.900 Crores) and Converts (diversified companies), in such a way that

each strata was more homogeneous than the total population. Accordingly, it was found that

there were 10 Large, 407 Small-Medium and 48 Converts. For selection of sample companies

in each stratum, companies for which data were available for minimum of eight years were

id tifi d Th h l t d ll th i f h t t hi h f lfill d th


4/19


Results And Discussion

The cost of capital constitutes an integral part of investment decisions. A company uses more

than one type of capital. The composite capital lies between the least and the most expensive

funds.

The formula used for analysis are:-

Cost of Debt, Kd = 100xDebtTotal

esargChFinancial&Interest

Cost of equity (ke) = Rf + bi (Rm-Rf)

Weighted Average Cost of Capital (WACC) =

100d

Kxemployedcapitaldebt toofProportion+

100EmployedCapitalTotalEquity toofProportionxKe

Table No.1 puts forward the synoptic description of Cost of Equity, Cost of Debt and WACC.

It is obvious from Table No.1 that, the cost of debt has declined over the years while the cost

of equity has exhibited wide variations. An attempt has been made to study the average cost

of debt for the different sub- groups of the companies by applying ANOVA.

Th f f d b i l f h l i i d f I


5/19


It is obvious from Table No.3 that F ratio value is 0.488. The calculated value being less

than the table value of 3.07, at 5% level of significance, it can be concluded that among thesampled companies distinctive cost of equity does not vary significantly from group to group.

The computation of overall cost of capital involves weights to specific costs and multiplying

these costs by their relative weights. The overall cost of capital of sampled companies

showed very wide variations and hence an attempt was made to study the average cost of

capital for the different sub groups of the sampled companies.

ANOVA has been performed to ensure whether there is any pertinent and significant

variation in WACC among sampled companies.

H0: There is no significant variation in WACC among the sub groups of sampled companies.

It is clear from the Table No.4 that the calculated F value is 0.631 as against the table value

of 3.07 at 5% level of significance. Since the calculated value of WACC is less than its table

value, it is concluded that the WACC among different sub groups does not show anydistinctive variation.

On the whole, it can be concluded that overall cost of capital does not differ significantly

from one sub-group to another sub-group of sampled companies.

The Cost of Debt, Cost of Equity and WACC for the whole sample and also for different sub-

groups are summarized in Table No.5:


6/19


Appendix-I, Table No.1.2 exhibits an inverse relationship between Debt-Equity and

Turnover. There exists positive relationship between Total Debt and EBIT in all the 10 yearsof the study (Appendix-I, Table No.1.3) and a high positive association is noticed during the

first five years of the study period. The association between Debt-Equity and ROCE was

found to be low positive during seven out of ten years of the study period as per Appendix-I,

Table No.1.4 and the first two years exhibited a negative relationship. A high positive

correlation was found during the year 2005-06 with a coefficient of 0.778.

Inverse relationship was observed in seven years of the study with regard to EBIT to capital

employed and Debt-Equity ratio presented in Appendix-I, Table No.1.5. During the

remaining years of the study, a very low positive association was found.

Recommendations

Barring multinational companies, most companies in India till recently paid lip service to the

goal of shareholder wealth maximization. They showed sporadic concern for the

shareholders, mainly when they approached the capital market for raising capital. The highercorporate needs for funds and the greater dependence on the capital market have induced

firms to become more friendly with shareholders. Institutional investors tend to be more

discerning and have the muscle and motivation to nudge companies to pursue shareholder

friendly policies. With the abolition of wealth tax on equity shares and other financial assets,

there is now an incentive to enhance share prices. An attempt is made here to sketch a few

recommendations emanating from the findings of the study to the software companies for

ff ti l ti i th l b l


7/19


There is an uncertainty with regard to the movement in share price. If the company does not

perform, the investor may not even get his money back. The cost of capital plays a role indeciding upon the dividend policy of the firm. In the present study, wide fluctuation is being

noticed regarding the behaviour of cost of capital and hence the software companies are

suggested to follow appropriate dividend policies with a view to maximize the wealth of the

shareholders as well as the company as a whole.

Conclusion

The analysis revealed that statistically there was no significant difference among various sub-

groups with regard to cost of debt capital. Distinctive patterns were found to exist with

respect to cost of equity and it varied from group to group. WACC among different sub-

groups did not show any distinctive variation. Debt-equity ratio was found to be far below the

standard norm in all the years under study. It establishes the fact that the share holders do not

enjoy the advantages of trading on equity.

Year wise averages of EBIT and Turnover showed an upward swing. Inverse relationship was

found between debt equity & turnover and between EBIT to capital employed & debt-equity

in majority of the years. Positive relationship was observed with respect to total debt & EBIT

and debt-equity & ROCE. Such a positive relationship favours the proposition that the use of

debt upto an optimal level could boost earnings related variables.

REFERENCES


8/19


John C. Groth, Ronald C. Anderson, The cost of capital: Perspectives for Managers,

Management Decision 35/6, 1997, pp.474-482.Jordan, J., Lowe, J. and Taylor, P. Strategy and financial policy in UK

small firms, Journal of Business Finance and Accounting 25(1), 1998, pp.1-27.

Matthew, Billet T., and Ryngaert, Mike, Capital Structure, Asset Structure and Equity

Takeover Premiums in Cash Tender Offers, Journal of Corporation Finance, Volume 3, No.2,

April 1997, pp.145-165.

Mohnot, Rajesh, Mohnot Abstract of Doctoral Dissertation, Capitalization and Capital

Structure in Indian Industries, Finance India, Vol. XLV No.2, June 2000, pp.546-551.

www.eva.com

www.indiainfoline.com

www.capitaline.com

www.bseindia.com

www.investopedia.comwww.iba.org.in.

www.valuebased management.net

www.icraindia.com


9/19


10/19


Table No. 5

Group-Wise Average Cost Of Debt (Kd), Cost Of Equity (Ke) & Wacc (Ko)

(in percentage)

Group Cost of Debt Cost of Equity WACC

Large 0.44 20.85 19.77

Small Medium 0.35 17.58 17.14

Converts 0.09 13.91 12.69

Table No. 6

Year Wise Average Of Select Variables For The Whole Sample

Years

Debt

Equity

(Ratio)

ROCE

(%)

Turnover

(Rs. in

Cr.)

EBIT

(Rs. in

Cr.)

Total

Debt (Rs.

in Cr.)

EBIT to

CE (Ratio)2005-06 0.131 8.857 399.74 104.013 18.131 0.106

2004-05 0.156 -15.136 255.44 64.714 12.765 -0.112

2003-04 0.123 -2.107 188.16 45.652 11.319 0.027

2002-03 0.110 -16.826 156.83 37.841 9.977 0.039

2001-02 0.095 -8.607 131.22 35.382 6.431 -0.019

2000-01 0.084 3.690 118.54 37.573 7.675 0.087

1999 0 083 12 713 83 88 21 295 8 777 0 149


11/19


ADVENT 0.1 -246.2 172.93 191.21 164.24 19.27

AFTEK LTD 0.4 -27.85 24.65 11.96 23.54 10.76

ASIANCE 0.31 -23.48 25.22 12.34 25.73 9.56AVANTELQ 0.47 40.61 21.37 -4.37 21.19 -1.04

AZTECH 0.31 24.78 17.94 -214.8 19.07 -225.55

B2BSOFT 0.07 -100 9.81 1.69 10.22 2.08

BLUESTINFO 0 0 23.52 -4.37 23.51 -4.38

BRELS 0.04 -24.19 15.77 9.7 12.96 6.57

CALIFSOF 0.15 -3.86 18.44 9.91 18.27 9.63

CGVAK 0.14 2.34 24.41 -4.36 22.63 -5.28CONTECH 0.17 13.27 7.15 -8.22 8.33 -8.09

CRANES 0.11 -21.37 12.98 6.25 11.47 -2.24

CRESSAN 0.03 0 -1.68 -4.35 0.54 -17.17

CSSOFT 0.21 10.64 17.16 -214.09 16.71 -215.44

CYBERTE 0 0 14 7.18 14.03 7.17

DATASOFT 0 0 17.42 9.42 16.64 9.42

DYNACON 0.17 4.95 10.45 2.9 10.95 2.15

ESERVE 0.3 -13.32 9.53 -5.05 11.59 -6.43

EUROSOFT 0.04 -100 26.84 13.7 25.34 13.64

EZCOM 0.43 -19.44 7.87 -4.18 8.01 -4.89

FINTECH 0.08 -100 18.44 9.91 18.19 8.93

FRONTINF 0.15 -23.86 8.4 -0.6 9.97 -6.46

GENESYS 0.27 -30.53 11.59 4.64 14.17 -8.26

GEOMETRIC 0.11 -100 21.48 11.07 21.32 11.67

GOLDTECH 0 18 2 18 11 59 4 64 12 19 2 57


12/19


MINDTEK 1.21 -1.1 18.22 8.94 19.14 11.97

MPHASIS 4.76 -31.05 23.51 11.67 27.19 7.17

NCCFIN 0.19 -100 14.76 7.78 21.24 9.22NUCLEUSSOFT 0.81 -100 17.68 9.55 17.92 9.29

ODYSSEY 0.07 0 15.9 8.56 15.45 8.9

ONWARD 0.13 -7.77 21.73 11.15 18.51 9.34

ORIENTINFO 0.79 12.33 21.73 11.15 21.72 13.15

OTCO 0 0 7.2 -11.31 7.2 -11.31

PALSOFT 0.4 -100 -10.22 28.9 -10.56 42.46

PENTASOFTTE 0.19 -41.12 17.42 9.42 15.95 6.21PIOTECH 0 0 10.45 2.9 10.45 2.9

PSI 0.12 -18.77 16.55 8.47 11.26 -8.56

RAMINFO 0.28 7.05 13.85 5.08 14.56 3.15

RAMCOSYS 0.16 0 17.81 -3.41 14.01 -9.85

ROLTA 0.11 -100 23.81 12.63 21.52 13.78

SANRASOF 0.18 -100 13.32 8.58 13.63 8.66

SILVERLINE 0.17 -31.84 16.15 8.72 12.83 4.12

SINDUVA 0 0 27.13 13.75 26.13 12.64

SOFTSOL 0 0 9.98 6.25 12.72 6.25

SONATA 0.07 -100 21.23 10.99 22.09 11.82

SVAMSOFT 0.35 -100 16.34 10.08 16.44 9.74

TELEDATA 0.1 -24.21 14.1 11.65 12.74 10.04

TERASOFT 0.1 0 21.23 10.99 19.52 11.45

TWINSOFT 0.14 -100 10.7 3.33 10.55 -5.24

A S 0 06 31 13 49 8 5 15 49 240 52


13/19


Sri Krishna International Research & Educational Consortium

http://www.skirec.com

-103-

Table 1.2

Correlation MatrixDebt Equity and Turnover(Whole Sample)

X06 X05 X04 X03 X02 X01 X00 X99 X98 X97 Y06 Y05 Y04 Y03 Y02 Y01 Y00 Y99 Y98 Y97

X06 1

X05 .934(**) 1

X04 .703(**) .995(**) 1

X03 0.213 .948(**) .971(**) 1X02 .277(*) .962(**) .927(**) .944(**) 1

X01 .333(**) .978(**) .952(**) .965(**) .995(**) 1

X00 .541(**) .647(**) .592(**) .509(**) .769(**) .876(**) 1

X99 .231(*) 0.041 0.07 0.079 .217(*) 0.202 .760(**) 1

X98 0.199 0.03 0.059 0.065 0.191 0.168 .719(**) .985(**) 1

X97 .495(**) 0.027 0.059 0.047 0.141 0.122 .660(**) .905(**) .917(**) 1

Y06 -0.048 -0.057 -0.059 -0.036 -0.048 -0.062 -0.061 -0.046 -0.05

-

0.053 1

Y05 -0.048 -0.033 -0.035 -0.033 -0.037 -0.038 -0.049 -0.046 -0.05

-

0.052 .999(**) 1

Y04 -0.049 -0.035 -0.037 -0.037 -0.046 -0.045 -0.056 -0.051 -0.053

-

0.054 .994(**) .995(**) 1

Y03 -0.05 -0.036 -0.036 -0.031 -0.043 -0.048 -0.053 -0.054 -0.056

-

0.057 .993(**) .993(**) .998(**) 1

Y02 -0.048 -0.035 -0.032 -0.02 -0.036 -0.048 -0.043 -0.056 -0.057

-

0.058 .985(**) .984(**) .988(**) .994(**) 1

Y01 -0.054 -0.04 -0.042 -0.041 -0.05 -0.051 -0.066 -0.053 -0.054

-

0.055 .967(**) .962(**) .958(**) .968(**) .985(**) 1

Y00 -0.041 -0.018 0.006 0.059 -0.002 -0.061 -0.032 -0.06 -0.059

-

0.057 .907(**) .888(**) .881(**) .896(**) .929(**) .969(**) 1

Y99 -0.048 -0.039 -0.041 -0.039 -0.049 -0.05 -0.063 -0.058 -0.06 -0.06 .886(**) .860(**) .850(**) .859(**) .887(**) .929(**) .970(**) 1

Y98 -0.052 -0.041 -0.047 -0.05 -0.058 -0.053 -0.077 -0.062 -0.06

-

0.063 .822(**) .796(**) .773(**) .779(**) .810(**) .861(**) .912(**) .979(**) 1

Y97 -0.055 -0.036 -0.041 -0.043 -0.052 -0.053 -0.06 -0.058 -0.058-

0.055 .772(**) .747(**) .730(**) .737(**) .774(**) .829(**) .897(**) .964(**) .993(**) 1

** Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).

* Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed).

XDebt Equity; Y - Turnover


14/19




-104-

Table 1.3

Correlation MatrixTotal Debt and EBIT (Whole Sample)


X06 1

X05 .537(**) 1

X04 .386(**) .868(**) 1

X03 .255(*) .831(**) .951(**) 1X02 .371(**) .711(**) .799(**) .938(**) 1

X01 0.111 .505(**) .636(**) .702(**) .378(**) 1

X00 0 .240(*) .480(**) .440(**) .227(*) .832(**) 1

X99 0.037 .234(*) .535(**) .425(**) . 255(*) .651(**) .854(**) 1

X98 0.089 .293(**) .605(**) .453(**) .315(**) .491(**) .687(**) .953(**) 1

X97 0.195 .257(*) .593(**) .433(**) .334(**) .368(**) .534(**) .872(**) .970(**) 1

Y06 0.028 0.077 0.172 0.129 0.039 .340(**) .426(**) .660(**) .656(**) .585(**) 1

Y05 0.033 0.089 0.177 0.132 0.046 .286(**) .353(**) .601(**) .618(**) .570(**) .994(**) 1

Y04 0.029 0.085 0.172 0.138 0.054 .319(**) .353(**) .495(**) .460(**) .440(**) .993(**) .994(**) 1

Y03 0.025 0.105 .201(*) 0.168 0.052 .284(**) .290(**) .477(**) .475(**) .473(**) .973(**) .978(**) .983(**) 1

Y02 0.042 0.128 .274(**) .248(*) 0.123 .427(**) .398(**) .577(**) .548(**) .530(**) .990(**) .982(**) .985(**) .979(**) 1

Y01 0.052 0.18 .388(**) .326(**) .263(*) .492(**) .611(**) . 774(**) .739(**) .689(**) .976(**) .957(**) .917(**) .908(**) .946(**) 1

Y00 0.059 .247(*) .478(**) .414(**) .333(**) .488(**) .577(**) .752(**) .764(**) .730(**) .947(**) .930(**) .850(**) .845(**) .883(**) .961(**) 1

Y99 0.006 .216(*) .426(**) .377(**) .232(*) .506(**) .559(**) .691(**) .695(**) .641(**) .903(**) .869(**) .842(**) .850(**) .874(**) .905(**) .930(**) 1

Y98 0.07 .258(*) .480(**) .424(**) .247(*) .463(**) .451(**) .708(**) .760(**) .760(**) .827(**) .791(**) .764(**) .801(**) .837(**) .843(**) .876(**) .925(**) 1

Y97 0.058 .235(*) .492(**) .409(**) .278(**) .412(**) .467(**) .760(**) .833(**) .840(**) .775(**) .754(**) .701(**) .736(**) .774(**) .815(**) .842(**) .888(**) .961(**) 1

** Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).* Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed).

XTotal Debt; Y - EBIT


15/19




-105-

Table 1.4

Correlation MatrixDebt Equity and ROCE (Whole Sample)


X06 1

X05 .934(**) 1

X04 .703(**) .995(**) 1

X03 0.213 .948(**) .971(**) 1

X02 .277(*) .962(**) .927(**) .944(**) 1

X01 .333(**) .978(**) .952(**) .965(**) .995(**) 1

X00 .541(**) .647(**) .592(**) .509(**) .769(**) .876(**) 1

X99 .231(*) 0.041 0.07 0.079 .217(*) 0.202 .760(**) 1

X98 0.199 0.03 0.059 0.065 0.191 0.168 .719(**) .985(**) 1

X97 .495(**) 0.027 0.059 0.047 0.141 0.122 .660(**) .905(**) .917(**) 1

Y06 .778(**) .661(**) .380(**) -0.036 -0.046 -0.048 .246(*) -0.031 -0.021 0.031 1

Y05 -0.128 0.021 0.032 0.048 0.044 0.045 -0.143 -0.025 -0.026 -0.013 -0.092 1

Y04 -0.091 0.106 0.096 0.089 0.087 0.094 0.006 -0.002 0.014 0.019 0.126 0.115 1

Y03 0.013 0.05 0.038 0.008 0.027 0.053 0.001 0.035 0.034 0.033 0.014 0.062 .337(**) 1

Y02 -0.18 0.013 0.014 0.021 0.011 0.011 0.018 0.023 0.025 0.023 -.257(*) -0.003 0.128 -0.067 1

Y01 0.019 .232(*) .228(*) .226(*) 0.191 0.196 -0.047 -0.019 -0.015 -0.015 .452(**) 0.075 0.168 0.037 0.083 1

Y00 0.065 0.147 0.168 0.187 0.07 -0.041 0.106 0.022 0.006 0.085 .354(**) 0.099 .234(*) -0.038 0.054 .620(**) 1

Y99 -.457(**) -0.027 -0.017 0.016 0.013 0.004 -0. 018 0.008 0.01 0.003 -.363(**) .208(*) 0.051 -0.032 0.046 0.066 .222(*) 1

Y98 -0.029 -0.013 -0.014 -0.008 -0.021 -0.024 -0.048 -0.094 -0.106 -0.086 0.031 0.05 -0.035 -0.062 0.168 0.115 .210(*) 0.067 1

Y97 -0.162 -0.06 -0.072 -0.055 -0.068 -0.072 -.228(*) -.307(**) -.285(**) -.469(**) 0.083 0.118 0.11 -0.036 0.107 0.068 0.049 0.159 .231(*) 1** Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).

* Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed).

XDebt Equity; Y - ROCE


16/19




-106-

Table 1.5

Correlation MatrixEBIT to Capital Employed and Debt Equity (Whole Sample)


X06 1

X05 0.076 1

X04 .331(**) .288(**) 1

X03 0.077 .354(**) .547(**) 1X02 .687(**) 0.031 0.193 -.241(*) 1

X01 -0.153 0.18 .368(**) .248(*) .378(**) 1

X00 -0.027 .282(**) .379(**) .205(*) 0.125 .599(**) 1

X99 0.215 0.022 0.061 0.012 0.057 0.1 0.149 1

X98 0.184 0.162 0.197 0.102 0.183 .404(**) .494(**) 0.157 1

X97 0.15 0.202 .345(**) .264(*) 0.048 .257(*) .452(**) 0.159 .635(**) 1

Y06 -.281(*) -0.066 -0.127 -0.038 -0.196 0.001 0.054 -.587(**) -0.084 -0.12 1

Y05 -.282(*) -0.062 -.267(*) -0.124 0.001 -0.083 0.124 -0.022 -0.066 -0.085 .934(**) 1

Y04 -0.2 -0.052 -.266(**) -0.146 0.001 -0.085 0.15 -0.012 -0.065 -0.089 .703(**) .995(**) 1

Y03 -0.095 -0.038 -.257(**) -0.196 0.012 -0.086 0.172 0.025 -0.05 -0.083 0.213 .948(**) .971(**) 1

Y02 -0.121 -0.043 -.252(*) -0.171 0.005 -0.112 0.06 0.023 -0.074 -0.096 .277(*) .962(**) .927(**) .944(**) 1

Y01 -0.137 -0.047 -.269(**) -0.134 0.004 -0.112 -0.035 0.013 -0.078 -0.095 .333(**) .978(**) .952(**) .965(**) .995(**) 1

Y00 -0.125 -0.144 -0.038 -0.081 0.016 -0.109 0.07 -0.006 -0.115 -0.166 .541(**) .647(**) .592(**) .509(**) .769(**) .876(**) 1

Y99 -0.062 -0.03 -0.033 0.001 0.021 -0.043 0 0.024 -0.12 -0.172 .231(*) 0.041 0.07 0.079 .217(*) 0.202 .760(**) 1

Y98 -0.031 -0.03 -0.015 0.001 0.023 -0.036 -0.017 0.022 -0.129 -0.168 0.199 0.03 0.059 0.065 0.191 0.168 .719(**) .985(**) 1

Y97 -0.012 -0.016 -0.011 -0.011 0.016 -0.049 0.064 0.012 -0.127 -.234(*) .495(**) 0.027 0.059 0.047 0.141 0.122 .660(**) .905(**) .917(**) 1

** Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).* Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed).

XEBIT to Capital Employed; YDebt Equity


17/19




-107-

TOTAL DEBT WHOLE SAMPLE

18.131

12.765

11.319

9.977

6.431

7.675

8.777

11.329

13.02512.145

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

18

20

2005-06 2004-05 2003-04 2002-03 2001-02 2000-01 1999-2000 1998-99 1997-98 1996-97

YEARS

RsinCrores


18/19




-108-

COST OF EQUITY - SEGMENT WISE

-40

-20

0

20

40

60

80

100

2005-06 2004-05 2003-04 2002-03 2001-02 2000-01 1999-00 1998-99 1997-98 1996-97

YEARS

AVERAGE

Large

Small-Medium

Converts


19/19




-109-

WEIGHTED AVERAGE COST OF CAPITAL - SEGMENT WISE

-40

-20

0

20

40

60

80

100

2005-06 2004-05 2003-04 2002-03 2001-02 2000-01 1999-00 1998-99 1997-98 1996-97

YEARS

AVERAGE

Large

Small-Medium

Converts

2.6 s.kalaiselvi Cost of Component Analysis

Documents

Transcript of 2.6 s.kalaiselvi Cost of Component Analysis