Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorBecker, Denis Mike
dc.date.accessioned2024-07-02T11:19:38Z
dc.date.available2024-07-02T11:19:38Z
dc.date.created2024-07-01T15:14:20Z
dc.date.issued2024
dc.identifier.citationJournal of Business Valuation and Economic Loss Analysis. 2024.en_US
dc.identifier.issn2194-5861
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/11250/3137313
dc.description.abstractIn this paper, we develop two complete discounted-cash flow (DCF) frameworks for the valuation of constant-growth annuities and perpetuities. By ‘complete’ we mean that these frameworks allow the valuation of a firm or project by means of different DCF methods, particularly, the equity method, the free-cash-flow (FCF) method, the adjusted-present-value-method, and the capital-cash-flow method. This also requires the derivation of formulas that allow the translation between different required returns, like the required return on unlevered and levered equity, the discount rate in the FCF method, and the required return on the tax-shield. Our paper departs from the two most advocated and mutually exclusive frameworks when dealing with DCF. The first is based on Modigliani and Miller (M&M), where the FCF at different points in time are independently distributed. The second framework rests on the analysis of Miles and Ezzell (M&E) who presume a first-order autoregressive cash-flow process. Some elements of a ‘complete’ framework exist in the literature, but in our opinion, a complete picture has not been developed yet. The contributions of this paper are the following: (1) We develop (or expand) the set of formulas that are required for the valuation of constant-growth annuities and perpetuities; (2) The formulas we develop in this paper are based on a backward-iteration process, which in itself represents a suitable tool for firm valuation; (3) Using a numerical example, we show that the two mutually exclusive frameworks of M&M or M&E achieve very different valuation results; (4) It turns out that the expected returns and the growth rate of the FCF are partly linked, but this relationship is different in the two frameworks; (5) In our numerical examples, we show how the constant-growth annuity or perpetuity, can be integrated with an explicitly planned FCF.en_US
dc.language.isoengen_US
dc.publisherWalter de Gruyter (De Gruyter)en_US
dc.rightsNavngivelse 4.0 Internasjonal*
dc.rights.urihttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/deed.no*
dc.titleConsistent DCF Methods for Constant-Growth Annuities à la Modigliani & Miller or Miles & Ezzellen_US
dc.title.alternativeConsistent DCF Methods for Constant-Growth Annuities à la Modigliani & Miller or Miles & Ezzellen_US
dc.typeJournal articleen_US
dc.typePeer revieweden_US
dc.description.versionacceptedVersionen_US
dc.source.journalJournal of Business Valuation and Economic Loss Analysisen_US
dc.identifier.doi10.1515/jbvela-2023-0015
dc.identifier.cristin2280191
cristin.ispublishedtrue
cristin.fulltextpostprint
cristin.qualitycode1


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record

Navngivelse 4.0 Internasjonal
Except where otherwise noted, this item's license is described as Navngivelse 4.0 Internasjonal