开发者:上海品职教育科技有限公司 隐私政策详情

应用版本:4.2.11(IOS)|3.2.5(安卓)APP下载

胖胖 · 2023年09月21日

is this the right way to approach this?

NO.PZ2023032701000076

问题如下:

Exhibit 1 Cratt Ltd. Press Release Core EPS Announcement

We are pleased to report an increase in Core EPS from $1.01 to $1.31 for the year-ended 31 December 2017. The company continues to pursue its growth-by- acquisition strategy, acquiring smaller specialty companies in the pet supplies industry. Acquisitions over the past two years have allowed us to increase our asset base by 20%, and we expect similar opportunities for growth in the next few years.

Zhang notes that Cratt is currently trading at $11.31 and reminds the club that the company had been sued over patent infringement for producing coats and blan­kets for dogs with the names and logos of local professional sports teams on them without the teams’ permission. The company had settled quickly out of court to avoid further negative publicity. Zhang believes the company will not be incurring legal fees again in the foreseeable future but believes that because the company’s strategy is to grow by acquisition, costs related to acquisitions will continue to be incurred and are relevant in any analysis. She does not agree with the company’s exclusion of those costs from core EPS. She calculates Cratt’s trailing price-to-earnings ratio (P/E) on the basis of her beliefs.

Based on Exhibit 1 and Zhang’s beliefs about recurring costs, her trailing P/E is closest to:

选项:

A.

10.98

B.

10.01

C.

8.64

解释:

Zhang believes that the acquisition costs will continue to be incurred and, therefore, should not be excluded from Cratt’s core EPS; however, the legal costs are non-recurring and should be excluded.

Using that definition, recurring EPS in 2017 = $1.03 + 0.10 = $1.13. Trailing P/E = $11.31 ÷ $1.13 = 10.01.

A is incorrect. It uses the GAAP (reported) EPS: P/E = $11.31 ÷ 1.03 = $10.98. But that includes the legal fees, which Zhang believes will not recur and should not be included.

C is incorrect because it uses core EPS as reported by Cratt: P/E = $11.31 ÷ 1.31 = $8.64, which excludes the acquisition costs.

core EPS excludes acquistion charges


so originally EPS had those charges, and then excluding it would mean adding back to the charges to arrive at core EPS.


And then it states legal fees is non-reocurring and acquisiton cost will continue.


Shouldn't the answer be Core EPS - acqusition cost?


or normal EPS add back legal fees? both of these would work right?

1 个答案

王园圆_品职助教 · 2023年09月21日

同学你好,这里“Zhang believes the company will not be incurring legal fees again in the foreseeable future but believes that because the company’s strategy is to grow by acquisition, costs related to acquisitions will continue to be incurred and are relevant in any analysis. She does not agree with the company’s exclusion of those costs from core EPS. "是本题解题的关键。加粗部分说了,法律费用被认为是不会重复出现的——那这个费用对公司的EPS的影响就是一次性的,应该被加回以消除这种一次性影响;而收购费用是会持续的发生的,所以收购费用不应该被认为是一次性影响,也不应该在计算core EPS的时候被加回。

但是表格下方*部分说了,现在的计算方法是每次收购费用和法律诉讼费都加回会计的EPS来计算所谓的core EPS 的——所以原本的处理方法里对收购费用的加回是错误的,不应该加回

所以用2017年会计上的EPS 1.03计算的真正的core EPS的话,应该是1.03+0.1=1.13

或者用2017计算错误的core EPS计算真正的core EPS的话,应该是1.31-0.18 =1.13

两种计算方法得出的结果一致


  • 1

    回答
  • 0

    关注
  • 376

    浏览
相关问题

NO.PZ2023032701000076 问题如下 Exhibit 1 Cratt Lt Press Release Core EPS AnnouncementWe are pleaseto report increase in Core EPS from $1.01 to $1.31 for the year-en31 cember 2017. The company continues to pursue its growth-by- acquisition strategy, acquiring smaller specialty companies in the pet supplies instry. Acquisitions over the past two years have alloweus to increase our asset base 20%, anwe expesimilopportunities for growth in the next few years. Zhang notes thCratt is currently trang $11.31 anremin the club ththe company hbeen sueover patent infringement for procing coats anblan­kets for gs with the names anlogos of locprofessionsports teams on them without the teams’ permission. The company hsettlequickly out of court to avoifurther negative publicity. Zhang believes the company will not incurring legfees again in the foreseeable future but believes thbecause the company’s strategy is to grow acquisition, costs relateto acquisitions will continue to incurreanare relevant in any analysis. She es not agree with the company’s exclusion of those costs from core EPS. She calculates Cratt’s trailing price-to-earnings ratio (P/E) on the basis of her beliefs.Baseon Exhibit 1 anZhang’s beliefs about recurring costs, her trailing P/E is closest to: A.10.98 B.10.01 C.8.64 Zhang believes ththe acquisition costs will continue to incurrean therefore, shoulnot exclufrom Cratt’s core EPS; however, the legcosts are non-recurring anshoulexcluUsing thfinition, recurring EPS in 2017 = $1.03 + 0.10 = $1.13. Trailing P/E = $11.31 ÷ $1.13 = 10.01.A is incorrect. It uses the GA(reporte EPS: P/E = $11.31 ÷ 1.03 = $10.98. But thinclus the legfees, whiZhang believes will not recur anshoulnot incluC is incorrebecause it uses core EPS reporteCratt: P/E = $11.31 ÷ 1.31 = $8.64, whiexclus the acquisition costs. Zhang believes the company will not incurring legfees again in the foreseeable future but believes thbecause the company’s strategy is to grow acquisition, costs relateto acquisitions will continue to incurreanare relevant in any analysis. She es not agree with the company’s exclusion of those costs from core EPS.第一句说了Zhang认为法律费用不是持续的,最后一句又说Zhang不同意把“those costs”剔除。答案中“those costs”指的只是并购费用,但从文字来看感觉有歧义,即“those costs”理解为即使法律费用不可持续,但Zhang仍然认为不应该剔除。

2024-08-14 16:16 1 · 回答

NO.PZ2023032701000076问题如下 Exhibit 1 Cratt Lt Press Release Core EPS AnnouncementWe are pleaseto report increase in Core EPS from $1.01 to $1.31 for the year-en31 cember 2017. The company continues to pursue its growth-by- acquisition strategy, acquiring smaller specialty companies in the pet supplies instry. Acquisitions over the past two years have alloweus to increase our asset base 20%, anwe expesimilopportunities for growth in the next few years. Zhang notes thCratt is currently trang $11.31 anremin the club ththe company hbeen sueover patent infringement for procing coats anblan­kets for gs with the names anlogos of locprofessionsports teams on them without the teams’ permission. The company hsettlequickly out of court to avoifurther negative publicity. Zhang believes the company will not incurring legfees again in the foreseeable future but believes thbecause the company’s strategy is to grow acquisition, costs relateto acquisitions will continue to incurreanare relevant in any analysis. She es not agree with the company’s exclusion of those costs from core EPS. She calculates Cratt’s trailing price-to-earnings ratio (P/E) on the basis of her beliefs.Baseon Exhibit 1 anZhang’s beliefs about recurring costs, her trailing P/E is closest to: A.10.98B.10.01C.8.64 Zhang believes ththe acquisition costs will continue to incurrean therefore, shoulnot exclufrom Cratt’s core EPS; however, the legcosts are non-recurring anshoulexcluUsing thfinition, recurring EPS in 2017 = $1.03 + 0.10 = $1.13. Trailing P/E = $11.31 ÷ $1.13 = 10.01.A is incorrect. It uses the GA(reporte EPS: P/E = $11.31 ÷ 1.03 = $10.98. But thinclus the legfees, whiZhang believes will not recur anshoulnot incluC is incorrebecause it uses core EPS reporteCratt: P/E = $11.31 ÷ 1.31 = $8.64, whiexclus the acquisition costs. 老师讲过core eps是调整之后的eps 为什么这道题的core比eps大呢?

2024-05-07 12:20 1 · 回答