Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Midland Energy Resources, Inc. is a global energy company that operates in oil and gas exploration and
production (E&P), refining and marketing (R&M), and petrochemicals. Midland’s most profitable
segment is its E&P division which produces 67% of the company’s net income (Exhibit 3). Its largest
division is R&M with the Petrochemical division being the smallest. The primary goals of Midland’s
financial strategy are to fund substantial overseas growth, invest in value-creating projects, achieve an
optimal capital structure, and repurchase undervalued shares. To accomplish these goals, Midland must
calculate an appropriate cost of capital that will allow reasonable valuations of their strategies. In
funding overseas growth, Midland must use its cost of capital to analyze, evaluate, and convert foreign
cash flows. In evaluating value-adding projects, the cost of capital must be used to discount project cash
flows. To optimize its capital structure, the company must continuously evaluate its ideal borrowing
based on its inherent cost. Lastly, when deciding when and how to repurchase shares, Midland’s
management has to determine the intrinsic value of its shares. This requires determining the value of
the
In the following sections we are going to answer the questions related to the cost of capital estimates.
1. How are Mortensen’s estimates of Midland’s cost of capital used? How, if at all, should these
Estimates of the cost of capital were used in many analyses within Midland, including asset appraisals
for both capital budgeting and financial accounting, performance assessments, M&A proposals, and
stock repurchase decisions. Some of these analyses were performed at the division or business unit
The cost of capital needs to be adjusted if the project is more or less risky in comparison to the firm risk.
The cost of capital should be used in performance assessments of the firm, taking into consideration the
factors such as economic scenario, industry cost of capital, size of the company etc. Also, cost of capital
about the various inputs to the calculations. Is Midland’s choice of EMRP appropriate? If
To calculate Midland’s company WACC, a 39.72% tax rate is assumed based on an average, of taxes
paid divided by income before taxes, over the last three years (Exhibit 1). The cost of debt of is
calculated as the 10-year rate (Table 2) on U.S. Treasury bonds plus the spread to Treasury (Table 1).
The 10-year risk-free rate seems more appropriate because Midland’s borrowing capacity is based
primarily on its energy reserves and long-lived assets. The short-term 1-year rate would be less for
calculating the risk. Then, 30-year rate will more applicable for a real estate companies, but not
The new beta was calculated by un-levering the old beta of 1.25 (which was based on a D/E ratio of
59.3% seen in exhibit 5) and new levering based on the target capital structure of 57.8% equity which
corresponds to a D/E ratio of 73%. The unlevered beta for Midland is calculated as .922. In calculating
the asset beta for new levering, the beta of debt is assumed to be zero based on Midland’s consolidated
A+ credit rating (Table 1). This assumes that the company as a whole has little or no risk of default. The
ratios of debt and equity are the target ratios for the consolidated company as set by management.
Exhibit 6 shows historical data on U.S. stock returns and bond yields supporting higher estimates of
EMRP. On the other hand, survey results shown in Exhibit 6 support lower figures. Midland adopted its
current estimate of 5 % after a review of recent research and in consultation with its professional
advisors, bankers and auditors, as well as Wall Street analysts covering the industry.
Tax rate is calculated according to the Exhibit 1 taking the average tax rates of 2004, 2005 and 2006.
Calculating new Levered Beta (for target capital structure of 42.2% debt):
Using EMRP of 5%
R(e)
WACC
midland
= (1-t) r
(D/V) + r
(E/V)= ((1-0.3972)*0.0628*0.422)+(0.1131*0.578)
WACC
midland
= 0.08134 = 8.13%
Midland is using EMRP of 5%. Based on the historical data presented in Exhibit 6A, the average of
historical data would result in EMRP closer to 6%. Especially in the more recent time period of 1987 to
2006, the average excess return (6.4%) is higher than Midland’s projection of 5%. Giving more weight
to historical data would decrease any bias by individual viewpoints or survey results. As the economy
has been more uncertain, investors are demanding higher return to compensate for the increased risk.
Hence it would be more appropriate for Midland to use EMRP closer to 6%.
3. Should Midland use a single corporate hurdle rate for evaluating investment opportunities in
If the company used the single cost of capital or hurdle rate it would assume that all divisions
are similar. Using single hurdle rate doesn’t consider each division’s different debt structures
and nature of assets. For example, Midland’s E&P division has assets of oil reserves and higher
demand for capital expenditures for development (Exhibit 3). Also, target debt ratio differs
among divisions.
For divisions, operating in different specific industries also can differentiate business risks. For
example, R&M division operates on smaller margins, so that it has more risk. However, if we
take into account that it operates long time before, the probability of decreases. Also, this
division requires not much capital taking into account its maturity in the market.
Considering the explanation given above, it is better to use different hurdle rates for each
division since it will provide company with more accurate and detailed information about the
expected riskiness.
4. Compute a separate cost of capital for the E&P and Marketing & Refining divisions. What
E&P and the Marketing and Refining divisions have different betas and target capital structures. For
E&P, the average industry unlevered beta is 0.9275 whereas the M&R division has an average industry
unlevered beta of 1.0692. This produces an equity divisional beta of 1.404 for E&P and 1.359 for M&R
taking into account their target capital structure. A 39.72% tax rate is assumed in unlevering
each
company’s beta. The risk free rate is assumed to be 4.66% (10 year treasury yield). Table 1 shows the
calculation of unlevered beta, cost of debt, cost of equity and the WACC of both the divisions.
Calculating new Levered Beta (for target capital structure of 46% debt):
Using EMRP of 5%
R(e)
Using EMRP of 5%
R(e)
Table 1: Cost of Capital for E&P and Marketing and Refining divisions
While the cost and debt and the cost of equity does not vary much between the two divisions, the target
capital structure of the divisions influences the cost of capital. E&P is able to take advantage of a lower
cost of debt by using greater leverage (46%) compared to Refining and Marketing (31%) which results
reports. For this purpose, we first need to multiply the beta of each division by respective weight. Then
we add all the products and set it equal to the total beta of the company. Finally, we find the unknown
beta for Petrochemical division from the equation we formulated. To understand the information given
above let’s see calculations
The company has already calculated the levered betas for total and for each division by finding
arithmetic mean. (For E&P: 1.15; for: R&M: 1.2; for Midland: 1.25)To find unlevered ones we have
following formula:
Levered Beta = Unlevered beta* (1+ (1-T)*D/E) D/E stands for debt to equity ratio
Note: Tax rate = 39.72% was calculated as the average of tax rates from 2004, 2005, 2006 from exhibit
So, from this equation we can find that unlevered beta for Petrochemicals is approximately 0.4
Relevering is based on the target capital structure of 60 equity which corresponds to a D/E ratio of
66.67%.
Cost of Equity R(e): R(f)+Beta (EMRP) where R(f) is 4.66% and EMPR = 5%
Cost of debt R(d): 10 year treasury rate + spread to treasury (from table 1)
WACC for Petrochemicals division: R(d)*(1-T)*(D/V)+ R(e)*(E/V) where D/V=0.4 and E/V=1-
The resulting WACC of 5.93% for the Petrochemical division represents the discount rate that can be
Recommendations:
In summary, the cost of capital for each of the divisions of Midland energy varies as shown in the table
below. For Midland energy to achieve its financial goals it must deploy a sound investment strategy
that takes into account the appropriate cost of capital for each project and must continuously evaluate
this against changing business needs. It is recommended that Midland Energy undertake this exercise at
a minimum annually and also when any significant events take like that affect the capital structure of
the
division or company.
https://www.studocu.com/en-us/document/georgetown-college/finance/mandatory-
assignments/seminar-assignments-case-study-midland-energyresources/468868/view