Financial valuation Applications and Models phần 5 doc

What support did the analyst provide for not utilizing this well-accepted methodology? Application of the method requires finding companies sufficiently comparable. Many companies share SICs with the subject, but further analysis was the key. The company has a narrow focus and market niche, which was not in line with the public companies. Again the analyst documents the reasons for ultimately not applying the method. Doing this helps the reader understand the unique nature of the business and why reliance must be placed on other methodologies. Analysis and judgment may have revealed companies an analyst believes to be sufficiently similar for application of this method. Going back to RR 59-60, we see that the use of the method is supported. We also know that the terms “same” or “similar” as they apply to publicly traded companies have been widely interpreted by the courts and by analysts. Guideline Company Transaction Method The guideline company transaction method is very similar to the guideline public company method. In this method, the subject company is compared to similar companies that have recently been purchased. We searched the following sources for information on relevant purchases of public and private companies within the above-stated SIC classifications: • The transaction database of the Institute of Business Appraisers (IBA) • Pratt’s Stats • The acquisitions database of Thomson Financial Securities Data Corporation (SDC) • Houlihan Lokey Howard & Zukin’s Mergerstat Review, within the “Instruments” classifications Our sources, which consist of transactions occurring on a national basis, located transactions within Acme’s general industry group. The analyst documents consideration of utilizing private company transaction multiples, and indicates the limitations of the method. Why were the located comparative transactions not used? They were for acquisitions of controlling interests, and synergistic considerations may be reflected in the prices. This may move the standard of value closer to “investment value” (value to a specific purchaser). We are valuing a minority interest under fair market value definition. Can we apply a minority discount to the multiples obtained from this method to develop a value for a minority, nonmarketable interest? Many analysts do so based on the level of information available about the transactions, the number of transactions available, the dates of the transactions, and other factors. The choice is made on a case-by-case basis. As can be seen in Exhibit 9.19, the transactions were for small- to large- size companies with revenues ranging from approximately $1.1 million to $75 million. 394 REPORT WRITING The transactions found occurred between 1995 and 2000. In addition, the transaction values ranged from $1.5 million to $85.0 million. The median Market Value to Invested Capital (MVIC) to Net Sales multiple was 1.13. As with any analysis of this type and scale, information availability is often sketchy and incomplete. Moreover, information related to these transactions can be misleading, because economies of scale and synergies, which are considered in a buyer’s analysis, are difficult to calculate based on historical public information. Also, this method is sometimes more applicable when valuing a control ownership interest in a company, since an eventual sale of the business would not be controllable by a minority shareholder. As a result, we did not utilize the private company transaction method in determining the value of a minority ownership interest in Acme. Adjusted Net Asset Method—Going Concern Value The Adjusted Net Asset Method gives consideration to the fair market value of the assets and liabilities of the business being valued as a starting point in the determination of the value of its equity. A current and accurate accounting of the assets and liabilities of the business is essential in obtaining an accurate indication of value. In order to determine the fair market value of a company utilizing the Adjusted Net Asset Method, we need to adjust all assets and liabilities to reflect fair market value. In addition, any off-balance sheet assets and liabilities need to be addressed. The starting point is the financial position of the Company as set forth in its balance sheet as of May 31, 2000. As discussed in the financial review, the underlying assets of the Company are, for the most part, fairly liquid, with cash and cash equivalents, contract receivables, marketable securities, and other assets comprising approximately 50 percent of total assets. The rest is comprised of inventory and fixed assets. Liabilities similarly are very liquid, and are comprised of accounts payable and obligation under capital lease. Our analysis and discussions with management determined that all balance sheet items would remain at book value in our analysis. In addition to the assets and liabilities stated on Acme’s books as of May 31, 2000, our analysis did not determine any off–balance sheet assets or liabilities. Based on our analysis of the fair market value of the underlying assets (making small adjustments for potential bad debts) and liabilities (adjusting for extra disposing costs for nuclear material) of the Company, we have determined the underlying net asset value by subtracting the stated or estimated fair market values of the liabilities from the fair market value of the underlying assets. This calculation indicated a likely value for the total equity in the Company in the range of approximately $12.45 to $12.75 million. This provided some corrobora- tion for our conclusion of value determined under the Income Capitalization Method. The Net Asset Value Method derives an amount that the business as a whole would likely sell for and is therefore an amount that all shareholders would share in equally if it occurred. However, it is important to note that the choice to sell the business would be in the hands of a controlling interest shareholder and would not be controllable by a minority shareholder. For this reason, we did not utilize the cost approach in determining the value of a minority ownership interest in Acme. Addendum 395 The analyst briefly considers the asset approach. Many of the company’s assets are highly liquid and thus are stated at a reasonable market value. Discussions with management indicated that book value was reasonably reflective of the value of other assets. In certain types of engagements appraisals may have been necessary. No effort was made to adjust the balance sheet for the value for any intangibles that may be present, but here the balance sheet simply was viewed as an analytical tool for gauging reasonableness of the value conclusion. We are valuing a minority interest that does not have the power to cause an asset sale and receive the value of the underlying assets. Would you have included such a discussion in your report? Other Valuation Information We also considered the following additional valuation information: • The Valuation Report finalized on March 15, 1991 by Mark Jones, Jr., of Valuation Nation, Inc., in which the fair market value of a 100 percent interest in the common stock of Acme as of December 31, 1989, was determined to be $10,300,410. As of that time, the Company’s total net revenue for the year ended December 31, 1989, was $16,197,000; the adjusted operating income was $1,721,590, or 10.6 percent of total revenue; and the adjusted net income was $1,064,530, or 6.6 percent of total revenue. For a total of 125,000 shares as of December 31, 1989, the value per share derived was $86.00. • We identified several transactions in the Company stock but, as per management, none occurred in the past 12 years. As a result we did not rely on the data from these transactions. The analyst considered a past valuation report and prior stock transactions. Past transactions are an element for consideration under Revenue Ruling 59-60 but must be viewed with caution. Due to the dates and transaction circumstances, they were not deemed relevant to a determination of current value. Discount for Lack of Marketability When an indication of value is developed without control adjustments and using multiples, discount rates, or capitalization rates derived from quoted security prices, the resulting value is normally equivalent to a minority, marketable value. Hence, generally no specific minority interest discount is necessary. However, publicly traded securities possess a much higher degree of liquidity than do closely held securities. Without market access, an investor’s ability to control the timing of potential gains, avoid losses, and make changes to their investment portfolio is severely impaired. Given two investment instruments identical in all other respects, the mar- 396 REPORT WRITING Addendum 397 ket will accord a considerable premium to the one that can be liquidated into cash quickly, especially without risk of loss in value. For this reason, an ownership interest in a privately held entity usually is worth less than a comparable interest in an otherwise similar publicly held entity whose securities are readily tradable. Consequently, a discount for lack of marketability would be required to induce a hypothetical willing buyer to purchase such a closely held security. Studies on restricted stock transactions compare the discounted prices paid for equity securities subject to trading restrictions with market prices for similar securities that are freely tradable without such restrictions. Restricted stock studies examine the prices paid for restricted shares of companies whose ordinary shares are freely traded on one or more public markets, either on a public exchange or over the counter. Publicly traded companies are permitted to issue “investment letter” stock to “sophisticated” investors without complying with normal SEC registration requirements. The terms of such transactions vary considerably. Sometimes the investors get a commitment from the issuer to register the securities at some future date, or they get “demand” rights allowing them to require registration at any time. Sometimes they receive “piggyback” rights, which require the issuer to include the securities in any future registration undertaken by the issuer. Most often, however, the securities are subject to Rule 144 sales restrictions. Under Rule 144, the investors are not permitted to sell securities acquired in such a transaction until a required minimum holding period has lapsed. Since April 29, 1997, the required holding period has been one year; however, during the periods covered by the studies, investors generally were required to hold restricted securities for two years. After the required holding period lapses, the stock becomes marketable, although certain restrictions having to do with overall trading volume of the company’s shares and the total number of shares outstanding remain in place for an additional year. Appendix C summarizes the results of commonly cited restricted stock studies. The studies cover a broad range of periods but show remarkably consistent results. The studies report mean and/or median discounts ranging from 24 to 45 percent. The average median and average mean results reported in the studies are 33 and 31 percent, respectively. Other Factors In addition, several other factors were also considered in our analysis in order to estimate the appropriate marketability discount for Acme. These included: 1. Financial Statement Analysis 2. Company’s Dividend Policy 3. The Nature of the Company, Its History, Its Position in the Industry, and Its Economic Outlook 4. Company’s Management 5. Amount of Control in Transferred Shares 6. Restrictions on Transferability of Stock 7. Holding Period for Stock 8. Company’s Redemption Policy 9. Costs Associated with Making a Public Offering 398 REPORT WRITING A description of these nine factors as they pertain to Acme is follows: (Note: Some analysts reflect some of these factors in the pre-discount value.) 1. Financial Statement Analysis. Investors normally regard the analysis of a company’s financial statements as a significant factor in determining the worth of the company’s stock. Financial statements include the annual results of a company’s operations (an income statement) and the company’s status at its year end (a balance sheet). Financial statements also include relevant footnotes relat- ing to the statements and the opinion of the preparer (e.g., an independent cer- tified public accountant or CPA) as to the condition of the company and the presentation of its financial statements. A nonexclusive list of relevant inquiries to make when analyzing financial statements includes the type of opinion ren- dered by the preparer, the soundness of the company’s capitalization, the ratio of the company’s assets to liabilities, the company’s net worth and future earn- ing power, the quality of the company’s revenue and earnings, and the company’s goodwill. We found that Acme engaged Smith & Smith to perform audits on, and gave unqualified opinions with respect to, Acme’s financial position as of December 31, 1995; December 31, 1996; December 31, 1997; December 31, 1998; and December 31, 1999. The Financial Statement Analysis section of the report describes the Company’s financial position and helps identify some of the Company’s strengths and weaknesses—both on an absolute basis and relative to other industry norms. Overall, based on the Financial Statement Analysis section and the analysis under the quantitative factors affecting the selection of a capitalization rate for Acme, we concluded that Acme would be considered somewhat average in desirability as an investment compared to alternative investments in the mar- ketplace. This factor favors an average marketability discount. 2. Company’s Dividend Policy. Investors regard a company’s dividend policy as a factor to consider in determining the worth of that company’s stock. Critical to this factor is whether an investor will receive a fair rate of return on his or her investment. The fact that a company pays small or no dividends will not always negatively affect the company’s marketability. Even if a corporation seldom pays dividends, an investor may aim to par- ticipate in the corporation’s success mainly through the appreciation in the value of his or her stock brought on by retained earnings and the possibility of a future return. Acme paid small dividends in comparison to its net income. We do not find this fact determinative. Acme’s net income increased continually from 1997, reaching almost $1.5 million for the LTM ending May 31, 2000. Acme also had sufficient cash during the past five years. Accordingly, Acme stock might attract an investor more interested in long-term growth than in current return. Overall, the net effect of this favors a below average marketability discount. 3. Nature of the Company, Its History, Its Position in the Industry, and Its Economic Outlook. Investors generally regard the nature of a company, its history, its position in the industry, and its economic outlook as relevant factors for determining the worth of the company’s stock. Addendum 399 Acme began its operations in 1965 and is a manufacturer of instruments for measurement of the physical properties of engineering materials. The Company faces a number of risks due to the nature of the technology employed. The major risk is that of the nuclear source material which entails a number of component risks. Acme finds itself in a difficult environment, being squeezed by the bargain- ing power of its buyers and suppliers as well as being concerned with the imme- diate loss of market share in the event of a breakthrough discovery of a substitute product that does not use radioactive materials. During the five-year period ending in 2004, analysts project an annual com- pound growth rate of 4 percent, with total U.S. industry shipments of measuring and controlling instruments reaching $24.1 billion. These factors favor an above-average marketability discount. 4. Company’s Management. Investors regard the strength of a company’s management as a factor to consider when determining the worth of that company’s stock. As mentioned in the Management/Personnel section of this report, the Company has a balanced management team comprised of individuals with extensive experience in the measuring devices industry. The key person factors associated with the loss of the services of Mr. Acme were previously considered in development of the capitalization rate and are not a part of this analysis. This factor favors an average marketability discount. 5. Amount of Control in Transferred Shares. Investors regard the control inherent in transferred shares as a relevant factor for determining the worth of the stock. Control reflects a shareholder’s ability to direct a corporation through his or her dictation of its policies, procedures, or operations. Control of a closely held corporation represents an element of value that justifies a higher value for a controlling block of stock. An investor will generally pay more for a block of stock that represents control than for a block of stock that is merely a minority interest in the company. The 13.1 percent block of stock that is at issue herein represents a minority ownership in Acme. The concentration of the remaining shares indicates that a 13.1 percent block will have a medium impact on the decisions of the Company. This factor favors a below-average marketability discount. 6. Restrictions on Transferability of Stock. Investors consider transferability restrictions as a factor to consider in determining the worth of that company’s stock. As per management, there are no contractual restrictions on the transferability of the stock at Acme. This factor favors a below-average marketability discount. 7. Holding Period for Stock. The length of time that an investor must hold his or her investment is a factor to consider in determining the worth of a corporation’s stock. An interest is less marketable if an investor must hold it for an extended period of time in order to reap a sufficient profit. Market risk tends to increase (and marketability tends to decrease) as the holding period gets longer. We are not aware of any intention on the part of management to sell the Company in the near future. Therefore, a long-term holding period is likely. As such, this factor favors an above-average discount. 400 REPORT WRITING 8. Company’s Redemption Policy. A company’s redemption policy is a factor to consider in determining the worth of the company’s stock. Acme has no record of redeeming its shares and we are not aware of any anticipated change in this policy. This factor favors an above-average marketability discount. 9. Costs Associated with Making a Public Offering. Investors consider the costs associated with making a public offering in determining the value of unlisted stock. An above-average to average discount is warranted if the buyer com- pletely bears the cost of registering the purchased stock. However, the discount is lessened to the extent that the buyer has the ability to minimize his or her registration costs. For example, registration costs may be minimal to the buyer if he or she has the right to compel the corporation to register (or otherwise “piggyback”) the unlisted shares at its expense. This factor favors an above-average marketability discount as there is no obligation on the part of the Company to register the stock or bear any cost incurred to register the stock. Overall, the analysis of the above factors indicates an average discount for lack of marketability. Conclusion for a Discount for Lack of Marketability The valuation approach and method are very important when determining the pro- priety and magnitude of a discount for lack of marketability. The income capitalization result is developed using rates of return from freely traded securities. As such, the result is regarded as a marketable result, necessitating the application of a lack of marketability discount for applicability to a privately held interest. Accordingly, based on the above analysis, the cited restricted stock studies, and all other information in this report, a marketability discount of 35 percent was selected for application to the result of the income capitalization method. Applying this discount to the minority marketable value of $12,054,134 derives a closely held minority interest value of approximately $7,835,187. The prior indication of value was developed on a minority, marketable basis. Marketability here refers to the price as if freely traded. The interest in a closely held business, while clearly capable of being sold, is obviously less marketable (or less liquid) than its publicly traded counterpart. The analyst focuses on restricted stock studies for quantification of the marketability discount. Other studies (pre-IPO) are also available to assist in this process and can provide meaningful guidance. Notice that court cases are not mentioned specifically. Such cases are relevant for issues only and not for citation as supporting a selected level of discount. Quoting cases in your report also put you on the “turf” of an attorney in a litigation engagement. Keep the issues in your “turf” based on an analysis of the specific facts and your judgment. Addendum 401 Nonoperating and Excess Assets As of May 31, 2000, the total cash and equivalent account amounted to $4,367,501, or 17.0 percent of total assets, which was comprised of the following: Cash and Equivalent Petty cash $ 10,725 First Commercial Bank 2,398,171 Regions Trust 698,401 Brokerage money market 379,612 Commercial checking 526,909 National Bank of Commerce 353,683 __________ Total $4,367,501 _________ _________ As of May 31, 2000, the Company had securities available for sale and securities held to maturity which amounted to $1,128,321, or 4.4 percent of total assets, as follows: Securities Stocks Central Power $ 75,187 CPC 45,657 Natural Dynamic Resources 29,437 Sterling Corp. 106,633 Lauderdale 16,405 __________ Total stocks 273,319 __________ Bonds U.S. Treasury 375,000 Associates Finance 225,000 Merrill Lynch 247,500 Federal Housing Financing Agency 7,500 __________ Total bonds 855,000 __________ Total securities $1,128,321 __________ _________ As of the Valuation Date, Acme’s most liquid assets amounted to $5,495,824, or 21.4 percent of total assets, which was above the industry median (21.4 percent for Acme versus 8.6 percent 1999 RMA data). Removal of the excess cash amount aligns the Company’s cash position relative to the industry median. We concluded that the amount of $3,289,330 ($5,495,824 –$25,656,903× 8.6%=$3,289,330) of Acme’s cash and marketable securities account should be treated as a nonoperating asset. We also treated as nonoperating assets the cash sur- render value of life insurance account of $86,034 and other receivables account of a nonoperating nature. In addition, as of May 31, 2000, the Company had $239,583 in securities held to maturity. We believe the Company historically had high cash reserves and the seasonality would not affect our calculation. Discussions with management indicated that there were no other nonoperating assets or liabilities on the Company’s balance sheet. Therefore, the total nonoperating asset amount, as of the Valuation Date, was approximated to $4,117,078. A 10 percent discount 16 was applied to this amount to account for the fact that the minority stockholders do not have direct access to these assets. An additional 35 percent was applied for lack of marketability as previously derived. This results in a combined discount of 41.5 percent when sequentially applied. Accordingly, we conclude that the fair market value of the total equity of the Company, on a minority, non-marketable interest basis derived through the income capitalization method, is $10,243,678 ($7,835,187 +$4,117,078× (1–41.50%) =$10,243,678). A nonoperating or an excess asset is an asset that can be removed from operations and have little or no impact on the operating earnings stream of the business. Such assets can be excess cash, investments, owner toys, and the like. As such, their value is not directly captured by application of a capitalization rate to an operating cash flow. Nor do several other methods capture their values. As indicated earlier, the analyst identified certain nonoperating or excess assets for consideration in this assignment. After his or her analysis, the analyst made an addition to value for these nonoperating items. Why would such an addition to value be made if the minority shareholder has no power to cause an asset sale or to tap into the value of those assets? Would not the minority owner simply focus on the earnings of the business that are available in the form of dividends, cash distributions, and appreciation of the underlying value of the minority interest? Opinion as to how this issue should be handled often is divided, but it also can depend on the facts and circumstances of the case. Regardless of the ultimate treatment, the presence of significant nonoperating or excess assets should generally receive consideration and discussion in the valuation report. One way to incorporate the presence of such assets is to view them as reducing risk. They can provide greater short-term or long-term liquidity, which may be a factor in reducing the discount rate, capitalization rate, or market multiple. Alternatively, often, when the relative value is large for these assets, they are treated as an addition to value, net of an appropriate discount for lack of control. If the analyst treats them as an addition to value, care must be exercised to avoid double counting. Analysts will often not reduce the discount rate for the impact of their assets on risk if they are not considered as an operating asset of the company. 402 REPORT WRITING 16 Source: James R. Hitchner, “Tax Court Reviews for Selecting a Discount on Non-operating Assets when Valuing a Non-controlling Interest.” Based on this source and our analysis, we concluded that a combined minority/marketability discount of 10 percent is applicable in this case. Addendum 403 Conclusion The Company’s net revenues were almost flat at around $29 million since 1997. As a result, we discarded the Discounted Cash Flow method from our analysis and relied instead on the Income Capitalization Method. We discarded the Guideline Public Company Method due to lack of compara- bility with Acme from an operational and investment point of view. Also, we discarded the Guideline Company Transaction Method and the Cost Approach since these methods are often more applicable when valuing a control ownership interest in a company, since an eventual sale of the business or assets would not be controllable by a minority shareholder. There were also data limitations. Exhibit 9.11 shows how the value indication was derived from the Income Capitalization Method. Exhibit 9.11 Summary Calculation 100% Minority equity, marketable (derived from the Income Capitalization Method) $12,054,134 ϪMarketability Discount Ϫ35% _________ ϭ100% Equity value, on a minority interest 7,835,187 ϩnon-operating assets (cash, securities, and proceeds from life insurance of approx. $100,000) discounted by 41.5% 2,408,491 __________ ϭ100% Equity minority, non-marketable 10,243,678 Total number of shares 124,684 __________ Value/share (rounded) $ 82.00 Based on our analysis, we have concluded that the fair market value of a minority, nonmarketable ownership interest, on a going-concern basis, in the common stock of Acme, as of May 31, 2000, based on 124,684 shares issued and outstanding, is approximately $82.00 per share ($10,243,678 / 124,684). Per share value $ 82.00 ___________ ___________ Value 16,279 shares $1,334,878 ___________ ___________ The valuation conclusion is expressed again at the end of the report narrative. Here, a per-share calculation is presented as well as a total for the value of the subject interest. This information was carried forward in the report to the cover/transmittal letter and/or valuation summary. Thus, in keeping with good communications skills, the analyst told the company what the analyst was going to tell the company—and then did so. [...]... 14,638,049 60.8 51 9,198 0 2,921,720 301, 451 $4, 352 ,54 1 Audited 12/31/98 11 ,54 0 ,55 5 4,923,600 2,167,428 496 ,50 0 _2 ,55 0,464 _ 5, 214,392 951 ,488 _ 218,220 _ 15, 072,729 280,821 3 75, 000 2,7 95, 967 $5, 236,842 Audited 12/31/99 47.4 20.2 8.9 2.0 10 .5 21.4 3.9 0.9 61.9 1.2 1 .5 11 .5 0.0 21 .5 % _ 11 ,56 4,268 5, 451 ,329 1, 053 ,000 255 ,000 _3,967,013 _ 5, 2 75, 013 951 ,488 _ 194,7 35 _ 16 ,50 2,142... 10,126,7 45 43.9 Exhibit 9.14 continued 6,6 95, 264 86, 157 4 85, 507 208, 257 386,390 64,2 75 51,030 187,041 23.3 0.3 1.7 0.7 1.3 0.2 0.2 0.7 Audited 12/31/97 % _ 164,664 0.6 149,792 0 .5 127,689 0.4 414,806 1.4 79,473 0.3 55 5, 750 1.9 25, 754 0.1 10,3 65 0.0 30,404 0.1 204,366 0.7 453 ,392 1.6 1 45, 800 0 .5 ( 355 ,931) –1.2 _ _ 14,3 65, 517 50 .0 6,736,661 68,814 497 ,55 9 2 45, 036 411,9 35 86,141 119,394 1 95, 224... 27,464 ,57 4 95. 0 Audited 12/31/98 % _ LTM as of 05/ 31/00 4.1 1,087,727 3.8 7,738,926 2,0 25, 638 1 ,56 5, 958 269,114 124,629 308,2 85 27.1 7.1 5. 5 0.9 0.4 1.1 7,403,193 2,063,087 1 ,50 2,237 267,467 143,379 350 ,028 (continues) 25. 9 7.2 5. 3 0.9 0 .5 1.2 1.0 0.9 _ _ 257 ,847 _ _ 278,936 _ $28 ,59 9, 155 100% $28 ,58 5,677 100% 100% 1,180 ,51 1 19,612,049 68.6 20,126,9 75 70.4 5, 763,689 20.2 5, 4 75, 587... (1,107 ,54 8) (1,036, 950 ) 371, 456 (6 65, 4 95) 55 3,874 1,284,903 (2, 257 ,016) 50 3 ,52 9 85, 290 Audited 12/31/97 1,376, 253 2,976,288 4, 352 ,54 1 (66,626) (438,9 35) (103,100) (54 2,034) (846,470) 822,722 (23,748) 718,938 1, 453 ,9 05 961,022 (1,1 25, 204) 2,008,661 Audited 12/31/98 884,301 4, 352 ,54 1 5, 236,842 (6,033) (59 6,342) (83,112) _ (679, 454 ) (55 3,260) (763,439) _... (99,384) –0.3 50 , 054 7 85, 616 177,398 15, 750 108,336 26,147 291,671 51 , 159 151 ,676 94,902 270 ,53 7 56 ,307 379 ,58 9 424,731 136,604 118,974 73,638 174, 654 _213 ,54 8 26,232,9 75 _ 1 ,51 0,803 _320,669 11,162,6 15 (87,234) 56 ,7 35 791,096 229,301 8, 250 123,993 17,142 316,9 65 21,776 72,032 94,902 272,349 46,017 434,316 393,023 136 ,54 1 116,982 67, 754 180, 756 _ _ 97.9 _ _ 0.6 _ _ 36 .5 (continues)... 140 ,59 1 69,168 2 25, 3 65 28.6 5. 3 2.9 0.6 0.3 1.0 8,408,381 1,418,480 674,331 155 , 354 70 ,54 2 248 ,57 1 30 .5 5.1 2.4 0.6 0.3 0.9 9,383,924 1 ,59 2,294 834,713 180,288 60,090 307,887 32.7 5. 5 2.9 0.6 0.2 1.1 0.8 _ 410,4 65 1.8 _ 221,816 _ _ 233,999 0.8 _ _ $23, 051 ,330 100% $27 ,57 7,739 100% $28,720,737 100% 998,660 n/a 20,944, 452 75. 9 21 ,53 4 ,51 6 75. 0 n/a 4,147 ,50 2 15. 0 4,386,449 15. 3 843,693... 27 ,57 7,739 -0.2 -5. 3 -3.6 4 .5 7.0 -2.8 -0.8 0.0 0.6 0.4 0.2 6.8 7.1 1, 457 ,186 (164 ,59 7) _ (8 75, 750 ) 1, 453 ,9 05 1,739,378 (6 95, 751 ) 5. 0 -0.6 -3.0 5. 0 6.0 -2.4 -1.0 0.2 0.0 -0.2 -1.1 (299,682) 43 ,59 2 — (47,876) _ (303,966) 3,232,140 256 ,698 _ (55 3,260) 1,406,6 25 3 ,53 6,7 95 (1,414,718) ( 257 ,847) 151 ,676 — — _ (106,172) 3,642,966 Audited % 12/31/99 _ _ 100.0 28 ,59 9, 155 2,043,344 Audited... 0.0 0 .5 1.2 0.2 2.3 1.1 0.6 1.1 0.6 0.6 5. 3 _ _162,449 0.6 28,444,877 99.0 _ _ 1 ,51 6,313 _ _ 355 ,931 1.2 12,400 ,59 9 43.2 (1 45, 800) –0 .5 64 ,57 7 729, 153 291,972 21,000 128 ,55 9 29,496 394,443 — — 138,608 350 ,2 05 67,203 659 ,990 316 ,59 0 182,774 3 05, 966 181,769 164,247 0.2 2.6 0.9 0.1 0.4 0.1 1.3 0.2 0.2 0.4 1.0 0.2 2.0 1.6 0.6 0.4 0.1 0 .5 5 .5 _ 76,034 0.3 _ 28 ,55 0,747... _ _ 1 ,59 6,369 1.3 379,026 _ _ 12,294 ,52 1 42 .5 (103 ,50 8) –0.4 44, 459 747,1 25 252 ,881 21, 750 118,071 16,289 379,310 50 ,937 43 ,59 2 108,7 25 297,432 69 ,50 4 58 0,998 472,124 187,748 103,494 27,1 25 136,682 0.2 2.7 0.6 0.1 0.4 0.1 1.0 0.2 0 .5 0.3 0.9 0.2 1.3 1 .5 0 .5 0.4 0.3 0.6 199,362 _ _ _ 26,688,704 _ _ _ 1 ,53 3, 153 324 ,56 9 _ _ _ 11,327,889 0.7 _ _ _ 93.3 _ _ _ 5. 4 1.1 _ _... 1.1 0.1 4 .5 4.7 72,464 0.3 75, 939 0.3 79,367 0.3 227,312 1.0 280,469 1.2 321,723 1.3 54 7, 650 2 .5 648, 150 2.7 877, 650 3 .5 299,639 150 ,819 _ 0.7 _ 54 6 ,52 7 _ _ _1.2 _ 2.2 _ 1,286,796 5. 8 1 ,59 1,211 6.6 2,108,444 8 .5 $22, 155 ,743 100.0 $24, 151 ,176 100.0 $24, 754 ,662 100.0 _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 288 ,55 2 Office furniture and equipment . Inventories 4,931 ,53 4 22.3 4, 450 ,491 18.4 5, 364 ,56 4 21.7 5, 4 65, 804 22.7 5, 214,392 21.4 5, 2 75, 013 20.6 30.8 Deferred income taxes 440 ,55 0 2.0 493, 050 2.0 796, 050 3.2 994, 050 4.1 951 ,488 3.9 951 ,488 3.7 Prepaid. 46.1 11 ,52 7,878 47.9 11 ,54 0 ,55 5 47.4 11 ,56 4,268 45. 1 Manufacturing equipment 3,489,8 45 15. 8 3 ,59 0,913 14.9 4,1 25, 582 16.7 4 ,50 1,364 18.7 4,923,600 20.2 5, 451 ,329 21.2 410 Office furniture and equipment. 1.3 360,876 1 .5 402,131 1.7 402,131 1.6 Deferred income taxes 54 7, 650 2 .5 648, 150 2.7 877, 650 3 .5 834, 150 3 .5 954 , 150 3.9 954 , 150 3.7 Securities held to maturity 150 ,819 0.7 299,639 1.2 54 6 ,52 7 2.2 0.0