Gillette Valuation Report Proter and Gamble Acquires ...s3.amazonaws.com/zanran_storage/webintec.ceram.fr/ContentPages/... · marketing strategy. This strategy should specialize every

Project for Business Analysis and Valuation using Financial Statements

Gillette Valuation Report Proter and Gamble Acquires Gillette Case

Group Members:

Junyong Zheng Adele Valentin

Daniel Diesinger Jonathan Karp Harald Getrey

Gillette Valuation Report: Procter & Gamble Acquires Gillette Case

Content Part 1 History and Background ..............................................................................................1

1.1 History of Procter&Gamble.................................................................................1 1.2 History of Gillette ...............................................................................................2 1.3 Continuing of both companies .............................................................................2

Part 2 Strategy Analysis.........................................................................................................3 2.1 Gillette and P&G’s Main Areas ...........................................................................3 2.2 Synergy effect and Risk Analysis ........................................................................4 2.3 Conclusion ..........................................................................................................6

Part 3 Financial Ratios Analysis ............................................................................................7 3.1 Sales ...................................................................................................................7 3.2 Profitability .........................................................................................................7 3.3 Capital Management ...........................................................................................8 3.4 Leverage Analysis ...............................................................................................9 3.5 Conclusion ........................................................................................................10

Part4 Assumptions analysis .................................................................................................11 4.1 Sales’ growth and EBITDA margin ...................................................................11 4.2 Tax rate.............................................................................................................15 4.3 Operating working capital to the sales ...............................................................15 4.4 Net long term assets to the sales ........................................................................16 4.5 Net debt to capital .............................................................................................17 4.6 Depreciation & amortization to sales .................................................................17 4.7 Capital expenditures to sales..............................................................................17 4.8 Conclusion ........................................................................................................18

Part 5 Valuation...................................................................................................................19 5.1 FCFF Valuation Methods ..................................................................................19 5.2 Discount rate.....................................................................................................19 5.3 Valuation as an independent firm ......................................................................21 5.4 Valuation of target after acquisition...................................................................23 5.5 Value of merger benefits ...................................................................................26 5.6 Conclusion ........................................................................................................26

Appendix:............................................................................................................................27


1

Part 1 History and Background

1.1 History of Procter&Gamble In the year 1837, William Procter and James Gamble create a new company: Procter&Gamble. In this year Procter&Gamble starts to sell only soap and candles. This are first objects which P&C sells. After 22 years, P&C employs 80 employees and made a turnover of $ 1 million. In the year 1890 P&C is selling more than 30 different types of soap and William A. Procter assumes the leadership of the enterprise. 1907, the son of William A. Procter, William Cooper Procter became the new chief of the company because his father died. 1930, William C. Procter gives the business into another hand. Richard R. Deupree will be, now, the new chairman of P&C. In the year 1931, Neil McElroy, the Company’s Promotion Department Manager, gives out a new marketing strategy. This strategy should specialize every brand in a different way. The brand management of P&C was born. In the years from 1934 until 1937, the last member of the origin family, William C. Procter died. The company reinforce his engagement in the Far East with an acquisition of the Philippine Manufacturing Company. 1937, the company celebrates his 100th birthday and the sales reached about $ 230 million. Neil H. McElroy will be the next leader of P&C in the 1948. In the Sixties, the company make some more big acquisition to continue the growth of the company. 1957, Howard J. Morgens is the successor of Mr. McElroy. The Seventies are the years of the big expansion. The company creates sub-companies for example in Germany, Belgium, the Middle East, Japan and other big companies. 1974, Ed Harness will be the next chief-executive-officer of P&C. The Eighties are also exciting. The company reached a turnover of $10 billion, another CEO will get the reins for the company and the company makes new acquisitions, for example: The acquisition of Norwich Eaton Pharmaceutics. 1990, again a new chief for the company: Edwin L. Artzt became the new boss of P&C.


2

In the year 1993, the company sales reached $ 30 billion. It is the first time for the company, that 50% of the sales came from outside the U.S. John E. Pepper will be the ninth chairman of the company and Durk. I. Jager became the first Chief Operating Officer in the year 1995. In 1999 Jager will be the next chairman of the company. In the Millennium P&C gets again a new chairman, A.G. Lafley is the next President and Chief Executive. 2002, P&C celebrates the 165th anniversary of the company. P&C has $ 12 billion brands in its portfolio, this is representing more of the half of the company sales.

1.2 History of Gillette In the year 1901 the Gillette Company is founded in Boston, Massachusetts. 1904 King C Gillette receives the US patent for razor with replaceable blade. 1905 is the first successful year for the company, because Gillette sold 90.000 razors and 12 million blades. After the year 1907 Gillette Blades will be to have in Germany. In the year 1967 the BROWN GmbH, an important manufacturer of drying electric shavers and electrical small devices, will be part of the Gillette Company. 1984 Gillette takes another big partner in to the company. “ORAL B”, the company of toothbrushes and mouth care. In the year 1996 Gillette takes over “DURACELL”, the company of big batteries. 1998 is a great year for Gillette. Gillette has created a new shaving system: the Gillette MACH3-Shaving-System. 2001, Gillette has got its 100.Birthday. The Company exists now 100 years and has made in this 100 years a huge success. In the year 2004/2005 there are some phrases about a big merger with another big company.

1.3 Continuing of both companies 01.02.2005 Procter and Gamble is nearing a deal to purchase Gillette in a stock swap value at about $ 55 billion. Under the terms of deal, P&G is offering 0,975 P&G share for each share of Gillette outstanding. That would value Gillette shares at $ 53,94 based on P&G’s Thusrday closing price of $ 55,32, the Journal said. The offer represents a 17,6% premium to Gillette’s closing price of $ 45,85.


3

Part 2 Strategy Analysis

2.1 Gillette and P&G’s Main Areas P&G works in 5 main areas: House, Personal Beauty, Baby, Health & Wellness and Pet Gillette works in 2 Gillette’s traditional sectors: Personal beauty with the Gillette Range and Health & Wellness with the Oral B Toothbrushes brand. Gillette is also working in the batteries sector with the Duracel brand.

Gillette and P&G’s main areas

Procter & Gamble works in 5 traditional sectors:

Personal BeautyHouse Health &

WellnessBaby Pet

The 3 gilette’s sectors will be considerate as 2 P&G’s sub-sectors …

Razors, blades, personal products

Oral Care: Toothbrushes,…

…and one new sector:

Batteries

Gillette brand Oral B brand

Duracel brand

2 from the top 100 world brand


4

Will many references be suppressed ?

• All Gillette’s brands are strong brands which will ad value to the P&G’s portfolio

• We can suppose that most of Gillette's references will be conserved

Gillette products portfolioGillette products portfolio

• 2 of the 5 P&G sectors will be impacted:• Personal Beauty: P&G and Gillette have exactly the same products into

the Men’s deodorants segment. The Gillette notoriety is so high on this segment that P&G may suppress 1/3 of its Men deodorants activity

• Health & Wellness: P&G and Gillette sell exactly the same products forChilds on the Tooth Brushes and the Toothpaste market. Each One pay big licenses (Spiderman & Disney) for a product. They can do big economies with the suppression of one of it

P&G products portfolioP&G products portfolio

Few brand suppressed but 2 P&G’s sectors enlarged will enable economy of scale

2.2 Synergy effect and Risk Analysis Thanks this analysis we can assume that Synergies will be realized though:

• Similar Brands Cutting in the Child toothpaste and in the Men’s deodorant sector. • Suppression of Similar jobs in the company • The worldwide brand Gillette’s knowledge

So we can assume that synergies anticipated by the P&G’s analyst are good.


5

A Great opportunity for both companies

• The new shareholder will enable Gillette to develop their brands with more resources

• They will have benefits from the P&G marketing strcuture

An opportunity for GilletteAn opportunity for Gillette

• The most important benefits for the P&G group are• More Bargain power:

• The biggest group of its sector: No one can deal without them• 2 news for the top 100 brands: Gillette & Duracell: Retailers can not afford

them not to sell its• A higher share in 2 department and a new department: the batteries

• Economy of scales: Job cuttings into central functions, some expensive segments and products will be suppressed, R&D, marketing and communications expenses will be reduced

An opportunity for P&GAn opportunity for P&G

Bargain Power and Economy of Scale are the most important factors about a merger in the goods industry. We can say that there is a good completion between both companies and there differences can lead to a new strength.


6

A risk for P&G: the Gillette's integration

• Global Marketing approach: 1 product for the world market

• 1 team working for the world market

Gilette structureGilette structure

• Diversity and regional approach: quite the same product declined in 10 brands

• Patchwork of team for each region

P&G StructureP&G Structure

++ • P&G can realize economies of scales thanks the gillette“world brand” knowledge but they must not impose theirs own methods to gilette structure

ImpactImpact

• Innovation culture, how to be the most competitive though technologies

• Social responsibilityapproach

+ • P&G can have benefits from the Gillette R&D structure and use its technologies in some project

P&G can have benefits if they adopt an hybrid structure (keeping the Gillette's structure and use it for big world projects) but this changes has a

cost, and they will have to do integration effort

2.3 Conclusion As a conclusion, we can assume that :

1. This merger seems to be very positives: l Some Synergies are possible l Many Economy of Scale will be realized l The bargain power of the group will be much important l P&G will learn from the Gillette’s Technology knowledge and R&D efforts l And P&G will invest in some new Gillette's high value projects

2. But Many effort have to be done to do this merger a success: l They have to create a new organization which not destroy the Gillette’s structure l They have to integrate the gillette’s methods to lauch new “world product l They have to invest a lot to manage the change and have only one business culture


7

Part 3 Financial Ratios Analysis

3.1 Sales Sales growth is not exactly a financial ratio as it has no immediate link to the balance sheet however it is quite a useful way, at least to start with, of looking at how the company has performed.

-5,00%

0,00%

5,00%

10,00%

15,00%

20,00%

2001 2002 2003 2004

GilletteP&G

3.2 Profitability Profitability is the core measure for a firm in order to determine its past and future performance. So in this first section I will try to determine how well both companies have performed in terms of profitabiltity. First I let us consider the ROE. Gillette has had in the four year period averaged an ROE 54,5%. Compared to the average of American firms (that stands at 12%), this is at first sight a very impressive figure. Initially that means that they have compared to other companies rewarded their shareholders with more profits that other companies, and that revenues have been much higher. However how did Gillette arrive at this number? They might have used a leverage effect and put lots of debt in the company so that ceteris paribus the ratio would have increased or they might have used some accounting cosmetics that would have increased profits. Compared to other companies Gillette has actually had quite a high leverage of about on average 3.6 debt/equity. This becomes especially significant as P&G which has a significantly lower leverage also has got a lower ROE. On average Gilette has had 1,5 times the debt to equity ratio than P&G.


8

Also the share of equity in the balance sheet (or the proportion of total assets) has been 1,5 times higher for P&G. Taking account of this P&G has averaged an ROE of about 47% over this period. Compared to the average this is quite an impressive number. As ROE is pretty similar next thing to look at is operating profit margin. It takes only into account the profit that has been generated from operations that means there is no influence of non – operating factors. Here Gillette has had an average operating profit margin of 21,3% whereas P&G was 16,5%. A very important strategic issue for both companies is advertising expenses. As they both produce consumer goods not industrial goods this will naturally be a high percentage of sales. Examining this figure more closely is important as it shows on average how much $ of advertising was necessary to generate 1$ of sales. Here the both companies have roughly the same percentage, P&G at 9,6% and Gillette at 8,7%. Concluding it can be said that Gillette has been slightly more profitable over the examined period.

3.3 Capital Management Here we will look at first at accounts receivable turnover. This ratio indicates how much money one receivable is worth on average. The higher this ratio, the shorter the money collecting period. This has also a significant impact on the cash flow. There is a significant difference between the two. Gillette stands at 8,8, P&G at 13,3, so P&G is more efficient. However as the below diagram shows Gillette has become more efficient doing this.

Receivables turnover

-

2,00

4,00

6,00

8,00

10,00

12,00

14,00

2001 2002 2003 2004

Reihe1

The next ratio to look at is inventory turnover. This is an indication how often company turns over its inventory.


9

P&G has a value of 6,3 whereas Gillette only achieves 3,5. Again P&G is more efficient. The next area to look at is the long term performance of capital. The net long term asset turnover. This measure evaluates how good a company manages its long term assets. The higher the ratio the more efficient the use of it. For P&G the ratio stands at 1,5 for Gillette at 1,7 suggesting no big differences between the 2 companies.

3.4 Leverage Analysis Leverage Analysis takes account mostly of how well a company has been able to meet its obligations, and how it could finance them if it would have to. For the short run the obvious measure to look at are the current ratio as well as the quick ratio. Here I will use the quick ratio as it is a more “strict” approach of measuring a companies short term ability of paying back debt. For example it doesn’t include deferred income tax as this is a really unsafe asset, often influenced by optimizing the firms tax payments. Gilette has an ratio of 57% whereas P&G has 50%. This is somewhat surprising given the fact that Gillette overall has got a much higher debt/equity ratio. This might be a stragegic issue as Gillette wants to increase their leverage by taking on a lot of long term debt whereas they want to be “save” paying off their short term liabilities. The second part of debt is to look at the long term debt. As stated earlier Gillette has had on average 1,5 more debt as P&G, which is mainly composed of long term debt. The next ratio to look at is the ability of the company to cover interest payments out of the cash flow (interest coverage ratio). Gillette´s average stands at 49 whereas P&G stands at 17. This number is suggesting that Gillette is having a very strong cash flow, given its higher leverage.


10

Interest coverage

0,00

10,00

20,00

30,00

40,00

50,00

60,00

70,00

80,00

90,00

2001 2002 2003 2004

GilletteP&G

3.5 Conclusion From these simple numbers the following can be derived: l Gillette has a high leverage, leading to a high Return on Equity i.e. Gillette is a profitable

company, more that P&G l Gillette has a strong cash flow i.e. sound financial fundamentals All these factors could explain a high possible net present value.


11

Part4 Assumptions analysis After strategic analysis has allowed us to understand the underlying objectives for P&G’s acquisition of Gillette; while financial analysis has helped identifying both companies strenghths and weaknesses, conclusions must be drawn out of this to assess the benefits for P&G of merging with Gillette. It has two aspects, and it involves the valuation of the firm in different ways. The first step is to assess the value of Gillette as an independent firm. Indeed, this is the starting point for analysing what it represents as potential value for an acquiring firm. The second step is to include in this analysis the expected benefits of the merger. This will eventually lead us to comment on the 18% premium offered by P&G for Gillette, which is 28 times projected 2005 earnings. The value of Gillette as an independant firm can be derived from the free cash flow valuation method, using a set of assumptions about Gillette’s future. These assumptions depend on the previous learnings about the firm accounting practices, about its strategic choices and from the ratio analysis. Some key drivers are needed for the forecast of Gillette’s future cash flows, being: l Sales’ growth l EBITDA margin l Interest rate on beginning debt l Tax rate l Operating working capital to the sales l Operating long term assets to the sales l Debt to capital

4.1 Sales’ growth and EBITDA margin What must be taken in account is that sales’ growth is usually “mean reverting”, which means that a very high path of growth (that is, way above the average) will eventually return to a more normal level in the long run. However, situations may allow companies to keep a high growth rate when they have a sustainable competitive advantage, which is Gillette’s situation. 1. Business segments Let us examine separately Gillette’s business segments and projected evolution of sales. Impact of exchange not taken in account (1) Blades and razors

This segment represents Gillette’s core business. It holds 70% of market shares. This position is supported by regular launching of high-technology new products and high advertising. In 2004, thanks to the launching of new products such as razor M3 Power, sales grew 12%, especially in the domestic market and in the UK. Growth in 2003 was 13%.


12

This is also a highly profitable segment, thanks to premium-priced products and incentives for consumer trade-up to premium brands. In 2004, operating profit was 37.6%, with an increase of 14% from 36,8% in 2003. à This trend is consistent with Gillette’s strategy to keep its position on this segment with technology leadership and advertising. Ø As for sales, even though the main part of sales are located in mature markets, we can

expect them to keep on growing at this rate because of the new products and geographical expansion in developing markets. Moreover, the 40% increase in total advertising expenses in 2004, primarily focused on this segment, will only have its full effect one year later. Therefore we can expect sales’ growth to be 14% in 2005, and 12% the following years.

Ø As for the operating profit, tow main factors account for its probable evolution. First, the advertising efforts aim at increasing consumer trade-up to premium products with higher margins. Second, Gillette set up in 2003 the Manufacturing Realignment Program aimed at reducing costs, improving operating efficiency and streamlining manufacturing, packaging and warehouse operations for the European blades and razors manufacturing and distribution. Once completed, starting from 2006 it should lead to annual cost savings of 50-60 million. In this context we can expect operating margin to remain at a high level and the operating profit to keep the path with the growth of sales. We thus assume an operating profit up to 40% for 2005 and thereafter.

(2) Duracell In 2004, sales in the segment of battery grew 11% thanks to strong demand, as opposed to 6% in 2003. However, there is a strong competition of low-priced and low-performance batteries, and Duracell kept its market share thanks to lowered prices after the price-realignment program in North America and to the double-digit advertising expenses. The industry of battery gives Gillette a good margin thanks to its big efforts for manufacturing efficiencies in 2004. It grew 41%, from 17.2% to 22% of sales. à Different facts have to be taken in account for the forecast. Ø The sales are primarily located in the US and in Europe, which are mature markets. The

objective for Gillette is to keep its market share in those regions, while it keeps its industry margin. But there is strong competition, and demand in 2004 was influenced by unusually active hurricane season in the US. Yet, in 2003, Gillette acquired a majority interest in the Fujian Nanping Nanfu Battery Company in China. Sales are thus expected to grow in such a developing market. Indeed, it only contributed about 2% of the sales’ growth in 2004. This part should increase. This should compensate the probable decrease in growth rate in domestic market. Moreover, advertising efforts should also foster sales. We can therefore expect a reasonable 9% in 2005 and 10% after.

Ø As for operating margin, the continuing efforts of Gillette in Cost saving programs, with the Company’s Strategic Sourcing Initiative and the Functional Excellence Program set in 2002, should t least allow for a stable operating margin, consistent with the strategy of the


13

firm, in spite of the probability that the firm will have to keep on lowering prices. We can thus forecast a 22% of sales operating margin for 2005 and after.

§ Oral care

The segment of Oral Care was driven in 2004 by growth of global share and strong sales’ growth of 20%, compared to 6% in 2003. This outstanding growth, which is the highest in all segments, is due to the strengthening of Oral-B as the number one product in global brushing market, to the launching of new products such as Professional Care 8000 and Sonic Complete rechargeable brushes, and to relevant investments, with the acquisition of Rembrandt teeth-whitening products to complete Gillette’s product line. The advertising supported the introduction of the new products. In this segment the operating profit grew 14%, however the operating margin decreased from 16.4% in 2003 to 15.7% in 2004, which means the segment is less profitable. à For the forecast we should keep in mind that Gillette’s strategy in this segment is to extend its global share through investments and innovation. Ø Concerning sales, there is a high competition in the segment and especially from battery-

powered products. Therefore, Gillette plans to increase its market share with the introduction of new products and with consumer trade-up from manual to power products. In parallel, Gillette also pursues its geographic expansion. As Gillette is having an offensive strategy on this market and has launched a number of new products supported by advertising we can expect a 25% growth in 2005 and after.

Ø In terms of operating profit, this segment can be seen as cost-consuming, because of the important innovation and advertising efforts Gillette makes for growing its market share. Therefore, although new products have higher prices, it will be difficult for the company to keep the path with sales’ growth and we can expect the operating profit’s growth to be lower than the sales’ growth. Thus we can assume the operating margin to decrease to 14.5% in 2005 and after.

(3) Braun

In this segment, Gillette has diversified a lot and holds a full product line. Thanks to the introduction of new products and geographic expansion, sales grew 16% in 2004, compared with 11% in 2003. However, Gillette has decided to refocus on its core business with dry shaving systems. This segment is highly capital intensive and operating margins are low. However, due to product rationalization, product sources changes and manufacturing efficiencies, operating profit for this segment went 94%, from a 4.1% margin to a 7% margin in 2004. à Braun operates on quite mature markets. The company’s objective on this segment is to keep margins higher than the cost of capital. Therefore we can expect the company to continue its effort of refocusing on core products and of launching attractive new products.


14

Ø Sales can therefore be expected to decrease for certain products and increase for others. The company’s strategy on this segment is not very offensive and focuses more on improving operating profit. We can assume the growth rate to stay at a 15% level.

Ø Operating profit should keep on growing as efforts are made to suppress non profitable products and for cost savings. We can assume the operating margin to increase 50% more thanks to the remaining effects of rationalization, and to refocusing on products with higher margins, up to a 10,5% margin for 2005, which should remain stable thereafter, taking in account the specific capital-consuming level of this segment.

(4) Personal care

The last segment, the personal care products, was driven in 2004 by the high sales’ growth on outside markets, in Europe, Africa, Middle East and Eastern Europe, making an 11% increase in sales compared to 6% in 2003. In 2004, Gillette has reinforced its global share in shaving preparations in key markets. While the segment only accounts for a small part of the total operating profit of Gillette, operating profit grew 30% in 2004, from a 8.4% margin up to a 9.9% margin thanks to manufacturing savings and overhead cost lowering. à This evolution is consistent with the firm’s objective, which is to achieve modest growth and increase margins. l The sales can be expected to continue growing at the same rate because of geographic

expansion and introduction of new products, without any major action planned for this segment. We can therefore assume a 11% sales’ growth for 2005 and after.

l Efforts in cost savings can further increase operating profit, however at a lower rate. We can assume this growth in operating profit will maintain a 10% profit margin.

2. Synthesis

Assumptions about sales’ growth

% of net sales 2004

Sales' growth in 2005

Pondered sales' growth

2005

% of projected

sales 2005

Sales' growth after 2005

Pondered sales' growth

after 2005

Blades & Razors 41,32% 14,00% 5,78% 41,15% 12,00% 4,94% Duracell 21,30% 9,00% 1,92% 20,29% 10,00% 2,03% Oral Care 15,17% 25,00% 3,79% 16,56% 25,00% 4,14% Braun 13,04% 15,00% 1,96% 13,10% 15,00% 1,96% Personal Care 9,17% 11,00% 1,01% 8,90% 11,00% 0,98% Total 100,00% 14,46% 100,00% 14,05%


15

Assumptions about EBITDA margin

% of PFO 2004

Profit margin in 2005

Pondered profit margin

2005

% of projected PFO 2005

Profit margin after 2005

Pondered profit margin

after 2005

Blades & Razors 63,68% 40,00% 25,47% 64,32% 40,00% 25,73% Duracell 19,16% 22,00% 4,21% 17,44% 22,00% 3,84% Oral Care 9,73% 14,50% 1,41% 9,38% 14,50% 1,36% Braun 3,71% 10,50% 0,39% 5,37% 10,50% 0,56% Personal Care 3,71% 10,00% 0,37% 3,48% 10,00% 0,35% Total 100,00% 31,86% 100,00% 31,84%

4.2 Tax rate The effective tax rate has been decreasing 1% every year: 32.2% in 2001, 31% in 2002, 30% in 2003 and 29% in 2004, due to the possibility of making a favourable mix of earnings to countries taxed at rates lower than the US statutory rate.

Table 6.3 Reconciliation of the statutory Federal income tax rate to Gillette’s effective tax rate

Source: Gillette Annual Report 2003 Form the above Table, we can see the effective tax rate of Gillette in 2003 is 30%. So we forecast its stable and keep 30% in the following years.

4.3 Operating working capital to the sales Gillette has been pursuing a policy of improvement of its working capital management. Operating Working Capital related to the sales decreased from 16% in 2001 to 8% in 2002, and 2% in 2003 and operating working capital turnover grew from 12 million in 2002 to 54 million in 2003. This is primarily due to a better management of Accounts receivable, which decreased 8% in 2003. This trend was even stronger in 2004 with a 23% decrease in Accounts receivable, and combined with a higher average day sales in the last quarter, let Day Sales Outstanding go down 32 to 24 days in 2004.


16

Working capital management

2004 2003 2002 2001Operating working capital1 NA 170 708 1333 Operating Working Capital/Sales NA 2% 8% 16% Day Sales Outstanding2 24 32 43 55 Days Inventory On Hand3 110 108 97 108 Days Payable Outstanding4 NA 57 60 43 Operating working capital turnover5 NA 54,42 11,94 6,06 Accounts receivable turnover6 12,55 10,06 7,03 5,49 Inventory turnover7 3,30 3,39 3,78 3,37

à Assessing the evolution of this trend needs to take in account different factors: First of all, management of working capital should further improve because of the company’s statement to follow this strategy and due to the effects of the programs (Functional Excellence program and Realignment program) aimed at optimizing inventory and supply chain management. Another factor to take in account is the product mix, that influences DSO. It is traditionally lower for blade and razors, manual oral care and personal care, and higher for Duracell, Braun and power oral care. As pondered sales’ growth shows, sales in the segment of blades and razors should be the highest, then product mix should support this trend. Although we don’t know the evolution of 2004, we can assume the operating working capital to go down 1%.

4.4 Net long term assets to the sales Long term assets management

2004 2003 2002 2001

Net long term assets8 na 5614 4968 4979Net long term assets/Sales na 60,68% 58,77% 61,59%Net long term assets turnover9 na 1,65 1,70 1,62Capital expenditures 616,00 408,00 405,00 624,00Capital expenditures % net sales 6% 4% 5% 8%

Since 2001, Gillette has had a quite stable fixed assets management, with a net long-term assets turnover ranging around 160% to 170%.

1 (Current assets-cash and marketable securities) - (current liabilities-loans payable and current portion of long-term debt) 2 Receivables/Average daily sales (3 last months sales/90) 3 Inventory/(Cost of sales/365) 4 Accounts payable/Cost of sales/365 5 Sales/OWC 6 Sales/Accounts receivable 7 Cost of goods sold/Inventory 8 Sales/ net long-term assets


17

à We know from the firm’s statement in the annual report 2003 that the company expects over the long term capital spending will average 7% of net sales. We can expect this growth of capital expenditures to be aimed at maintaining the favourable long term asset turnover, and we assume net long term assets to the sales will remain average 60% of sales.

4.5 Net debt to capital

Embedment

2004 2003 2002 2001Long term debt 3195 2984 2984 2082Net debt/equity ratio na 1,60 1,67 1,95

The company has had a net debt/equity ratio revealing a very healthy financial structure. à We can assume the level of net debt to capital to remain stable, around 1,60.

4.6 Depreciation & amortization to sales

Depreciation & amortization to sales percentage 2003 2002 2001 2000 1999 Average Depreciation & Amortization 578 500 509 535 464 D&A/Sales 6.25% 5.92% 6.30% 6.44% 5.11% 6.00%

à We can assume the level of Depreciation & amortization to sales percentage, around 6%.

4.7 Capital expenditures to sales

Capital expenditures to sales percentage 2004 2003 2002 2001 2000 1999 Average Capital expenditures 616 408 405 624 793 889 Capital expenditures/Sales 5.88% 4.41% 4.79% 7.72% 9.54% 9.80% 7.02%

à We can assume the level of Capital expenditures to sales percentage, around 7.02%.

9 Sales/ net long-term assets


18

4.8 Conclusion The following assumptions can thus be used to calculate Gillette’s value as an independent firm:

Assumptions for the valuation

2005 After 2005 Sales' growth rate 14,86% 14,05% EBITDA margin 31,86% 31,84% Tax rate 30% 30% Operating working capital/sales 1% 1% Net long term assets/sales 60% 60% Net debt/equity 1,6 1,6


19

Part 5 Valuation

5.1 FCFF Valuation Methods To value Gillette, we will use the Free Cash Flow Approach.

The free cash flow to the firm (FCFF) is the sum of the cash flows to all claim holders in the firm,

including stockholders, bondholders, and preferred stockholders.

A simple way of getting to free cash flow to the firm is to estimate the cash flows prior to any of

any of the above claims. Thus we could begin with the earnings before interest and taxes, net out

taxes (then we get NOPAT, net operating profit after-tax) and reinvestment needs, and arrive at an

estimate of the free cash flow to the firm:

FCFF = NOPAT + depreciation&amortization – changes in NWC – Capex

Comparing to other valuation method, FCF has the following advantages:

l Capture the firm’s future growth system instead of final result logically;

l Suited for growth firm with low or zero dividend payout ratio;

l Absorb important assumption which include sales zgrowth rate, EBIT/sale ratio, tax rate,

depreciation&amortization portion, working capital percentage to sales, discount factor, etc.

So, we will use the FCFF model to value Gillette.

5.2 Discount rate The discount rate to be used for Gillette’s valuation would be the company’s weighted average

cost of capital. To get the WACC of Gillette we need to figure out by the following steps:

(1) cost of debt

The Company’s investment grade long-term credit ratings of AA– from Standard & Poor’s and

Aa3 from Moody’s and commercial paper ratings of A+ from Standard&Poor’s and A1 from

Moody’s. So we can simply find out the spread on newly issued AA- rated bonds is. And adding

the benchmark yield, we can get the cost of debt for Gillette. For the spread, we can find it from

table 6.2. For the debt structure of Gillette, the weighting average of the debt term to maturity is

almost 5 year. So we choose the 5 year treasuries note yield as the benchmark and the 5 year

spread to get the cost of debt. The average weekly yield for 5 year t-note yield is 3.735% from

Table 6.2. So we can get the cost of debt for Gillette is 3.735%+0.46%= 4.295%.


20

Table 5.1 Spread for bond with given ratings Rating 1 year 2 year 3 year 5 year 7 year 10 year 30 year

Aa3/AA- 20 34 35 46 59 69 97 A1/A+ 39 43 47 53 67 81 105

Source: bondsonline.com

Table 5.2 Weekly 5 year T-note yield in 2005 Week Close date Yield (%)

1 2005-01-07 3.71 2 2005-01-14 3.72 3 2005-01-21 3.7 4 2005-01-28 3.71 5 2005-02-04 3.72 6 2005-02-11 3.66 7 2005-02-18 3.77 8 2005-02-25 3.89

Average weekly yield 3.735

Source: finance.yahoo.com

(2) Tax rate

Table 5.3 Reconciliation of the statutory Federal income tax rate to Gillette’s effective tax rate

Source: Gillette Annual Report 2003

Form the above Table, we can see the effective tax rate of Gillette in 2003 is 30%. So we forecast

its stable and keep 30% in the following years.

(3) cost of equity

We can get the cost of equity form CAPM model.

Since Gillette lists in NASDAQ, we calculate the NASDAQ index average yearly return from

1985 to 2004 as the market return and we get 16.53%. As for the current risk-free rate, 3m


21

Treasuries bill yield is trading at 2.70% per year. For the beta, we get 0.700 from

finance.yahoo.com. So the cost of equity of Gillette is :

Cost of equity = 2.70+0.772×(16.53-2.70) =12.38%

(4) WACC

At the end of year 2004, we get the following information from Gillette’s Earning Report in Feb 3,

2005: In Dec 31, 2004, Total debt is $3,386 million, the Stockholders’ Equity is $2,836 million.

So the WACC is calculated as:

%28.7386,3836,2

386,3%)301(%295.4386,3836,2

836,2%38.12 =+

×−×++

×

5.3 Valuation as an independent firm From the assumption part we get the following forecast:

Table 5.4 assumptions for the valuation 2005 After 2005

Sales' growth rate 14,86% 10,00% EBIT margin 31,86% 31,84%

Tax rate 30% 30% Depreciation and amortization to Sales

percentage 6.00% 6.00%

Net working capital to sales percentage 1% 1% Capital expenditures to sales percentage 7.02% 7.02%

Discount rate 7.73% 7.73%

Before the valuation, we need to figure out the Terminal Value.

The terminal value in this model is critical, because it must capture all free cash flow value

flowing indefinitely into the future. Although the cash flows are estimated for the explicit period

of 2005 to 2011, Gillette’s business will most likely continue far into the future. The typical

calculation of the terminal value uses a constant dividend growth model. Assuming a discount rate

of 7.73% (the WACC) and a free cash flow growth rate into the future of 1.0% per year

(conservative estimation) terminal value in year 11 of the analysis as:

7.53832)1(

ValueTerminal 2011 =−

+=

gkgFCFF

wacc

Then we can input the above input to the Excel Spreadsheet created by us. We can get the Value

of Gillette as an independent firm. See Table 6.6

From the result, we see that the equity of Gillette is valued at $51.275 billion or $48.09 per share

as an independent firm.


22

Table 5.5


23

5.4 Valuation of target after acquisition For Procter & Gamble, after the acquisition, they can create synergy effect. So we need to take

such synergy effect into account.

In a consumer analyst meeting, in describing the many strengths Gillette brings to the combination

with PROCTER & GAMBLE, Mr. Kilts, Gillette Company Chairman, President, CEO, said,

"Strength plus strength will equal success as a very strong Gillette combines with an equally

strong Procter & Gamble. We will create a global company built upon scale, diversity and brand

strength - all requisites for consistent growth in a consolidating, highly competitive global

environment. This is an opportunity to help build something that Gillette has been pursuing for

four years ... to become the best consumer products company in the world."

Mr. Kilts discussed the businesses and capabilities Gillette has created, which will continue to

deliver, strong consistent growth. He described four key growth drivers that give the Company a

unique competitive advantage: Gillette's presence in high-growth, advantaged global categories;

its technological leadership in these categories; its ability to drive consumer trade-up around the

world to better- performing, premium products; and the Company's culture, which is defined by a

constant turnaround mentality and a drive for total innovation.

The synergy effect as the following:

l Cost cut and EBIT margin:

Cost can be reduced in the aspects of Administrative overlap, advertisement expense, R&D,

employment cost, promotion expenditure. And we estimate the above 4 aspects decrease as

following:

Table 5.6 Selected cost item of Gillette Item 2003 2002 2001 2000 1999

Advertising costs 827 647 576 539 513 Advertising costs to Sales 8.9 7.7 7.1 na na

Sales promotion 376 319 319 na na Sales promotion to sales 4.1 3.8 3.9 na na

Other Selling, General and Administrative Expenses

2,338 2,206 2,112 na na

Other SG&A 25.3 26.1 26.1 na na Cost of Sales 3,708 3,511 3,407 3,469 3,486

R&D expenditures 202 185 187 179 201

Source: Gillette annual report 2001,2002, 2003

From table 5.6, we see the advertising costs, sales promotion expense and other SG&A expense

are increasing sharply. And after the acquisition, since the new company can manage the


24

advertising and marketing plan together and surely lower the cost for Gillette. For the sale

promotion, because PROCTER & GAMBLE have created a very good organic structural and the

new company with over $60bn revenue can increase the bargaining power to the retailer, such as

Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. And we estimate 15% cost cut from the advertising expenditures and 20%

cost cut from the sales promotion expense. So the advertising and sale promotion save should be

827×15%+2338×20%=591.65. From the labour, Gillette can lay off some employees especially

some managers for administrative lay lap to cut the cost. And we estimate conservatively this cost

cut will be 15%. And we reset the EBIT margin assumption 1 percentage up to 22.05% to reflect

the employment cost save.

l Sales growth

The similarities of the Gillette and Procter & Gamble organizations structures are remarkable,

with both companies using global business units to maximize brand strength and growth, and

market based commercial selling units to assure local customization and flexibility. The results

should be a smooth integration that will produce the ability to move Gillette products through the

existing Procter & Gamble infrastructure very efficiently. This combination will enable our

businesses to create more value in more ways than would ever have been possible as a stand-alone

company. The Gillette as a target after acquisition can get higher sales growth under the

combining synergy effect from PROCTER & GAMBLE deal. So we reset the assumption of Sales

growth to 15% since the fourth year after the deal, that is to say, the estimated sales growth from

2008 will be reassumed as 15%.

Then we can input the above input to the Excel Spreadsheet created by us. We can get the Value

of Gillette as target after acquisition. See Table 5.7

From the result, we see that the equity of Gillette is valued at $65.164 billion or $64.71per share

as an independent firm.


25

Table 5.7


26

5.5 Value of merger benefits Since for the M&A deal the value of target after acquisition, value as an independent firm and value of merger benefits satisfy the following equation:

Value of target after acquisition=Value as independent firm + Value of merger benefits So we can rearrange the equation:

Value of merger benefits= Value of target after acquisition - Value as independent firm From the above formula, we can estimate the merger benefits for PROCTER & GAMBLE from this M&A deal.

Table 5.8 Value of Merger Benefits

Category Value of Target After acquisition

Value as an independent firm

Value of Merger benefits

Valuation of total equity (Billion, $)

65.16 51.28 13.88

Valuation per share ($ per share)

64.71 50.92 13.79

5.6 Conclusion (1) Procter & Gamble should buy Gillette because the value of merger benefits is positive and

quite high to it. After the acquisition, PROCTER & GAMBLE and Gillette can share the $13.88 billion merger benefits together.

(2) Under our assumptions, Procter & Gamble should pay from $51.28 billion to $65.16 billion to Gillette for buying the 100% share. Finally, PROCTER & GAMBLE paid $57 billion for this deal, which is within the above range.


27

Appendix: Appendix 1


28

Appendix 2


29

Appendix 3


30

Appendix 4


31

Appendix 5


32

Appendix 6

Documents

Gillette Valuation Report Proter and Gamble Acquires ...s3.amazonaws.com/zanran_storage/webintec.ceram.fr/ContentPages/... · marketing strategy. This strategy should specialize every