Business results between enterprises are often different, influenced by many different factors such as enterprise size, business characteristics, business fields, etc. Therefore, the research process needs to develop new research methods and models to verify this relationship.
3.3. Analysis of capital structure and cost of capital at some typical enterprises
In order to better understand the capital structure and average cost of capital of enterprises as well as to verify the average cost of capital of enterprises in the context of changing capital structure, the thesis analyzes the capital structure and cost of capital at some typical enterprises.
The criteria for selecting typical enterprises are enterprises with stable capital structure policies and enterprises in popular industries on the Vietnamese stock market. Through the process of consulting experts and managers in the enterprise, the thesis selected the following two enterprises:
- VICEM Packaging Hai Phong Joint Stock Company (BXH): Total assets reached 120 billion VND at the end of 2017, an enterprise with an average capital scale on the Vietnamese stock market. The enterprise belongs to the Industrial sector, which is the industry group with the largest number of listed enterprises at present. The debt to total assets ratio is maintained at 50-60%, which is also the common capital structure of industrial enterprises and many other industry groups on the Vietnamese stock market.
- Kido Group Joint Stock Company (KDC): Total assets reached 11,300 billion VND at the end of 2017, is an enterprise with a capital scale above average compared to listed enterprises. The enterprise belongs to the Consumer Goods industry group, second only to the Industrial industry group in terms of the number of listed enterprises. The enterprise has a large brand, long-standing reputation on the stock market and constantly expands its scale and competitiveness to increase the enterprise value. The debt ratio to total assets of the enterprise over the years is quite stable, maintained around 23-33%, lower than the average debt ratio to total assets of other listed enterprises.
When determining the average cost of capital at the enterprise, the thesis does not consider the cost of capital from non-interest-bearing debt, including payables to suppliers, taxes and
payable to the State, other payables... because there is no basis to determine the costs for these items. The thesis uses Damodaran country risk data updated in January 2018, as shown in Table 3.4:
Table 3.4: Vietnam data to determine average cost of capital
(updated January 2018)
TT
Index | Value | Source | |
1 | Determine the cost of debt | ||
Vietnam's risk-free rate of return (R f ) | 4.87% | Damodaran A. (2018) https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3 /papers.cfm?abstract_id=32 17944 | |
Enterprise risk spread (Conversion table from Liquidity ratio) interest calculation | Table 2.1 | http://pages.stern.nyu.edu/~ adamodar/ | |
Country Risk Spread - Vietnam (based on international bond yields) | 1.52% | http://pages.stern.nyu.edu/~ adamodar/ | |
2 | Determine the cost of equity | ||
The industry average beta for unlevered firms (β u - unlevered beta), operating in the equity market US stock market | Appendix 5 | http://pages.stern.nyu.edu/~ adamodar/New_Home_Pag e/datafile/Betas.html | |
Current risk premium for the market mature market premium | 5.08% | http://pages.stern.nyu.edu/~ adamodar/ | |
Equity and Bond Yield Volatility Rate (S&P Emerging BMI Index/BAML Public Sector US Emerging Markets Corporate Plus Index Yield for 5 years from 2012 to 2017 =13.31%/11.84%) | 1.12 | S&Phttp://us.spindices.com /indices/equity/sp- emerging-bmi-us-dollar FRED https://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/series/BAMLEMPBPUBSICRPIEY/do download data | |
Country Risk Premium (Spread) country risk * volatility of equity and bonds) | 1.52% * 1.12 = 1.71% | http://pages.stern.nyu.edu/~ adamodar/ | |
Maybe you are interested!
-
Solutions for tourism development in Tien Lang - 10
zt2i3t4l5ee
zt2a3gstourism, tourism development
zt2a3ge
zc2o3n4t5e6n7ts
- District People's Committees and authorities of communes with tourist attractions should support, promote, and provide necessary information to people, helping them improve their knowledge about tourism. Raise tourism awareness for local people.
*
* *
Due to limited knowledge and research time, the thesis inevitably has shortcomings. Therefore, I look forward to receiving guidance from teachers, experts as well as your comments to make the thesis more complete.
Chapter III Conclusion
Through the issues presented in Chapter II, we can come to some conclusions:
Based on the strengths of available tourism resources, the types of tourism in Tien Lang that need to be promoted in the coming time are sightseeing and resort tourism, discovery tourism, weekend tourism. To improve the quality and diversify tourism products, Tien Lang district needs to combine with local cultural tourism resources, at the same time combine with surrounding areas, build rich tourism products. The strengths of Tien Lang tourism are eco-tourism and cultural tourism, so developing Tien Lang tourism must always go hand in hand with restoring and preserving types of cultural tourism resources. Some necessary measures to support and improve the efficiency of exploiting tourism resources in Tien Lang are: strengthening the construction of technical facilities and labor force serving tourism, actively promoting and advertising tourism, and expanding forms of capital mobilization for tourism development.
CONCLUDE
I Conclusion
1. Based on the results achieved within the framework of the thesis's needs, some basic conclusions can be drawn as follows:
Tien Lang is a locality with great potential for tourism development. The relatively abundant cultural tourism resources and ecological tourism resources have great appeal to tourists. Based on this potential, Tien Lang can build a unique tourism industry that is competitive enough with other localities within Hai Phong city and neighboring areas.
In recent years, the exploitation of the advantages of resources to develop tourism and build tourist routes in Tien Lang has not been commensurate with the available potential. In terms of quantity, many resource objects have not been brought into the purpose of tourism development. In terms of time, the regular service time has not been extended to attract more visitors. Infrastructure and technical facilities are still weak. The labor force is still thin and weak in terms of expertise. Tourism programs and routes have not been organized properly, the exploitation content is still monotonous, so it has not attracted many visitors. Although resources have not been mobilized much for tourism development, they are facing the risk of destruction and degradation.
2. Based on the results of investigation, analysis, synthesis, evaluation and selective absorption of research results of related topics, the thesis has proposed a number of necessary solutions to improve the efficiency of exploiting tourism resources in Tien Lang such as: promoting the restoration and conservation of tourism resources, focusing on investment and key exploitation of ecotourism resources, strengthening the construction of infrastructure and tourism workforce. Expanding forms of capital mobilization. In addition, the thesis has built a number of tourist routes of Hai Phong in which Tien Lang tourism resources play an important role.
Exploiting Tien Lang tourism resources for tourism development is currently facing many difficulties. The above measures, if applied synchronously, will likely bring new prospects for the local tourism industry, contributing to making Tien Lang tourism an important economic sector in the district's economic structure.
REFERENCES
1. Nhuan Ha, Trinh Minh Hien, Tran Phuong, Hai Phong - Historical and cultural relics, Hai Phong Publishing House, 1993
2. Hai Phong City History Council, Hai Phong Gazetteer, Hai Phong Publishing House, 1990.
3. Hai Phong City History Council, History of Tien Lang District Party Committee, Hai Phong Publishing House, 1990.
4. Hai Phong City History Council, University of Social Sciences and Humanities, VNU, Hai Phong Place Names Encyclopedia, Hai Phong Publishing House. 2001.
5. Law on Cultural Heritage and documents guiding its implementation, National Political Publishing House, Hanoi, 2003.
6. Tran Duc Thanh, Lecture on Tourism Geography, Faculty of Tourism, University of Social Sciences and Humanities, VNU, 2006
7. Hai Phong Center for Social Sciences and Humanities, Some typical cultural heritages of Hai Phong, Hai Phong Publishing House, 2001
8. Nguyen Ngoc Thao (editor-in-chief, Tourism Geography, Hai Phong Publishing House, two volumes (2001-2002)
9. Nguyen Minh Tue and group of authors, Hai Phong Tourism Geography, Ho Chi Minh City Publishing House, 1997.
10. Nguyen Thanh Son, Hai Phong Tourism Territory Organization, Associate Doctoral Thesis in Geological Geography, Hanoi, 1996.
11. Decision No. 2033/QD – UB on detailed planning of Tien Lang town, Hai Phong city until 2020.
12. Department of Culture, Information, Hai Phong Museum, Hai Phong relics
- National ranked scenic spot, Hai Phong Publishing House, 2005. 13. Tien Lang District People's Committee, Economic Development Planning -
Culture - Society of Tien Lang district to 2010.
14.Website www.HaiPhong.gov.vn
APPENDIX 1
List of national ranked monuments
STT
Name of the monument
Number, year of decisiondetermine
Location
1
Gam Temple
938 VH/QĐ04/08/1992
Cam Khe Village- Toan Thang commune
2
Doc Hau Temple
9381 VH/QĐ04/08/1992
Doc Hau Village –Toan Thang commune
3
Cuu Doi Communal House
3207 VH/QĐDecember 30, 1991
Zone II of townTien Lang
4
Ha Dai Temple
938 VH/QĐ04/08/1992
Ha Dai Village –Tien Thanh commune
APPENDIX II
STT
Name of the monument
Number, year of decision
Location
1
Phu Ke Pagoda Temple
178/QD-UBJanuary 28, 2005
Zone 1 - townTien Lang
2
Trung Lang Temple
178/QD-UBJanuary 28, 2005
Zone 4 – townTien Lang
3
Bao Khanh Pagoda
1900/QD-UBAugust 24, 2006
Nam Tu Village -Kien Thiet commune
4
Bach Da Pagoda
1792/QD-UB11/11/2002
Hung Thang Commune
5
Ngoc Dong Temple
177/QD-UBNovember 27, 2005
Tien Thanh Commune
6
Tomb of Minister TSNhu Van Lan
2848/QD-UBSeptember 19, 2003
Nam Tu Village -Kien Thiet commune
7
Canh Son Stone Temple
2160/QD-UBSeptember 19, 2003
Van Doi Commune –Doan Lap
8
Meiji Temple
2259/QD-UBSeptember 19, 2002
Toan Thang Commune
9
Tien Doi Noi Temple
477/QD-UBSeptember 19, 2005
Doan Lap Commune
10
Tu Doi Temple
177/QD-UBJanuary 28, 2005
Doan Lap Commune
11
Duyen Lao Temple
177/QD-UBJanuary 28, 2005
Tien Minh Commune
12
Dinh Xuan Uc Pagoda
177/QD-UBJanuary 28, 2005
Bac Hung Commune
13
Chu Khe Pagoda
177/QD-UBJanuary 28, 2005
Hung Thang Commune
14
Dong Dinh
2848/QD-UBNovember 21, 2002
Vinh Quang Commune
15
President's Memorial HouseTon Duc Thang
177/QD-UBJanuary 28, 2005
NT Quy Cao
Ha Dai Temple
Ben Vua Temple
Tien Lang hot spring
div.maincontent .p { color: black; font-family:"Times New Roman", serif; font-style: normal; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: none; font-size: 14pt; margin:0pt; } div.maincontent p { color: black; font-family:"Times New Roman", serif; font-style: normal; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: none; font-size: 14pt; margin:0pt; } div.maincontent .s1 { color: black; font-family:"Times New Roman", serif; font-style: normal; font-weight: normal; font-size: 16pt; } div.maincontent .s2 { color: black; font-family:"Times New Roman", serif; font-style: italic; font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none; font-size: 14pt; } div.maincontent .s3 { color: black; font-family:"Times New Roman", serif; font-style: italic; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: none; font-size: 14pt; } div.maincontent .s4 { color: black; font-family:"Times New Roman", serif; font-style: normal; font-weight: normal; font-size: 14pt; } div.maincontent .s5 { color: black; font-family:"Times New Roman", serif; font-style: normal; font-weight: bold; font-size: 14pt; } div.maincontent .s6 { color: black; font-family:"Times New Roman", serif; font-style: normal; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: none; font-size: 14pt; } div.maincontent .s7 { color: black; font-family:"Times New Roman", serif; font-style: normal; font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none; font-size: 14pt; } div.maincontent .s8 { color: black; font-family:"Times New Roman", serif; font-style: normal; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: none; font-size: 9pt; vertical-align: 6pt; } div.maincontent .s9 { color: black; font-family:"Times New Roman", serif; font-style: normal; font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none; font-size: 12pt; } div.maincontent .s11 { color: black; font-family:"Times New Roman", serif; font-style: normal; font-weight: normal; tex -
Group of Indicators for Efficiency of Capital Use in Production and Business -
Analysis of Working Capital Efficiency at the Company. -
The impact of capital structure on business performance of joint stock companies listed on the Vietnamese stock market - 25 -
The Impact of Capital Structure on Business Performance

Source: Author's own compilation
3.3.1. Analysis of capital structure and average cost of capital for VICEM Hai Phong Packaging JSC
Introduction to VICEM Hai Phong Packaging JSC
VICEM Hai Phong Packaging Joint Stock Company (BXH) was formerly Hai Phong Cement Packaging Enterprise (under Hai Phong Cement Company). The company is the pioneer in the production transformation program of Hai Phong Cement Company following the industrialization and modernization policy. In 2009, the company registered for listing and on November 25, 2009, the company's shares were officially traded on the Hanoi Stock Exchange. The main business lines of the enterprise are the production and trading of cement packaging and other types of packaging, production of raw materials for the packaging industry... The company's main customers include: VICEM Hai Phong Cement One Member Co., Ltd., VICEM Hoang Thach Cement One Member Co., Ltd., But Son Cement Joint Stock Company, Dien Bien Cement Joint Stock Company, Ha Long Cement Joint Stock Company...
Analysis of capital structure and business performance
The capital structure and business efficiency of VICEM Hai Phong Packaging JSC are shown in the following chart 3.11:
Table 3.11: Capital structure and average business efficiency of VICEM Hai Phong Packaging JSC
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
1.4
1.2
1
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0
Equity/Total Assets Ratio
Debt to Total Assets Ratio ROE
Tobin's Q
Year Year Year Year Year Year 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017
Source: Compiled from Stoxplus data
VICEM Hai Phong Packaging Joint Stock Company maintains a capital structure that has not changed much over the years with the debt to total assets ratio always reaching 50-60% from 2011 to 2017. This is also a fairly common debt ratio of industrial enterprises listed on the stock market. In general, during the research period, the debt to total assets ratio of the enterprise tended to decrease from 64% in 2011 to 52% in 2017. The business performance of the enterprise through the two indicators ROE and Tobin's Q tended to increase slightly, although it was not stable in the period from 2011 to 2016. In 2017, the company's business results tended to decrease when the return on equity ratio only reached 5.5%. According to the company's explanatory report, the reason for the decrease in profit margin in 2017 compared to 2016 was due to the differentiation and competition of the packaging market, causing the selling price of packaging to decrease by 114 VND (equivalent to 2.14%), in addition to the increase in the price of main raw materials (plastic price increased by 7% to 9%, paper increased by 3% compared to 2016). This is also a common difficulty of some businesses in the same industry such as But Son Cement Packaging Joint Stock Company, Bien Hoa Packaging Joint Stock Company, when the ROE index decreased significantly in 2017.
When analyzing the financial balance shown through the Net Working Capital (NWC) indicator, the results show that the enterprise has always maintained a good financial balance. Net working capital in the period of 2011 - 2017 has always been between 33 billion VND and 44 billion VND. The solvency indicator has fluctuated around 1.5 times in recent years, which is relatively good compared to some enterprises in the same packaging industry such as Bim Son Packaging JSC and Vegetable Oil Packaging JSC.
Details of the company's debt structure are shown in Table 3.12:
Table 3.12: Debt structure of VICEM Hai Phong Packaging JSC
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
39%
57%
65%
53%
60%
54%
65%
Non-interest bearing debt/Total liabilities ratio
0%
5%
0%
17%
4%
13%
0%
61%
Long-term debt/Total liabilities ratio
43%
46%
25%
37%
22%
35%
2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016
2017
Current Debt/Total Liabilities Ratio
Source: Compiled from Stoxplus data
Through table 3.12 on debt structure, it can be seen that the enterprise mainly relies on short-term loans and interest-free debt. The enterprise's short-term loans mainly supplement working capital and serve the enterprise's production and business. The ratio of short-term debt to total liabilities of the enterprise is unstable and tends to increase in recent years. In 2017, the ratio of short-term debt reached its highest value when it accounted for 61% of total liabilities. Thus, in addition to some objective reasons regarding the market and input material prices, the increase in debt arising from costs (short-term debt) in 2017 may be a reason for the decline in business efficiency of the enterprise.
Regarding long-term debt, the company started to mobilize a loan of 10 billion VND in 2010, with a term of 5 years, with the purpose of investing in the project "Investing in construction of works and production lines to expand the Hai Phong cement packaging factory with a capacity of 25 million bags/year". The company gradually paid off the principal and interest in the following years, so the chart shows that the long-term debt ratio gradually decreased from 17% of total debt payable in 2011, to 4% in 2014 and no longer used long-term debt in the following years.
Regarding equity, the Company has not had many changes in its business operations. During the research period from 2011 to 2017, BXH only increased capital once from offering shares to the market in 2011. The Company successfully issued 12,040 shares with a total proceeds of VND 180,600,000. After this share issuance, the number of common shares outstanding of the Company has remained stable up to the present time at 3,012,040 shares. The Company's annual dividend payout ratio on earnings per share fluctuates around 35% -65%. The Company does not issue preferred shares or buy back treasury shares.
Determine the cost of debt
Based on the formula for calculating the cost of debt and cost of equity mentioned in chapter 2, the thesis applies it to calculate the cost of debt and cost of equity of VICEM Hai Phong Packaging Joint Stock Company for 2017 as follows:
Table 3.5: Debt cost in 2017 of VICEM Hai Phong Packaging JSC
TT
Target | Interpretation | Value | Unit | |
1 | Earnings before interest and tax | 6,367 | Million Dong | |
2 | Interest expense | 2,328 | Million Dong | |
3 | Interest payment capacity | (1)/(2) | 2,735 | Time |
4 | Rating | Convert from (3) | B1/B+ | |
5 | Enterprise risk spread | Convert from (4) | 2.98% | %/year |
6 | Country risk spread | 1.52% | %/year | |
7 | Risk-free return | 4.87% | %/year | |
8 | Corporate income tax rate | 20.00% | %/year | |
9 | Pre-tax cost of debt | (5)+(6)+(7) | 9.37% | %/year |
10 | After-tax cost of debt | (9)*(1-(8)) | 7.50% | %/year |
Table 3.6: Calculation table of 2017 Cost of Equity of VICEM Hai Phong Packaging JSC
STT
Target | Interpretation | Value | Unit | |
1 | Unleverd beta | Industry average beta for construction materials industry companies no debt | 0.95 | Time |
2 | Loan value | 37,921 | Million Dong | |
3 | Market value of equity own | 34,939 | Million Dong | |
4 | Corporate income tax rate | 20 | %/year | |
5 | Debt to Equity Ratio Possession (D/E) | (2)/(3) | 1.0853 | Time |
6 | Beta | (1)*(1+(1-(4))*(5)) | 1,775 | Time |
7 | Risk-free return | 4.87% | %/year | |
8 | Current risk premium for market development | 5.08% | %/year | |
9 | Country risk premium | 1.71% | %/year | |
10 | Cost of equity | (7)+(6)*((8)+(9)) | 16.92% | %/year |
Average cost of capital of the enterprise in 2017: WACC = R E (E/(D+E)) +R D (D/(D+E))
= 16.92%* 34,939/72,860 + 7.5% *37,921/72,860 = 12.02%/year
In order to evaluate the capital structure decision of Vicem Hai Phong Packaging Joint Stock Company, the thesis determines the average cost of capital of the enterprise when the debt ratio changes. To determine the average cost of capital in cases of changing the debt ratio, the thesis makes the following assumptions:
- The business's capital needs remain unchanged or total debt and equity remain unchanged: D+E = 37,921 + 34,939 = 72,860 million VND.
- When the business changes the debt ratio, the interest rate remains unchanged and equals the current level: Current interest expense/Current debt value = 2,328/37,921= 6.14%/year.
- When the enterprise changes the debt ratio, the profit before interest and tax remains unchanged and equals the current level: 6,367 million VND.
On that basis, the Thesis builds the following cases of debt ratio adjustment:
Present (D/E=1.09) | Assumption A (D/E=0.25) | Assumption B (D/E=1.5) | |
Debt | 37,921 million VND | 14,572 million VND | 43,716 million VND |
Market value Equity | 34,939 million VND | 58,288 million VND | 29,144 million VND |
Total | 72,860 million VND | 72,860 million VND | 72,860 million VND |
The cost of debt and equity in hypothetical case A, when adjusted to reduce the debt ratio, is determined as follows:
Table 3.7: Assumed cost of debt A of VICEM Hai Phong Packaging JSC
TT
Target | Interpretation | Value | Unit | |
1 | Earnings before interest and taxes (Assuming constant) | 6,367 | Million Dong | |
Interest rate (assuming constant) | 2,328/37,921 | 6.14% | %/year | |
2 | Interest expense | 6.14%*14,572 | 894.72 | Million Dong |
3 | Interest payment capacity | (1)/(2) | 7.12 | Time |
4 | Rating | Convert from (3) | A2/A | |
5 | Enterprise risk spread | Convert from (4) | 0.99% | %/year |
6 | Country risk spread | 1.52% | %/year | |
7 | Risk-free return | 4.87% | %/year | |
8 | Corporate income tax rate | 20.00% | %/year | |
9 | Pre-tax cost of debt | (5)+(6)+(7) | 7.38% | %/year |
10 | After-tax cost of debt | (9)*(1-(8)) | 5.90% | %/year |





