Butler Solution
Butler Solution
Butler Solution
End-of-Chapter
Questions and Problems
to accompany
Multinational Finance
by Kirt C. Butler
1
Kirt C. Butler, Solutions for Multinational Finance, 4th edition
2
Kirt C. Butler, Solutions for Multinational Finance, 4th edition
2.7 Describe the Bretton Woods agreement. How long did the agreement last? What forced its collapse?
After World War II, representatives of the Allied nations convened at Bretton Woods, New
Hampshire to stabilize financial markets and promote world trade. Under Bretton Woods’ “gold
exchange standard,” currencies were pegged to the price of gold (or to the U.S. dollar). Bretton
Woods also created the International Monetary Fund and the International Bank for Reconstruction
and Development (the World Bank). The Bretton Woods fixed exchange rate system lasted until
1970, when high U.S. inflation relative to gold prices and to other currencies forced the dollar off the
gold exchange standard.
2.8 What factors contributed to the Mexican peso crisis of 1995 and to the Asian crises of 1997?
In each instance, the government tried to maintain the value of the local currency at artificially high
levels. This depleted foreign currency reserves. Local businesses and governments were also
borrowing in non-local currencies (primarily the dollar), which heavily exposed them to a drop in the
value of the local currency.
2.9 What is moral hazard and how does it relate to IMF rescue packages?
Moral hazard occurs when the existence of a contract changes the behaviors of parties to the contract.
When the IMF assists countries in defending their currencies, it changes the expectations and hence
the behaviors of lenders, borrowers, and governments. For example, lenders might underestimate the
risks of lending to struggling economies if there is an expectation that the IMF will intervene during
difficult times.
Problem Solutions
2.1 This open-ended question is intended to engage the student and bring their knowledge up-to-date.
Useful websites are listed on the inside-front cover of the text, and include:
Bank for International Settlements www.bis.org
International Monetary Fund (IMF) www.imf.org
World Trade Organization (WTO) www.wto.org
International Labor Organization www.ilo.org
International Chamber of Commerce www.iccwbo.org
Michigan State University Global Edge globaledge.msu.edu
United Nations www.un.org
United Nations’ Commission on International Trade Law www.uncitral.org
World Bank www.worldbank.org
World Bank’s Multilateral Investment Guarantee Agency www.miga.org
World Economic Forum www.weforum.org
3
Kirt C. Butler, Solutions for Multinational Finance, 4th edition
4
Kirt C. Butler, Solutions for Multinational Finance, 4th edition
Problem Solutions
3.1 a. The bid is less than the offer, so Citicorp is quoting the currency in the denominator. Citicorp is
buying dollars at the DKr5.62/$ bid rate and selling dollars at the DKr5.87/$ offer rate.
b. In American terms, the bid price is $0.1704/DKr and the ask price is $0.1779/DKr. Citicorp is
buying and selling the kroner at these quotes.
c. In direct terms, the bid quote for the dollar is $0.1779/DKr and the ask price is $0.1704/DKr.
Citicorp is buying dollars at $0.1779/DKr (which is equivalent to DKr5.62/$) and selling
dollars at $0.1704/DKr (or DKr5.87/$).
d. The bank will receive the bid-ask spread on each dollar. When buying one million dollars at
DKr5.62/$ and selling one million dollars at DKr5.87/$, the bank’s profit on the bid-ask spread
will be (DKr5.87/$–DKr5.62/$)($1,000,000) = DKr250,000.
3.2 The ask price is higher than the bid, so these are rates at which the bank is willing to buy or sell
dollars (in the denominator). You’re selling dollars, so you’ll get the bank’s dollar bid price. You
need to pay SKr10,000,000/(SKr7.5050/$) ≈ $1,332,445.
3.3 The U.S. dollar (in the denominator) is selling at a forward premium, so the Canadian dollar must
be selling at a forward discount. Annualized forward premia on the U.S. dollar are:
Bid ($) Ask ($)
Six months forward +0.681% +0.761%
Percent per annum on the Canadian dollar from the U.S. perspective are as follows:
Bid (C$) Ask (C$)
Six months forward –0.678% –0.758%
The premiums/discounts on the two currencies are opposite in sign and nearly equal in magnitude.
Forward premiums and discounts are of slightly different magnitude because the bases (U$ vs. C$)
on which they are calculated are different. Forward premiums/discounts are as stated above
regardless of where a trader resides.
3.4 a. The forward premium is equal to (F1$/¥ – S0$/¥) = ($0.008772945/¥ – $0.009057355/¥) =
–$0.000284410/¥, or –2.8441 basis points. As a percentage over the 90-day period, this is
(F1$/¥ – S0$/¥) / S0$/¥ = –0.031401, or –3.1401 percent.
b. As an annualized forward premium following the U.S. convention, this is equal to
5
Kirt C. Butler, Solutions for Multinational Finance, 4th edition
6
Kirt C. Butler, Solutions for Multinational Finance, 4th edition
7
Kirt C. Butler, Solutions for Multinational Finance, 4th edition
4.11 Will an appreciation of the domestic currency help or hurt a domestic exporter?
A nominal appreciation in the domestic currency is likely to have little effect on domestic importers
and exporters. A real appreciation of the domestic currency can hurt domestic exporters by raising the
price of domestic goods relative to foreign goods. Domestic importers will see their purchasing power
increase relative to foreign competitors, and so are likely to be helped by a real appreciation of the
domestic currency.
4.12 Describe the behavior of real exchange rates.
Although real exchange rates revert to their long run average, in the short run there can be substantial
deviations from purchasing power parity and the long run average.
4.13 What methods can be used to forecast future spot rates of exchange?
Market-based forecasts are obtained from forward exchange rates or from interest rate parity when
forward prices are unavailable. Model-based forecasts can be generated from technical analysis
(analyzing patterns in exchange rates) or from fundamental analysis (from a larger set of economic
relationships).
4.14 How can the international parity conditions allow you to forecast next year’s spot rate?
In theory, any of the international parity conditions could be used: E[Std/f]/S0d/f = Ftd/f/S0d/f =
[(1+id)/(1+if)]t = [(1+E[pd])/(1+E[pf])]t. In practice, forward rates are usually used to predict spot rates.
At the least, forwards have the advantage of reflecting the opportunity costs of capital through the
interest rate parity relation, Ftd/f/S0d/f = [(1+id)/(1+if)]t.
Problem Solutions
4.1 a. S¥SFr = S¥/$S$/SFr = (¥200/$)($0.50/SFr) = ¥100/SFr
b. S¥SFr = S¥/$/SSFr/$ =(¥100/$)/(SFr1.60/$) = ¥62.5/SFr
4.2 SSFr/$ S$/¥ S¥/SFr = 1.0326 > 1. Spot rates are “too high” relative to the parity condition, so you should
sell the currencies in the denominators for the currencies in the numerators at the relatively high
prices. This means that you should a) sell dollars for francs, b) sell yen for dollars, and c) sell francs
for yen. Alternatively, a) buy francs with dollars, b) buy dollars with yen, and c) buy yen with
francs. Triangular arbitrage would yield a profit of 3.26 percent of the starting amount. For triangular
arbitrage to be profitable, transactions costs on a “round turn” cannot be more than this amount.
4.3 Each of these prices is a traded contract in the interbank forex market, and so arbitrage (either bilateral
or triangular) will ensure that the relations Ftd/f(Y)/Fd/f(X) = 1 and Ftd/eFte/fFtf/d = 1 hold within the
bounds of transaction costs.
4.4 The forward price is at a 9 bp discount over six months, or 18 bps on an annualized basis. The six-
month percentage premium is (F1£/$/S0£/$)–1 = (£0.6352/$)/(£0.6361/$)–1 = 0.9986–1 = –0.14%, or a
discount of 0.28% on an annualized basis. Because Ft£/$ = E[St£/$] according to forward parity (the
unbiased forward expectations hypothesis), the spot rate is expected to depreciate by 0.14% over the
next six months.
4.5 a. The percentage bid-ask spread depends on which currency is in the denominator.
Tokyo quote for the peso: (¥28.77/MXN – ¥28.74/MXN)/(¥28.74/MXN) = 0.00104, or 0.104%.
Mexico City quote for yen: (MXN0.03420/¥ – MXN0.03416/¥)/(MXN0.03416/¥) = 0.00117, or
0.117%.
b. The Mexican bank’s yen quote can be converted into a quote for the Mexican peso as follows:
S¥/MXN = 1/(MXN0.03416/¥) ≈ ¥29.27/MXN bid on the yen and ask on the peso.
S¥/MXN = 1/(MXN0.03420/¥) ≈ ¥29.24/MXN ask on the yen and bid on the peso.
So “MXN0.03416/¥ BID and MXN0.03420/¥ ASK” on the yen is equivalent to ¥29.24/MXN
BID and ¥29.27/MXN ASK on the Mexican peso.
The winning strategy is to buy pesos (and sell yen) from the Tokyo bank at the ¥28.77/MXN ask
8
Kirt C. Butler, Solutions for Multinational Finance, 4th edition
price for pesos and sell pesos (and buy yen) to the Mexican bank at the ¥29.24/MXN bid price
for pesos. Buying pesos in Tokyo yields (¥1,000,000)/(¥28.77/MXN) = MXN34,758. Selling
pesos in Mexico City yields (MXN34,758)(¥29.24/MXN) = ¥1,016,336. Your arbitrage profit is
16,336 yen, or about MXN559 at the Mexican bank’s ¥29.24/MXN bid price for pesos.
4.6 In this circumstance, the international parity conditions do not have anything to say about the U.K.
inflation rate. Nominal interest rates will adjust to expected inflation according to the Fisher relation;
(1+i) = (1+p)(1+ė).
4.7 a. From interest rate parity, (¥210/$)/(¥190/$) = (1+i¥)/(1.15) ⇒ i¥ = 27.11%.
b. Because the forward rate of ¥210/$ is greater than the spot rate of ¥190/$, the dollar is at a forward
premium. If forward rates are unbiased predictors of future spot rates, the dollar is likely to
appreciate against the yen by (¥210/$)/(¥190/$)–1 = 10.526%.
4.8 a. In this problem, we know the spot and forward rates and U.S. inflation. The real and nominal
interest rates are not needed: F1$/£/S0$/£ = ($1.20/£)/($1.25/£) = 0.96 = E(1+p$)/E(1+p£) =
(1.05)/E(1+p£) => E(p£) = (1.05/0.96)–1 = 9.375%
b. From the Fisher equation: i£ = (1+p£)(1+ė£)–1 = (1.09375)(1.02)–1 = 11.56%.
4.9 a. E[P1D] = P0D(1+pD) = D100(1.10) = D110
E[P1F] = P0F(1+pF) = F1(1.21) = F1.21
E[S1D/F] = E[P1D] / E[P1F] = D110 / F1.21 = D90.91/F.
b. E[P2D] = P0D(1+pD)2 = D100(1.10)2 = D121
E[P2F] = P0F(1+pF)2 = F1(1.21)2 = F1.4641
E[S2D/F] = E[P2D]/E[P2F] = D121/F1.4641
= S0D/F[(1+pD)/(1+pF)]2 = (D100/F)(1.10/1.21)2 = D82.64/F.
4.10 a. A 7% annualized rate with quarterly compounding is equivalent to 7%/4 = 1.75% per quarter.
From interest rate parity, the 3-month MR interest rate is FMR/$/SMR/$ =
(MR3.9888/$)/(MR4.0200/$) = (1+iMR)/(1+i$) = (1+iMR)/(1+0.0175) => iMR = 0.009603, or
0.9603% per three months. Annualized, this is equivalent to (0.9603%)*4 = 3.8412% per year
with quarterly compounding. Alternatively, the annual percentage rate is (1.009603)4–1 =
0.03897, or 3.897% per year.
b. $10,000,000 invested at the three-month U.S. rate yields $10,175,000. Changed into MR at the
forward rate, this is worth ($10,175,000)(MR3.9888/$) = MR40,586,040. You can finance your
$10,000,000 by borrowing MR40,200,000. Your obligation on this contract will be
(MR40,200,000)(1.009603) ≈ MR40,586,040 which is exactly offset by the proceeds from your
forward contract.
4.11 a. FtBt/$/S0Bt/$ = (1 + iBt)t/(1 + i$)t = (Bt 25.64/$)/(Bt 24.96/$) = (1 + iBt)/(1.06125)
⇒ 1.02724 = (1 + iBt)/1.06125 ⇒ iBt = 9.02%
−$1,000,000
9
Kirt C. Butler, Solutions for Multinational Finance, 4th edition
This leaves a net gain at time 1 of $1,070,827 – $1,061,250 = $9,577, which is worth
$9,577/1.06125 = $9,024 in present value.
4.12 F1MXN/$/S0MXN/$=(MXN11/$)/(MXN10/$)=1.1<1.1132=(1.18)/(1.06)=(1+iMXN)/(1+i$). The ratio of
interest rates is too high and must fall, so borrow at the relatively low dollar rate and invest at the
relatively high peso rate. Similarly, the forward premium is too low and must rise, so buy dollars
(and sell pesos) at the relatively low forward rate for the dollar and sell dollars (and buy pesos) at the
relatively high dollar spot rate.
- Borrow $1 million so that $1,060,000 is due in six months.
- Sell $1 million and buy MXN10,000,000 at the relatively high spot price.
- Invest MXN10,000,000 at 18% to yield MXN11,800,000 in six months.
- Cover by selling MXN11,800,000 at the MXN11/$ forward rate to yield $1,072,727.
This leaves a profit of $1,072,727–$1,060,000 = $12,727 at time t=1 in six months.
4.13 The Singapore dollar is at a forward premium; F1$/S$/S0$/S$ = ($0.51/S$)/($0.50/S$) = 1.02, or 2% per
year. This is less than is warranted by the difference in interest rates (1+i$)/(1+iS$) = (1.06)/(1.04) =
1.019231, so F1$/S$/S0$/S$ > (1+i$)/(1+iS$). The forward/spot ratio is too high and must fall, so sell S$
(and buy dollars) at the relatively high S$ forward rate and buy S$ (and sell dollars) at the relatively
low S$ spot rate. Conversely, the ratio of interest rates is too low and must rise, so borrow at the
relatively low dollar interest rate and invest at the relatively high S$ rate. (Even though S$ interest
rates are lower than dollar interest rates in nominal terms, S$ interest rates are high and dollar
interest rates are low relative to the forward/spot ratio.) Suppose you borrow ($1,000,000)/(1+i$) =
$1,060,000 at i$ = 6.0%.
+$1,000,000
-$1,060,000
+S$2,000,000
-$1,000,000
+S$2,080,000
-S$2,000,000
10
Kirt C. Butler, Solutions for Multinational Finance, 4th edition
+$1,060,800
-S$2,080,000
The result is a dollar profit of $1,060,800–$1,060,000 = $800. These transactions are worth
undertaking only if the costs of executing the four transactions is less than $800.
4.14 a. E[P1F] = P0F(1+pF) = 1.21
E[P1D] = P0D(1+pD) = 110
E[S1D/F] = (S0D/F)(1+pD)/(1+pF) = (D100/F)(1.10/1.21) ≈ D90.91/F.
b. Because nominal exchange rates should adjust to reflect changes in relative purchasing power, the
expected real exchange rate is 100% of the beginning rate: E[X1D/F] = (E[S1D/F]/S0D/F)((1+pF)/(1+pD))
= ((D90.91/F)/(D100/F))(1.21/1.10) = 1.00, or 100%.
c. E[P2F]) = P0F(1+pF)2 = F1.4641
E[P2D]) = P0D(1+pD)2 = D121
E[P2F]) = P0F(1+pF)2 = F1.4641
E[P2D]) = P0D(1+pD)2 = D121
E[S2D/F] = S0D/F((1+pD)/(1+pF))2 = (D100/F)(1.10/1.21)2 ≈ D82.64/F
The real exchange rate is not expected to change: E[X2D/F] = (E[S2D/F]/E[S0D/F]) [(1+pF)/(1+pD)]2
= ((D82.64/F)(D100/F)) / (1.21/1.10)2 = 1.00, or 100%.
4.15 a. s¥/SFr = (S0¥/SFr)/(S–1¥/SFr) –1 = (¥155/SFr)/(¥160/SFr) – 1 = –3.125%.
b. From relative purchasing power parity, the spot rate should have been:
E[S0¥/SFr] = (S–1¥/SFr) [(1+p¥)/(1+pSFr)] = (¥160/SFr) [(1.02)/(1.03)] = ¥158.45.
c. As a difference from the expectation, the real change in the spot rate is:
x¥/SFr = (Actual-Expected)/(Expected) = (S0¥/SFr –E[S0¥/SFr])/E[S0¥/SFr])
= (¥155/SFr–¥158.45/SFr)/¥158.45/SFr = –2.18%.
Alternatively, change in the real exchange rate is equal to:
x¥/SFr = ((S0¥/SFr)/(S–1¥/SFr)) ((1+pSFr)/(1+p¥)) – 1
= ((¥155/SFr)/(¥160/SFr)) ((1.03)/(1.02)) – 1 = –2.18%.
d. The franc depreciated by 2.18% in purchasing power.
e. In real terms, the yen rose by xSFr/¥ = ((S0SFr/¥) / (S–1SFr/¥)) ((1+p¥) / (1+pSFr)) – 1
= ((S0¥/SFr)–1 / (S–1¥/SFr)–1) ((1+p¥) / (1+pSFr)) – 1
= ((¥155/SFr)–1 / (¥160/SFr)–1 ) ((1.02)/(1.03)) – 1 = +2.23%
= ((SFr.0064516/¥)/(SFr.00625000/¥)) ((1.02)/(1.03)) – 1 = +2.23%.
Because the SFr fell by 2.18% in real terms, the yen rose by 1/(1–0.0218) ≈ 2.23%.
4.16 a. technical analysis
b. technical analysis
c. fundamental analysis
d. fundamental analysis
e. technical analysis
4A.2 Inflation rates are pD = ln(1+pD) = ln(1.10) = 9.531% and pF = ln(1+pF) = ln(1.21) = 19.062% in
continuously compounded returns. Expected price levels and spot rates are:
E[P1D] = P0D e(0.09531) = (D100)(1.10) = D110
E[P2D] = P0D e(2)(0.09531) = (D100)(1.21) = D121
E[P1F] = P0F e(0.19062) = (F1)(1.21) = F1.21
E[P2F] = P0F e(2)(0.19062) = (F1)(1.4641) = F1.4641
E[S1D/F] = E[P1D] / E[P1F] = D110 / F1.21 = D90.91/F
E[S2D/F] = E[P2D] / E[P2F] = D121 / F1.4641 = D82.64/F
12
Kirt C. Butler, Solutions for Multinational Finance, 4th edition
ΔSd/f ΔSd/f
ΔSd/f ΔSd/f
13
Kirt C. Butler, Solutions for Multinational Finance, 4th edition
domestic currency, f2 = the currency in which transaction exposure is denominated, and f1 = the
currency used to hedge against std/f2. If there is neither a currency nor a maturity mismatch, then
futures prices converge to spot prices at expiration and exposure to currency risk can be hedged
exactly (an r-square of one) with a futures contract.
Problem Solutions
5.1
Forward: +$.0180/S$
0 30 60 90
Futures:
$0.0002/S$ $0.0002/S$ $0.0002/S$ $0.0002/S$
0 1 2 ... 89 90
Your cumulative gain over the 90 days of the futures contract is $0.018/S$. This is the value of the
net cash inflow at expiration of the forward contract.
5.2 The U.S. MNC will need (S$3,000,000)/(S$125,000/contract) = 24 futures contracts to cover its
forward exposure. The underlying position is long S$, so the MNC should sell 24 S$ futures
contracts. A short futures position in S$ gains from a depreciation of the S$. If the spot rate closes
at $0.5900/S$ on the expiration date, then the gain accumulated over the three months of the
contract (as the contracts are marked to market each day) will be ($0.6075/S$–
$0.5900/S$)(S$3,000,000) = $52,500.
5.3 a.
¥9,000,000
today 6 months
b. Draw a payoff profile for this project with $/¥ on the axes.
ΔV$/¥
ΔS$/¥
-Sh500,000
b.
Buy shekels in the U.S. dollar futures market +Sh500,000
-$81,250
14
Kirt C. Butler, Solutions for Multinational Finance, 4th edition
-S$125,000
-S$125,000
These ending values exactly hedge the currency exposures of the expected cash flows. Any
changes in spot rates SSh/$ and SS$/$ would be received over the 90-day life of the futures
contract according to the daily settlement procedures.
c. Cotton Bolls could take out a 90-day futures contract to sell S$ for Israeli shekels. Because the
ratio of exposed amounts (S$125,000/Sh500,000) = S$0.2500/Sh = FS$/Sh, the underlying
exposures can be matched exactly. The implied forward rate is S$0.25/Sh. Cotton Bolls would
save on commissions, having to buy one futures contract rather than two.
5.5 Hedge ratios and delta-, cross-, and delta-cross-hedges:
a. The optimal hedge ratio for this delta-hedge is given by:
NFut* = (amt in futures)/(amt exposed) = –β
⇒ (amt in futures) = (–β)(amt exposed) = (–1.025)(–DKr10bn) = DKr10.25bn,
so buy (DKr10.25bn)($0.80/DKr)/($50,000/contract) = 164,000 contracts.
b. The optimal amount in the futures position of this cross-hedge is:
⇒ (amt in futures) = (–1.04)(–DKr10bn) = DKr10.4bn,
or (€0.75/DKr)(DKr10.4bn) = €7.8bn at the €0.75/DKr exchange rate.
c. The optimal amount in the futures position of this delta-cross-hedge is:
⇒ (amt in futures) = (–1.05)(–DKr10bn) = DKr10.5bn.
This is equal to (DKr10.5bn)($0.80/DKr)/($50,000/contract) = 168,000 contracts.
d. Hedge quality can be ranked as follows: 1) delta-hedge (r2 = 0.98), 2) cross-hedge (r2 = 0.89),
and 3) delta-cross-hedge (r2 =0.86). If the merchant banker does not enjoy the same volume and
liquidity as the futures exchanges, the cross-hedge through the merchant bank is likely to be the
most expensive hedge.
5.6 a. Profit/loss on each of the positions is as follows:
Scenario #1 St$/S$ = $0.6089/S$ i$ = 6.24% iS$ = 4.04%
$/S$
Futt,T = ($0.6089/S$) [(1.0624)/(1.0404)](51/365) ≅ $0.6107/S$
Profit on futures: +($0.6107/S$–$0.6107/S$) +$0.0000/S$
Profit on spot: –($0.6089/S$–$0.6089/S$) –$0.0000/S$
Net gain $0.0000/S$
Scenario #2 St$/S$ = $0.6089/S$ i$ = 6.24% iS$ = 4.54%
$/S$
Futt,T = ($0.6089/S$) [(1.0624)/(1.0454)](51/365) ≅ $0.6102/S$
Profit on futures: +($0.6102/S$–$0.6107/S$) –$0.0004/S$
Profit on spot: –($0.6089/S$–$0.6089/S$) –$0.0000/S$
Net gain –$0.0004/S$
Scenario #3 St$/S$ = $0.6089/S$ i$ = 6.74% iS$ = 4.04%
Futt,T$/S$ = ($0.6089/S$) [(1.0674)/(1.0404)](51/365) ≅ $0.6111/S$
Profit on futures: –($0.6111/S$–$0.6107/S$) +$0.0004/S$
Profit on spot: +($0.6089/S$–$0.6089/S$) –$0.0000/S$
Net gain +$0.0004/S$
The profit spread is ±$0.0004/S$. This is about the same as in the example of Figure 5.6. This
shows that basis risk exists even if the spot exchange rate does not change.
15
Kirt C. Butler, Solutions for Multinational Finance, 4th edition
16
Kirt C. Butler, Solutions for Multinational Finance, 4th edition
Problem Solutions
6.1 A call option to buy pounds sterling with krone is equivalent to a put option to sell krone for pound
sterling. With pounds in the denominator, it is most convenient to think of consider the pound call.
Option values at expiration as a function of the krone value of the pound are then:
Spot rate at expiration (DKr/£) 8.00 8.40 8.42 8.44 8.46 8.48
Pound call value at expiration (DKr/£) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.03
17
Kirt C. Butler, Solutions for Multinational Finance, 4th edition
6.2 An exercise price of DKr8.45/£ is equivalent to £0.11834/DKr. The corresponding krone put option
values are:
Spot rate at expiration (£/DKr) .12500 .11905 .11876 .11848 .11820 .11792
Krone put value at expiration (£/DKr) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.14 0.42
6.3 A short krone put is equivalent to a short pound call. Here are their payoff profiles.
− DKr.03/£
−£.11834/DKr
+£.1464/DKr
+£.00204/DKr
ΔST£/DKr ≡ ΔSTDKr/£
DKr8.45/£ DKr8.5964/£
£.11834/DKr
−£.11633/DKr
£.11633/DKr
6.4 Buy a A$ call and sell a A$ put, each with an exercise price of F1$/A$ = $0.75/A$ and the same
expiration date as the forward contract. Payoffs at expiration look like this:
ΔCallT$/A$ −ΔPutT$/A$ ΔFT$/A$
6.5 The arguments are the same as for call options. As the variability of end-of-period spot rates
becomes more dispersed, the probability of the spot rate closing below the exercise price increases
and put options gain value. Here are the three sets of graphs:
18
Kirt C. Butler, Solutions for Multinational Finance, 4th edition
Sd/f Sd/f
-2
-1
-2
-1
3
-3 -3
Sd/f Sd/f
-2
-1
-2
-1
3
-3 -3
Sd/f
-2
-1
-2
-1
0
3
Sd/f
-3 -3
Increasing variability in the distribution of end-of-period spot rates results in an increase in put
option value in each case. (For in-the-money puts, the increase in option value with decreases in the
underlying spot rate is greater than the decrease in value from proportional increases in the spot
rate.) Variability in the distribution of end-of-period spot exchange rates comes from exchange rate
volatility and from time to expiration.
6.6 The payoff profile of a purchased straddle at expiration is shown below.
VT¥/$
¥/$
ST¥/$
K
A purchased straddle has more value the further from the exercise price it expires. This
combination will allow you to place a bet that the market has underestimated the volatility of the
yen/dollar exchange rate. Of course, if the market is informationally efficient, then volatility is
correctly priced in the market and this position (net of the costs of the options) will have zero net
present value.
6.7 ln [(¥110.517/$) / (¥100/$)] = ln(1.10517) = +0.10 = +10%
ln [(¥90.484/$) / (¥100/$)] = ln(0.90484) = –0.10 = –10%
6.8 ln [(¥156.64/$) / (¥105/$)] = ln(1.49181) = +0.40 = +40%
19
Kirt C. Butler, Solutions for Multinational Finance, 4th edition
20
Kirt C. Butler, Solutions for Multinational Finance, 4th edition
(a violation of Rule #2 from Chapter 3) of the exchange rates. This is not unusual, as the pound is
often left in the denominator of a foreign exchange quote. Historically, the pound was composed
of shillings and pence rather than decimal units. (Nobody understands cricket, either.) For clarity,
the table below includes forward rates in £/DKr and quotes option prices in direct £/DKr terms
from a Londoner’s perspective. The current spot rate is S0£/DKr = 1/(DKr8.4528/£) =
£0.11830/DKr and the exercise price is K£/DKr = 1/(DKr8.5/£) = £0.11765/DKr.
0.018
0.016
0.014
0.012
0.010
0.008
0.006
0.004
0.002
0.000
0.0900 0.0950 0.1000 0.1050 0.1100 0.1150 0.1200 0.1250
-0.002
d. Here are put option payoff profiles for the options prior to expiration. The one-year option has a
higher value at high spot rates and a lower value at low spot rates. The one-month option has
lower value at high spot rates and a higher value at lower spot rates. The darkened 45o line is the
intrinsic value of the option. European put option values can be below intrinsic value because they
cannot be exercised until expiration.
21
Kirt C. Butler, Solutions for Multinational Finance, 4th edition
0.120
0.100
0.080
0.060
0.040
0.020
0.000
0.0000 0.0200 0.0400 0.0600 0.0800 0.1000 0.1200 0.1400 0.1600
-0.020
6A.5 Let’s restate these exercise prices as pound per krone rates before proceeding.
Exercise prices
Exercise prices (DKr/£) 8.2000 8.4000 8.6000 8.8000
Exercise prices (£/DKr) 0.12195 0.11905 0.11628 0.11364
Call option value 0.00114 0.00222 0.00377 0.00568
Put option value 0.00421 0.00244 0.00127 0.00058
22
Kirt C. Butler, Solutions for Multinational Finance, 4th edition
Problem Solutions
7.1 a. Borrowing directly in the foreign currency results in the following cash flows:
Sunflower
borrow Lira: +100% -8% -8% -108% lire
Rosa
borrow $: +100% -9% -9% -109% dollars
23
Kirt C. Butler, Solutions for Multinational Finance, 4th edition
Sunflower
borrow Lira: +100% -8% -8% -108% Lira
borrow $: +100% -5% -5% -105% $
c. Sunflower borrows at 8% in lira but earns (9%–5%) = 4% over cost on the dollar loan to Rosa
for a net borrowing cost of (8%–4%) = 4% in lira. This is a 4% savings over borrowing directly
in the lira market at 8%.
Rosa borrows at 9% in dollars but earns (8%–7%) = 1% over cost on the lira loan to Sunflower
for a net borrowing cost of (9%–1%) = 8% in dollars. This is a 1% savings over the cost of
borrowing directly in the dollar market at 9%.
7.2 Little Prince could form a coupon swap (an interest rate swap) of its existing fixed rate debt into
floating rate debt. Consider the coupon swap pricing table from the text:
Bank Pays Bank Receives Current
Maturity Fixed Rate Fixed Rate TN Rate
2 years 2 yr TN sa + 19bps 2 yr TN sa + 40bps 7.05%
3 years 3 yr TN sa + 24bps 3 yr TN sa + 47bps 7.42%
4 years 4 yr TN sa + 28bps 4 yr TN sa + 53bps 7.85%
5 years 5 yr TN sa + 33bps 5 yr TN sa + 60bps 7.92%
This schedule assumes non-amortizing debt and semiannual rates (sa).
All quotes are against 6-month LIBOR flat. TN = Treasury Note rate.
LP would pay LIBOR flat on the floating rate side and receive the 2-year T-note rate of 7.24%
(7.05%+19 bp) on the fixed rate side. Because LP is now paying 8.25% on its fixed rate debt, its
interest shortfall would be (8.25%–7.24%) = 1.01%. This is equal to 1.01%(360/365) = 0.996%
per year in money market yield. LP’s net cost of floating rate funds is then LIBOR + 99.6 bps in
money market yield. In this example, the swap just barely beats the market rate on new floating
rate debt of LIBOR + 100 bps.
7.3 a. Ford pays fixed-rate zloty interest at a bond equivalent yield of 7.98%+0.78% = 8.76% and
receives floating rate zloty interest at the 6-month LIBOR rate. After converting the 45 bps
premium above LIBOR to a bond equivalent yield, Ford’s cost of fixed rate zloty debt is
8.76%+0.45%(365/360) ≈ 9.22% in semiannually compounded bond equivalent yield.
b. PM receives fixed rate zloty interest from the swap bank at 7.98%+0.24% = 8.22%. PM pays
floating rate zloty interest at 6-month LIBOR flat. After converting the difference between
PM’s fixed-rate outflows and inflows (9.83%–8.22% = 161 bps) to a money market yield,
PM’s cost of floating rate zloty debt is LIBOR + (161 bps)(360/365) = LIBOR+159 bps in
money market yield.
c. The swap bank pays LIBOR to Ford and receives LIBOR from PM for no net gain or loss in
floating-rate zlotys. The swap bank receives 8.76% (sa) from Ford and pays 8.22% (sa) to PM
for a net gain of (8.76%–8.22%) = 54 bps in bond equivalent yield on the notional principal.
7.4 a. The 6-month pound interest rate is (4.12%)/2 = 2.06%. The pound is selling at a 6-month
forward discount of 0.58%, so the yen rate that corresponds to the 2.06% pound rate in present
value is (1+i¥)/(1+i£) = F1¥/£/S0¥/£ ⇒ i¥ = (1+i£)(F1¥/£/S0¥/£)–1 = (1.0206)(1–0.0058)–1 =
24
Kirt C. Butler, Solutions for Multinational Finance, 4th edition
0.01468052, or about 1.468 percent per six months. Note in passing that the PV annuity
factors that correspond to these interest rates are PVIFA(i¥=1.46805,T=6) = 5.70339081 and
PVIFA(i£=2.06%,T=6) = 5.59010642.
b. Step (1): JI’s 105 bps spread to LIBOR translates into a BEY of (1.05%/2)(365/360) =
53.2292 bps per six months.
Step (2): Solving equation (7.2) for the equivalent semiannual pound spread yields r£ = r¥
PVIFA(i¥=1.46805,T=6)/PVIFA(i£=2.06%,T=6) = (53.2292 bps)(5.70339081/5.59010642) =
54.3079 bps in bond equivalent yield.
Step (3): JI also must pay the fixed rate side of the swap to the swap bank at a rate of 4.12% +
5 bps, or a semiannual rate of 2.085%. JI’s all-in cost of fixed rate pound sterling debt is
(2.085% + 0.543079%) = 2.628079 percent (BEY), or 5.256157 percent per year compounded
semiannually.
c. Step (1): BD is paying 7.45% over the 4.07 pound swap rate that it receives from the swap
bank, for a semiannual premium of (7.45%–4.07%)/2 = 169 bps.
Step (2): The corresponding yen premium to LIBOR is r¥ = r£ PVIFA(i£,6)/PVIFA(i¥,6) = (169
bps)(5.59010642/5.70339081) = 165.6432 bps (BEY).
Step (3): This is equivalent to (165.6432 bps)(360/365) = 163.3741 bps in money market
yield. BD’s all-in cost of floating rate yen financing over the LIBOR yen rate is 2(163.3741
bps) = 3.267483% in money market yield, or about 3.27 percent.
d. The swap bank earns a (4.17%–4.07%) = 10 bp spread in bond equivalent yield on the
notional principal regardless of whether the bank quotes fully covered rates or uses the swap
pricing schedule given in the problem. When the bank quotes fully covered rates, it adds a
premium to both the fixed and floating rate sides that leaves its net position unchanged.
7.5 a. The dollar interest rate that corresponds to the zloty swap mid-rate is ((1+iZ)/(1+i$))t =
FtZ/$/S0Z/$ ⇒ i$ = (1+iZ)/(FtZ/$/S0Z/$)–1 = (1.079)/(1.038)–1 = 0.03949904, or about 3.95 percent.
The corresponding present value annuity factors are PVIFA(iZ=7.9%,5) = 4.00325549 and
PVIFA(i$=3.949904%,5) = 4.45809446.
Usually, we know the notional principal and need to calculate payments based on the swap
pricing schedule. In this problem, GE knows the payments and needs to calculate the notional
principal. GE wants zloty cash outflows of Z5 million per year to hedge one-half of their Z10
million expected after-tax operating cash flow. GE will be paying the fixed zloty cash flow,
and so will pay the swap bank’s ask rate of 8.10%. This requires notional principal of PV0Z =
PMTZ PVIFA(iZ=8.1%,5) = (Z5 million)(3.98220886) = Z19,911,044 to generate a 5-year
annuity of Z5 million. This is equivalent to $7,111,087 at the Z2.80/$ spot rate.
Step (1): GE’s cost of floating rate dollar debt is at LIBOR + 32 bps, or (32 bps)(365/360) =
32.4444 basis points in (dollar) bond equivalent yield.
Step (2): The zloty spread to LIBOR is rZ = (32.4444 bps)(4.45809446/4.00325549) = 36.1307
bps (BEY).
Step (3): GE’s all-in cost of fixed rate zloty debt is then (8.10% + 36.1307 bps) = 8.461307
percent (BEY).
b. Step (1): SP is paying 10.24% on its existing zloty debt, compared to the 7.70% they’ll receive
from the swap bank, for a premium of (10.24%–7.70%) = 254 bps.
Step (2): The equivalent dollar premium is r$ = rZ PVIFA(iZ=7.9%,5)/PVIFA(i$=3.949904%,5)
= (2.54%)(4.00325549/4.45809446) = 228.0855 bps in bond equivalent yield, or (228.0855
bps)(360/365) = 224.9611 bps in money market yield.
Step (3): SP’s all-in cost of floating rate dollar financing is LIBOR + 224.9611 bps (MMY), or
about 2.25 percent over the LIBOR Eurodollar rate.
c. The swap bank earns a (8.10%–7.70%) = 40 bp spread in bond equivalent yield on the
notional principal. When the bank quotes fully covered rates, it adds a premium to both the
fixed and floating rate sides of its swaps that leaves its net position unchanged.
7.6 a. The all-in cost of JI’s swap can be verified through the cash flows. JI pays a floating rate yen
cash flow of LIBOR + 52.5 bps (MMY) each six months, or (0.00525)(365/360) = 0.00532292
25
Kirt C. Butler, Solutions for Multinational Finance, 4th edition
–£54,308 –£54,308
–£208,500 –£208,500
This leaves a net pound payment of (£208,500+£54,308) = £262,808 every six months.
–£262,808 –£262,808
This is an all-in cost of (£262,808)(£10,000,000) = 0.0262808 per six months, or 5.256157
percent per year compounded semiannually.
b. Similarly, the all-in cost of BD’s swap can be verified from the cash flows of BD’s swap.
BD’s underlying fixed rate pound CFs are (7.45%/2)(£10,000,000) = –£372,500.
–£372,500 –£372,500
The swap offsets these pound cash flows with floating rate yen interest payments over LIBOR.
The corresponding yen spread over LIBOR is (165.6432 bps)(¥2.4 billion) = ¥39,754,371.
+£372,500 –£372,500
26
Kirt C. Butler, Solutions for Multinational Finance, 4th edition
The swap offsets the dollar spread to LIBOR with fixed rate zloty CFs of the same present
value through equation (7.2), or an annual spread of (0.00361307)(Z19,911,044) = Z71,940.
GE also has to pay the 8.1% swap rate, for a fixed-rate zloty payment of (0.081)(Z19,911,044)
= Z1,612,795.
+$ LIBOR (MMY) –$ LIBOR (MMY)
+$23,072 +$23,072
–Z71,940 – Z71,940
–Z1,612,795 – Z1,612,795
The total fixed-rate zloty payment is Z1,684,735 each year.
– Z1,684,735 – Z1,684,735
This is indeed an all-in cost (Z1,684,735)/(Z19,911,044) = 0.08461307 per year (or about 8.46
percent) on GE’s fixed-rate zloty debt.
b. SP’s underlying fixed rate zloty payments are (10.24%)(Z19,811,044) = Z2,038,891 per year.
–Z2,038,891 – Z2,038,891
The swap offsets these fixed-rate zloty CFs with floating rate dollar payments over LIBOR.
The corresponding $ spread over LIBOR is (0.02280855)($7,111,087) = $162,194 as a BEY.
+Z2,038,891 +Z2,038,891
27
Kirt C. Butler, Solutions for Multinational Finance, 4th edition
Problem Solutions
8.1 a. Expected taxable income is (½)($250,000) + (½)(–$250,000) = $0.
E[PV(taxes)|unhedged] = (½)($125,000)–(½)($125,000)/(1.25) = $12,500. The present value of
current taxes is $125,000. The present value of the tax shield received in one year is only
($125,000)/(1.25) = $100,000.
E[PV(taxes)|hedged] = Tax rate times expected taxable income = (½)($0) = $0, an expected tax
savings of $12,500.
b. Expected taxable income is (½)($250,000) + (½)(–$250,000) = $0.
E[PV(taxes)|unhedged] = (½)($125,000)–(½)($125,000)/(1.00) = $0.
E[PV(taxes)|hedged] = (tax rate) times (expected taxable income) = (½)($0) = $0.
The present value of the tax shield from tax loss carryforwards increases at lower discount rates.
If the discount rate is zero, time doesn’t matter and future tax shields have the same magnitude as
current tax payments.
c. Expected taxable income is (½)($250,000) + (½)(–$250,000) = $0.
E[PV(taxes)|unhedged] = (½)($125,000)–(½)($125,000)/(1.25)2 = $22,500. The present value of
current taxes is $125,000. The present value of the tax shield received in one year is only
($125,000)/(1.25)2 = $80,000.
E[PV(taxes)|hedged] = (tax rate) times (expected taxable income) = (0.50)($0) = $0, a savings in
expected tax payments of $22,500.
28
Kirt C. Butler, Solutions for Multinational Finance, 4th edition
8.2 a.
Taxes
R250,000
R200,000
R0 R1,000,000 R2,000,000
+ =
$6,000 $16,000
Firm value
c. Unhedged E[VBonds] = (½)($6,000–$2,000) + (½)($10,000) = $7,000
+ E[VStock] = (½)($0) + (½)($6,000) = $3,000
E[VFirm] = (½)($6,000–$2,000) + (½)($16,000) = $10,000
29
Kirt C. Butler, Solutions for Multinational Finance, 4th edition
Firm value rises from $10,000 when unhedged to $11,000 when hedged. Hedging results in a
$3,000 increase in the value of debt and a $2,000 decrease in the value of equity, for a net gain of
$1,000. The $1,000 net gain is captured by avoiding the ½ probability of a $2,000 deadweight
bankruptcy cost.
Whether equity chooses to hedge in this circumstance depends on whether the gain in firm value
is more or less than the shift in value from equity to debt from the reduction in risk.
In this example, debt gains at equity’s expense. The $3,000 shift in value from equity to debt is
less than the $1,000 net gain to the firm, so equity bears the $2,000 net loss. In the absence of a
renegotiation of the debt contract, equity would choose to leave its currency risk exposure
unhedged.
8.4 a.
VBonds + VStock = VBonds + Stock
+ =
$4,000 $14,000
Firm value
b. Unhedged E[VBonds] = (½)($4,000–$2,000) + (½)($10,000) = $6,000
+ E[VStock] = (½)($0) + (½)($4,000) = $2,000
E[VFirm] = (½)($4,000–$2,000) + (½)($14,000) = $8,000
In this example, hedging can keep the firm solvent and avoid all of the costs of bankruptcy.
Hedged value is then $11,000 with certainty as in Problems 9.2 and 9.3. Payoffs are as follows:
Hedged E[VBonds] = $10,000
+ E[VStock] = $1,000
E[VFirm] = $11,000
c. Hedging avoids the $2,000 indirect cost as well as the ½ probability of a $2,000 direct cost,
resulting in a stakeholder gain of $3,000. Bondholders would prefer to hedge and lock in $10,000,
resulting in a gain of $4,000 over the unhedged situation. Equity locks in a value of $1,000,
resulting in an expected loss of $1,000 relative to the unhedged situation. If equity is risk neutral,
they will prefer to remain unhedged and face a 50 percent chance of having a $4,000 payout.
Equity can gain from hedging in this situation. In particular, if equity can renegotiate the bond
contract in these examples, then they can more evenly share the gain in firm value with the debt.
Alternatively, equity can pre-negotiate a smaller promised payment to debt (resulting in a lower
required return and hence cost of capital) by establishing and maintaining a risk-hedging program.
Again, this will allow equity to share in any gain from reducing the probability and costs
associated with financial distress.
30
Kirt C. Butler, Solutions for Multinational Finance, 4th edition
8.5 a. If firm value is £9,000, equity will not exercise its option to buy the firm at a price of £10,000. In
this case, equity receives nothing and debt receives £9,000. If the firm is worth £19,000, equity
pays bondholders £10,000 and retains the residual £9,000. Firm value is E[VFIRM] = E[VBONDS] +
E[VSTOCK] = [(½)(£9,000) + (½)(£10,000)] + [(½)(£0)+(½)(£9,000)] = £9,500 + £4,500 =
£14,000.
Hedged, firm value is VFIRM = VBONDS + VSTOCK = £10,000 + £4,000 = £14,000. The reduction in
the variability of firm value results in a reduction in call option value and a £500 shift in value
from equity to debt.
b. Unhedged, firm value is decomposed as: E[VFIRM] = E[VBONDS] + E[VSTOCK] = [(½)(£9,000–
£1,000) + (½)(£10,000)] + [(½)(£0) + (½)(£9,000)] = £9,000 + £4,500 = £13,500. With hedging,
VFIRM = VBONDS + VSTOCK = £10,000 + £4,000 = £14,000. As in the previous example, there is a
reduction in the variability of firm value and an accompanying £500 transfer of wealth from
equity to debt. Hedging also avoids the deadweight £1,000 bankruptcy cost and yields a higher
expected payoff in the amount of (½)(£1,000) = £500. In this example, debt captures the expected
gain of £500. Equity may capture some of the gain if hedging results in lower interest payments
on the next round of debt.
c. Unhedged, firm value is E[VFIRM] = E[VBONDS] + E[VSTOCK] = [(½)(£6,000–£1,000) +
(½)(£10,000)] + [(½)(£0) + (½)(£8,000)] = £7,500 + £4,000 = £11,500. If the firm hedges, then
VFIRM = VBONDS + VSTOCK = £10,000 + £4,000 = £14,000. This is the same as in b after including
indirect costs of financial distress with an expected value of [(½)(£9,000–£6,000) + (½)(£19,000–
£18,000)] = £1,500+£500 = £2,000.
31
Kirt C. Butler, Solutions for Multinational Finance, 4th edition
32
Kirt C. Butler, Solutions for Multinational Finance, 4th edition
9.11 How can treasury assist in managing relations among the operating units of the MNC?
Treasury can serve as a “corporate bank” satisfying the financing requirements of the operating
units. This central role allows Treasury to net transactions within the corporation and thereby
minimize the number and size of external market transactions. Treasury can also direct operating
units on transfer pricing issues and identify hurdle rates on new investments.
9.12 What are the five steps in a currency risk management program?
1) Identify those currencies to which the firm is exposed and the distribution of future exchange
rates for each of these currencies. 2) Estimate the firm’s sensitivity to changes in these currency
values. 3) Determine the desirability of hedging, given the firm’s estimated risk exposures and risk
management policy. 4) Evaluate the cost/benefit performance of each hedging alternative, given
the forecasted exchange rate distributions. Select and implement the hedging instrument or
strategy. 5) Monitor the firm’s evolving exposures and revisit these steps as necessary.
9.13 What is the difference between passive and active currency risk management?
Active management selectively hedges FX exposures depending on the manager’s market view.
Passive management does not take a view, but applys the same hedging rule to each exposure.
9.14 What is the difference between technical and fundamental analysis?
Technical analysis uses exchange rate history to predict short-term exchange rate movements.
Fundamental analysis uses macroeconomic data to forecast long-term exchange rate movements.
9.15 Are small, medium, or large firms most likely to use derivatives to hedge currency risk? How do
firms benchmark their hedges?
Derivatives users tend to be large firms, and typically use the forward rate for benchmarking.
Problem Solutions
9.1 a. A 6% interest rate compounded quarterly is the same as a 1.5% quarterly rate. The net amount
payable at maturity is $9,990,000 after subtracting Paribas’ acceptance fee. Fruit of the Loom will
receive ($9,990,000)/(1.015) = $9,842,365 if it sells the acceptance to its bank.
b. The all-in cost of the acceptance is ($10,000,000)/($9,842,365)–1 = 1.60% per quarter or an
effective annual rate of (1.0160)4–1= 0.0656, or 6.56% per year.
9.2 a. The 2%/month factoring fee of ($10 million)(0.02/month)(3 months) = $600,000 is due at the
time the receivables are factored. Fruit of the Loom is giving up accounts receivable with a face
amount of $10 million due in three months in exchange for a net amount of $9,400,000.
b. The all-in cost to Fruit of the Loom is ($10,000,000)/($9,400,000)–1 = 0.06383 per quarter or an
effective annual rate of (1.06383)4–1 = 0.2808, or 28.08% per year. While this all-in cost seems
high, note that Fruit of the Loom has no collection expenses or credit risk on this nonrecourse sale
of receivables.
9.3 a. The net amount payable at maturity is $998,000 after subtracting the bank’s acceptance fee. A 5%
annual rate compounded quarterly is the same as a 1¼% quarterly rate. Savvy Fare will receive
($998,000)/(1.0125)2 = $973,510 if it sells the acceptance to its bank today.
b. The all-in cost of the acceptance to Savvy Fare is ($1,000,000)/($973,510)–1 = 2.72% per six
months or an effective annual rate of (1.0272)2–1= 5.52% per year.
9.4 a. Cash flows faced by Savvy Fare include the following:
Face amount of receivable $1,000,000
Less 4% nonrecourse fee –$40,000
Less 1% monthly factoring fee over six months –$60,000
Net amount received $900,000
b. The all-in cost to Savvy Fare is ($1,000,000)/($900,000)–1 = 11.11% per six months or an
effective annual rate of (1.1111)2–1 = 23.46% per year.
33
Kirt C. Butler, Solutions for Multinational Finance, 4th edition
9.5 a. The sale is invoiced in Czech koruna, so the expected future cash flow is:
+CZK40,000,000
b. The contractual payment is a positive cash flow in koruna, so Hippity Hops is positively
exposed to the value of the koruna.
ΔV€/CZK
Hippity Hops’ koruna exposure
ΔS€/CZK
ΔS€/CZK
34
Kirt C. Butler, Solutions for Multinational Finance, 4th edition
35
Kirt C. Butler, Solutions for Multinational Finance, 4th edition
Problem Solutions
10.1. Paying affiliate Total Net Net
Receiving affiliate U.S. Can. Mex. P.R. Receipts Receipts Payments
United States 0 $300 $500 $600 $1400 $100 $0
Canadian $500 0 $400 $200 $1100 $0 $800
Mexican $400 $700 0 $200 $1300 $0 $0
Puerto Rican $400 $900 $400 0 $1700 $700 $0
Total payments $1300 $1900 $1300 $1000 0 $800 $800
10.2 Paying affiliate Net Net
Receiving affiliate U.S. Can. Mex. P.R. Total receipts Receipts Payments
United States 0 $800 $300 $400 $1500 $600 $0
Canadian $600 0 $300 $700 $1600 $0 $700
Mexican $100 $900 0 $800 $1800 $600 $0
Puerto Rican $200 $600 $600 0 $1400 $0 $500
Total payments $900 $2300 $1200 $1900 0 $1200 $1200
Here is one possible set of settling transactions.
U.S. Mexican
affiliate affiliate
$100
$600 $500
V0$/€ s$/€
S$/€
S0$/€
36
Kirt C. Butler, Solutions for Multinational Finance, 4th edition
b. Hedges:
i) A short euro forward hedge can exactly offset the underlying exposure.
$/€
ΔV
$/€
ΔS
ii) Short euro futures have the same exposure as the forward, although the gain or loss on the
futures is settled daily whereas the loss or gain on the underlying position accrues at maturity.
iii) A money market hedge
$/ €
Convert to dollars at today’s spot rate S0 +($x)
+($x)/(1+i )
$
⇒
€ -( €1 million)
-( €1m)/(1+i )
$
Invest this amount at i
+($x)
$
-($x)/(1+i )
In the absence of transactions costs, this money market hedge has the same payoff as a
forward contract according to interest rate parity; F1$/€ = S0$/€(1+i$)/(1+i€).
37
Kirt C. Butler, Solutions for Multinational Finance, 4th edition
iv) A long euro put option hedge eliminates the downside risk of the underlying exposure and
results in a net position that replicates the payoff of a long euro call.
s$/€
S$/€
10.4 a. Not necessarily. From interest rate parity, FtA$/$/S0A$/$ = [(1+iA$)/(1+i$)]t, the forward premium
says only that interest rates are higher in Australia than in the United States.
b. Rupert is short the U.S. dollar, so he might want to leave some of his exposure uncovered if he
expects the dollar to close below the forward price. How much he leaves uncovered depends on
his risk tolerance and on his corporate hedging policy.
c. By hedging at a forward price of A$1.6035/$, Rupert avoids having to buy U.S. dollars at the
higher expected spot price.
d. Rupert should ask himself: “Do I feel lucky?” Over-hedging in this way is a form of currency
speculation. Rupert is surely better off sticking to the beer business.
e. This differs from the situation in d. because Rupert has a legitimate business reason for buying
more than $5 million forward. Hedging an anticipated transaction makes good business sense
when the anticipated transaction is highly likely to occur. If Rupert is not sure that he’ll actually
incur this additional dollar exposure, he should probably wait before hedging.
10.5 a. Rupert should buy the U.S. dollar forward against the Australian dollar. Futures contracts on
the AS/$ exchange rate are traded on a number of exchanges, including the Chicago Mercantile
Exchange. Futures are marked-to-market daily, so Rupert will have to put up an initial margin
and then settle any changes in the value of the contract on a daily basis.
b. Rupert can replicate a long U.S. dollar forward position by: 1) borrowing Australian dollars, 2)
converting to U.S. dollars, and 3) investing in U.S. dollars. The bid-ask spread on both spot and
3-month forward exchange is 10 basis points (0.10%), so the additional transaction costs on a
money market hedge will primarily depend on the spreads of borrowing Australian dollars and
lending U.S. dollars.
c. Rupert can purchase a long dollar call; that is, an option to buy U.S. dollars. Buying U.S.
dollars is equivalent to selling Australian dollars, so a long call on U.S. dollars is equivalent to
a long put option on Australian dollars.
d. Rupert can swap existing Australian dollar debt for U.S. dollar debt such that his inflow in U.S.
dollars is $5 million per quarter from the swap contract.
10.6 a. You are receiving £100,000 in one year, so sell £100,000 forward and buy dollars. In one year,
you will receive £100,000 from your album sale. You can then convert this amount into
(£100,000)($1.20/£) = $120,000 through the forward contract. You have eliminated your
exposure to the value of the pound.
b. A money market hedge borrows in one currency, invests in another, and nets the transactions
in the spot market. The result is the equivalent of a forward contract. The forward contract that
you want to replicate is a forward sale of £100,000. This can be replicated as follows:
38
Kirt C. Butler, Solutions for Multinational Finance, 4th edition
-£100,000
Convert to (£89,638)($1.25/£) = $112,047 at S0$/£ = $1.25/£.
+$112,047
-£89,638
Invest in dollars at the U.S. dollar rate of i$ = 9.82%.
+$123,050
-$112,047
+£100,000
-$123,050
Note that this is on more favorable terms than the forward contract. Forward prices are not in
equilibrium with the interest rate differential. In this situation, it is cheaper to hedge through
the money markets than through the forward market.
c. These markets are not in equilibrium. F1$/£/S0$/£ = ($1.20/£)/($1.25/£) = 0.96 < =0.98440 =
(1.0982)/(1.1156) = (1+i$)/(1+i£), so you should buy pounds at the relatively low forward
price, sell pounds at the relatively high spot price, invest in dollars at the relatively high dollar
interest rate, and borrow pounds at the relatively low pound interest rate.
39
Kirt C. Butler, Solutions for Multinational Finance, 4th edition
40
Kirt C. Butler, Solutions for Multinational Finance, 4th edition
11.9 List several operating strategies for hedging operating risk. What are the advantages and
disadvantages of these hedges compared to financial market hedges?
Operating strategies for hedging currency risk exposures include: (a) product sourcing decisions,
(b) plant location decisions, and (c) market selection and promotion strategies. Although operating
hedges are likely to be more effective than financial market hedges for managing operating
exposures, they are also more costly and more difficult to reverse.
11.10 What is the price elasticity of demand, and why is it important?
The price elasticity of demand is defined as minus the percentage change in quantity demanded for
a given percentage change in price, –(ΔQ/Q)/(ΔP/P). The price elasticity of demand determines
whether and how much revenues will increase or decrease with a given change in price.
11.11 What five steps are involved in estimating the impact of exchange rate changes on the value of the
firm’s real assets or on the value of equity?
The five steps are: a) Identify the distribution of future exchange rates, b) estimate the sensitivity
of revenues and operating expenses to changes in exchange rates, c) determine the desirability of
hedging, given the firm’s risk management policy, d) identify the hedging alternatives and
evaluate the cost/benefit performance of each alternative, given the forecasted exchange rate
distributions, and e) monitor the position and revisit steps 1 through 4 as necessary.
Problem Solutions
11.1 Operating exposure to currency risk is more difficult to measure than transaction exposure because
the values of exposed real assets do not vary one-for-one with exchange rate changes as exposed
monetary assets and liabilities do. Weak relations (i.e. low r-squares) between asset and currency
values make financial market hedges of operating exposures less than perfect. Operating hedges
might be more effective, but they are also more difficult to implement.
11.2 a. Sterling & Co. has exposed monetary assets of $30,000 and exposed monetary liabilities of
$45,000+$90,000 = $135,000. Net monetary assets of –$105,000 are exposed to the dollar.
b. A 10 percent dollar appreciation will change the pound value of Sterling & Co. by
(0.10)(£0.66667/$)(–$105,000) = –£7,000. Exposed monetary assets and liabilities change in
value one-for-one with changes in exchange rates, so the r-square of this relation is +1, or 100
percent.
c. The sensitivity of plant and equipment to the value of the dollar is β$ = ρr,s(σr/σs) =
(0.10)(0.20/0.10) = +0.2. A 10 percent appreciation of the dollar is likely to increase the pound
value of Sterling’s plant and equipment by 0.2(10%) = 2 percent or $1,600, from £80,000 to
£81,600. The relation between real asset value and the exchange rate is not very strong. The r-
square is (0.10)2 = 0.01, so one percent of the variation in real asset value is explained by
variation in the value of the dollar.
d. Equity exposure is equal to the net exposure of monetary assets and liabilities plus the
exposure of real assets, or (–£7,000) + £1,600 = –£5,400.
e. Sterling’s use of long-term dollar liabilities tends to offset the positive exposure of their real
assets. However, the quality or effectiveness of this hedge is poor because the low r-square on
the real asset side does not exactly match the one-for-one exposure on the liability side.
f. The sunk entry costs of this operating hedge are high. Opening a U.S. plant would entail
renting or buying a U.S. site, hiring local (U.S.) artisans or bringing in U.K. expatriates into
the United States, and perhaps moving an existing supervisor from the U.K. to the United
States as well. It will be difficult for Sterling & Co. to manage their U.S. operations as
effectively as they manage their U.K. operations. Sterling should undertake this operating
hedge if and only if it makes good business sense. Their dollar exposure should not be the
deciding factor.
41
Kirt C. Butler, Solutions for Multinational Finance, 4th edition
11.3 a. Monetary assets = Cash ($) + Accts receivable ($) + Accts receivable (€)
= $40,000 + $30,000 + $60,000 = $130,000.
Monetary liabilities = Wages ($) + Accts payable ($) + Bank note (€) + Bank note (€)
= $40,000 + $70,000 + $10,000 + $50,000 = $170,000.
Net monetary assets = Monetary assets less monetary liabilities
= $130,000 – $170,000 = –$40,000.
b. Monetary assets exposed to currency risk = Accts receivable (euros) = $60,000.
Monetary liabilities exposed to currency risk = Bank note due (€) + Bank note (€)
= $10,000 + $50,000 = $60,000.
Net monetary assets exposed to currency risk
= Exposed monetary assets less exposed monetary liabilities
= $60,000 – $60,000 = $0,
so there is no net transaction exposure to the euro.
c. The negative euro exposure of the euro bank note offsets the positive exposure of the euro
receivables, and hence reduces the firm’s net exposure to the euro.
d. Even though the firm has no net transaction exposure, this exporter’s real assets (i.e. plant and
equipment) are likely to have a positive operating exposure to the euro.
11.4 Low currency risk exposures for U.S. firms means that U.S. investors are more likely to be able to
diversify away currency risk than investors in other countries. This also suggests that currency risk
management is more important outside the United States than within the United States.
11.5 Figure 11.5 is reconstructed for a ¥50 million forward hedge as follows.
Uncertain yen revenues
Underlying revenues in yen +¥50 million +¥100 million +¥150 million
Cash flows of the forward hedge
long dollars +$500,000 +$500,000 +$500,000
short yen –¥50 million –¥50 million –¥50 million
Net position
in dollars +$500,000 +$500,000 +$500,000
in yen +¥0 +¥50 million +¥100 million
Exchange rate uncertainty at revenues of ¥50 million
Underlying revenues in yen +¥50 million +¥50 million +¥50 million
Cash flows of the forward hedge
long dollars +$500,000 +$500,000 +$500,000
short yen –¥50 million –¥50 million –¥50 million
Net position
in dollars +$500,000 +$500,000 +$500,000
in yen ¥0 ¥0 ¥0
Actual exchange rate $0.005/¥ $0.010/¥ $0.015/¥
Actual revenues in dollars +$500,000 +$500,000 +$500,000
Exchange rate uncertainty at revenues of ¥150 million
Underlying revenues in yen +¥150 million +¥150 million +¥150 million
Cash flows of the forward hedge
long dollars +$500,000 +$500,000 +$500,000
short yen –¥50 million –¥50 million –¥50 million
Net position
in dollars +$500,000 +$500,000 +$500,000
in yen +¥100 million +¥100 million +¥100 million
Actual exchange rate $0.005/¥ $0.010/¥ $0.015/¥
Actual revenues in dollars +$1,000,000 +$1,500,000 +$2,000,000
42
Kirt C. Butler, Solutions for Multinational Finance, 4th edition
The partial hedge of –¥50 million is a perfect hedge when yen revenues are ¥50 million. When yen
revenues are ¥150 million, the –¥50 million hedge isn’t nearly large enough and the range of
dollar outcomes is twice as large as in the text example.
11.6 Figure 11.6 is reconstructed for this problem as follows.
a. If Dow maintains its £4 price, value will fall by 25 percent in pounds and by 40 percent in
dollars. This sets the benchmark for proposed changes in the pound price.
b. If Dow maintains its $6 price (resulting in a £5 price in the U.K.), value will fall by 37.5
percent in pounds and by 50 percent in dollars. With price elastic demand, Dow should
maintain its £4 price to minimize the impact on its dollar value.
c. If Dow maintains its $6 price, value will rise by 12.5 percent in pounds and fall by 10 percent
in dollars. With price inelastic demand, Dow should maintain its $6 price to minimize the
impact on its dollar value.
43
Kirt C. Butler, Solutions for Multinational Finance, 4th edition
44
Kirt C. Butler, Solutions for Multinational Finance, 4th edition
45
Kirt C. Butler, Solutions for Multinational Finance, 4th edition
The linkage between the exposed position and the hedge must then be carefully and fully
documented.
Problem Solutions
12.1 Balance sheets Translated value at $0.80/€
Value at Current/
Assets € value $1.00/€ noncurrent Temporal Current
€
Cash 50,000 $50,000 $40,000 $40,000 $40,000
€
A/R 30,000 $30,000 $24,000 $24,000 $24,000
€
Inventory 20,000 $20,000 $16,000 $16,000 $16,000
€
P&E 900,000 $900,000 $900,000 $900,000 $720,000
€
Total assets 1,000,000 $1,000,000 $980,000 $980,000 $800,000
Liabilities
€
A/P 125,000 $125,000 $100,000 $100,000 $100,000
€
ST debt 75,000 $75,000 $60,000 $60,000 $60,000
€
LT debt 750,000 $750,000 $750,000 $600,000 $600,000
€
Net worth 50,000 $50,000 $70,000 $220,000 $40,000
€
Total liabs 1,000,000 $1,000,000 $980,000 $980,000 $800,000
a) Net exposed assets:
Current/noncurrent rate method:
($50,000+$30,000+$20,000) –($125,000+$75,000)
= $100,000–$200,000 = –$100,000.
Temporal method (FAS #8):
($50,000+$30,000+$20,000) – ($125,000+$75,000+$750,000)
= $100,000–$950,000 = –$850,000.
Current rate method (FAS #52):
($50,000+$30,000+$20,000+$900,000) – ($125,000+$75,000+$750,000)
= $1,000,000–$950,000 = +$50,000.
b) Translation gain or loss (note that the dollar is in the numerator)
Current/noncurrent rate method: (–0.2)(–$100,000) = +$20,000.
Temporal method (FAS #8): (–0.2)(–$850,000) = +$170,000.
Current rate method (FAS #52): (–0.2)(+$50,000) = –$10,000.
12.2 Balance sheets Translated value at C$1.50/$:
Value at Current/
Assets C$ value C$1.60/$ noncurrent Temporal Current
C$
Cash 320,000 $200,000 $213,333 $213,333 $213,333
C$
A/R 160,000 $100,000 $106,667 $106,667 $106,667
C$
Inventory 640,000 $400,000 $426,667 $426,667 $426,667
C$
P&E 480,000 $300,000 $300,000 $300,000 $320,000
C$
Total assets 1,600,000 $1,000,000 $1,046,667 $1,046,667 $1,066,667
Liabilities
C$
A/P 320,000 $200,000 $213,333 $213,333 $213,333
C$
Wages 160,000 $100,000 $106,667 $106,667 $106,667
C$
Net worth 1,120,000 $700,000 $726,667 $726,667 $746,667
C$
Total liabs 1,600,000 $1,000,000 $1,046,667 $1,046,667 $1,066,667
a) Net exposed assets:
Current/noncurrent rate method:
($200,000+$100,000+$400,000) – ($200,000+$100,000)
= $700,000–$300,000 = $400,000.
46
Kirt C. Butler, Solutions for Multinational Finance, 4th edition
47
Kirt C. Butler, Solutions for Multinational Finance, 4th edition
c. As in Problem 12.3 b, both debt and current ratios have deteriorated. However, Silver Saddle
is actually less risky after the hedge than before. Silver Saddle can qualify this hedge under
FASB #133. However, because this is only an anticipated transaction, the forward position has
an element of speculation in it. The speculative element depends on the probability of not
receiving the anticipated euro payment.
Upon further review: Note in passing that the exposure of the peso payable partially offsets the
exposure of the euro receivable. If the euro-per-peso spot rate S€/MXN does not change, then a
depreciation of the dollar (and hence an appreciation of the foreign currency in the
denominator of the spot rate) will increase the dollar value of the euro receivable and – at the
same time – increase the dollar value of the peso payable. Conversely, if the dollar appreciates,
then the peso and euro depreciations will reduce the dollar value of the euro receivable at the
same time that it reduces the dollar value of the peso payable. With no change in the S€/MXN
exchange rate, the dollar value of Silver Saddle’s net exposure to currency risk is ($60,000-
$30,000) = $30,000. Of course, the peso payable will not be a perfect hedge of one-half of the
euro receivable because there is a chance that the euro-per-peso spot rate S€/MXN will change.
(For those of you that studied the chapter on currency futures, note that Silver Saddle’s
offsetting euro and peso exposures are similar to a currency futures cross-hedge where the
exposure of the Mexican peso payable partially offsets the exposure of the euro receivable.)
12.5 a. Capitalizing the long Canadian dollar (short U.S. dollar) position results in:
Assets Liabilities and Owners’ Equity
Current assets Current liabilities
Accounts receivable $60,000 Accounts payable $30,000
(€60,000 at $1.00/€) (MXN300,000 at MXN0.10/$)
Forward asset $22,000 Forward liability $22,000
(long C$20,000 at $1.10/C$) (short $22,000)
Fixed assets Long-term liabilities & owners’ equity
Furnishings (beds & blankets) $30,000 Long-term debt $170,000
Property and buildings $910,000 Owners’ equity $800,000
Total assets $1,022,000 Total liabilities & owners’ equity $1,022,000
b. Current ratio Debt-to-assets
Before $60,000/$30,000 = 2.000 $200,000/$1,000,000 = 0.200
After $82,000/$52,000 = 1.577 $222,000/$1,022,000 = 0.217
c. The debt-to-assets and current ratios have deteriorated. Indeed, Silver Saddle is more risky
after this speculative transaction than before because she now has a new exposure to the
Canadian dollar. There is no underlying exposure that is hedged by this speculative
transaction, so the transaction cannot be qualified as a hedge under FASB #133.
12.6 a. The translated value is P1$ = P1W / S1W/$ = (W1 billion) / (W1250/$) = W800,000.
b. The parent firm sees a translation loss of $200,000. The market value of the asset remained $1
million, so this translation loss is not an economic loss.
c. Selling W1 billion forward creates a $200,000 gain on the forward hedge. This exactly offsets
the $200,000 translation loss on the underlying exposure. However, the net result in economic
terms is a $200,000 gain on the forward hedge without a corresponding loss on the underlying
exposure. The forward “hedge” actually increases the real or economic exposure of the firm to
currency risk.
d. This forward hedge would nevertheless qualify for the hedge accounting rules under FASB
#133 because it is tied to an underlying exposure – even though it is a translation and not an
economic exposure.
48
Kirt C. Butler, Solutions for Multinational Finance, 4th edition
49
Kirt C. Butler, Solutions for Multinational Finance, 4th edition
13.6 How is expropriation included in a discounted cash flow analysis of a proposed foreign
investment? Does expropriation impact expected future cash flows? From a discounted cash flow
perspective, is it likely to impact the discount rate on foreign investment?
Expropriation occurs when a government seizes foreign assets. This risk clearly affects expected
cash flows. It can affect the discount rate when investors cannot diversify their investment
portfolios against this risk; that is, when it is a systematic risk.
13.7 What is protectionism and how can it impact the multinational corporation?
Protectionism refers to protection of local industries through tariffs, quotas, and regulations in
ways that discriminate against foreign businesses.
13.8 What are blocked funds? How might they arise?
Blocked funds are cash flows generated by a foreign project that cannot be immediately repatriated
to the parent firm. They most commonly arise from capital flow restrictions imposed by the host
government.
13.9 What are intellectual property rights? How are they at risk when the multinational corporation has
foreign operations?
Intellectual property rights include patents, copyrights, and proprietary technologies and processes.
Host governments sometimes protect local businesses at the expense of foreign firms. The
multinational corporation must work to minimize the exposure of its intellectual property rights to
theft or expropriation by foreign firms or governments.
13.10 What is an investment agreement? What conditions might it include?
An investment agreement specifies the rights and responsibilities of a host government and a
corporation in the structure and operation of an investment project in the host country. The
agreement should specify the investment and financial environments including taxes, concessions,
obligations, and restrictions on the multinational corporation’s operations. It also should specify a
jurisdiction for the arbitration of disputes.
13.11 What constitutes an insurable risk? List several insurable political risks.
Insurable risks have four elements: (a) The loss is identifiable in time, place, cause, and amount. (b)
A large number of individuals or businesses are exposed to the risk, ideally in an independently
and identically distributed manner. (c) The expected loss over the life of the contract is estimable,
so that reasonable premiums can be set by the insurer. (d) The loss is outside the influence of the
insured.
13.12 What operational strategies does the multinational corporation have to protect itself against
political risk?
In addition to negotiating the environment (perhaps through an investment agreement), the MNC can
(a) limit the scope of technology transfer to foreign affiliates, (b) limit dependence on a single partner,
(c) enlist local partners to represent the firm in the local environment, (d) use more stringent
investment criteria when appropriate, and (e) plan for disaster recovery.
13.13 How can the MNC protect its competitive advantages in the international marketplace?
The text lists several ways to protect competitive advantages such as the firm’s intellectual property
rights. The most important of these protections lies in finding the right partner. Other ways that the
MNC can protect itself include: i) limit the scope of the technology transfer to include only non-
essential parts of the production process, ii) limit the transferability of the technology by contract, iii)
limit dependence on any single partner, iv) use only assets near the end of their product life cycle, v)
use only assets with limited growth options, vi) trade one technology for another, vii) remove the
threat by acquiring the stock or assets of the foreign partner.
50
Kirt C. Butler, Solutions for Multinational Finance, 4th edition
Problem Solutions
13.1 There is not always a clear distinction between political and financial risks. Indeed, financial risks
often result from political decisions. In Russia’s case, the financial risks of investment in Russian
have been acerbated by the inability of the Russian government to establish and enforce laws and
regulations for the orderly conduct of business. Organized crime and corruption have contributed
to poor political, economic, financial country risk ratings in Russia. Governments make a
convenient scapegoats, and this hedge fund manager clearly holds the Russian government
responsible for his losses.
13.2 Although the most obvious form of expropriation occurs when a host government confiscates a
company’s assets, in fact each type of political risk can be thought of as a form of expropriation.
Host governments can appropriate foreign assets for themselves or for local companies through
actions that differentially impair nonlocal firms, including protectionism, blocked funds, or theft or
misappropriation of intellectual property rights.
13.3 a. Total risk is conventionally measured by standard deviation of return. The foreign asset with a
standard deviation of σi’ = 0.3 has greater total risk than the domestic asset with a standard
deviation of σi = 0.2.
b. The foreign asset also has greater systematic risk: βi’ = ρiW’ (σi’/σW) = (0.3)(0.3/0.1) = 0.9 > βi =
ρiW (σi /σW) = (0.4)(0.2/0.1) = 0.8.
13.4 Although the answer to this question will be specific to the chosen country, country risks that turn
up usually include factors from the ICRG political risk categories. These factors include political risk
(leadership, government corruption, internal or external political tensions), economic risk (inflation,
current account balance, or foreign trade collection experience), and financial risk (currency controls,
expropriations, contract renegotiations, payment delays, loan restructurings or cancellations). Of
course, other political risk information providers use these same types of factors.
51
Kirt C. Butler, Solutions for Multinational Finance, 4th edition
Problem Solutions
Cross-border capital budgeting when the international parity conditions hold.
14.1 a. Note that relative purchasing power parity holds for this class of risky investments.
(1+iILS)/(1+iCNY) = (1.15)/( 1.11745) ≈ (1+pILS)/(1+pCNY) = (1.06)/(1.03) ≈ 1.0291.
Discounting yuan cash flows at the yuan discount rate yields
V0CNY = –CNY600m+CNY200m/1.11745+CNY500m/(1.11745)2+CNY300m/(1.11745)3
= CNY194.39 million
ILS CNY
or V0 |i = (CNY194.39m)(ILS 0.5526/CNY) = ILS 107.42 million at the spot rate.
b. Relative purchasing power parity states that the spot rate should change according to
E[StILS/CNY]/E[S0ILS/CNY] = [(1+E[pILS])/(1+E[pCNY])]t = (1.06/1.03)t = (1.029)t. That is, the yuan
should appreciate by approximately 2.9% per year relative to the shekel because of lower Chinese
inflation. Expected future spot rates of exchange are then
E[S1ILS/CNY] = (ILS 0.5526)[(1.06)/(1.03)]1 = ILS 0.5687/CNY
E[S2ILS/CNY] = (ILS 0.5526)[(1.06)/(1.03)]2 = ILS 0.5853/CNY
E[S3ILS/CNY] = (ILS 0.5526)[(1.06)/(1.03)]3 = ILS 0.6023/CNY
Based on these spot exchange rates, expected dollar cash flows are:
E[CF0ILS] = (CNY600m)(ILS 0.5526/CNY) = ILS 331.56m
E[CF1ILS] = (CNY200m)(ILS 0.5687/CNY) = ILS 113.74m
52
Kirt C. Butler, Solutions for Multinational Finance, 4th edition
53
Kirt C. Butler, Solutions for Multinational Finance, 4th edition
54
Kirt C. Butler, Solutions for Multinational Finance, 4th edition
While the project has a positive NPV regardless of the perspective, the project has more value
from the parent’s perspective than from the project perspective. This is because the expected
future value of the shekel (yuan) is less (more) than under the equilibrium conditions. The
parent company may choose to leave its cash flows from the project unhedged in the hopes of
benefiting from the expected future spot exchange rates. This does expose the parent to
currency risk.
b. Discount in yuan: V0CNY = [Σt E[CFtCNY] / (1+iCNY)t ]
= [–CNY600m + CNY200m/(1.1175) + CNY500m/(1.1175)2+CNY300m/(1.1175)3] = CNY194.39
⇒ V0ILS|iILS = (S0ILS/CNY) (V0CNY) = (ILS 0.5526/CNY)(CNY194.39m) = ILS 107.42 million
Discount in ILS: V0ILS|iILS = Σt {E[StILS/CNY]E[CFtCNY] / (1+iILS)t }
= [(–CNY600m)(ILS 0.5526/CNY) + (CNY200m)(ILS 0.5575/CNY)/(1.15)
+ (CNY500m)(ILS 0.5625/CNY)/(1.15)2 + (CNY300m)(ILS 0.5676/CNY)/(1.15)3 ]
= ILS 90.04m < ILS 107.42 million
Although the project has a positive NPV from each perspective, the project has more value in the
local currency than it does in shekels. The parent should hedge the yuan cash flows either directly
in the forward market, by borrowing a part of the project in yuan, or by swapping shekel debt for
yuan debt to hedge its expected future yuan cash flows from the project.
55
Kirt C. Butler, Solutions for Multinational Finance, 4th edition
The sum of the probabilities of the possible states of nature is 0.100 + 0.090 + 0.081 + 0.729 =
1.000. The probability of receiving the cash flow in year t is (0.9)t. The expected cash flow in the
presence of expropriation risk is this probability times the expected cash flow from Problem 14.1.
The NPV in yuan is then V0CNY = –CNY600m + CNY200m(0.9)1/(1.11745) + CNY500m(0.9)2/(1.11745)2
+ CNY300m(0.9)3/(1.11745)3 = CNY42.15 million, or V0ILS|iCNY = (CNY42.15)(ILS 0.5526/CNY) = ILS
23.29 million at the spot exchange rate. The value of the expropriation side effect is thus V(Side
effect) = V(Project with side effect) – V(Project without side effect) = (CNY42.15–CNY194.40) = –
CNY
152.24, or (ILS 23.29m – ILS 107.42m) = –ILS 84.13million.
Alternatively, the side effect can be valued explicitly as follows. There is a 0.1 chance of losing
the first and all later cash flows, an additional (0.1)(0.9) = 0.09 risk of losing the 2nd year cash
flow given the 1st year cash flow was received, and an additional (0.1)(0.9)2 = 0.081 risk of losing
the 3rd year cash flow given the 2nd year cash flow was received. Hence, the probability of not
receiving CFt is (1–(0.9)t):
P[losing CF1CNY] = 1–(.9)1 = 0.100
P[losing CF1CNY] = 1–(.9)2 = 0.100 + 0.090 = 0.190
P[losing CF1CNY] = 1–(.9)3 = 0.100 + 0.090 + 0.081 = 0.271
The expected loss in present value due to expropriation risk is then (0.10)CNY200m/(1.11745) +
(0.19)CNY500m/(1.11745)2 +(0.271)CNY300m/(1.11745)3 = CNY152.24 million, or (CNY152.24)(ILS
0.5526/CNY) = ILS 84.13 million.
14.10 Step 1: Calculate the value of blocked funds assuming they are not blocked.
If blocked funds had been invested at the risky croc rate of 40% per year, they would have grown
in value to Cr8,000(1.40)3 + Cr13,819.5(1.40)2 + Cr19,573.5(1.40) ≈ Cr76,441. Discounted at the
40% rate, this would have been worth Cr19,898 in present value. This is equivalent to discounting
blocked funds back to the beginning of the project at the 40% risky croc discount rate, so this is a
zero-NPV investment at the 40% croc interest rate.
Step 2: Calculate the opportunity cost of blocked funds.
With blocked funds earning no interest, the accumulated balance of Cr41,393 has a present value
of (Cr41,393) / (1.40)4 = Cr10,775 at the 40% required return. The opportunity cost of blocked
funds is then Cr19,898–Cr10,775 = Cr9,123.
Step 3: Calculate project value including the opportunity cost of blocked funds.
Vproject with side effect = Vproject without side effect + Vside effect = –Cr137 – Cr9,123 = –Cr9,260.
At the 40% (foregone) risky discount rate, the opportunity cost of blocked funds is higher than the
Cr9,077 value in the text example. At the 40% risky rate, blocked funds make the Neverland project
look even worse than when Hook’s treasure chest is riskless.
56
Kirt C. Butler, Solutions for Multinational Finance, 4th edition
57
Kirt C. Butler, Solutions for Multinational Finance, 4th edition
Liberalizations are decisions by governments to allow foreigners to purchase local assets. Bekaert
and Harvey (“Foreign Speculators and Emerging Equity Markets,” Journal of Finance, April
2000) found that liberalizations tend to (a) increase the correlation of emerging and world market
returns, (b) have little impact on return volatility, and (c) decrease local firms’ cost of capital by up
to one percent.
15.10 What is a targeted registered offering and why is it useful to the corporation?
Targeted registered offerings are securities sold to foreign financial institutions that then make a
market in the corporation’s securities in the foreign market. They are useful for gaining access to
foreign investors and their capital.
15.11 What is project financing, and when is it an appropriate source of funds?
Project financing is a way of unbundling a project from the firm’s other assets and liabilities. A
separate legal entity is created that is heavily financed with debt. Project financing is appropriate for
real assets that generate a steady stream of cash flows that can be used to service the debt.
15.12 What evidence is there on the international determinants of corporate capital structure? How is the
international evidence similar to the domestic U.S. evidence?
Rajan and Zingales (1995) find that leverage is positively related to the tangibility of firm assets (i.e.
the proportion of fixed assets) and firm size. Leverage is negatively related to profitability and the
presence of growth options (i.e. the asset market-to-book ratio). Several national markets including the
domestic U.S. market share these characteristics.
Problem Solutions
15.1 a. r = rF + β (E[rW] – rF) = 5% + (1.2)(12%–5%) = 13.4%
b. r = rF + β (E[rM] – rF) = 5% + (1.4)(11%–5%) = 13.4%
15.2 a. r = rF + β (E[rW] – rF) = 5% + (0.8)(10%–5%) = 9%
b. r = rF + β (E[rM] – rF) = 5% + (1.2)(10%–5%) = 11%
15.3 a. The required return on Oilily’s equity within the French market is rF+β(E[rM]–rF) = 5% +
(1.4)(11%–5%) = 13.4%. Oilily’s weighted average cost of capital is iWACC = (B/VL)iB(1–
TC)+(S/VL)iS = (0.4)(7%)(1–0.33)+(0.6)(13.4%) = 9.916%.
b. Required return on Oilily’s stock is r = 5%+(1.2)(12%–5%) = 13.4% for an international
investor. Using international sources, Oilily’s cost of capital is iWACC = (B/VL)iB(1–TC) +
(S/VL)iS = (½)(6%)(1–0.33) + (½)(13.4%) = 8.710%.
c. The operating cash flow is before interest expense. In France, Oilily’s value is V0 = CF1/(i–g)
= (€10million)/(0.09916–0.04) = €169,033,130. If the global market, Oilily’s value is V0 =
CF1/(i–g) = €10,000,000/(0.08710–0.04) = €212,314,225. Oilily can increase its value by over
25% by financing in international markets because of this market’s higher tolerance for debt
and lower required returns.
15.4 a. Grand Pet’s debt ratio is (B/VL) = 33/(33+100) = 0.25. The required return on Grand Pet’s
equity is r = rF + β(E[rM]–rF) = 5%+(1.2)(15%–5%) = 17%. Grand Pet’s weighted average cost
of capital is: iWACC = (B/VL)iB(1–TC)+(S/VL)iS = (0.25)(6%)(1–0.33) + (0.75)(17%) =
13.755%.
b. The debt ratio is now (B/VL) = 50/(50+100) = 0.33. The required return on Grand Pet’s equity
in international markets is r = rF+β(E[rW]–rF) = 5%+(0.8)(10%–5%) = 9%. Using international
sources of capital, Grand Pet’s cost of capital is: iWACC = (B/VL)iB(1–TC)+(S/VL)iS =
(0.33)(5%)(1–0.33) + (0.67)(9%) = 7.1355%.
c. Let’s assume that the £1 billion operating cash flow is before interest expense, so that the
weighted average cost of capital is the appropriate discount rate on these cash flows to debt
and equity. In the U.K. market, Grand Pet’s value is
58
Kirt C. Butler, Solutions for Multinational Finance, 4th edition
10% L H
5%
Beta
0.5 1.0 1.5
On a risk-adjusted basis, project L should be accepted and project H should be rejected. Using
a 5 percent hurdle rate for both low-risk and high-risk projects will inappropriately favor
projects with high expected returns whether or not they are low-risk or high-risk projects. Over
time, the asset portfolios of Chinese companies using the CD rate as their hurdle rate will tilt
toward high-return, high-risk projects. From a capital markets perspective, some of these risky
59
Kirt C. Butler, Solutions for Multinational Finance, 4th edition
60
Kirt C. Butler, Solutions for Multinational Finance, 4th edition
61
Kirt C. Butler, Solutions for Multinational Finance, 4th edition
62
Kirt C. Butler, Solutions for Multinational Finance, 4th edition
63
Kirt C. Butler, Solutions for Multinational Finance, 4th edition
17.10 What are the shortcomings of option pricing methods for valuing real assets?
Difficulties include: a) identifying the underlying asset or assets; b) specifying the return-generating
process of the underlying asset(s); and c) the fact that the values of real options are not directly
observable in the marketplace.
Problem Solutions
17.1 a. A decision tree represents possible paths to future states of the world as branches on a tree. For
Grolsch’s invest in Dubiety, the decision tree looks like:
Invest today D
NPV0 = ?
D
Invest at Pbeer = 75 D D
NPV0 ⏐(Pbeer= 75) = ?
Invest in one year
D
Invest at Pbeer = 25 D D
NPV0 ⏐(Pbeer= 25) = ?
b. Equation (17.2) from the text must be modified to include fixed costs:
INVEST TODAY: NPV = [(P–V)Q–F]/i – I0
NPV(invest today)
= [((D50/btl–D10/btl)(1,000,000 btls) – D10,000,000)/0.10] – D200,000,000
= D100,000,000 ⇒ invest today?
c. Equation (17.3) from the text must be modified to include fixed costs:
WAIT ONE YEAR: NPV = [[(P–V)Q–F]/i] / (1+i) – I0
NPV⏐Pbeer=D75
= [(((D75/btl–D10/btl)(1,000,000 btls)–D10,000,000)/0.10)/(1.10)]–D200,000,000
= D300,000,000 ⇒ invest
NPV⏐Pbeer=D25
= [(((D25/btl–D10/btl)(1,000,000 btls)–D10,000,000)/0.10) / (1.10)]–D200,000,000
= –D154,545,455 < $0 ⇒ don’t invest
NPV(wait one year)
= [Prob(P1=D75)](NPV⏐P1=D75)+[Prob(P1=D25)](NPV⏐P1=D25)
= (½) (D300,000,000) + (½)(D0)
= +D150,000,000 > NPV(invest today) > D0
d. Option Value = Intrinsic Value + Time Value
NPV(wait one year) = NPV(invest today) + Opportunity cost of investing today
D D D
150,000,000 = 100,000,000 + 50,000,000
e. Wait one period before deciding to invest.
17.2 a.
Abandon today
NPV0D = ?
D
Abandon at Pbeer = 35
Abandon in one year NPV0D ⏐Pbeer=D35 = ?
Abandon at Pbeer = D15
NPV0D ⏐Pbeer= D15 = ?
b. If the project is abandoned today at a cost of D10,000,000, cash flows from the project will be
foregone and there will be a minus sign on operating cash flow in the NPV equations that follow.
At the expected end-of-year price of ½(D15/btl+D35/btl) = D25/btl, the NPV of the “abandon
today” alternative is:
64
Kirt C. Butler, Solutions for Multinational Finance, 4th edition
NPV(abandon today)
= –[((D25/btl–D20/btl)(1,000,000 btls)–D10,000,000)/0.10]–D10,000,000
= D40,000,000 > D0 ⇒ abandon today?
c. If Grolsch management waits one year before making its abandonment decision, beer prices will
be either D15 or D35 with certainty.
NPV⏐P1=D35
= –[(((D35/btl–D20/btl)(1,000,000 btls)–D10,000,000) /0.10)/(1.10)]–D10,000,000
= –D55,454,545 ⇒ don’t abandon if price rises to D35
NPV⏐P1=D15
= –[(((D15/btl–D20/btl)(1,000,000 btls)–D10,000,000) /0.10)/(1.10)]–D10,000,000
= D126,363,636 ⇒ abandon if price falls to D15
NPV(wait 1 year) = [Prob(P1=D35)](NPV⏐P1=D35)+[Prob(P1=D15)](NPV⏐P1=D15)
= (½) (D126,363,636) + (½)($0)
= D63,181,818 > NPV(abandon today) > D0
d. Option Value = Intrinsic Value + Time Value
NPV(wait one year) = NPV(abandon today) + Opportunity cost of abandoning today
+D63,181,818 = +D40,000,000 + D
23,181,818
e. Wait one year before making the abandonment decision.
17.3 We know from Problem 17.1 that investment in a single brewery today has value. The issue is
whether to invest in all five breweries today or invest in a single exploratory brewery and then
make a decision on the four additional breweries in one year after receiving information about the
price of beer produced by the exploratory brewery.
a. Decision tree:
Invest in all five breweries today D D
NPV0 = 500 million
D
Invest in 4 more if Pbeer = 75 D D
NPV0 ⏐(Pbeer= 75) = ?
Invest in one brewery
D
Don’t invest if Pbeer = 25 D D
NPV0 ⏐(Pbeer= 25) = ?
b. At the expected end-of-year price of D50/btl, the NPV of a single brewery is D100m as in Problem
17.1. The PV of the perpetual stream of cash inflows is either [((D75–D10)(1m)–D10m)/0.10] =
D
550m or [((D25–D10)(1m)–D10m)/0.10] = D50m with equal probability, for an expected value of
D
300m. Net of the required D200m investment, this has a net present value of D100m. Therefore,
NPV(invest in all 5 breweries today) = 5*NPV(invest in 1 today) = D500 million.
c. If Grolsch management waits one year before making its investment decision, beer prices will be
either D25 or D75 with certainty in this problem. Of course, it won’t know this until it invests in
the first, exploratory brewery. The NPV of each of the four additional breweries at a price of
D
75/bottle is D300,000,000, as in Problem 17.1. At a price of D25/bottle, the optimal strategy is to
forego further investment. The NPV of sequential investment is then:
NPV(invest in exploratory brewery and continue to invest if it is positive-NPV)
= NPV(invest in one brewery today)
+ 4 [Prob(Pbeer=D75)] (NPV⏐invest in 1 year if Pbeer=D75)
= 100m + 4 (½) (D300m)
D
65
Kirt C. Butler, Solutions for Multinational Finance, 4th edition
+ [Prob(Pbeer=$75)](NPV⏐Pbeer=$75)
= (½) [((D25–D10)(1m)–D10m)/(.1)–D200m]
+ (½) [ (((D75–D10)(1m)–D10m)/(.1)–D200m) + (4)(D300m) ]
= (½) [–D150m] + (½)[(D350m) + (4)(D300m)]
= D700 million > D0 ⇒ Invest in an exploratory brewery
d. Option Value = Intrinsic Value + Time Value
NPV(wait one year) = NPV(invest today) + Opportunity cost of investing in
four additional breweries today
D D D
700,000,000 = 500,000,000 + 200,000,000
The NPV of investing in all 5 breweries today is –D200,000,000. By investing today, Grolsch
would forego the flexibility provided by the timing option on this sequential investment.
e. Invest in an exploratory brewery today and continue to invest if warranted by the quality (and
hence market price) of the output.
17.4 a. NPV(invest today) = [((R18,000/car–R15,000/car)(10,000cars))/0.20] – R100 million
= R50 million ⇒ invest today?
If you wait one year before deciding, then NPV will be either:
NPV⏐C1=R12,000
= [((R18,000/car–R12,000/car)(10,000cars)/0.20]/1.20] – R100 million
= R150 million ⇒ invest,
or NPV⏐C1=R18,000
= [((R18,000/car–R18,000/car)(10,000cars)/0.20]/1.20] – R100 million
= –R100 million ⇒ do not invest (so that NPV = R0).
NPV(wait one year)
= [Prob(C1=R12,000)](NPV⏐C1=R12,000)
+ [Prob(C1=R18,000)](NPV⏐C1=R18,000)
= (½)(R150,000,000) + (½)(R0)
= 75,000,000 > NPV(invest today) =R50,000 > R0
The time value of this real option reflects the opportunity cost of investing today:
Time value = option value – intrinsic value
= R75 million – R50 million = R25 million.
b. NPV(invest in 10 plants today) = 10*NPV(invest in one plant today) = R500 million
NPV(invest in an exploratory plant and then invest in 9 additional plants if NPV>0)
= [Prob(C1=R12,000)](NPV⏐C1=R12,000)
+ [Prob(C1=R18,000)](NPV⏐C1=R18,000)
= (½)[(R200 million)+(9)(R150 million)] + (½)(–R100 million)
= +R725 million > NPV(invest in all ten today) = R500 million > R0
The opportunity cost of investing in all 10 plants today equals the time value of this real option:
Time value = Option value – Intrinsic value
= R725 million – R500 million = R225 million.
Alternatively,
NPV(invest in an exploratory plant and then invest in 9 additional plants if NPV>0)
= NPV(invest in one plant today)
+ 9 [Prob(C1=R12,000)] (NPV⏐invest in 1 year if C1=R12,000)
= R50m + 9 (½) (150m)
= +R725 million > R0 ⇒ Invest in an exploratory plant
17.5 a. At expected production of 150 oz, the NPV of investment in a single mine is
NPV(now-or-never) = [(¥5,000/oz–¥1,000/oz)(150 oz)] – ¥600,000 = ¥0.
The NPV of investing in all 5 mines as a now-or-never decision is also ¥0.
66
Kirt C. Butler, Solutions for Multinational Finance, 4th edition
b. If you invest in an exploratory mine and then reconsider based on the revealed information about
yield, then the NPV of the first mine is ¥0. The NPV of each additional mine can be calculated
conditional on the yield of the first mine:
NPV⏐(Q=200 oz) = [(¥5,000/oz–¥1,000/oz)(200 oz)] – ¥600,000 = ¥200,000
NPV⏐(Q=100 oz) = [(¥5,000/oz–¥1,000/oz)(100 oz)] – ¥600,000 = –¥200,000
so don’t invest at the lower guano yield. Then,
NPV(sequential investment)
= NPV (exploratory mine) + Prob(Q=200 oz)*(4)*NPV⏐(Q=200 oz)
= ¥0 + (½)[(4)(¥200,000)] = ¥400,000.
c. The best strategy is to invest in an exploratory mine today and continue to invest if yield is high.
17.6 a. At expected production of 150 oz, the NPV of investment in a single mine is
NPV(now-or-never)
= [(¥5,000/oz–¥1,000/oz)(150 oz)(1–0.3)+¥600,000(0.3)]/(1.10) – ¥600,000
≈ –¥54,545
The NPV of investing in all 5 mines as a now-or-never decision is –¥272,727
b. If you invest in an exploratory mine and then reconsider based on the revealed information about
yield, then the NPV of the first mine is –¥54,545. The NPV of each additional mine can be
calculated conditional on the yield of the first mine:
NPV⏐(Q=200 oz)
= [(¥5,000/oz–¥1,000/oz)(200 oz)(1–0.3)+¥600,000(0.3)]/(1.10)2 – ¥600,000/(1.10)
≈ ¥66,116
NPV⏐(Q=100 oz)
= [(¥5,000/oz–¥1,000/oz)(100 oz)(1–0.3)+¥600,000(0.3)]/(1.10)2 – ¥600,000/(1.10)
≈ –¥165,289
You won’t invest at the lower guano yield. Then,
NPV(sequential investment)
= NPV (exploratory mine) + Prob(Q=200 oz)*(4)*NPV⏐(Q=200 oz)
≈ –¥54,545 + (½)[(4)(¥66,116)] ≈ ¥77,686
c. Although taxes reduce the value of this real option, the optimal strategy is still to invest in an
exploratory mine and continue to invest if yield is high.
17.7 a. There are 22 = 4 equally-likely price paths in the price lattice, resulting in three possible outcomes.
Quantity Quality
=> KS20,000,000 with p=0.25
KES
20k/ct
1k cts
KES
40k/ct
=> KS40,000,000 with p=0.50
KES
20k/ct
2k cts
KES
40k/ct
=> KS80,000,000 with p=0.25
67
Kirt C. Butler, Solutions for Multinational Finance, 4th edition
68
Kirt C. Butler, Solutions for Multinational Finance, 4th edition
Chapter 18 Corporate Governance and the International Market for Corporate Control
Answers to Conceptual Questions
18.1 Define corporate governance. Why is it important in international finance?
Corporate governance refers to the way in which major stakeholders influence and control the modern
corporation. Typically, there is a supervisory board (e.g., the Board of Directors in the U.S.) that
represents the most influential stakeholders (debtholders in bank-based systems and equity in market-
based systems). The supervisory board monitors the management team which manages the day-to-day
operations of the corporation. The form of corporate governance determines the particular
stakeholders that are represented on the board and has a major large influence on top executive
turnover and the market for corporate control.
18.2 In what ways can one firm gain control over the assets of another firm?
Direct means of acquiring control over another firm’s assets include an outright purchase of those
assets, a purchase of equity, and through merger or consolidation. Indirect means include joint
ventures or other collaborative alliances.
18.3 What is synergy?
When the whole is greater than the sum of the parts in a corporate acquisition.
18.4 Describe several differences in the role of commercial banks in corporate governance in Germany,
Japan, and the United States.
Commercial governance in the U.S. is dominated by capital markets. Commercial banks in the U.S.
have been constrained by the U.S. Congress in the influence that they can exert over U.S.
corporations. For example, the Glass-Steagall Act of 1933 prohibited banks from owning stock except
in trust, actively voting shares held in trust for their clients, or acting as investment bankers or equity
brokers. Banks in Germany are not constrained in any of these ways. While banks in Japan cannot
own more than 5% of the equity of any single company, the share cross-holdings in Japan’s keiretsu
place Japanese banks in a more prominent role than their counterparts in the United States. For these
reasons, German banks are more influential in corporate governance than Japanese banks and
Japanese banks are more influential than U.S. banks in corporate governance.
18.5 Describe four ways that banks can influence corporate boardrooms in countries – such as Germany –
that offer universal banking?
Universal banking refers to a financial system in which banks offer a full range of banking and
financial services. They can influence corporate boardrooms in four ways: 1) supply debt capital via
commercial loans, 2) invest in equity, 3) actively vote the shares of their trust (pension fund) and
brokerage customers, and 4) serve as investment bankers for debt and equity issues to the public.
18.6 How does the legal environment affect minority investors? Include a description of tunneling n your
answer.
Minority investors in countries with poor legal protections are exposed to tunneling, which is the
expropriation of corporate assets from minority shareholders by controlling shareholders,
management, or both. Because of this risk, countries with poor legal protections for minority investors
experience lower industrial growth and less efficient capital allocation than countries with enforceable
legal protections.
18.7 Why are hostile acquisitions less common in Germany and Japan than in the United Kingdom and the
United States?
Corporate governance in Germany and Japan is characterized by debt and equity ownership that is
concentrated in the hands of one or more major stakeholders. Management in Germany and Japan is
much more closely tied to this major stakeholder than their counterparts in the U.K. and the U.S.
Consequently, acquisitions in Germany and Japan are difficult to accomplish without the consent and
69
Kirt C. Butler, Solutions for Multinational Finance, 4th edition
cooperation of this major stakeholder or stakeholders. The relatively dispersed equity ownership in the
U.K. and U.S. allow hostile suitors to appeal directly to the public markets through a tender offer.
Tender offers in the U.K. and U.S. may or may not be in cooperation with current management.
18.8 How is turnover in the ranks of top executives similar in China, Germany, Japan and the United
States? How is it different?
The why and when of top executive turnover is similar in these countries. Top executives in non-
performing companies are likely to be replaced. The how of top executive turnover differs, however.
Top executive turnover is initiated and executed by the lead bank in Germany, by the keiretsu
(perhaps by the main bank) in Japan, and by the public market for corporate control in China and the
United States. State-owned companies in China are an exception, in that politically-connected CEOs
in state-owned enterprises are more entrenched than similar CEOs in the private sector.
18.9 Who are the likely winners and losers in domestic mergers and acquisitions that involve two firms
incorporated in the same country? How are the returns to acquiring firm shareholders related to the
method of payment (cash versus stock) and the acquiring firm’s free cash flow or profitability?
In the United States, target shareholders gain while acquiring firm shareholders may or may not win.
Acquiring shareholders are more likely to win than lose in non-U.S. domestic markets. Bidding firm
shareholders are more likely to win: a) when cash is offered rather than stock, and b) when the firm
does not have a lot of free cash flow
18.10 In what ways are the winners and losers in cross-border mergers and acquisitions different than in
domestic U.S. mergers and acquisitions?
Shareholders of the bidding firm are more likely to win in a cross-border merger or acquisition. Target
firm shareholders win in either case. As with domestic acquisitions, bidders are more likely to win if
the bidding firm does not have a great deal of free cash flow or profitability.
18.11 Why might the shareholders of bidding firms lose when the bidding firm has excess free cash flow or
profitability?
Jensen’s “free cash flow hypothesis” suggests that managers are more likely to waste shareholders
capital on poor investments when there is a lot of free cash flow (or profitability) around. When things
are tight, capital constraints are more likely to be imposed by the market and managers cannot as
easily rationalize wasteful expenditures.
18.12 How are gains to bidding firms related to exchange rates?
Empirical studies find that a strong domestic currency leads to both more foreign acquisitions and to
higher bidder returns.
Problem Solutions
18.1 a. E
b. D
c. F
d. A
e. B
f. G
g. C
18.2 The pre-acquisition value of the two firms is $3 billion + $1 billion = $4 billion. Synergy is 10% of
this value, or (0.1)($4 billion) = $400 million. After subtracting the (0.2)($1 billion) = $200 million
acquisition premium from the $400,000 million, Agile shareholders are likely to see a $200 million
appreciation in the value of their shares.
70
Kirt C. Butler, Solutions for Multinational Finance, 4th edition
18.3 Managers like free cash flow because it makes expansion possible without resort to external
capital markets for financing. Unfortunately, the existence of free cash flow also makes it more
likely that management will waste resources on new ventures in which it has no business (Jensen
[1986]). When cash flow is scarce, managers are more likely to pick winning ventures.
18.4 A real increase in the value of the domestic currency increases the purchasing power of domestic
residents. Froot and Stein [1991] suggest that an informational asymmetry between inside
managers and outside investors can make outside capital more expensive than inside capital, which
can preferentially benefit bidders that see their currency rise in real terms. If an increase in the real
value of the domestic currency forces foreign companies to access capital markets to fund
acquisitions whereas domestic companies can fund acquisitions with cash, then domestic
companies enjoy an advantage in the presence of this informational asymmetry.
18.5 The biggest auto deal in 2007 was private equity fund Cerberus Capital Management’s acquisition
of 80.1 percent of the equity of Chrysler from Daimler-Chrysler for $7.4billion. Daimler AG – the
surviving firm – retained the other 19.9 percent of the equity.
18.6 Non-performing loans in Japan forced consolidation of Japanese banking in the 2000s. The three
largest financial institutions in Japan at the time of this writing were Mitsubishi UFJ Financial
Group (including the former Bank of Tokyo-Mitsubishi, UFJ, Sanwa Bank, Tokai Bank, & Tokyo
Trust), Sumitomo Mitsui Banking Corp (Sumitomo Bank and Sakura Bank), and Mizuho Holding
Financial Group (Fuji Bank, Dai-Ichi Kangyo Bank, and Industrial Bank of Japan).
71
Kirt C. Butler, Solutions for Multinational Finance, 4th edition
72
Kirt C. Butler, Solutions for Multinational Finance, 4th edition
19.8 Do MNCs provide international portfolio diversification benefits? If so, do they provide the same
diversification benefits as direct ownership of companies located in the countries in which the
MNC does business?
Owning shares in an internationally diversified multinational corporation provides some indirect
diversification benefits. Unfortunately, MNC share prices move more with the home market than
with foreign markets, so MNCs do not provide the same diversification benefits as direct
investment in foreign shares.
19.9 What is the difference between a passive and an active investment philosophy?
Passive strategies do not try to shift assets in anticipation of market shifts. Rather, they follow a
‘buy-and-hold’ philosophy that identifies the types of assets that are to be held and then take
advantage of diversification to achieve optimal performance. Active strategies try to shift between
asset classes or between individual securities in an effort to anticipate changes in market values.
19.10 What makes cross-border financial statement analysis difficult?
Barriers include differences in language, accounting measurement conventions (such as accounting
for cash, goodwill, discretionary reserves, pension liabilities, and inflation), and financial
disclosure requirements.
19.11 What alternatives does a multinational corporation have when investors in a foreign country
demand accounting and financial information?
The MNC can (1) do nothing, (2) prepare convenience translations, (3) prepare supplementary
financial statements using different accounting principles, such as U.S. GAAP or the IAS.
Problem Solutions
19.1 No interest accrues on the 31st of the month with the 30/360 convention.
19.2 With the actual/365 convention, 31 days out of 182.5 days would have accrued by July 31st. This is
(31/182.5) = 16.986% of the semiannual interest payment.
19.3 Three days of interest accrue on the 28th of February during years that are not leap years. During leap
years, one day of interest accrues on the 28th of February and two days of interest accrue on the 29th
of February.
19.4 Matsushita’s global bonds selling at par:
a. According to the U.S. bond equivalent yield convention, the promised yield of a bond selling at
par is equal to the coupon yield. For the Matsushita bond, this is 7¼% compounded
semiannually (or 3.626% semiannually).
b. According to the effective annual yield quotation commonly used in Europe, the promised yield is
the solution to (1.03625)2–1 = 7.3814%.
19.5 Matsushita’s global bonds selling at 101% of par:
a. The promised yield on a semiannual basis is the solution to:
101 = (3.625)/(1+i) + (3.625)/(1+i)2 + (3.625)/(1+i)3 + (103.625)/(1+i)4
for an effective semiannual yield of i = 3.354%. The U.S. bond equivalent yield convention
would quote this as 6.708% compounded semiannually.
b. According to the effective annual yield quotation, the promised yield is (1.03354)2–1 =
6.820%.
19.6 Countries with large stock markets tend to have large domestic bond markets as well. After deleting
countries that do not appear in both lists, the correlation between the stock market caps in Table 3.6
and the bond market caps in Table 3.2 is 0.97. Italy has a large domestic bond market relative to its
stock market. In contrast, Switzerland has a large stock market capitalization relative to its domestic
bond market.
73
Kirt C. Butler, Solutions for Multinational Finance, 4th edition
74
Kirt C. Butler, Solutions for Multinational Finance, 4th edition
20.10 Are real world financial markets perfect? If not, in what ways are they imperfect?
Following the definition of a perfect financial market, financial market imperfections can be
categorized as market frictions (government controls, taxes, transactions costs), investor irrationality,
and unequal access to market prices or information.
75
Kirt C. Butler, Solutions for Multinational Finance, 4th edition
Problem Solutions
20.1 E[rP] = (½)(0.144)+(½)(0.138) = 0.141, or 14.1%
Var(rP) = (½)2(0.279)2+(½)2(0.298)2 + 2(½)(½)(0.665)(0.279)(0.298) = 0.0693
⇒ σP = (0.0693)1/2 = 0.2633, or 26.3%
SI = (rP – rF)/σP = (0.141–0.068)/(0.263) = 0.277, which is superior in return/risk performance to
either the French (0.272) or Germany (0.235) markets alone.
20.2 E[rP] = (½)(0.138)+(½)(0.157) = 14.75%
Var(rP) = (½)2(0.298)2+(½)2(0.346)2 + 2(½)(½)(0.355)(0.298)(0.346) = 0.0704
⇒ σP = (0.0704)1/2 = 0.2654, or 26.5%
SI = (0.1475–0.068)/(0.265) = 0.300, which is superior in return/risk performance to either the
German (0.235) or Japanese (0.257) markets alone.
20.3 E[rP] = (½)(0.113)+(½)(0.084) = 9.85%
Var(rP) = (½)2(0.170)2+(½)2(0.108)2 + 2(½)(½)(0.360)(0.170)(0.108) = 0.0134
⇒ σP = (0. 0134)1/2 = 0.1160, or 11.6%
SI = (0.985–0.068)/(0.116) = 0.263, which is superior to the performance of globally diversified
stocks (0.265) or bonds (0.148) alone.
20.4 E[rP] = (⅓)[(0.157)+(0.145)+(0.111)] = 0.1377, or 13.8%
Var(rP) = (⅓)2[(0.346)2+(0.275)2+(0.169)2]
+2(⅓)2[(0.361)(0.346)(0.275)+(0.302)(0.346)(0.169)+(0.534)(0.275)(0.169)] = 0.0420
⇒ σP = (0. 0420)1/2 = 0.2048, or about 20.5%
SI = (0.1377–0.068)/(0.2048) = 0.340, which is superior in return/risk performance to the Japanese
(0.257), U.K. (0.280), and U.S. (0.254) alone.
20.5 ρU.S.G = +1: σpt = (XU.S.σU.S. + XGσG) = (0.5)(0.1) + (0.5)(0.2) = 0.15
ρU.S.G = –1: σpt = (XU.S.σ U.S. – XGσG) = (0.5)(0.1) – (0.5)(0.2) = 0.05
ρU.S.G = 0: σpt = (XU.S.2σU.S.2 + XG2σG2)½ = [(0.5)2(0.1)2 + (0.5)2(0.2)2] ½ = 0.11
ρU.S.G = 0.3: σpt = (XU.S.2σU.S.2 + XG2σG2 + 2XU.S.XGσU.S.σGρU.S.G) ½
= [0.520.12 + 0.520.22 + 2(0.5)(0.5)(0.1)(0.2)(0.3)] ½ = 0.1245
20.6 E[rp] = XAE[rA] + XBE[rB] + XCE[rC] = 0.2(0.08) + 0.3(0.1) + 0.5(0.13) = 11.1%
20.7 At least some individual stocks will have return/risk performance above the market portfolio just
by chance. Similarly, in any given period individual country indices will surpass the world market
portfolio when returns are measured ex post. In an informationally efficient market, it is not
possible to predict these high-performing assets ex ante.
76
Kirt C. Butler, Solutions for Multinational Finance, 4th edition
0
-100% 0% 100% 200% 300% 400%
If this data is entered into a spreadsheet, it is easy to verify that the distribution is indeed positively
skewed (skewness = 2.87 > 0.0 = normal skew) and leptokurtic (kurtosis = 10.30 > 3.0 = normal
kurtosis).
77
Kirt C. Butler, Solutions for Multinational Finance, 4th edition
20A.2 a.
600
Israel
500
Jordan
400
World
300
200
100
0
D- D- D- D- D- D- D- D- D- D- D- D- D- D- D-
92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 00 01 02 03 04 05 06
The Israeli index seems to move with the market during most years, and the index for Jordan
seems to be somewhat independent of the world market portfolio.
Return statistics are reported below and interpreted in parts b-d. Each country’s correlation with
the all-country world index also is reported.
Holding period return Continuously compounded return
Israel Jordan World Israel Jordan World
1993 15.60% 20.90% 24.90% 14.50% 18.98% 22.23%
1994 –32.35% –8.68% 5.04% –39.09% –9.09% 4.92%
1995 23.53% 7.43% 19.44% 21.13% 7.16% 17.76%
1996 –2.28% –8.43% 13.21% –2.30% –8.81% 12.41%
1997 25.00% 1.57% 14.99% 22.31% 1.55% 13.97%
1998 –5.08% –10.97% 21.96% –5.22% –11.62% 19.85%
1999 59.64% 6.21% 26.81% 46.78% 6.03% 23.75%
2000 27.74% –23.20% –13.95% 24.48% –26.40% –15.02%
2001 –31.13% 34.58% –15.91% –37.29% 29.70% –17.33%
2002 –31.21% 4.55% –18.97% –37.42% 4.45% –21.03%
2003 57.58% 57.68% 34.65% 45.48% 45.54% 29.75%
2004 20.29% 61.34% 15.74% 18.48% 47.83% 14.61%
2005 27.45% 73.84% 11.38% 24.26% 55.30% 10.78%
2006 –4.86% –30.88% 21.52% –4.98% –36.93% 19.49%
Mean 10.71% 13.28% 11.49% 6.51% 8.84% 9.72%
Stdev 29.96% 32.32% 16.70% 28.72% 27.78% 16.13%
ρIsrael,Jordan 0.3301 0.2828
ρi,World 0.6174 0.1638 1.000 0.6250 0.1450 1.000
βi 1.108 0.317 1.000 1.113 0.250 1.000
b. The standard deviations are fairly close, but the mean returns are much less with continuously
compounded returns. As a general rule, the continuously compounded mean return is always
smaller than the corresponding holding period mean return.
c. The correlation coefficients for each country are relatively close using the two compounding
methods.
d. The betas also are relatively close.
e. Jordan had lower systematic risk because returns to Jordan had a very low correlation with returns
to the world index. Jordan contributed very little to the volatility of the world market index
because most of its risk was diversifiable.
78
Kirt C. Butler, Solutions for Multinational Finance, 4th edition
79
Kirt C. Butler, Solutions for Multinational Finance, 4th edition
21.11 What is the value premium? What is the size effect? Do international stocks exhibit these
characteristics? Are these factors evidence of market inefficiency?
The value premium refers to the tendency of value (high equity book-to-market) stocks to outperform
growth (low equity book-to-market) stocks. The size effect refers to the tendency of small stocks to
outperform large stocks. Fama and French [1998] found that these factors are present in a study of 13
national stock markets. Size and value premiums are not necessarily evidence of informational
inefficiency, as they could reflect systematic (nondiversifiable) risks such as relative financial distress.
21.12 What is momentum? Can it lead to profitable investment opportunities for international investors?
Momentum refers to the tendency of recent winners (stocks with positive returns over a recent period)
to outperform recent losers. Momentum effects have been found in U.S. (Jegadeesh and Titman,
1992) and European (Rouwenhorst, 1998) stock markets. In particular, recent winners outperform
recent losers for about one year, after which time the winners tend to underperform losers. Because of
the curious reversal of fortunes after one year, momentum effects are harder to reconcile with the
efficient market hypothesis. If momentum effects persist in the future, they offer the possibility of
positive risk-adjusted investment opportunities.
21.13 Are individual stocks exposed to currency risk? Does currency risk affect required returns?
Individual stocks (especially firms with international operations) are often exposed to currency risk.
Jorion’s and De Santis and Gérard’s studies (presented in the text) suggest that currency risk is not
priced in the U.S. stock market, but does appear to be priced in non-U.S. stock markets. In any case,
managers will continue to care about currency risk because - as employees of the firm - they cannot
diversify their wealth in the same way that outside shareholders can.
Problem Solutions
21.1 a. rS = rF + βS (rM – rF) = 8% + [16.5% – 8%] (1.5) = 20.75%.
b. rS = rF + βS (rM – rF) = 4% + [12.5% – 4%] (1.2) = 14.2%.
21.2 a. ßBMW = ρBMW,DAX (σBMW/σDAX) = (0.44)(0.105/0.046) ≈ 1.00 relative to the Frankfurt DAX
stock market index.
b. rBMW = rF + βBMW (E[rM]–rF) = 0.05 + (1.00)(0.06) ≈ 0.110, or 11.0%
c. ßDAX,World = ρDAX,World (σDAX/σWorld) = (0.494) (0.0413/0.0526) = 0.3879 relative to the world
market index.
21.3 a. According to BP’s factor sensitivities, BP shares should rise with an increase in world
industrial production, a decrease in the price of oil, or an increase in the value of currencies in
BP’s trading basket in the denominator of the spot rate.
b. E(r) = μ + βProdFProd+βOilFOil+βSpotFSpot
= 14%+(1.5)(2%)+(–0.80)(10%)+ (0.01)(–5%)
= 14% + 3% – 8% – 0.05% = 8.95%.
c. With an expectation of 8.95% and an actual return of only 4%, BP underperformed its
expectation by 4.95% during the period.
21.4 a. According to Paribas’ factor sensitivities, Paribas shares should rise with an increase in
industrial production or with an increase in the price of oil. Share price should fall with an
increase in the term premium, the risk premium, or the value of the foreign currencies in
Paribas’ trading basket in the denominator of the foreign exchange quote. (Conversely, the
negative sign on this last factor means that Paribas is likely to rise with an appreciation of the
euro in the numerator of the spot rate quote.)
b. E(r) = μ + βProd FProd + βOil FOil + βTerm FTerm + βRisk FRisk + βSpot FSpot
= 12% + (1.10)(10%)+(0.60)(10%)+(–0.05)(10%)+(–0.10)(10%)+(–0.02)(10%) = 12% + 11%
+ 6% – 0.5% – 1% – 0.2% = 27.3%.
80
Kirt C. Butler, Solutions for Multinational Finance, 4th edition
c. With an expectation of 27.3% and an actual return of –12%, Paribas underperformed its
expectation by 39.3% during the period.
21.5 a. E(r) = μ + βMFM + βZFZ + βDFD = 10% +(1.0)(–1%)+(0.1)(–1%)+(0.05)(–1%) = 10.00% –
1.00% – 0.10% – 0.05% = 8.85%.
b. With an expectation of 8.85% and an actual return of 12%, Amazon.com outperformed its
expectation by 3.15% during the period.
21.6 a. Over a single year, it is difficult to say which manager is likely to see higher returns. Returns
to value (and other) investment strategies vary from year to year.
b. If the value premium persists over the next 10 years as it has in the past, then the value-
oriented strategy of investing in stocks with high equity book-to-market value ratios is likely
to lead to higher returns over 10-year investment horizons.
c. It is difficult to say whether higher returns to value strategies are truly superior risk-adjusted
returns or merely a systematic risk for which investors demand compensation, such as a
premium for relative financial distress.
21.7 a. Momentum strategies invest in recent winners (stocks with high returns over a recent period)
and avoid or short-sell recent losers. In Jegadeesh and Titman’s [1992] study of U.S. stocks,
the return difference between winner and loser portfolios was 9.5 percent over the year
following formation of the winner and loser portfolios. During the second year after portfolio
formation, U.S. winners lost about one-half of this accumulated gain.
b. In Rouwenhorst’s [1998] study of 12 European markets, winners beat losers by 12 percent
over the first year after portfolio formation. As in the U.S., winners lost some of their
accumulated gain during the subsequent year. Momentum strategies hold promise for
international markets.
c. At the time of this writing, momentum effects had not been investigated in Latin American
markets. Momentum appears to have a strong international component in the Rouwenhorst
study, so there is a strong possibility that they will be found in Latin American stock markets
as well.
81