Professional Documents
Culture Documents
2009
2,744
248
(20)
228
83.9
3,481
290
(26)
264
97.2
144.1
2,888.1
165
946
1,942.1
2,516
319
(46)
273
100.5
166.8
3,647.8
781
1
47
117
2008
172.5
2,688.5
1,288
-40
(47)
( 7)
1,281
2,366.8
847
(9)
48
76
115
962
1,726.5
The 10-K does not report a number for interest income received in cash, so we use the
accrual number from the income statement as an approximation.
Accruals are the difference between Net Income and Cash Flow from Operations,
reported in the cash flow statement (in millions of dollars):
Net income
Cash from operations
Accruals
2010
2009
2008
1,943
2,744
( 801)
1,994
3,481
(1,487)
1,829
2,516
( 687)
Free cash flow for 2010 is calculated as follows, using equation 4.11:
Earnings
Net interest paid, after tax (above)
Investments (above)
Accruals
Free cash flow
$1,943
+ 144
- 946
+ 801
$1,942
(as above)
Stock-based compensation
based compensation in the equity statement.
PPE
Equity earnings
Postretirement benefits
Other
Capital spending
PPE
Acquisitions
reported
with goodwill
Investment in and proceeds from
inother assets
marketable securities
PPE
2008
1,726
1.080
1,598
2009
2,367
1.166
2,030
5,169
4.0%
33,014
26,202
31,371
(5,294)
26,077
64.09
2010
1,942
1.260
1,541
1,942 1.02
= $33,014
1.08 1.02
We are, of course, uncertain about the growth rate to apply in the continuing value. This
is quite speculative, and notice that a sizable amount of the valuation comes from the
continuing value. What justifies the 2% growth rate? Should it be 4%, more like the
average GDP growth rate? Clearly, we have more work to do to get a feel for the
appropriate growth rate. You might also ask whether the required return is the right one.
Are free cash flows a good base to apply growth to? Well, in KMBs case it might work.
This is a firm with positive free cash flows, growing somewhat steadily. At least the free
cash flows are not negative!