My Twitter

  • Subscribe to our RSS feed.
  • Twitter
  • StumbleUpon
  • Reddit
  • Facebook
  • Digg

Thursday, 16 October 2008

Is preferred stock equity?

Posted on 10:36 by Unknown
In the last few days, we have seen announcement by both the UK and US governments of their intent to invest hundreds of billions into their biggest banks. In both plans, the investment will be in preferred stock in the banks, and the announcements have described them as investments in equity. But is preferred stock equity? That is a question that is not new but acquires fresh urgency, with these infusions.
Preferred stock is a hybrid security, sharing some characteristics with equity and some with debt. Like equity, it has a perpetual life and the dividends can be skipped, if a firm is in financial trouble, without the risk of default. Unlike equity, the preferred dividend is usually fixed at the time o the issue (as a percent of the face value of the preferred stock) and is often cumulative; failure to pay dividends one year is compensated for by paying the dividends in the next year. In fact, investing in preferred stock is more akin to investing in a bond than stock, with almost all of the returns coming from the dividends. There is one final confounding factor. While interest payment on debt are tax deductible, preferred dividends are not. In my discounted cash flow valuations, I have always considered preferred stock to be more debt than equity, and very expensive debt at that, since it does not provide a tax deduction.
Among US companies, the biggest issuers of preferred stock are the financial service companies (banks, insurance companies) and there is a simple reason for it. While it may be more expensive than conventional debt, it is counted as equity by the regulatory authorities while computing capital ratios for banks. 
So what is the bottom line of these capital infusions by the governments for existing equity investors in the banks receiving the infusions? If I were an investor in a US bank receiving the infusion, I am concerned about the effect of the preferred dividends that the banks have to pay for the foreseeable future out of after-tax earnings, which will lower my earnings and returns on equity going forward on common stock. However, given that the bank will have to raise capital to cover it's mistakes from the last few years, and that the capital will not come easily in this market (Think of the problems Bank of America had last week when it tried to raise $ 10 billion), I will accept this bargain. If I were an investor in a UK bank receiving capital from the British government, I am not so sure that this works in my favor. The British government plan is much more punitive to common stockholders; the dividend rate is set much higher, the banks will not be allowed to pay common dividends until they pay off the preferred stock and the government looks like it will take a much more active role in the way the banks are run. In other words, the British preferred stock infusion seems to encroach more on common equity than the US preferred stock infusion. Not surprisingly, the British banks that are prime targets for the infusion (Lloyds, HBOS and Royal Bank of Scotland) have seen their stock prices drop since the plan was announced, whereas the US banks have seen marginal improvements in the stock price.
Email ThisBlogThis!Share to XShare to Facebook
Posted in | No comments
Newer Post Older Post Home

0 comments:

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)

Popular Posts

  • Equity Risk Premiums and the Fear of Catastrophe
    As many of you already know, I am a little fixated on the equity risk premium. More than any variable, it explains what happens in equity ma...
  • Twitter announces IPO: The Valuation
    A little more than a week ago, I posted my first take on Twitter and argued that even in the absence of financial information from the comp...
  • The future of the MBA
    As someone who has a vintage MBA (from 1981) and has taught MBAs for almost thirty years, I have been spending the last few months wondering...
  • Growth (Part 4): Growth and Management Credibility
    If you buy a growth company, the bulk of the value that you attach to the company comes from its growth assets. For these growth assets to b...
  • Asset selection & Valuation in Illiquid Markets
    In my last post, I looked at how the asset allocation decision can be altered by differences in liquidity across asset classes, with the uns...
  • Buffett and Munger... Shock value!
    Berkshire Hathaway is having its annual meeting and the financial press is falling all over itself reporting what the sage from Omaha has to...
  • Unstable risk premiums: A new paper
    I am back from a long hiatus from posting, but I had nothing profound (even mildly so) to post and I was on vacation for a couple of weeks a...
  • Love the company! Love the product! Love the stock? An Update on Apple
    My first computer was a Mac 128K . I was a budget-constrained doctoral student from UCLA, teaching my very first class at UC Berkeley. At $2...
  • Snowmen and Shovels: Investing Lessons?
    I live near New York and woke up this morning to our first snowstorm of the winter (we had a freak one in the fall but no snow in November a...
  • Many a slip between the cup & the lip: From forward value to value per share today
    Valuing young, growth companies is never easy to do but it is well worth doing, partly because it forces you think through the business that...

Categories

  • Acquisitions
  • Corporate Governance
  • Data Observations
  • Dividends and cash balances
  • Equity Risk Premiums
  • Facebook
  • Facebook IPO
  • Governments and value
  • I
  • Information
  • Introduction to web site
  • Investment Philosophy
  • IPO
  • liquidity
  • prices and value
  • Private Equity
  • Taxes and value
  • Teaching
  • The
  • Value and Pricing
  • Value Investing
  • Value of a franchise
  • Value of growth
  • Year end

Blog Archive

  • ►  2013 (36)
    • ►  November (2)
    • ►  October (7)
    • ►  September (7)
    • ►  August (1)
    • ►  July (4)
    • ►  June (2)
    • ►  May (1)
    • ►  April (2)
    • ►  March (2)
    • ►  February (5)
    • ►  January (3)
  • ►  2012 (49)
    • ►  December (8)
    • ►  November (3)
    • ►  October (4)
    • ►  September (3)
    • ►  August (3)
    • ►  July (2)
    • ►  June (5)
    • ►  May (5)
    • ►  April (6)
    • ►  March (3)
    • ►  February (3)
    • ►  January (4)
  • ►  2011 (55)
    • ►  December (3)
    • ►  November (3)
    • ►  October (5)
    • ►  September (6)
    • ►  August (4)
    • ►  July (3)
    • ►  June (3)
    • ►  May (4)
    • ►  April (7)
    • ►  March (5)
    • ►  February (6)
    • ►  January (6)
  • ►  2010 (45)
    • ►  December (5)
    • ►  November (6)
    • ►  October (4)
    • ►  September (6)
    • ►  July (1)
    • ►  June (4)
    • ►  May (2)
    • ►  April (3)
    • ►  March (5)
    • ►  February (4)
    • ►  January (5)
  • ►  2009 (60)
    • ►  December (3)
    • ►  November (6)
    • ►  October (5)
    • ►  September (6)
    • ►  August (3)
    • ►  July (3)
    • ►  June (4)
    • ►  May (4)
    • ►  April (5)
    • ►  March (9)
    • ►  February (7)
    • ►  January (5)
  • ▼  2008 (42)
    • ►  December (6)
    • ►  November (8)
    • ▼  October (13)
      • Another strange incident... in a market full of an...
      • What is the message the market is sending?
      • The New World Order: How this crisis affects valua...
      • What is going on with the inflation indexed treasu...
      • Is preferred stock equity?
      • Black, blue and white swans: Comments on Taleb
      • Markets for sports outcomes- The long odds bias!
      • Gold, fine art and collectibles...
      • Diversification: Why is it not working?
      • Is it time to make the move?
      • Explaining the Market....
      • The Buffett Gambit: Buying (Selling) Credibility
      • Mark to Market or Not to Mark to Market?
    • ►  September (15)
Powered by Blogger.

About Me

Unknown
View my complete profile