Creating Value and Managing Investors

What does "value creation" mean? How can companies prevent value improvement plans from culminating in value destruction? The answers lie in Value Based Management, a framework designed to manage internal corporate processes in order to maximize the created value.

Why do value improvement plans so often fail to impact the company's market value? Is it an undervaluation issue? How can managers change the market's assessment? The answers lie in the Active Shareholder Management, a framework designed to identify target investors through segmentation and to develop a strategy that, consistent with value creation plans, enables a company to optimize its market and shareholder value.

The following presents a comprehensive view of value creation, from an internal point of view, Value Based Management, and from an external view, Active Shareholder Management.

What does "value creation" mean?

It is common for management to announce plans to create value for stockholders. It is also common for their financial statements down the line to reveal that if anything, value has been destroyed. What went wrong?

It is crucial for managers to realize that "value creation" is a clearly defined and tangible measure, based on interpretation or personal assessments. Mathematical formulas exist that objectively and rigorously verify whether value has been actually created, based on financial statements. These formulas are based on the EVA(TM) or Economic Profit concept, which is defined as the difference between the return on the invested capital and its cost.

If the return on the capital employed is higher than its cost, the firm is creating value. Otherwise, it is destroying value.

Once "value creation" is defined, how can it be maximized?

Based on our consulting experience, companies that have low value creation trends are usually plagued by poor managerial processes. VBM (Value Based Management) is an approach that aims to maximize value creation by effectively leveraging and aligning strategic actions, resource allocation, performance assessment, and management rewards.

VBM has been successfully implemented by a large number of widely diverse companies around the world. Some demonstrate the approach in their external communications: For example, see the section of the BASF website dedicated to value creation.

Companies may differ in terms of size and business focus, but if they successfully implemented VBM, they share two elements: an organic approach and a well-designed roadmap.

Deploying VBM means to redesign and align all internal processes. Once the value creation indicator is well defined, every process, from the strategic plan to management incentives, has to be renewed.

Logically, VBM must start with building a strategic plan designed to maximally improve the value creation indicator. The next stage is disciplined execution, which is monitored by a system of Key Performance Indicators. Lastly, the management incentive plan must be shaped to focus on value creation.

VBM implementation

The standard VBM framework can be altered based on the needs and priorities of the client. Timing and characteristics of implementation may also be changed.

The key point for a successful VBM program is organic implementation, even if the sequence of projects and actions differ from company to company. VBM deployment requires discipline in following a precise action plan. Management must have a roadmap in place that clearly defines all actions that have to be taken along some key dimensions (value indicators, processes, systems and incentives), and sets clear milestones.

A medium to long- term range of vision is necessary to effectively drive implementation. That is why CEOs with a "short term scope" tend not to start such programs.

VBM is a comprehensive program that requires a strong leader, typically the CEO, to drive its implementation. Introducing the approach is an opportunity for a significant cultural shift and upgrade at the company. Within the roadmap, management must also plan times for collective discussions, sharing, and alignment involving the entire management team, in addition to communication and training sessions throughout the organization.

VBM is not just something to make the company work better. It is the key methodology to maximizing economic profit and, consequently, company share value. In fact, the firm's market value is directly linked to the present value of future company performance, measured as economic profit.

Merely deciding to adopt VBM isn't enough. It is common for VBM adopters to fail to translate improvement plans into higher market value. The mismatch lies in two root causes: unrealistic hypotheses about planned future performance and secondly, the financial community's failure to recognize the company's fair value.

This article investigates the second problem.

Active Investor Management

Some managers accuse the market of not being rational enough. We, however, believe that the problem isn't a crooked dance floor. The main source of mismatched market value to expected Economic Profit improvements lies in management's failure to properly communicate the firm's value to the external world.

Active Shareholder Management (ASM) is an innovative methodology to enhance company market value by managing key financial investors. The main goal of ASM is to develop a strategy that, given internal plans and results, maximizes value to shareholders.

The ASM approach is based on Investor Segmentation, a tool to identify and understand major investors and, consequently, to manage them. Investor Segmentation exploits the breadth of increasingly available information channels in order to provide CEOs and CFOs with the elements required to target new investors and define an active and effective financial communication strategy.

Investor Segmentation is based on a coordinated analytical effort. It can be carried out through various data gathering methods and market intelligence sources. Focused interviews with investors are performed to outline management styles and behaviours. Desk research allows investigation of different investor strategies and clusters them homogenously.

Particular attention should be paid to investors holding significant assets in similar companies, which identifies the most relevant shareholders - including ones who currently do not hold positions and could stand to be further explored.

With the identification of key investors in hand, managers are equipped to visualize the actions required to improve shareholder value. In fact, based on the ASM approach, managers can "test" their potential actions by simulating investor reactions with the help of mathematical models, and can therefore predict the impact on the share value.

Future investor behaviour is a relevant input for business, financial, and communication strategy.

Consider dividend strategy. Some investors do not "appreciate" dividends, many for tax reasons. Others do like them, for instance stockholders in low tax brackets who need cash from dividend payments or tax-exempt institutions that need periodic cash. Many investors are simply used to receiving dividends from a given company and would frown on any reduction.

There are also investors who prefer companies that pay no dividends, channeling the money instead into ambitious "growth stock" strategies. Other investors prefer more stable behaviors, typically "value stock" companies, where dividends are usually quite high and constant.

These preferences are often public knowledge and can heavily influence the actual portfolio strategy of fund managers. Awareness of this information can help managers better understand which investors would be attracted by their strategies.

Buy-back operations and stock splits, common tools to increase company market value, must also be planned with key investors in mind, factoring in their needs and foreseeable reactions. Equity repurchasing can deliver a strong signal of management confidence in future performance. Following buy-back announcements, financial analysts frequently revise their earnings forecast estimates upwards. An empirical study showed an average abnormal share return of 3.42% .

Managers have to develop ad hoc approaches for each segment of investors identified. For instance, investors who rely on analyses based on "strategic" issues would prefer information regarding industry trends, competitive strengths, and new "growth stories". Meanwhile, "finance-oriented" investors prefer data related to cash flow, operating profitability, and working capital returns. Communication actions such as preferred channels and frequency of the meetings must be tailored accordingly.

ASM Implementation

ASM managerial methodology has not yet attained the popularity of VBM, mainly because investor management is usually restricted to the Investor Relations team, yet it should be a process that involves the whole organization.

Many companies, including large corporations, manage investors with a highly qualitative approach, based on personal relationships. Analytics are rarely and poorly used, which is a striking difference compared with standard sales and marketing activities and tools - that essentially helps a company to sell a product/service to someone (a client, not an investor).

To create momentum for ASM implementation, a clear benefit case must be built. In addition to the advantages already described, a further key benefit of ASM is the opportunity for top managers to spend their valuable and expensive time more accurately. Deep knowledge of target investors improves focus: management can attend only the "right" events and meet only the "right" investors.

In conclusion, value creation can be, and should be, measured analytically. It is an objective quantity, not a qualitative interpretation. Best Practices apply Value Based Management as a tool to manage internal processes with the aim of increasing the value created for shareholders.

When improvements fail to be reflected in market value, management must work on communication strategies. Active Shareholder Management can be leveraged to influence market perception by delivering the right messages to the right investors, in a way that they can hear loud and clear.

http://www.tefen.com/Strategy.aspx

http://www.tefen.com/TheTefenTribune.aspx

D. L. Ikenberry, T. Vermaelen, "The option to repurchase stock" (1996), Financial Management

The Business Value of Diamonds

As the king of jewelry, diamond has a huge business value which demonstrates its own superiority. It's expensive not only because of its natural quality but also of its great business potential.

It needs a great deal of time and money to find a diamond and cut it. Beyond its gorgeous appearance concentrate great efforts. The diamond deposit is not that easy to find, and this process requires several years or even decades of years. The cost of digging a deposit is incredibly high, which attributes to the high price of the diamond.

When it comes to cutting, design and skills are necessary. A good diamond needs to be polished well, or it will lose its own value. A small mistake in cutting may result in huge loss. In order to make good use of the material, the owner of the diamond will try his best to find the best cutter. The owner has to pay a lot to his employee.

Design is another thing that the owner needs to do. A good diamond should be in great shape. If the design is too easy or too complicated, it will affect the price of the diamond. What's more, some people are more interested in the diamond's appearance than its quality. A good design is definitely popular among them.

Diamond has a huge market as jewels. It attracts many women and makes them pay for it. Also, it's applied to the industrial world for its unusual solidness. In the financial world, however, diamond plays an important role as well. It has a store of value. Its value has already surpassed the gold, because its price is rather stable.

All in all, diamond has the functions of decorating and storing. It will be a good way to keep a diamond.

Monica is a freelance writer who has written thousands of articles on various niches. She likes to share her knowledge with her readers and provide them with the best information on various topics. She also likes to write about replica watch

Investing in Car Dealerships - How to Value Them

Most business valuations are driven substantially by the company's historical financial statements, tempered by other factors such as: location, brand name, management and such. In truth and in fact, the dealership's balance sheet represents less than half the information necessary to properly value an automobile dealership. The balance sheet is but a starting point from which a number of factors must be added and subtracted in order to determine the true value of the assets.

Valuing new car dealerships has to do with projecting future profits and opportunities based upon the "dynamics" of the particular dealership being valued and of the automobile business itself.

The Internal Revenue Service recognizes that valuations include more than financial statements: "The appraiser must exercise his judgment as to the degree of risk attaching to the business of the corporation which issued the stock, but that judgment must be related to all of the other factors affecting the value." Revenue Ruling 59-60, Section 3.03.

DEFINITION OF MARKET VALUE

The definition of market value according to the American Institute of Real Estate Appraisers' Dictionary of Real Estate Appraisal, is: "The most probable price in cash, terms equivalent to cash, or other precisely revealed terms, for which the appraised property will sell in a competitive market under all conditions requisite to fair sale, with the buyer and seller each acting prudently, knowledgeably, and for self interest, and assuming that neither is under duress." American Institute of Real Estate Appraisers, The Dictionary of Real Estate Appraisal. (Chicago: American Institute of Real Estate Appraisers, 1984), 194 195.

In Revenue Ruling 59-60, the Internal Revenue Service defines "fair market value" as follows: "...the price at which the business would change hands between a willing buyer and a willing seller when the former is not under any compulsion to buy and the latter is not under any compulsion to sell, both parties having reasonable knowledge and relevant facts."

The purpose of Revenue Ruling 59-60 is to outline and review in general the approach, methods and factors to be considered in valuing shares of the capital stock of closely held corporations.

The methods discussed in the Revenue Ruling apply to the valuation of corporate stocks on which market quotations are either unavailable or are of such scarcity that they do not reflect the fair market value.

The Ruling goes on to state that no set formula can be devised to determine fair market value of closely held stocks and that the value will depend upon such considerations as:

(a) The nature of the business and the history of the enterprise from its inception.

(b) The economic outlook in general and the condition and outlook of the specific industry in particular.

(c) The book value of the stock and the financial condition of the business.

(d) The earnings capacity of the company.

(e) The dividend-paying capacity. The ability to pay dividends is often more important than a company's history of distributing cash to shareholders, especially when valuing controlling interests.

(f) Whether or not the enterprise has goodwill or other intangible value.

(g) Sales of the stock and the size of the block of stock to be valued.

(h) The market price of stocks of corporations engaged in the same or a similar line of business having their stocks actively traded in a free and open market, either on an exchange or over-the-counter. With respect to an individual dealership sale, the best comparable is the amount the public company paid or received for buying or selling a similar dealership, not what the public company's stock value or earnings multiple, per se, that is reflected on the stock exchange.

In practice, in arriving at the fair market value of a new car dealership, several different formulas have been used:

1. Return on Investment (or earnings valuation) Formula: The value of a business to a particular purchaser based upon a return on investment analysis. This value varies from purchaser to purchaser, according to the purchaser's investment criterion, and it may or may not reflect fair market value. The National Automobile Dealers Association (NADA) refers to this value as "Investment Value." A Dealer Guide to Valuing an Automobile Dealership, NADA June 1995, Revised July 2000.

The capitalization rate is determined by the stability of the dealership's earnings and the risk involved in the automobile business at the time of sale, investment, or valuation. This method is highly subjective as the capitalization rate is based upon the particular appraiser's perception of the risk of the business; consequently, the lower the appraiser perceives the risk, the lower will be the capitalization rate and the higher will be the price he would expect a potential purchaser to pay for the business.

In short, the capitalization rate is the appraiser's opinion as to a rate of return on investment that would motivate a prospective purchaser to buy the dealership. Considerations include those specified in Revenue Ruling 59-60, as well as available rate of return on alternative investments.

2. Adjusted Net Worth Formula: Net worth of the company, adjusted to reflect the appraised value of the assets used in the day to day operations of a business, assuming that the user or purchaser will continue to make use of the assets. To this "net worth" value will be added blue sky or goodwill, if any. The "Adjusted Net Worth Formula" is the most common method used in purchasing and selling a new car dealership.

3. Orderly Liquidation Formula. This method values the assets as if all of them had to be sold - not at a "fire sale," but in an orderly manner and without time constraints. Normally, if the dealership is profitable, some value will still be placed upon goodwill.

4. Forced Liquidation. The lowest of all values, forced liquidation means that all of the assets must be sold at a forced sale such as an auction, creditors' sale or by order of a bankruptcy court. A bankruptcy proceeding regarding a new car dealership almost never brings goodwill. This might be the most appropriate formula if the dealership has no lease (or only a short term remaining on its lease) and cannot, as a practical matter, relocate.

5. Income Formula. The income formula is basically taking the store's earnings and multiplying it by an appropriated capitalization rate. The trick here is the definition of "earnings." In determining "earnings" a perspective purchase could use any combination of the following:

(a) current earnings

(b) average earnings - add the last five years together and divide by 5

(c) weighted average earnings - usually an inverted weight with the current year multiplied by five, last year by four, the year before last by three, four years ago by two, five years ago by one, then adding them together and dividing by 15

(d) cash flow - net income plus agreed add-backs such as depreciation, LIFO, personal expenses, excess bonuses and such

(e) forecasted earnings - future projected earnings discounted to present day value.

6. Fair Value. NADA also refers to a third value in addition to "Market Value" "Investment Value," which it calls "Fair Value." NADA describes "Fair Value" as being "...primarily used when a minority shareholder objects to a proposed sale of the company in assessing liquidating damages." and defines it as: "The value of the minority interest immediately before the transaction to which the dissenter objects, excluding any appreciation or depreciation in anticipation of the transaction and without reference to either a minority or non-marketability discount."

The NADA guide states: It is not common for auto dealers to run across this particular valuation standard. This author has never used, nor has ever seen this value used with respect to valuing automobile dealerships.

As can be seen in this report, this author in discussing valuations excludes what NADA describes as "Fair Value".

7. The Greater Fool Theory. The National Automobile Dealers Association publication (A Dealer Guide to Valuing an Automobile Dealership, NADA June 1995), bemuses, in part: "A Rule of Thumb is more properly referred to as a 'greater fool theory.' It is not 'valuation theory, however." (In its "Valuing an Automobile Dealership: Update 2004" NADA dropped the reference to "fool" and simply states that the theory is ". . . rarely based upon sound economic or valuation theory," but advises sellers to "Go for it, and maybe someone will be stupid enough to pay [it]."

The considerations for valuing new car dealerships are more complex than those used for valuing most other businesses. Dynamics such as the unique requirements of automobile manufactures and distributors can limit the amount of monies that may be paid for a dealership, regardless of what perspective purchasers may offer to pay for the store.

Therefore, the value of a new car dealership varies based upon the needs and ability of the purchaser and, consequently, the same dealership could have two different values to two different purchaser and both values would be correct.

Thus, our valuation of the subject dealership should be considered in the context and limitations of the facts and history of new car dealership sales as delineated herein.

Mr. Pico served as a court appointed "Consultant to Debtor" in bankruptcy cases, a "Court Appointed Mediator" in automotive disputes, the "Court Appointed Arbitrator / Appraiser" in partnership disputes, a "Court Approved Consultant to Receiver" in a check-kiting case, as a "Superior Court Mediator" in dealership/lender litigation and has been recognized as an expert witness on both State and Federal levels.

He has consulted on upside-down positions of over $50 Million, out of trust position of over $4 Million and a bank overdraft of $30 Million. Since 1972, Mr. Pico has completed over 1,000 automobile dealership transactions, whose combined values exceed One Billion Dollars.

In 1986, he authored and National Legal Publishing Company published the nation's first book on Buying and Selling Automobile Dealerships. You can view his biography at http://www.advisingdealers.com

Chronic Diseases - How Expensive Are They?

A very small percentage of our population is consuming a very large percentage of our health care dollars. These patients with chronic conditions account for 83% of the $1.67 trillion spent on health care and cause two-thirds of the deaths in the U.S.

The major chronic conditions are: heart disease, stroke, cancer, diabetes and chronic lower respiratory diseases. These diseases are major killers and a major source of illness, hospitalization and health care costs. Not to mention the cost of long-term disability associated with them. And without aggressive intervention these costs are expected to worsen.

As mentioned earlier total national spending on healthcare rose to $1.67 trillion dollars. That is over $5,500 per person in the US. And that is a 7% increase over the year before.

Health care spending for a patient with a chronic condition is on average two and a half times greater than for a patient without a chronic condition. Or put another way the average cost for a patient with a chronic condition is over $13,000.

It is not surprising that many of those people with chronic conditions have less insurance requiring greater out of pocket expenses. Also they file for bankruptcy more often (51% of those that file for bankruptcy cite medical expenses as the cause). And the number of medical related bankruptcies has increased 30 times since 1980.

To make these figures more devastating one only need to factor in the aging population. By 2011 the first of the baby boomers will reach 65, the added strain that will put on these numbers cannot be doubted. Also due to medical technology, those with chronic conditions are living longer, requiring more services and additional costs.

For a more detailed look at how this relates lets look at one condition and see its impact. Diabetes is the body's inability to utilize glucose. Some diabetes can be controlled with diet and/or oral medications while another type requires insulin injection and close monitoring of glucose levels. Diabetes can be linked to other illnesses such as neuropathy, glaucoma and heart disease to name a few. Over 18 million Americans have diabetes and roughly one third don't even know they have the disease.

By the year 2050 it is estimated 29 million residents will be diagnosed with diabetes. It is now the sixth leading cause of death, with over 200,000 deaths each year from diabetes or related complications. The estimated cost in 2002 was $132 billion, of that $92 billion was for direct medical costs, $40 billion was for indirect costs such as lost work days, restricted activities and disability.

Heart disease and stroke amass similar numbers: 70 million of us or 1 in 4 live, with cardiovascular disease; and heart disease is responsible for 1 death every 34 seconds. It cost the U.S. $394 Billion in 2005 from direct and indirect costs.

You can see how quickly these chronic conditions can amass staggering numbers. You can also see how those few in the Medicare/Medicaid rolls can account for 83% of health care spending.

Many state governments are looking at this problem and possible solutions to ward off financial crises. Even the federal government is investigating cost saving measures. Disease management programs are one option. These programs not only help prevent chronically ill patients from further disease and costly treatments, it also involves patients in managing their own care. This frees scarce health care resources.

Disease management is used by insurance carriers and private industries. Those identified with diabetes for example are contacted and kept informed about the importance of healthy behaviors. Specifically, they are contacted by phone and asked how often they check their glucose and what the values are. Those without strict control are advised to visit their physicians.

Another method to limit chronic conditions and their enormous costs is through prevention. Several states have instituted these programs. Whether it be cancer screening procedures like mammograms or colonoscopies in Michigan or smoking cessation programs like Arizona and California, states are becoming more proactive.

It is vital to our nation that chronic conditions such as heart disease and stroke be limited. Not only for the direct costs each of us has to pay but the indirect costs to our workforce and nation. And as the population ages, more and more patients will be diagnoses with chronic conditions thus ballooning an already strapped system. We must find a solution now before the cost is beyond reach.

I have been a nurse for over 30 years. And as a baby boomer, I am concerned about the state of health care in the U.S. My son and daughters will be asked to change the system that will provide care for my care when I become Medicare eligible.

For more information on chronic diseases and health care please visit Health Resources Health Resources provides timely information and tips on a variety of health care issues. Health Resources focuses primarily on prevention as a means to lower health care costs. Visit Health Resources today.

Measuring Brand Equity - The First Crucial Step in Maximizing Value

Intangible assets are crucial to a company's future. Assuring long-term growth and constant increase of shareholder value depend on the company maximizing its brand value.

Improving brand value should be a key goal for management and workers alike. To improve brand value, it must be constantly monitored and measured, as exemplified by the model described herein, which was developed for that very purpose.

Accounting standards address the issue of measuring the value of intangibles, for instance through IFRS3, but these present methods for measuring brand value are flawed. One of the problems is that there is no distinction between goodwill resulting from the brand and goodwill in general. For another, a brand developed in-house does not appear in the books: it is not considered an asset. Its value only appears during an acquisition event, whether it is acquired alone or as part of a business operation. Bare accounting practices, as expressed in the company's books, cannot provide a full picture of the company's value, including all tangible and intangible assets.

To illustrate the point, just compare the book value of companies versus their fair value (market value). Over the years, it has become apparent that intangible assets are driving value creation for shareholders. A study conducted over 20 years on the Russell 3,000 companies found a sharp shift towards intangible values. If in 1978, 95% of a company's value was clear from the books, by the beginning of the 2000s that proportion had plunged to about 15%. Other studies carried out among S&P-500 index companies and among the 350 largest-cap companies listed on London's FTSE delivered similar results - 70% to 75% of the companies' values, respectively, could not be explained by their books.

Let's look at specific companies. In Disney's case, 70% of its value can't be explained through the book figures. For Heinz that ratio rises to 85% and for Microsoft, 98%. Coca Cola's ratio is 80%. Where is the value coming from? Intangible assets, mainly the brand.

Companies are increasingly beginning to grasp that they have to manage their intangible assets, just as they do their tangible ones. During the economic downturn in the early 1990s as part of the global economic cycle, companies slashed expenditure. They scaled back their tangible assets and stopped investing in supporting their intangible assets, including their brands - without carefully considering accruing and future outcome of these actions.

In hindsight, we now know that companies who didn't neglect their intangible assets, and continued to build and financially manage their brands, weathered the trouble. The capital markets applauded their sustained growth, too. As a retail giant, Wal-Mart for instance is highly vulnerable to market fluctuations: yet it did not cut back spending on branding, and in fact leveraged the recession to build up its brand even more, creating a sustainable competitive edge for itself. The lesson is that even when times turn rough, a company must not cease managing its portfolio of tangible and intangible assets. It needs not to stop spending, but rather spend effectively.

The benefits of measuring brand value touch on almost every aspect of the business, from strategy and management to finances, marketing, and even the legal department. Brand value is a factor when analyzing returns on marketing drives, brand portfolio, or brand performance, even management performance. Brand value is key when evaluating a company for the purposes of M&A or in the event of ownership disputes, licensing lawsuits, partnership conflicts, and licensing agreements.

The Tefen-Globes-Giza Model

The model we developed is based on premium pricing, a method designed to calculate the current net value that the brand can be expected to produce for the company, and to other links in the value chain along the years.

The model focuses on the basic role of the brand - to create a preference based on which the consumer can be charged a premium. Therefore, the monetary value that the brand creates is the total premium revenues collected from the consumer, minus the brand's maintenance costs (advertising, support, and so on), capitalized based on the risk of the brand minus the rate of growth.

How is the premium underlying the brand calculated? The premium is the difference between the branded product's price, and that of the identical non-branded product available on the shelf. The premium is the end that which the consumer is willing to pay.

The premium paid by the consumer is divided by the different value chain components. For example, the premium paid for Coca Cola, will be divided between Coca Cola, the brand owner, and the specific retailer selling the brand.

Tefen and Giza carried out risk evaluation of each brand in the Israeli market, assessing the risks at three levels: sector risk, the specific risk of the brand, and the inherent risk of the brand owner. Each of these levels present different risks for the brand. The analysis compared these risks and focused on evaluating each and every brand by analyzing the ten most dominant parameters, such as degree of regulation, steadiness of demand, entry barriers, and intensity of competition. The lesser amount of risk, the greater the value the brand will hold.

There are other models, alongside the Tefen-Globes-Giza model used in business circles to evaluate brand value. One such model is the Interbrand model. Developed by Omnicom, Interbrand ranks the leading brands in world markets each year and the leading brands in selected markets. The model's methodology measures the brand value in three phases: financial forecasting - identifying revenues from the model or service that originate from the company's intangible assets, and building an estimate of future revenues originating from the intangible assets over the next six years; the role of branding - identifying the proportion of revenues from the intangible assets that originate from the brand alone; and brand strength - to calculate the net present value of the brand's revenues, a deduction representing the risk profile (time and likelihood of the scenario).

The Tefen model, unlike the Interbrand model, can measure more than just the brand value of companies: it can also measure the brand value of products. This is especially significant in markets such as FMCG, where companies have developed into "houses of brands." Leading companies such as P&G and Unilever should measure the value of each brand separately, since the consumer is usually unaware of the corporate brand.

Brand Management

Much has been written about brand management, but a thorough investigation using the Tefen-Globes-Giza model shows that a company must invest its efforts on three main fronts to squeeze the most out of its brand: volume, premium, and branding expenditure. Correct management on the three fronts will maximize the brand's economic potential for the company, thus creating value for both the company and the consumer.

The product and its characteristics are fundamental to creating high brand equity. Comparisons cannot be drawn between products and services provided in a saturated market to those in "blue oceans," which can grow much more and for which the consumer will pay much greater premiums. Therefore, brand equity is not only a function of the brand itself, but is also influenced by market characteristics such as regulation, entry barriers, and steadiness of demand.

The company usually cannot affect these external parameters, but should be aware of them. There are three main factors which can be influenced and can increase brand equity: volume, premium, and branding expenditure.

Volume

Naturally, the three parameters affect one another. Product volume is affected by the premium charged from the consumer, which in turn is affected by the investment in marketing the brand.

There are many ways to stimulate volume demand for a product, such as stretching the brand or approaching new consumer segments. Adjusting the value offering of the brand to changing market needs is critical to maintaining sales.

Let's take the example of Ford and Toyota, which were measured using the Interbrand global brands model. In 2003 both companies had roughly the same brand value ($17 billion for Ford and $20 billion for Toyota). By 2007, however, Toyota had a brand value of $32 billion while Ford's had shrunk to $9 billion. The Globes-Tefen "brands index," an annual study of the 100 leading brands in Israel, likewise showed that Toyota's brand value in Israel increased by 32% from 2002 to 2007, while Ford's dropped in real terms, losing 2% in the five years.

How does a thing like that happen? Toyota identified rising demand for economic and environmentally friendly cars, while Ford continued to make gas guzzlers and SUVs. The Detroit giant misread the future of the market and lost miles to their rival from Japan. Toyota recognized the market's yearning for "green" and adjusted its model, offering perceived added value to the consumer in the form of more efficient cars.

The success of the Toyota Prius and the good press the model received showed that identifying and meeting existing demand required lower investment on the brand than the standard models launched by the other car companies.

Premium

The premium charged for the brand is the difference between the price of the branded products and the price of comparable products lacking branding. The premium positions the brand, and determines its profitability.

Setting the premium lower forces the manufacturer to drive heavy demand for the product in order to achieve high brand value. Drumming up demand of that magnitude requires heavy investment in branding, which in and of itself, diminishes the brand value. On the other hand, setting the premium too high can hurt sales and stunt growth.

To properly set the premium the brand can collect, the manufacturer must know the market inside and out: the competition and consumers. It also depends on the positioning of the brand itself - is it a luxury brand? Does the added value that it brings the client justify a high premium? What is the highest possible premium under prevailing market conditions?

Luxury brands are the best example of charging a high premium in exchange for added value, for the feeling of exclusiveness and perceived quality. If a mass market brand can command a premium of up to 30%, then for a luxury brand the premium could reach more than 90%. The Interbrand index of 100 global brands includes three luxury brands of Louis Vuitton - Moet & Chandon, Louis Vuitton, and Hennessy. Louis Vuitton has a brand equity of more than $20 billion.

Another area where brands command high premiums is sports. The Tefen-Globes-Giza brands model places Nike Israel and Toyota Israel side by side, with a negligible difference of 2.5% between their brand values. However, Toyota Israel's sales turnover is much greater than that of Nike Israel. The reason for their practically identical brand value is the premium that Nike charges, meaning the percent of the price that the customer is paying for the pleasure of the brand. It can be more than 50% of the final price. Toyota, which is considered expensive for a non-luxury brand, charges a premium of less than half that of Nike.

Brand expenditure

This front includes all the direct expenditure on branding your product, from studying the market to designing the product to marketing -whether the branding is above or below it. This does not include actual product development costs, but focuses on expenditure that advances the product as a brand.

The company's goal is to optimize these expenses while preserving the values of the brand, whether at the level of design or experience. Ideally, the product and the value that the consumer derives from it, should speak for itself. Positive buzz, or word of mouth, can be major marketing tools.

Our index of the 100 leading brands in Israel placed Google Israel in 21st place, and immediately following it was the Danone dairy brand. The brand value of the two brands was practically identical, even though Danone's local branch makes more than double the revenue of Google Israel. How is this possible? Danone spends terrific sums of money in marketing and promotion, while Google relies on the good name of its parent company and the strength of its products. Compared with peer enterprises, it invests relatively little on branding itself, which inflates its brand equity to beyond that of heavy-spending Danone.

A Juggling Act

Balancing between volume, the premium, and branding expenditure is a perpetual juggling act by the brand manager throughout the brand's lifetime. The manager's purpose is to maximize the value of the brand for the company and the consumer. Maximizing the brand's economic value should be a basic goal of strategic planning, alongside the company's desire to maximize shareholder value. Management should ask whether the brand is realizing its full financial potential.

Volume, the premium, and branding expenditure are interlinked. Change one and you change the rest, directly affecting brand value. Measuring these components is not trivial, but it is necessary to keep track of brand value and to design a strategy to maximize it. A company that wants to maximize value must keep constant track of these parameters, and define goals and work plans, which should all be a part of its corporate marketing strategy.

http://www.tefen.com/Strategy.aspx

http://www.tefen.com/TheTefenTribune.aspx

Valuing/Appraising Your IRA Account - What Are the IRS Rules?

What is a Self Directed IRA?

An IRA account that requires that the account owner to make all of the investment decisions is called a "Self Directed" IRA. A "Custodian" is required to hold the investments in the account and to do the record keeping and the governmental reporting. There are two types of IRA accounts; one type is known as a "Traditional IRA"; the other is know as a "Self-Directed" IRA. They both have the same governing rules and regulations. With a Self Directed IRA there are very few limitations as to what types of investments are allowed. The Traditional IRA is generally limited to investing in listed securities-stock, bonds, mutual funds, etc.

Investing in Promissory Notes/Mortgage Notes

Many private mortgage notes are funded through Self-Directed IRAs. Real estate investing and business investing can also be done in a Self-Directed IRA account.

IRS Reports Required

Section 408(i) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 requires that the Custodian of an IRA account make certain reports regarding such account to the Secretary of the Treasury and to the individual for whom such account is maintained.

Section 1.408-5 of the Income Tax Regulations provides that the Custodian of an IRA account shall make annual calendar year reports concerning the status of the account. The information required in the reports include: the amount of contributions, the amount of distributions, the value of the account, and such other information as the Commissioner of the IRS may require. IRS Form 5498 is the form used to satisfy Section 408(i).

Question:

Is the IRA required to value "hard to value" assets---promissory notes, partnership interests, real estate, closely-held stock, collectables, etc.?

Answer:

Yes, annually. These types of assets, that do not trade on a public market, must be valued annually. A written appraisal valuation report prepared by a recognized third-party expert is usually required to establish the fair market value of the asset.

Question:

Who is responsible for insuring that the IRA's assets are properly valued?

Answer:

The Custodian is responsible. The Custodian can order an appraisal valuation report, at the expense of the IRA account owner, to satisfy the annual reporting requirement.

Question:

What is the impact of declining property values on note values?

Answer:

IT IS HUGE! The historical value that you are carrying the note at in your IRA account may be overstating the fair market value of the note today by 15%, 25%, 50% or more.

Many promissory notes that were originated between 2002 and 2006 are now valued at a discount of 15% to 50% of their unpaid balance. That means that you are paying fees based on too high a value. Getting a current value appraisal may save you money on fees year after year.

Remember, "You can't do today's investing with yesterday's methods and be in business as an investor tomorrow" Unknown author

Lawrence Tepper specializes in: PROMISSORY NOTE SERVICES, VALUATIONS AND BROKERING
EXPERT WITNESS AND EXPERT CONSULTING SERVICES NATIONALLY

EDUCATION AND TRAINING- 1956 Law Degree /Accounting Minor from University of Denver
1961 to Present Colorado Real Estate Broker Specializing in Promissory Notes
1984 Certified Commercial Investment Member Designation From National Assoc. Realtors

PRACTICAL EXPERIENCE- Over 45 years of buying, selling, exchanging, brokering, and structuring promissory notes. Detailed, documented professional valuation reports for attorneys, CPA's, estates, and financial planners.

http://www.promissorynoteappraisers.com

Have Values Lost Their Value?

Values, everyone has them whether they're written down or not. Some are negative and some are positive. It's belief in them that gives them credibility and establishes their value. Where a mission statement defines a company's purpose, it is the values that help define the behaviours it wants exhibited in order to achieve the mission. Companies can spend ridiculously large sums of money defining, documenting and displaying their values. They're often quick to capitalise both internally to staff and externally to their market, when they (usually senior management or executives) are displaying those carefully crafted values. Yet it's interesting to observe how much faster they are to minimise, possibly even ignore, when they're not. Dare I suggest these often very expensive values only have value when it suits?

Some readers may be quick to point out a touch of cynicism and I'm not about to deny that may be the case, just as I always say 'No' as my starting position when negotiating a scope change to a project. Seriously though, how many times have you seen a list of values so lovingly laminated and proudly displayed in the corridors, inconsistently applied? What of those unwritten and unacknowledged values? Those that support 'when it suits me' or 'subject to my agenda being satisfied'. Why aren't they included on the list? If values are, and I quote "judgements about what is important" and "along with worldview and personality, they generate behaviour", then surely along with the positive we should also include the more negative or perhaps controversial ones. After all one persons negative could be another's positive and not everything can be fabulous all the time.

A recent discussion about a company that changed one of their value statements from openness and integrity to honesty with integrity suggested a need to change behaviours. Basically everyone was being far too open and there was potential for people to know too much. I can see how this can be a bit dangerous for a company, particularly when it comes to moles or leaks who like nothing better than to pass information on to those who shouldn't have it. The change they made may have meant 'we'll be honest about the stuff we do say, we just won't say everything'. Well, at least that's honest and tells everyone where things stand.

Values are about creating a culture and environment of desired behaviours and the value comes when they are believed by those on the receiving end. Rosabeth Moss Kanter writes in her blog post " Ten Essentials for Getting Value from Values" for the Harvard Business Review, "it's not the words that make a difference; it's the conversation". The behaviours experienced consistently every single day without exception must support a company's defined values, be part of all conversations and generate belief.

If that leads to values being listed along the lines of:

Keeping everyone in the dark, ie: Fear
Expecting loyalty while giving none in return, ie: Selfishness
Following the 'do as I say' model, not the 'do as I do' one, ie: Double-standards
Always being unavailable particularly when difficult decisions are required, ie: Invisible

at least be honest about it. Look at what is on the values list and challenge it. Make the list real. If an organisation wants to:

Change the culture
Be a great place to work
Develop loyal customers

spending mega-bucks to refresh the values list is probably not the answer and will likely cost a packet. Far more can be achieved by simply matching the spoken and written word with everyday actions. Take a leaf out of The Undercover Boss TV program - get out of the office, mix with the troops on the ground, and find out how those beautifully branded and laminated lists are really being applied. Whether the experience results in personnel changes, training, coaching, or the type of wobbly only a 4 year old in a supermarket can have, it'd be worth it. Employees are the ones who will vote with their feet when a company's values don't match their own. They lose faith, stop believing and feel they're compromising their personal values.

Don't run the risk of losing excellent, dedicated, knowledgeable employees. Value the values and whatever makes the list, be honest about them and in action with them at all times!

Deanne Earle is a global business consultant and program/project manager specialising in organisational change and IT-led projects that are complex in nature or in a state of crisis. She has authored the e-Books "10 Tips for Effective Change", and "Ignite the Possibility! How to Create the Outcomes You Want". Visit the Unlike Before website ( http://www.unlikebefore.com ) and Change Through Action blog ( http://www.unlikebefore.blogspot.com ) for more details, downloads, and free newsletters.