What factors should be considered in deciding whether the cost of capital for a foreign affiliateshould be higher, lower, or the same as the cost of capital for a comparable domestic operation?

INSTRUCTORS MANUAL: MULTINATIONAL FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT, 9th ED. CHAPTER 10 SUGGESTED ANSWERS TO CHAPTER 10 QUESTIONS 1. What is translation exposure? Transaction exposure? ANSWER. Translation exposure equals the difference between exposed assets and exposed liabilities. A foreign currency asset or liability is exposed if it must be translated at the current exchange rate. Transaction exposure equals the net amount of foreign-currency denominated transactions already entered into. Upon settlement, these transactions may give rise to currency gains or losses. 2. What are the basic translation methods? How do they differ? ANSWER. The basic translation methods are the currentoncurrent method, monetaryonmonetary method, temporal method, and current-rate method. The currentoncurrent method treats only current assets and liabilities as being exposed. The monetaryonmonetary method treats only monetary assets and liabilities as being exposed. The temporal method translates assets and liabilities valued at current cost as exposed and historical cost assets and liabilities as unexposed. The current rate method treats all assets and liabilities as exposed. 3. What factors affect a company's translation exposure? What can the company do to affect its degree of translation exposure? ANSWER. The factors affecting a company's translation exposure under FASB-52 include the currency of the primary economic environment in which the company (or its affiliate) does business, the currency in which it invoices its sales, the currency in which it negotiates to buy, the currency denomination of its borrowings, the currency denomination of the securities in which it invests surplus cash, and the location of its customers. This list suggests the actions that a company can take to affect its degree of translation exposure: borrow, invest, and invoice both sales and purchases in the local currency. It also has some degree of control over which customers to serve--foreign or domestic--but this decision should be based on economic profitability rather than its impact on translation exposure. 4. What alternative hedging transactions are available to a company seeking to hedge the translation exposure of its German subsidiary? How would the appropriate hedge change if the German affiliate's functional currency is the U.S. dollar? ANSWER. As mentioned in the text, the parent has three available methods for managing its translation exposure: (1) adjusting fund flows, (2) entering into forward contracts, and (3) exposure netting. Direct funds-adjustment methods include pricing exports in hard currencies and imports in a soft currency, investing in hard-currency securities, and replacing hard-currency borrowings with local currency loans. The indirect methods (see Chapter 20), include adjusting transfer prices on the sale of goods between affiliates; speeding up or slowing down the payment of dividends, fees, and royalties; and adjusting the leads and lags of intersubsidiary accounts. The standard techniques for responding to anticipated currency changes are summarized in Exhibit 10.1. The translation exposure would change if the functional currency were the U.S. dollar. For example, U.S. dollar transactions with the German sub would be considered exposed if the euro were the functional currency; by contrast, U.S. dollar transactions are exposed if the euro is the functional currency. 5. In order to eliminate all risk on its exports to Japan, a company decides to hedge both its actual and anticipated sales there. What risk is the company exposing itself to? How could this risk be managed? ANSWER. The company faces uncertainty as to what its future yen sales revenue will be. This uncertainty stems from quantity risk, the risk that those future sales will not materialize, and price risk, the uncertainty as to the yen prices it can expect to realize in Japan. If it uses forward contracts to hedge its uncertain future yen sales revenue, it faces the risk that it will overhedge, winding up with yen liabilities not offset by yen assets. The company can 1 CHAPTER 10: MEASURING AND MANAGING ACCOUNTING EXPOSURE protect itself by using forward contracts to hedge the certain component of its expected future yen sales then hedging the remainder of its projected sales revenue with currency options. 6. Instead of its previous policy of always hedging its foreign currency receivables, Sun Microsystems has decided to hedge only when it believes the dollar will strengthen. Otherwise, it will go uncovered. Comment on this new policy. ANSWER. Sun is engaging in selective hedging, which is really speculation. Sun faces the risk that it will be unhedged when foreign currencies weaken and be hedged when they strengthen. The purpose of hedging is to reduce risk, not to boost profits. 7. Your bank is working with an American client who wishes to hedge its long exposure in the Malaysian ringgit. Suppose it is possible to invest in ringgit but not borrow in that currency. However, you can both borrow and lend in U.S. dollars. a. Assuming there is no forward market in ringgit, can you create a homemade forward contract that would allow your client to hedge its ringgit exposure? ANSWER. To hedge its ringgit exposure, your bank's American client should short the ringgit. This strategy would entail buying a forward contract from your bank. To create this forward contract, the bank needs to borrow ringgit, sell the proceeds spot for dollars, and invest the dollars. Unfortunately, since the bank can't borrow ringgit, it cannot create the needed forward contract. b. Several of your Malaysian clients are interested in selling their U.S. dollar export earnings forward for ringgit. Can you accommodate them by creating a forward contract? ANSWER. In this case, you can create the necessary forward contract by borrowing U.S. dollars, converting them to ringgit, and investing the ringgit until the forward contract you sell your Malaysian clients matures. 8. Eastman Kodak gives its traders bonuses if their selective hedging strategies are less expensive than the cost of hedging all their transaction exposure on a continuous basis. What problems can you foresee from this bonus plan? ANSWER. The danger is that Kodak's traders will take inappropriate risks in order to earn their bonuses. Specifically, they are being incented to engage in selective hedged, which runs the risk of leaving Kodak unhedged when the dollar is rising and being hedged when the dollar is falling. 9. Many managers prefer to use options to hedge their exposure because it allows them the possibility of capitalizing on favorable movements in the exchange rate. In contrast, a company using forward contracts avoids the downside but also loses the upside potential as well. Comment on this strategy. ANSWER. Options are clearly more valuable than forward contracts for the reasons stated in the question. However, this does not mean that options are preferable to forward contracts. The reason has to do with cost. Options are more expensive than forward contracts at the same forward rate or exercise price. One must trade off the added benefits of options against their higher costs. To the extent that these derivative markets are efficient--and the evidence suggests they are--the expected net present value of entering into either of these contracts is zero. The appropriate use of these derivatives is to hedge foreign exchange risk, not to speculate on future exchange rate movements. As explained in the chapter, one should match the derivative against the type of risk being hedged: Known risks should be hedged with forward contracts and contingent risks with options. 10. In January 1988, Arco bought a 24.3% stake in the British oil firm Britoil PLC. It intended to buy a further $1 billion worth of Britoil stock if Britoil was agreeable. However, Arco was uncertain whether Britoil, which had expressed a strong desire to remain independent, would accept its bid. To guard against the possibility of a pound appreciation in the interim, Arco decided to convert $1 billion into pounds and place them on deposit in London, pending the outcome of its discussions with Britoil's management. What exchange risk did Arco face and did it choose the best way to protect itself from that risk? 2 INSTRUCTORS MANUAL: MULTINATIONAL FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT, 9th ED. ANSWER. The exchange risk faced by Arco was that it had a contingent pound liability (the cost of its possible purchase of Britoil) offset by a fixed pound asset (the deposit). If the deal went through, Arco would know exactly how many dollars its bid will cost, namely, $1 billion. But if the deal fell apart (which it did), Arco would have a large bank account in London with an uncertain dollar value. Hedging that deposit would not eliminate exchange risk because if the deal went through Arco would not know at the time of its offer how many dollars it would take to buy $1 billion worth of shares at today's exchange rate. (This analysis leaves aside the issue of fluctuations in the dollar price of Britoil shares.) Note that it doesn't make sense to convert dollars into pounds and then hedge those pounds. Assuming interest parity holds, Arco might as well have deposited dollars. The solution for Arco is to buy a call option on $1 billion worth of pounds at the current spot exchange rate. This limits Arco's downside risk to the call premium, while enabling it to capitalize on an appreciation in the value of the pound. 11. Sumitomo Chemical of Japan has one week in which to negotiate a contract to supply products to a U.S. company at a dollar price that will remain fixed for one year. What advice would you give Sumitomo? ANSWER. This problem is identical to that faced by Weyerhaeuser in the example given in the text. The general rule on credit sales overseas is to convert between the foreign currency price and the dollar price using the forward rate, not the spot rate. In the case of a sequence of payments to be received at several points in time, the foreign currency price should be a weighted average of the forward rates for delivery on those dates. Here, Sumitomo should decide on the yen price that it would set and then convert that yen price into a dollar price using the forward rate or an average of forward rates, depending on whether it will be paid all at once or in installments. 12. U.S. Farm-Raised Fish Trading Co., a catfish concern in Jackson, Mississippi, tells its Japanese customers that it wants to be paid in dollars. According to its director of export marketing, this simple strategy eliminates all its currency risk. Is he right? Why? ANSWER. The marketing director for U.S. Farm-Raised Fish Trading Co. is confusing transaction exposure with economic exposure. By pricing in dollars, the company eliminates its transaction exposure. But it still has operating exposure. As the yen falls in value, if the firm maintains its dollar price, the yen price of its fish rises and Japanese customers will buy less fish. If the dollar price is reduced to maintain market share, the profit margin falls. Either way, dollar revenues and profits fall. Conversely, a falling dollar will boost the dollar profitability of selling to Japan. 13. The Montreal Expos are a major-league baseball team located in Montreal, Canada. What currency risk is faced by the Expos, and how can this exchange risk be managed? ANSWER. Payroll costs account for the lion's share of baseball costs. The Expos have currency risk since they pay their players in U.S. dollars while their principal source of income, from home game ticket sales, is in Canadian dollars. This currency mismatch means trouble when the U.S. dollar appreciates relative to the Canadian dollar. Most importantly, salaries for Expo ballplayers are based on the salaries these players would earn in the United States; they are not based on Canadian salaries. An extended discussion of the Toronto Blue Jays, another Canadian major league baseball team, appears in Section 9.4 and sheds further light on the currency risk faced by baseball teams. The Expos might protect themselves by doing what the Blue Jays do: Buy U.S. dollars forward. The larger the purchase, the greater the amount of protection. Typically, though, the Jays buy enough U.S. dollars to cover their projected currency needs for the coming year. While this strategy protects them for next year, it doesn't hedge their longer-term exposure. 14. General Electric recently had to put together a $50 million bid, denominated in Swiss francs, to upgrade a Swiss power plant. If it won, General Electric expected to pay subcontractors and suppliers in five currencies. The payment schedule for the contract stretched over a five-year period. 3 CHAPTER 10: MEASURING AND MANAGING ACCOUNTING EXPOSURE a. How should General Electric establish the Swiss franc price of its $50 million bid? ANSWER. GE should begin with the price it would set if the bid were in dollars, and then convert the expected cash inflows into Swiss francs at the forward rates prevailing for each of the dates on which it expects to receive a cash inflow. b. What exposure does GE face on this bid? How can it hedge that exposure? ANSWER. To begin, GE is not certain of winning the bid. To hedge this quantity risk (it's uncertain as to how many Swiss francs it will be receiving--either 0 or the amount of its bid), Westinghouse should buy a Swiss franc put option for the amount of its bid, less the amount of Swiss francs it expects to pay out. It should simultaneously buy call options in the amounts of the non-Swiss franc foreign currency cash payments it will be making if it wins the contract. If it wins the bid, GE should then convert the SFr franc put option into a series of SFr forward sales, with the amounts and maturities of the forward contracts timed to coincide with the net Swiss franc inflows. At the same time, GE should convert the foreign currency call options into forward purchases of those foreign currencies, with the maturities and amounts of these contracts timed to coincide with the payments in those currencies. 15. Dell Computer produces its machines in Asia with components largely imported from the United States and sells its products in various Asian nations in local currencies. a. What is the likely impact on Dell's Asian profits of a strengthened dollar? Explain. ANSWER. Dell's dollar costs largely stay fixed whereas its dollar revenues will decline. Thus, a strengthened dollar reduced Dell's dollar profits on its Asian sales. b. What hedging technique(s) can Dell employ to lock in a desired currency conversion rate for its Asian sales during the next year? ANSWER. Dell can use forward or futures contracts to sell the local currencies forward against the dollar in an amount equal to its projected annual local currency sales. It can also buy put options on the various Asian currencies that it can exercise in the event of dollar appreciation. c. Suppose Dell wishes to lock in a specific conversion rate but does not want to foreclose the possibility of profiting from future currency moves. What hedging technique would be most likely to achieve this objective? ANSWER. Buying put options on the local currencies would allow Dell to offset its currency losses with gains on its put options if the local currencies depreciate against the dollar. If the local currencies remain stable or strengthen, Dell would just allow the options to expire unexercised and convert its local currency revenues at the higher spot rates. d. What are the limits of Dell's hedging approach? ANSWER. This approach will cover Dell for the first year. But if the dollar strengthens, when Dell goes to roll over its forwards or options to hedge the next year's revenues, it will pay a price for these contracts that reflects the devalued exchange rates of the local Asian currencies. ADDITIONAL CHAPTER 10 QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS 1. Why was FASB-8 so widely criticized? How did the Financial Accounting Standards Board respond to this criticism? ANSWER. The major criticism of FASB-8 was that by disallowing all currency reserves, translation gains and losses flowed right through to the income statement, often leading to dramatic fluctuations in reported income. The 4 INSTRUCTORS MANUAL: MULTINATIONAL FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT, 9th ED. corporate belief that this was a problem stemmed from the view that financial markets focus on earnings rather than cash flows. 2. A U.S. firm has fully hedged its sterling receivables and has bought credit insurance to cover the risk of default. Has this firm eliminated all risk on these receivables? Explain. ANSWER. No. The company has converted its sterling receivables into a fixed amount of dollars to be received in the future. But because this sum of money is set in nominal terms, the firm bears exchange risk. That is, it knows how many dollars it will receive in the future but it does not know what the purchasing power of those dollars will be. 3. What is the basic translation hedging strategy? How does it work? ANSWER. As discussed in the chapter, the basic translation hedging strategy involves increasing hard-currency assets and decreasing soft-currency assets, while simultaneously decreasing hard-currency liabilities and increasing soft-currency liabilities. The specific techniques used to hedge a particular translation exposure all involve establishing an offsetting currency position (e.g., by means of a forward contract) such that whatever is lost or gained on the original currency exposure is exactly offset by a corresponding foreign exchange gain or loss on the currency hedge. 4. Multinational firms can always reduce the foreign exchange risk faced by their foreign affiliates by borrowing in the local currency. True or false? Why? ANSWER. False. Currency risk is reduced when swings in operating profits due to currency changes are offset, in whole or in part, by opposite movements in the cost of servicing its debts. In this way, currency changes have less effect on dollar cash flows. Consider an MNC with a foreign subsidiary that manufactures for export. The subsidiary's dollar operating cash flows will rise with LC appreciation and fall with LC depreciation. If the subsidiary borrowed in the local currency, then the dollar cost of servicing its liabilities would also rise with LC appreciation and fall with LC depreciation. This would reinforce, not dampen, the swings in its operating profits caused by the currency changes. 5. Can hedging provide protection against expected exchange rate changes? Explain. ANSWER. No. The explanation is contained in fundamental point #1 on managing accounting exposure at the start of this chapter discussion. 6. What is the domestic counterpart to exchange risk? Explain. ANSWER. The domestic counterpart to exchange risk is inflation risk. Exchange risk involves uncertain changes in the exchange rate between domestic currency and foreign currency (and, ultimately, between domestic currency and foreign goods and services), while inflation risk involves uncertain changes in the exchange rate between domestic currency and domestic goods and services. 7. If a currency that a company is long in threatens to weaken, many companies will sell that currency forward. Comment on this policy. ANSWER. A reasonable working hypothesis is that financial markets are efficient. If so, the expected currency depreciation will already be reflected in the forward rate in the form of a forward discount which exactly offsets the expected loss-reducing benefits of hedging. Thus the company will benefit from hedging only to the extent that it can estimate the probability and timing of the depreciation more accurately than the general market can. Unless the company has some special information about the future spot rate that it has good reason to believe is not adequately reflected in the forward rate, it should accept the forward rate's predictive validity as a working hypothesis and avoid speculative activities. 8. Studies have shown that in trade dealings between nations that have high and volatile inflation rates, most export prices are quoted in dollars. What might account for this finding? 5 CHAPTER 10: MEASURING AND MANAGING ACCOUNTING EXPOSURE ANSWER. What matters to both importer and exporter is the real price of the goods traded, not its nominal price. However, with high and uncertain inflation, if the currency of either of the two nations is used, both exporter and importer will face uncertainty as to the real price of the goods being traded. The exporter faces the risk that inflation will be higher than expected, lowering its real revenue. Conversely, the importer faces the risk that inflation will be lower than expected, raising its real cost of goods. By pricing in dollars, which is more likely to maintain its real value than either of their home currencies, both parties can reduce their risk. 9. Kemp & Beatley, Inc., is a New York importer of table linens and accessories. It hedges all its import orders using forward contracts. Does Kemp & Beatley face any exchange risk? Explain. ANSWER. Yes. According to the Wall Street Journal (September 27, 1984, p.7), "Kemp & Beatley recently made a sizable purchase of Japanese placemats just before the dollar strengthened again. Competitors, as a result, will be able to buy the items for less and the profit margins of Kemp & Beatley will be squeezed, said Lee Greenbaum, president. `We had to eat' the price difference, he said." Thus, even though hedging enables the company to lock in a dollar price for its cost of goods, its revenue fluctuates in line with the exchange rate; that is, the price at which it can sell its products depends on the replacement cost of these items, which varies with the exchange rate. 10. Liz Claiborne contracts out much of its production to foreign manufacturers. As such, the company faces currency risk. a. What currency risk does Liz Claiborne face? ANSWER. If foreign manufacturers bill in their local currencies, Liz Claiborne is uncertain as to what the dollar cost of its orders will be, both now and in the future. If Liz Claiborne insists on dollar invoicing, the dollar price will likely vary with the exchange rate. Hence, although Liz Claiborne can lock in the dollar price of its current orders, it has no idea what will be the dollar costs of its future orders. b. How might Liz Claiborne go about hedging its currency risk? ANSWER. Liz Claiborne can hedge its transaction exposure (equal to the amount of current orders invoiced in foreign currencies) using forward market or money market hedges, depending on their relative costs. The company can hedge its future orders, whether denominated in foreign currencies or in dollars, by buying forward the anticipated amounts of its foreign currency requirements. Liz Claiborne could also use a money market hedge (which would involve the company borrowing dollars and then investing these dollars in foreign money market instruments to create a foreign currency asset to offset its foreign currency liabilities) to lock in the dollar cost of its anticipated future orders. This method would be less practical than the forward market hedge since it would involve Liz Claiborne holding a large portfolio of foreign securities. c. What danger does it face from locking in currency rates today? ANSWER. This question is similar to that in Problem 17. The assumption in the hedging analysis so far is that the dollar prices Liz Claiborne can charge customers for its clothes are unrelated to its dollar costs. However, to the extent that its competitors also use foreign manufacturers, a rise in dollar costs of foreign orders will affect all companies in the market to a similar degree. Hence, the companies will likely raise their dollar prices if their dollar costs rise since they have similar cost structures. If Liz Claiborne has hedged its foreign costs, it will earn higher margins. Conversely, if the dollar appreciates, competitors will likely cut their prices to reflect the lower cost of replacing their goods sold. If Liz Claiborne has already locked in a higher dollar price for its orders and tries to recoup its higher costs by raising its prices, it will be placed at a competitive disadvantage and will lose market share. On the other hand, if Liz Claiborne reduces its dollar prices to maintain its competitive position in the market, its margins will shrink since its dollar costs have not fallen. To properly hedge its operating exposure, Liz Claiborne must estimate the responsiveness of price in the marketplace to changes in foreign exchange rates. The more responsive these prices are to changes in costs (and the quicker this response), the less operating exposure faced by Liz Claiborne and the less it needs to hedge. 6 INSTRUCTORS MANUAL: MULTINATIONAL FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT, 9th ED. SUGGESTED SOLUTIONS TO CHAPTER 10 PROBLEMS 1. Suppose that at the start and at the end of the year, Bell U.K., the British subsidiary of Bell U.S., has current assets of 1 million, fixed assets of 2 million, and current liabilities of 1 million. Bell has no long-term liabilities. a. What is Bell U.K.'s translation exposure under the currentoncurrent, monetaryonmonetary, temporal, and current rate methods? ANSWER. Under the currentoncurrent method, Bell U.K.'s translation exposure is 1 million - 1 million, or 0. We cannot determine Bell U.K.'s translation exposure under the monetaryonmonetary method because we do not know the monetaryonmonetary breakdown of its assets and liabilities. Similarly, we cannot determine Bell U.K.'s temporal exposure because we do not know the breakdown of its current assets between inventory and monetary assets. Under the current rate method, Bell U.K.'s exposure is 3 million - 1 million = 2 million. b. Assuming the pound is the functional currency, if the pound depreciated during that year from $1.50 to $1.30, what is the FASB-52 translation gain (loss) to be included in the equity account of Bell's U.S. parent? ANSWER. Under FASB-52, Bell U.K. has net pound exposure equal to 3 million - 1 million = 2 million. At the original exchange rate of $1.50, the value of this net exposure is $3 million. By the end of the year, this net pound exposure is worth only 2 million x $1.30 = $2.6 million. The net result is a translation loss for Bell U.K.'s parent equal to the difference between the beginning and end-of-year values or $400,000. c. Redo part (b) assuming the dollar is the functional currency. Included in current assets is inventory of 0.5 million. The historical exchange rates for inventory and fixed assets are $1.45 and $1.65, respectively. If the dollar is the functional currency, where does Bell U.K.'s translation gain of loss show up on Bell U.S.'s financial statements? ANSWER. If the dollar is the functional currency, then FASB-52 mandates the use of the temporal method for translation purposes. Under the temporal method, the value of fixed assets and inventory stays constant. The only change is to its monetary assets of 0.5 million and current liabilities of 1 million, for net exposure of -0.5 million. With negative translation exposure, a depreciation in the value of the pound from $1.50 to $1.30 will result in a translation gain of $0.20 x 500,000, or $100,000. This translation gain must be included in Bell U.K.'s income statement. 2. Rolls-Royce, the British jet engine manufacturer, sells engines to U.S. airlines and buys parts from U.S. companies. Suppose it has accounts receivable of $1.5 billion and accounts payable of $740 million. It also borrowed $600 million. The current spot rate is $1.5128/. a. What is Rolls-Royce's dollar transaction exposure in dollar terms? In pound terms? ANSWER. Rolls-Royce has $160 million in dollar transaction exposure ($1.5 billion - $740 million - $600 million). In pound terms, its transaction exposure equals 105.76 million (160,000,000/1.5128). b. Suppose the pound appreciates to $1.7642/. What is Rolls-Royce's gain or loss, in pound terms, on its dollar transaction exposure? ANSWER. Translated at the new exchange rate, the value of its transaction exposure is now 90.69 million. Compared to the former value of its transaction exposure, the result is a loss of 15.07 million (90.69 million 105.76 million). 3. Zapata Auto Parts, the Mexican affiliate of American Diversified, Inc., had the following balance sheet on January 1: Assets (Mex$ millions) Cash, marketable Liabilities (Mex$ millions) Mex$1,000 7 CHAPTER 10: MEASURING AND MANAGING ACCOUNTING EXPOSURE securities Accounts receivable Inventory Fixed assets 50,000 32,000 111,000 Mex$194,000 Current liabilities Long-term debt Equity Mex$47,000 12,000 135,000 Mex$194,000 The exchange rate on January 1 was Mex$8,000 = $1. a. What is Zapata's FASB-52 peso translation exposure on January 1? ANSWER. Zapata's translation exposure depends on the functional currency used. If, over the past three years, Mexico's rate of inflation has exceeded 100%, Zapata must use the dollar as its functional currency. This means that translation exposure is measured using the temporal method. In this case, Zapata's FASB-52 translation exposure will be (all peso figures are in millions) Mex$83,000 - Mex$59,000 = Mex$24,000, or $3 million. This calculation treats cash, receivables, inventory, current liabilities, and long-term debt as exposed, and equity and net fixed assets as unexposed. It also assumes that all these assets and liabilities are in pesos. If inflation has cooled off, and the peso is the functional currency, then translation exposure equals Zapata's net worth of Mex$135,000 (assuming as before that all assets and liabilities are denominated in pesos), or $16.875 million. The difference between the two translation exposure figures of Mex$111,000 = $13.875 million equals Zapata's net fixed assets, which are exposed under the current rate method but not under the temporal method. b. Suppose the exchange rate on December 31 is Mex$12,000. What will be Zapata's translation loss for the year? ANSWER. The peso has lost one-third of its dollar value during the year. Hence, Zapata's translation loss equals one-third of its initial exposure. If the dollar is the functional currency, and assuming no change in assets and liabilities, Zapata's translation loss for the year will be $3,000,000/3 = $1 million. Alternatively, if the peso is the functional currency, Zapata's translation loss equals $16,875,000/3 = $5.625 million. c. Zapata can borrow an additional Mex$15,000 (in millions). What will this do to its translation exposure if it uses the funds to pay a dividend to its parent? If it uses the funds to increase its cash position? ANSWER. If Zapata borrows an additional Mex$15,000 (all peso figures are in millions) and uses these funds to pay a dividend to its parent, its liabilities will rise by Mex$15,000 and its equity will fall by the same amount. With the added peso liabilities, its exposure will fall by Mex$15,000 or $1.875 million regardless of the functional currency. If the dollar is the functional currency, Zapata's new translation exposure becomes $1.125 million; if the peso is the functional currency, the new translation exposure becomes $15 million. If Zapata uses the Mex$15,000 to increase its cash position, then its translation exposure stays the same; the added peso liabilities are exactly offset by the added peso assets. 4. Walt Disney expects to receive a Mex$16 million theatrical fee from Mexico in 90 days. The current spot rate is $0.1321/Mex$ and the 90-day forward rate is $0.1242/Mex$. a. What is Disney's peso transaction exposure associated with this fee? ANSWER. Disney's peso transaction exposure on this fee equals Mex$16 million or $2,113,600 (16,000,00 x 0.1321). b. If the spot rate expected in 90 days is $0.1305, what is the expected U.S. dollar value of the fee? ANSWER. The expected value of this fee in 90 days is $2,088,000 (16,000,000 x 0.1305). c. What is the hedged dollar value of the fee? ANSWER. The hedged value of this fee in 90 days is $1,987,200 (16,000,00 x 0.1242). 8 INSTRUCTORS MANUAL: MULTINATIONAL FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT, 9th ED. d. What factors will influence the hedging decision? ANSWER. 5. A foreign exchange trader assesses the euro exchange rate three months hence as follows: $1.11 with probability 0.25 $1.13 with probability 0.50 $1.15 with probability 0.25 The 90-day forward rate is $1.12. a. Will the trader buy or sell euros forward against the dollar if she is concerned solely with expected values? In what volume? ANSWER. The expected future spot exchange rate is $1.13 ($1.11 x 0.25 + $1.13 x 0.50 + $1.15 x0.25). Because this exceeds the forward rate of $1.12, the trader will buy euros forward against the dollar. She should buy an infinite amount of euros. This absurd result is due to the assumption of a linear utility function. b. In reality, what is likely to limit the trader's speculative activities? ANSWER. Regardless of her utility function, she will be restrained by bank policies designed to guard against excessive currency speculation. c. Suppose the trader revises her probability assessment as follows: $1.09 with probability 0.33 $1.13 with probability 0.33 $1.17 with probability 0.33 Assuming the forward rate remains at $1.12, do you think this new assessment will affect the trader's decision? ANSWER. The expected future spot rate remains at $1.13. However, the variance of the expected spot rate is now greater than it was before. If the trader is concerned solely with expected values, this will not affect her speculative activities. But if she is concerned with risk in addition to expected return, the greater variance and consequent greater risk should lead her to reduce her speculative activities. 6. An investment manager hedges a portfolio of Bunds (German government bonds) with a 6-month forward contract. The current spot rate is 0.84:$1 and the 180-day forward rate is 0.81:$1. At the end of the 6-month period, the Bunds have risen in value by 3.75 percent (in euro terms), and the spot rate is now 0.76:$1. a. If the Bunds earn interest at the annual rate of 5 percent, paid semi-annually, what is the investment manager's total dollar return on the hedged Bunds? ANSWER. Ignoring hedging for the time being, for each $100 invested in Bunds at a spot rate of 0.84 per dollar, the investment manager would have at the end of six months an amount of euros equal to 89.25, as follows 0.84 x 100 x (1 + 0.025 + 0.0375) = 89.25 This amount takes into account both the 3.75% capital gain on the Bunds and the 2.5% semiannual interest payment. Assuming that the investment manager did not anticipate the 3.75% capital gain and hedged only the expected amount of 86.10, he would now have $106.30 (86.10/0.81) from the original hedged principal and interest plus an additional $4.14 (0.84 x 100 x 0.0375/0.76) from the 3.75% capital gain on the Bund principal of 84 converted into dollars at the spot rate of 0.76:$1. The total dollar amount received in six months would, therefore, be $110.44 (106.30 + 4.14), which is a 10.44% return on the original $100 investment. b. What would the return on the Bunds have been without hedging? 9 CHAPTER 10: MEASURING AND MANAGING ACCOUNTING EXPOSURE ANSWER. As shown in the answer to part a, the euro value of the Bund's principal plus interest at the end of six months would be 89.25. Converting this amount into dollars at the spot rate of 0.76:$1 yields an amount equal to $117.43 (89.25/0.76). This amount translates into a dollar return of 17.43%. c. What was the true cost of the forward contract? ANSWER. As shown in the text (see the section titled "The True Cost of Hedging"), the forward contract reduces the return per dollar invested by an amount equal to the difference between the forward rate and the actual spot rate at the time of settlement, or 0.05 (0.81 - 0.76) per euro hedged. Relative to the original spot rate, this cost translates into 5.95% ((0.81 - 0.76)/0.84). 7. Magnetronics, Inc., a U.S. company, owes its Taiwanese supplier NT$205 million in three months. The company wishes to hedge its NT$ payable. The current spot rate is NT$1 = U.S. $0.03987, and the threemonth forward rate is NT$1 = U.S. $0.04051. Magnetronics can also borrow/lend U.S. dollars at an annualized interest rate of 12 percent and Taiwanese dollars at an annualized interest rate of 8 percent. a. What is the U.S. dollar accounting entry for this payable? ANSWER. Magnetronics will record a payable of U.S. $8,173,350, which is just NT$205 converted at the spot rate of U.S. $0.03987. b. What is the minimum U.S. dollar cost that Magnetronics can lock in for this payable? Describe the procedure it would use to get this price. ANSWER. Magnetronics can use either a forward market hedge or a money market hedge. The forward market hedge will lock in a cost of U.S. $8,304,550 (205,000,000 x 0.04051). Alternatively, Magnetronics can borrow U.S. dollars, convert them into NT$, and invest the NT$ for three months and use the proceeds to settle the NT$ payable. To estimate the cost of this money market hedge, we must work backwards to figure out first how many NT$ are needed today. At a quarterly interest rate of 2%, Magnetronics must invest NT$200,980,392 (205,000,000/1.02) today in order to have NT$205 million in three months. At the current spot rate, this amount translates into U.S. $8,013,088 today. At a quarterly U.S. interest rate of 3%, this loan will cost U.S. $8,253,481 to repay in three months (8,013,088 x 1.03). Since this amount is $51,069 less than the cost of satisfying the payable using the forward market, it makes sense to use the money market hedge and lock in a cost of U.S. $8,253,481. c. At what forward rate would interest rate parity hold given the interest rates? ANSWER. Interest rate parity will hold when the U.S. dollar return on U.S. dollars, 1.12, equals the hedged U.S. dollar return on NT$, or (1/0.03987) x 1.08 x f, where f is the equilibrium forward rate. The solution to this equation is f = .03987 x 1.12/1.08 = $0.04135. At this forward rate, interest rate parity will hold. 8. Cooper Inc., a U.S. firm, has just invested 500,000 in a note that will come due in 90 days and is yielding 9.5% annualized. The current spot value of the pound is $1.5612 and the 90-day forward rate is $1.5467. a. What is the hedged dollar value of this note at maturity? ANSWER. At maturity, this note will pay off 511,875 (500,000 x 1 + 0.095/4). The hedged dollar value of this note at maturity is $791,717 (511,875 x 1.5467). b. What is the annualized dollar yield on the hedged note? ANSWER. The dollar investment in the note today is $780,600 (500,000 x 1.5612). The 90-day return is 1.424% (791,717/780,600 - 1). Annualized, this dollar return is 5.697% (1.424% x 4). c. Cooper anticipates that the value of the pound in 90 days will be $1.5550. Should it hedge? Why or why not? 10 INSTRUCTORS MANUAL: MULTINATIONAL FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT, 9th ED. ANSWER. If Cooper does not hedge, it will expect to collect at maturity $795,966 (511,875 x 1.5550). This amount exceeds the hedged return. Whether it should hedge depends on how strongly it believes that its expectation of the 90-day spot rate is correct and the forward market is wrong, and on its risk preferences. It also depends on whether it has an offsetting exposure, as the question in part c indicates. d. Suppose that Cooper has a payable of 980,000 coming due in 180 days. Should this affect its decision of whether to hedge its sterling note? How and why? ANSWER. Yes. If Cooper hedges its investment, it will actually exacerbate its pound exposure. As it stands, the pound investment currently provides an offset of 511,875 to its negative exposure of 980,000, yielding a net exposure of -468,125 (511,875 - 980,000). If Cooper hedges the pound investment, its net exposure rises to 980,000. 9. American Airlines is trying to decide how to go about hedging SFr70 million in ticket sales receivable in 180 days. Suppose it faces the following exchange and interest rates. Spot rate: Forward rate (180 days): SFr 180-day interest rate (annualized): U.S. dollar 180-day interest rate (annualized): a. $0.6433-42/SFr $0.6578-99/SFr 4.01%-3.97% 8.01%-7.98% What is the hedged value of American's ticket sales using a forward market hedge? ANSWER. By selling the ticket receipts forward, American Airlines can lock in a dollar value of 70,000,000 x 0.6578 = $46,046,000. b. What is the hedged value of American's ticket sales using a money market hedge? Assume the first interest rate is the rate at which money can be borrowed and the second one the rate at which it can be lent. ANSWER. American can also hedge it euro receivable by borrowing the present value of SFr70 million at a 180-day interest rate of 2.005% (4.01%/2), sell the proceeds in the spot market at a rate of $0.6433/SFr, and invest the dollar proceeds at a 180-day interest rate of 3.99% (7.98%/2). Using this money market hedge, American can lock in a value for its SFr70 million receivable of $45,907,296 (70,000,000/1.02005 x 0.6433 x 1.0399). c. Which hedge is less expensive? ANSWER. The forward market hedge yields a higher dollar value for the ticket receivables, so it is preferable. d. Is there an arbitrage opportunity here? ANSWER. Yes. By borrowing dollars at a semiannual rate of 4.005% (8.01%/2), converting them to SFr at the ask rate of $0.6442, and simultaneously investing the SFr at a semiannual rate of 1.985% (3.97%/2) and selling the loan proceeds forward at a bid rate of $0.6578, you can lock in an arbitrage spread of 0.133% semiannually. 1 x 1.01985 x 0.6578 = 1.04138 0.6442 This can be seen as follows. Following the steps outlined above, the return on the borrowed dollars will be 4.138% Subtracting off the 4.005% cost of borrowing the dollars yields a semiannual covered interest differential of 0.133% (4.138% - 4.005%) e. Suppose the expected spot rate in 180 days is $0.67/SFr with a most likely range of $0.64-$0.70/SFr. Should American hedge? What factors should enter into its decision? 11 CHAPTER 10: MEASURING AND MANAGING ACCOUNTING EXPOSURE ANSWER. Based on the expected 180-day spot rate and its expected range, it would appear that American would be better off waiting to convert its ticket sales at the future spot rate. However, American must ask itself where its comparative advantage lies? Does it lie in running an innovative airline or does it reside in trying to outguess apparently sophisticated financial markets? If the former, which most would agree with, American should stick to its knitting and leave the speculation to financial institutions specifically organized for that purpose. 10. Madison Inc. imports olive oil from Chilean firms and the invoices are always denominated in pesos (Ch$). It currently has a payable in the amount of Ch$250 million that it would like to hedge. Unfortunately, there are no drachma futures contracts available and Madison is having difficulty arranging a drachma forward contract. Its treasurer, who recently received her MBA, suggests using Brazilian real (R) to cross-hedge the peso exposure. She recently ran the following regression of the change in the exchange rate for the drachma against the change in the real exchange rate: Ch$/$ = 1.6(R/$) a. There is an active market in the forward real. To cross-hedge Madison's peso exposure, should the treasurer buy or sell the real forward? ANSWER. Given that Madison is short pesos and there is a positive correlation between the real and the peso, Madison should create a long position in the real; that is, Madison should buy the real forward. b. What is the risk-minimizing amount of reais that the treasurer would have to buy or sell forward to hedge Madison's peso exposure? ANSWER. According to the regression, a 1 change in the value of the real leads to a 1.6 change in the value of the peso. To cross-hedge the forthcoming payment of Ch$, R1.6 must be bought forward for every peso owed. With a peso exposure of Ch$250 million, the exporter must buy forward reais in the amount of R400 million (1.6 x 250,000,000). ADDITIONAL CHAPTER 10 PROBLEMS AND SOLUTIONS 1. Paragon U.S.'s Japanese subsidiary, Paragon Japan, has exposed assets of 8 billion and exposed liabilities of 6 billion. During the year, the yen appreciates from 125/$ to 95/$. a. What is Paragon Japan's net translation exposure at the beginning of the year in yen? in dollars? ANSWER. Paragon Japan has net translation exposure of 2 billion (8 billion - 6 billion). Converted into dollars, this figure yields translation exposure of $16 million (2 billion/125). b. What is Paragon Japan's translation gain or loss from the change in the yen's value? ANSWER. At the end-of-year exchange rate, Paragon Japan's translation exposure equals $21,052,632 (2 billion/95). The net result is a translation gain for the year of $5,052,632 ($21,052,632 - $16,000,000). c. At the start of the next year, Paragon Japan adds exposed assets of 1.5 billion and exposed liabilities of 2 billion. During the year, the yen depreciates from 95/$ to 130/$. What is Paragon Japan's translation gain or loss for this year? What is its total translation gain or loss for the two years? ANSWER. Paragon Japan's new translation exposure at the start of the year is 1.5 billion (2 billion + 1.5 billion 2 billion). Given this exposure and the exchange rate change during the year, its translation loss for the year equals $4,251,012 (1,500,000,000 x (1/95 - 1/130)). Over the two-year period, Paragon Japan has realized a translation gain of $801,620 ($5,052,632 - $4,251,012). 12 INSTRUCTORS MANUAL: MULTINATIONAL FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT, 9th ED. 2. Suppose that on January 1, American Golf's Mexico subsidiary, Golf de Mexico , had a balance sheet that showed current assets of Mex$1 million; current liabilities of Mex$300,000; total assets of Mex$2.5 million; and total liabilities of Mex$900,000. On December 31, Golf de Mexico's balance sheet in pesos was unchanged from the figures given above, but the peso had declined in value from $0.1270 at the start of the year to $0.1180 at the end of the year. Under FASB-52, what is the translation amount to be shown on American Golf's equity account for the year if the peso is the functional currency? How would your answer change if the dollar were the functional currency? ANSWER. According to FASB-52, balance sheets must be translated using the current rate method; that is, all assets and all liabilities must be translated at the current rate. Golf de Mexico's net foreign currency translation exposure, therefore, is Mex$2,500,000 - Mex$900,000 or Mex$1,600,000. At the original rate of $.1270, the value of the peso net exposure was Mex$1,600,000 x .1270 = $203,200. By the end of the year, this net exposure equals Mex$1,600,000 x $.1180 = $188,800. This involves a translation loss for American Golf of $14,400 ($203,200 $188,800). If the current assets are all monetary or if inventory is carried at market value, Golf de Mexico's exposure if the dollar is the functional currency would be current assets minus current liabilities or Mex$1,000,000 - Mex$900,000 = Mex$100,000. In this case, American Golf's translation loss would equal 100,000 x (.1270 -.1180) = $900. This loss must be included in the income statement. 13 CHAPTER 10: MEASURING AND MANAGING ACCOUNTING EXPOSURE 3. Halon Norway, the Norwegian subsidiary of a U.S. company, Halon, Inc., has the following balance sheet: Assets (NKr thousands) Cash, marketable securities Accounts receivable Inventory Net fixed assets a. Liabilities (NKr thousands) 7,000 18,000 31,000 63,000 NKr119,000 Accounts payable Short-term debt Long-term debt Equity 14,000 8,000 45,000 52,000 NKr119,000 At the current spot rate of $0.21/NKr, calculate Halon Norway's accounting exposure under the currentoncurrent, monetaryonmonetary, temporal, and current rate methods. ANSWER. Under the currentoncurrent method, Halon Norway's accounting exposure is NKr34 million (7 + 18 + 31 - 14 - 8, in millions), or $7.14 million (0.21 x 34 million). Its monetaryonmonetary method accounting exposure is - NKr42 million (7 + 18 - 14 - 8 - 45, in millions), or -$8.82 million (0.21 x -42 million). Halon Norway's temporal method exposure is the same as its currentoncurrent method exposure. Under the current rate method, Halon Norway's exposure is its equity of NKr52 million, or $10.92 million (0.21 x 52 million). The calculations assume that all assets and liabilities are denominated in NKr. b. Suppose the Norwegian krone depreciates to $0.17. Produce balance sheets for Halon Norway at the new exchange rate under each of the four alternative translation methods. ANSWER. Currentoncurrent rate and temporal methods: Assets ($ thousands) Cash, marketable securities* Accounts receivable* Inventory* Net fixed assets Liabilities ($ thousands) 1,190 3,060 5,270 13,230 $22,750 Accounts payable* Short-term debt* Long-term debt Equity 2,380 1,360 9,450 9,560 $22,750 *Exposed Monetaryonmonetary method Assets ($ thousands) Cash, marketable securities* Accounts receivable* Inventory Net fixed assets Liabilities ($ thousands) 1,190 3,060 6,510 13,230 $23,990 Accounts payable* Short-term debt* Long-term debt* Equity 2,380 1,360 7,650 12,600 $23,990 *Exposed Current rate method Assets ($ thousands) Cash, marketable securities* Accounts receivable* Inventory* Net fixed assets* Liabilities ($ thousands) 1,190 3,060 5,270 10,710 $20,230 *Exposed 14 Accounts payable* Short-term debt* Long-term debt* Equity 2,380 1,360 7,650 8,840 $20,230 INSTRUCTORS MANUAL: MULTINATIONAL FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT, 9th ED. c. Calculate the translation gains or losses associated with the NKr depreciation for each of the four methods. Relate these gains and losses to the exposure calculations performed in part (a) combined with the exchange rate change. Where would these translation gains or losses show up in the balance sheets prepared for part (b)? ANSWER. The translation gain (loss) equals the krone exposure multiplied by the -$0.04 change in the exchange rate. These translation gains (losses) are as follows: currentoncurrent/temporal methods--loss of $1.36 million (0.04 x 34 million); monetaryonmonetary method--gain of $1.68 million (-0.04 x -42 million); and current rate method--loss of $2.08 million (-0.04 x 52 million). These gains (losses) show up on the equity account and equal the difference in equity values calculated at the new exchange rate of $0.17/NKr and the old exchange rate of $0.21/NKr. 4. An importer has a payment of 8 million due in 90 days. a. If the 90-day pound forward rate is $1.4201, what is the hedged cost of making that payment? ANSWER. The hedged cost of making the payment is $11,360,800 (8,000,000 x 1.4201). b. If the spot rate expected in 90 days is $1.4050, what is the expected cost of payment? ANSWER. The expected cost of payment is $11,240,000 (8,000.000 x 1.4050)/ c. What factors will influence the hedging decision? ANSWER. The importer must consider the basis for its expected future spot rate and why that value diverges from the forward rate, its willingness to bear risk, and whether it has any offsetting pound assets. 5. International Worldwide would like to execute a money market hedge to cover a 250,000,000 shipment from Japan of sound systems it will receive in six months. The current exchange rate is 124 = $1. a. How would International structure the hedge? What would it do to hedge the Japanese yen it must pay in six months? The annual yen interest rate is 4%. ANSWER. International should invest the present value of 250,000,000, or 250,000,000/1.02 = 245,098,039 = $1,976,597 at today's exchange rate of 124 = $1. In six months International can cash in its investment, which by then will have grown to 250,000,000, and use the proceeds to pay off its supplier. b. The yen may rise to as much as 140 = $1 or fall to 115 = $1. What will the total dollar cash flow be in six months in either case? ANSWER. We can only value the future dollar cash flow in relation to the current spot rate of the yen. Converting the future value of 250,000,000 into dollars at today's spot rate of 124, International Worldwide's total dollar cost of paying for the sound system delivery, assuming it makes use of the money market hedge, will be $2,016,100, which is shown as follows: POSSIBLE OUTCOMES OF MONEY MARKET HEDGE IN 6 MONTHS Spot Exchange Rate in 6 Months 115 = $1 124 = $1 140 = $1 Value of Payable (1) $2,173,900 $2,016,100 $1,785,700 Loss (gain) on Money Market Hedge + (2) ($157,800) 0 $230,400 Total Cash Flow in 6 Months = (3) $2,016,100 $2,016,100 $2,016,100 The money market hedge gain of $157,800 if the exchange rate moves to 115 = $1 arises because the investment proceeds of 250,000,000, valued at $2,016,100 at the exchange rate of 124 = $1, will be worth $2,173,900 at the new exchange rate. This gain is subtracted off the cost of the payable. 15 CHAPTER 10: MEASURING AND MANAGING ACCOUNTING EXPOSURE 6. A Polish corporate treasurer expects to receive a 11 million payment in 90 days from a German customer. The current spot rate is 0.29870:z1 and the 90-day forward rate is 0.29631:z1. In addition, the annualized three-month euro and zloty interest rates are 9.8% and 12.3%, respectively. a. What is the hedged value of the euro receivable using the forward contract? ANSWER. By selling the euro receivable forward, the Polish treasurer can lock in revenue of z37,123,283 (11,000,000/0.29631). b. Describe how the Polish treasurer could use a money market hedge to lock in the zloty value of the euro receivable. What is the hedged value of the euro receivable? What is the effective forward rate that the treasurer can obtain using this money market hedge? ANSWER. The Polish treasurer can borrow the present value of the 11 million receivable, which equals 10,736,945 (11,000,000/1.0245) at the 2.45% quarterly interest rate (9.8%/4). Next, the treasurer converts these Euros into Polish zloty at the spot rate of 0.29870:z1 to get z35,945,580. Finally, the treasurer will invest the zloty at the quarterly rate of 3.075% (12.3%/4) and receive z37,050,907 in 90 days. The result from this money market hedge is the equivalent of selling forward the 11 million at a forward rate of 0.29689 (11,000,000/37,050,907). From the standpoint of the treasurer, this is a worse rate than could be realized directly in the forward market (as evidenced by the fact that the forward market hedge yields z72,376 more than does the money market hedge). c. Given your answers in parts a and b, is there an arbitrage opportunity? How could the treasurer take advantage of it? ANSWER. There is an arbitrage opportunity here, assuming that transaction costs (such as the bid-ask spreads in both the foreign exchange and money markets, which were ignored in this example) don't offset the gains. The opportunity would involve borrowing zloty, converting them into Euros, investing the Euros while simultaneously selling them forward for zloty, and using the proceeds to repay the zloty loan. However, since the difference between the actual and the constructed forward rates is only 0.2%, it is quite likely that transaction costs will preclude an arbitrage profit. d. At what 90-day forward rate would interest rate parity hold? ANSWER. Interest rate parity holds when the Polish zloty return on zloty equals the hedged zloty return on Euros. The former return is 1 + 0.123/4 = 1.03075. The latter return is 0.29870*1.0246/f90, where f90 is the 90-day forward rate. Setting these two terms equal and solving for f90 yields f90 = (1.0246/1.03075)*0.29870 = 0.29692. 7. Plantronics owes SKr 50 million, due in one year, for some electrical equipment it recently bought from ABB Asea Brown Boveri. At the current spot rate of $0.1480/SKr, this payable is $7.4 million. It wishes to hedge this payable but is undecided how to do it. The one-year forward rate is currently $0.1436. Plantronics' treasurer notes that the company has $10 million in a marketable U.S. dollar CD yielding 7% per annum. At the same time, SE Banken in Stockholm is offering a one-year time deposit rate of 10.5%. a. What is the low-cost hedging alternative for Plantronics? What is the cost? ANSWER. Plantronics can use the forward market to lock in a cost for its payable of $7.18 million. Alternatively, Plantronics can use a money market hedge to lock in a lower dollar cost of $7,165,611 for its payable. Thus, the money market hedge is the low-cost hedge. To compute this cost, note that Plantronics must invest SKr 45,248,869 today at 10.5% to have SKr 50 million in one year (45,248,869 x 0.105 = 50 million). This amount is equivalent to $6,696,833 at the current spot of SKr $0.1480/SKr. The opportunity cost to Plantronics of taking this amount from its CD today and converting it into SKr is $7,165,611, which is the future value of $6,696,833 invested at 7%. b. Suppose interest rate parity held. What would the one-year forward rate be? 16 INSTRUCTORS MANUAL: MULTINATIONAL FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT, 9th ED. ANSWER. Interest rate parity holds when the dollar return on investing dollars equals the dollar return on investing SKr, or 1.07 = (1/0.1480) x 1.105 x f1, where f1 is the equilibrium one-year forward rate. The solution to this equation is f1 = $0.1433/SKr. 8. Dow Chemical has sold SFr 25 million in chemicals to Ciba-Geigy. Payment is due in 180 days. Spot rate: 180-day forward rate 180-day U.S. dollar interest rate (annualized) 180-day Swiss franc interest rate (annualized) 180-day call option at $0.80/SFr 180-day put option at $0.80/SFr a. $0.7957/SFr $0.8095/SFr 5.25% 1.90% 2% premium 1% premium What is the hedged value of Dow's receivable using the forward market hedge? the money market hedge? ANSWER. Dow Chemical can use a forward contract to lock in a value of $20,237,500 (25,000,000 x 0.8095) for its receivable. It can also use a money market hedge, which would proceed as follows. Dow would borrow the present value of the SFr 25 million receivable, which equals SFr 24,764,735 (25,000,000/1.0095) at the 0.95% 180-day interest rate (1.9%/2). This franc amount translates into a dollar amount of $19,705,300 at the current spot rate of $0.7957/SFr. By investing these dollars at the semiannual rate of 2.625% (5.25%/2), Dow will have $20,222,564 at the end of 180 days (1.02625 x $19,705,300). It can then pay off the Swiss franc loan with the SFr 25 million in collected receivables. b. What alternatives are available to Dow to use currency options to hedge its receivable? Which option hedging strategy would you recommend? ANSWER. Dow can buy a put option giving it the right but not the obligation to sell SFr 25 million in 180 days at a price of $0.80/SFr and a put premium of 1%. Dow can also use a currency collar, which would involve buying the put option and selling a call option in the amount of SFr 25 million and receiving a 2% premium. With sale of the call option, if the Swiss franc appreciates beyond $0.80, the holder of the call option will call the francs away. Thus, Dow will cap its upside potential at $0.80 plus the 2% premium and be protected on the downside by the put option. By buying the put option and selling the call option at a strike price of $0.80/SFr and pocketing the 1% premium of $0.008 (0.01 x $0.7957), Dow would create the equivalent of a forward contract at $0.808. This is a poorer price than Dow would receive via the forward contract. c. Which of the hedging alternatives analyzed in parts (a) and (b) would you recommend to Dow? Why? ANSWER. The forward contract is the preferred alternative because its hedging characteristics are identical to those of the others but it has a higher payoff. Dow would be speculating on the future spot price of the Swiss franc if it bought the put option. Since Dow has no comparative advantage in pricing options, it should drop this alternative. 9.* Metalgesselschaft, a leading German metal processor, has scheduled a supply of 20,000 metric tons of copper for October 1. On April 1, copper is quoted on the London Metals Exchange at 562 per metric ton for immediate delivery and 605 per metric ton for delivery on October 1. Monthly storage costs are 10 for a metric ton in London and DM 30 in Hamburg, payable on the first day of storage. Exchange rate quotations are as follows: The pound is worth DM 3.61 on April 1 and is selling at a 6.3% annual discount. The opportunity cost of capital for Metalgesselschaft is estimated at 8% annually, and the pound sterling is expected to depreciate at a yearly rate of 6.3% throughout the next 12 months. Compute the DM cost for Metalgesselschaft on April 1 of the following options: * Problem contributed by Laurent Jacque. 17 CHAPTER 10: MEASURING AND MANAGING ACCOUNTING EXPOSURE a. Buy 20,000 metric tons of copper on April 1 and store it in London until October 1. b. Buy a forward contract of 20,000 metric tons on April 1, for delivery in six months. Cover sterling debt by purchasing forward pounds on April 1. c. Buy 20,000 metric tons of copper on October 1. Can you identify other options available to Metalgesselschaft? Which one would you recommend? ANSWER. This problem illustrates some of the difficulties often encountered when trading in commodities, where the bulk of the contracting is generally done in pounds or U.S. dollars. In this case, Metalgesselschaft is confronted with two types of risk: (i) relative price risk stemming from fluctuations in the price of copper on the London Metals Exchange and (ii) currency risk resulting from fluctuations in the DM/pound exchange rate. Here are calculations for the present values of the alternatives. a. Buy the required 20,000 metric tons of copper and incur storage costs in London. Payment occurs on April 1 so the present value of the cost is the same as the actual cost. DM cost Number of tons needed x [sterling price per ton for immediate delivery + pound storage cost in London per ton for a six-month period] x DM spot price of one pound on April 1 = 20,000 x (562 + 60) x 3.61 = b. = DM 44,908,400 Cover both commodity and currency risks through forward contracts of matching maturities in the respective markets. Payment doesn't take place until October 1. DM cost Number of tons needed x sterling price per ton of copper for delivery on October 1 x forward DM price per pound on April 1 for delivery on October 1/(1 + opportunity cost of funds) = 20,000 x 605 x 3.61(1 - .063/2)/(1 + .08/2) = c. = DM 40,677,931 Leave both commodity and currency positions uncovered. The DM cost of this option cannot be computed since no information is given as to the projected price of copper or the projected DM value of the pound six months hence. An additional option would consist of buying the copper on April 1 and storing it in Hamburg. This option is analogous to the first one, except for the geographical location of storage. This option is less expensive than the first one, however, because the cost of storage in Hamburg is only DM180, whereas it costs DM60 x 3.61 = DM216.6 to store copper in London. The total cost of this option is 20,000[562 x 3.61 + 180] = DM 44,176,400. Of the options we can price, the second one, which involves hedging both commodity price risk and currency risk, is the least expensive. Whether Metalgesselschaft should, in fact, hedge depends on how its DM revenues vary with the spot cost of copper expressed in DM. If its DM revenues don't vary with the current DM spot price of copper, the firm is probably better off hedging its copper purchases. On the other hand, if DM revenues vary directly with the spot price of copper, then hedging one end of the profit equation (costs) without hedging the other end (revenues) could subject Metalgesselschaft to more risk than if it didn't hedge at all. 10. Cosmo, a Japanese exporter, wishes to hedge its $15 million in dollar receivables coming due in 60 days. In order to reduce its net cost of hedging to zero, however, Cosmo sells a 60-day dollar call option for $15 million 18 INSTRUCTORS MANUAL: MULTINATIONAL FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT, 9th ED. with a strike price of 98/$ and uses the premium of $314,000 to buy a 60-day $15 million put option at a strike price of 90/$. a. Graph the payoff on Cosmo's hedged position over the range 80/$-110/$. What risk is Cosmo subjecting itself to with this option hedge? ANSWER. As can be seen from the payoff diagram on Cosmo's currency collar, Cosmo is limiting the upside potential on its receivable with the call option but also limiting its downside risk. The put and call premiums of $314,000 cancel offset each other and so don't affect the payoff on the currency collar. The diagram reflects the fact that Cosmo will not exercise its put option at an exchange rate above 90/$ and the buyer will not exercise its call option below 98/$. Neither option, therefore, will be exercised in the range of 90/$:98/$. PAYOFF ON COSMO'S CURRENCY COLLAR 1,700 1,600 Yen (millions) 1,500 1,400 1,300 Value of unhedged receivables Value