Boston Beer Analysis Essay Example for Free

Boston Beer Analysis Essay Boston Beer Company (SAM) is a brewery in Massachusetts most commonly known for its Samuel Adams line of â€Å"craft† beers. The Samuel Adams line of beer was introduced in 1985. Since then the company has grown to do over 580 million dollars in revenue each year. 580 million is a very small piece of the food and beverage industry but the amount of shareholder wealth they are providing is impressive. Boston Beer Company has been named one of the top publically traded businesses to watch in 2013 by Forbes. Boston Beer Company is actually part of two markets. In the overall U. S. Beer market they have a mere one percent of the market. However, they own 22% of the craft beer market. In their industry, 66% of those competing in the craft brew market are brewpubs, which generally do not do mass distribution giving Boston Beer Company an edge. (Smith, 2011) Boston Beer Company has one major difference from its competitors. The company has no debt. The entire company runs on cash even though they have a 50 million dollar line of credit available to them, which they have never used. The company purchased Diageo’s Pennsylvania Brewery in June of 2008 for 55 million dollars cash so that they could produce 100% of their product without having to subcontract larger orders out. Boston Beer Company is capitalized with no bonds or preferred stock, only 13. 6 million shares of common stock. (Smith, 2011) Boston Beer Company’s cost of capital is 6. 60% since their weighted cost of equity is 6. 60% and their weighted cost of debt is 0. 00%. (Market Grader Inc. , 2013) Price to Revenue Ratio (Price to Sales) Boston Beer Company’s price to revenue ratio (TTM) is 3. 54 The price to revenue ratio is usually applied in place of the price to earnings ratio. This ratio is usually applied to companies within the same industry, however it excludes debt and expenses so the information the ratio provides is limited. Price to Cash Flow Ratio The current price to cash flow ratio for Boston Beer Company is 25. 76. The price to cash flow ratio is used to evaluate the price of a company’s stock as compared to the amount of cash flow it generates. The price to cash flow ratio is important for one main reason, it allows the comparison of companies from different jurisdictions because it removes depreciation (which may vary by country) and other non-cash factors. Therefore, it would allow an investor to compare Boston Beer Company’s stock to that of AB InBev along similar financial values. Price to Book Ratio (MRQ). The price to book ratio for Boston Beer Company is 8. 34. The price to book ratio measures a company’s market value in comparison to its book value. The price to book ratio indicates whether or not a company’s asset value is comparable to the market price of it’s stock. Because the price to book ratio for Boston Beer Company is well over one it may be an indicator that the stock is overvalued. An over valued stock for Boston Beer Company could imply the rapid decline in stock value in the near future, especially since the stock has climbed almost 25% in the last quarter alone. With the book value ratio as high as it is, a drop in stock price seems likely in the near future. Current Ratio (MRQ) Boston Beer Company’s current ratio is 1. 83. Current ratio is defined by a company’s current assets divided by is current liabilities. A company’s current ratio is a liquidity ratio that measures a company’s ability to pay short-term obligations. This ratio also takes into account inventory as current assets, although it may easily be converted into cash quickly. Because Boston Beer Company’s ratio is well over one, it means they have the assets and cash flows available to pay off any immediate debt should it be made due. The company’s amount of inventory provides a great deal of assets that makes the company much more liquid when this formula is used. Quick Ratio (MRQ) The quick ratio for Boston Beer Company is 1. 33. A company’s quick ratio is an indicator of a company’s short-term liquidity. This ratio is a more conservative form of the current ratio because it does not take into account inventory of the company when determining its current assets. Boston Beer Company still has a favorable ratio well above 1. 0. While their current ratio is much better with all the inventory, Boston Beer Company is still a reliable company that can pay off its short term debts if need be. Measuring Returns Primary Stakeholders Boston Beer Company has five primary stakeholders within company, Martin F. Roper (President and CEO), C. James Koch (Founder and Chairman), William F. Urich (CFO and Treasurer), John C. Geist (Vice President of Sales), and Thomas W. Lance (Vice President of Operations). Of the five of them C. James Koch holds more than 34% of the shares and is the sole holder of the class B common stock that gives him the right to appoint five of the eight members that are chosen to be on the board as seen in the following quote from the 2013 Proxy Statement. â€Å"At the Annual Meeting you will be asked to elect three Class A Directors and cast an advisory vote on executive compensation. As the sole holder of Class B Common Stock, I will elect five Class B Directors and cast a vote to ratify the selection of our independent registered public accounting firm. † (Boston Beer Company, Inc. , 2013) While Koch may have stepped down from CEO in 2001 he has maintained a great interest in his company and has positioned himself to have great control over the Company with his position as Chairman of the Board. His actions and goals are seen laid out in all of the company’s press releases and the company is continuing to be grown and maintained the same as it always has been with the exception of Boston Beer Company running its own breweries instead of subcontracting out their orders. Capital Budgeting Boston Beer Company runs just like any cash business. They have no money tied up in debt and any investment they make is paid for in cash. There is an upside and downside to this method of running a company. On the upside, the company is very liquid, meaning they can pay for most investments on the spot without accruing any debt. However, no debt might deter some investors from buying into the company. Having no debt throws off a company’s ratios in comparison with other companies within the industry and can make it difficult for investors to trust in the company. A typical investment for Boston Beer Company would be opening a new brewery or purchasing an existing one to help the company keep up with the demands for their products. The acquisition of the Diageo brewery 60 miles outside of Philadelphia in 2008 was the company’s most recent investment. Since the purchase, Boston Beer Company has been pouring tens of millions of dollars into the facility that used to employ 220 people to make Smirnoff and now employs 260 people to brew Sam Adams. â€Å"Boston Beers Breinigsville facility employs 260, up from 220 workers when the plant was purchased from Diageo. † (Richardson, 2012) Boston Beer Company now has three breweries. They are located in Cincinnati, Ohio, Breinigsville, Pennsylvania, and Boston, Massachusetts. Boston Beer Company has been weary to invest in the western half of the U. S. because they believe the craft beer market is oversaturated and they will not have much success, however, some market specialists believe they should do a trial batch with a brewery in the western market and measure real results. The only real measure of value for Boston Beer is the volume being sold. Boston Beer used to lease brewery locations in order to brew according to their demand. Within the last five years the demands for craft beers have grown significantly especially among the younger alcohol consuming demographic that is looking for something more the generic beer taste of the three big beer companies, Anheuser Busch InBev, MillerCoors, and Pabst. Boston Beer Company no longer has the need to lease other breweries after the purchase of the Diageo brewery. Now that they have the capacity to brew their own beer and staff accordingly Boston Beer Company has not only added value to the company, but have positioned them self to expand as the demands for their products continue to increase. The only place that Boston Beer Company seems to be struggling with is the money that they are leaving sit idle. While the company is very profitable and is run as a cash business, some of their cash flows could be invested to generate a better return than they are currently getting.

History of the Origins of Environmental Ethics Essay -- Ethics Philoso

History of the Origins of Environmental Ethics The inspiration for environmental ethics was the first Earth Day in 1970 when environmentalists started urging philosophers who were involved with environmental groups to do something about environmental ethics. An intellectual climate had developed in the last few years of the 1960s in large part because of the publication of two papers in Science: Lynn White's "The Historical Roots of our Ecologic Crisis" (March 1967) and Garett Hardin's "The Tragedy of the Commons" (December 1968). Most influential with regard to this kind of thinking, however, was an essay in Aldo Leopold's A Sand County Almanac, "The Land Ethic," in which Leopold explicitly claimed that the roots of the ecological crisis were philosophical. (Although originally published in 1949, Sand County Almanac became widely available in 1970 in a special Sierra Club/Ballantine edition, which included essays from a second book, Round River. Most academic activity in the 1970s was spent debating the Lynn White thesis and the tragedy of the commons. These debates were primarily historical, theological, and religious, not philosophical. Throughout most of the decade philosophers sat on the sidelines trying to determine what a field called environmental ethics might look like. The first philosophical conference was organized by William Blackstone at the University of Georgia in 1972. The proceedings were published as Philosophy and Environmental Crisis in 1974, which included Pete Gunter's first paper on the Big Thicket. In 1972 a book called Is It Too Late? A Theology of Ecology, written by John B. Cobb, was published. It was the first single-authored book written by a philosopher, even though the primary focus of the b... ...n environmental phenomenology. On the theoretical level, Taylor and Rolston, despite many disagreements, can be regarded as objective nonanthropocentric intrinsic value theorists. Callicott, who follows Aldo Leopold closely, is a subjective nonanthropocentric intrinsic value theorist. Hargrove is considered a weak anthropocentric intrinsic value theorist. Sagoff is very close to this position although he doesn't talk about intrinsic value much and takes a Kantian rather than an Aristotlian approach. At the far end is Bryan Norton who thought up weak anthropocentrism but wants to replace intrinsic value with a pragmatic conception of value. The anti-intrinsic value pragmatic movement includes such philosophers as Anthony Weston and Andrew Light, although Ben Minteer has recently indicated that intrinsic value could be included in an environmental pragmatism. History of the Origins of Environmental Ethics Essay -- Ethics Philoso History of the Origins of Environmental Ethics The inspiration for environmental ethics was the first Earth Day in 1970 when environmentalists started urging philosophers who were involved with environmental groups to do something about environmental ethics. An intellectual climate had developed in the last few years of the 1960s in large part because of the publication of two papers in Science: Lynn White's "The Historical Roots of our Ecologic Crisis" (March 1967) and Garett Hardin's "The Tragedy of the Commons" (December 1968). Most influential with regard to this kind of thinking, however, was an essay in Aldo Leopold's A Sand County Almanac, "The Land Ethic," in which Leopold explicitly claimed that the roots of the ecological crisis were philosophical. (Although originally published in 1949, Sand County Almanac became widely available in 1970 in a special Sierra Club/Ballantine edition, which included essays from a second book, Round River. Most academic activity in the 1970s was spent debating the Lynn White thesis and the tragedy of the commons. These debates were primarily historical, theological, and religious, not philosophical. Throughout most of the decade philosophers sat on the sidelines trying to determine what a field called environmental ethics might look like. The first philosophical conference was organized by William Blackstone at the University of Georgia in 1972. The proceedings were published as Philosophy and Environmental Crisis in 1974, which included Pete Gunter's first paper on the Big Thicket. In 1972 a book called Is It Too Late? A Theology of Ecology, written by John B. Cobb, was published. It was the first single-authored book written by a philosopher, even though the primary focus of the b... ...n environmental phenomenology. On the theoretical level, Taylor and Rolston, despite many disagreements, can be regarded as objective nonanthropocentric intrinsic value theorists. Callicott, who follows Aldo Leopold closely, is a subjective nonanthropocentric intrinsic value theorist. Hargrove is considered a weak anthropocentric intrinsic value theorist. Sagoff is very close to this position although he doesn't talk about intrinsic value much and takes a Kantian rather than an Aristotlian approach. At the far end is Bryan Norton who thought up weak anthropocentrism but wants to replace intrinsic value with a pragmatic conception of value. The anti-intrinsic value pragmatic movement includes such philosophers as Anthony Weston and Andrew Light, although Ben Minteer has recently indicated that intrinsic value could be included in an environmental pragmatism.

Course notes conflict recreation Essay

Major factors behind outdoor recreational conflicts have been found to be: 1. Activity Style: The various personal meanings assigned to an activity. differences in personal meanings assigned to an activity, 2. Resource Specificity: The significance attached to using a specific recreation resource for a given recreational experience. differences in the level of significance attached to using a specific recreation resource, 3. Mode of Experience: The varying expectations of how the natural environment will be perceived. c) differences in expectations of the natural environment, 4. Lifestyle Tolerance: The tendency to accept of reject lifestyles different from one’s own. (d) differences in lifestyles. According to Jacob and Schreyer (1980), there are four major classes of factors which contribute to conflict in outdoor recreation: (a) differences in the level of significance attached to using a specific recreation resource, (b) differences in personal meanings assigned to an activity, (c) differences in expectations of the natural environment, and (d) differences in lifestyles. Users who become â€Å"attached† to a resource are believed to develop a sense of possession or perception of the place as a â€Å"central life interest. † The degree to which a particular activity or place represents a central life interest can vary substantially among groups using an area, even among groups participating in the same activity. Thus, one individual or group may believe they are more attached to an area or an activity than a competing individual or group. This perception of differences can initiate feelings of conflict. Variation in the personal meanings visitors attach to particular activities may also be linked coping are strategies as those that people use more typically during active participation (recreationists can respond to unwanted situations by substituting one place for another, by altering their use patterns, and by maintaining satisfaction by enjoying different activities. ? Displacement ? change activity pattern if negative setting, experience change ? temporal: shift visit time (weekend–weekday, peak–off-peak ? spatial ? intersite: shift from one area to a different area ? intrasite: shifts within recreation area (e. g. , other campsite) ? Rationalization ? recreation voluntary, investment of time, money, effort ? reduce internal conflict, report high satisfaction, low conflict & crowding regardless of actual conditions. ? Product Shift ? alter definition of recreation opportunity in congruence with conditions experiences; change way think about area Major factors behind outdoor recreational conflicts have been found to be: 1. Activity Style: The various personal meanings assigned to an activity. 2. Resource Specificity: The significance attached to using a specific recreation resource for a given recreational experience. differences in the level of significance attached to using a specific recreation resource, 1. Activity Style: The various personal meanings assigned to an activity. 2. Mode of Experience: The varying expectations of how the natural environment will be perceived or in other words, differences in a person’s expectations of the natural environment. 4. Lifestyle Tolerance: The tendency to accept of reject lifestyles different from one’s own. (d) differences in lifestyles. When a conflict is asymmetrical such as those identified in between hikers and trail bikers (Ramthun, 1995;Watson et al. , 1991), and water skiers and fishermen (Gramann & Burdge, 1981) one way conflict relationships often based on stereotyping from one group to the other based. These conflicts often require management intervention. Substitution alternatives (Shelby & Vaske, 1991), is a coping behavior where a recreationists use behavioral choices when faced with an unwanted crowding or other undesirable situation. Alternatives that can be substituted include the resource, timing of participation (temporal substitution), and mode of participation (activity substitution). In other words, substituting one place for another, changing when they go or how they participate, but still keeping their satisfaction by enjoying different activities. This paper specifically examines the issue of participant skill level as a factor in out-group and in-group conflict by conducting surveys with skiers and snowboarders at five different Colorado ski resorts. Two particular hypotheses were tested: 1) individuals with greater skills in skiing and snowboarding would experience more conflict than those with less ability, and 2) across all skill levels, skiers and snowboarders would experience more out-group than in-group conflict. A total of 383 skiers and 212 snowboarders were asked to rate their skill level on a four-point scale (beginner, intermediate, advanced, or expert). Conflict was measured by asking respondents the frequency with which other skiers or snowboarders a) failed to be aware of others around them, b) were not keeping an adequate distance from others, c) failed to yield the right of way to the downhill skier/snowboarder, d) behaved in a discourteous manner, e) cut others off, and f) failed to be aware of and yield to less advanced skiers/snowboarders. The results of the study supported both hypotheses. As perceived skill level increased, out-group and in-group conflict increased for both skiers and snowboarders. Within each skill level, skiers reported more unacceptable behaviors by snowboarders than with fellow skiers, and snowboarders also identified more out-group than in-group conflict. Conflict is between different activities. Conflict can be as great or greater within the same activity as it is between different activities. While earlier studies were generally limited to conflicts caused by other activities, some researchers have included both in-group and out-group comparisons in their assessments. Thapa (1996) found that skiers were as likely to attribute conflict to other skiers as they were to snowboarders. Todd (1987) found that conflict among Delaware River canoeists was more likely to be caused by other canoeists than other water-based recreationists like motorboaters, tubers or rafters. Additionally, the intra-activity conflicts among river users were more likely to result from other members of one’s own group (intra-group conflict) than from other canoeists (inter-group conflict). Some conflict is not activity-based, but rather, based on undesirable behaviors that may be exhibited by participants in any activity. Gibbons and Ruddell (1995) found more goal interference attributed to discourteous behavior than to encounters with helicopter skiers. Todd (1987) also found that some conflicts perceived by canoeists resulted from non-. In-group conflict is when the recreationists are participating in the same activity such as the conflict between conoeists on the same river or skiers on a mountain. Out-group conflict is conflict between different users/activities. In the same example above, the out group conflict would be with canoeists and motorboats user or with skiers and snowboarders. Some conflict is not activity-based, but rather, based on undesirable behaviors that may be exhibited by participants in any activity. Thapa.

The Role Of Participants During The Vietnam War - 1121 Words

Many historians have been arguing the fact whether or not Canada played the role of bystanders or the role of participants during the Vietnam War. However, based on research, it is clear to conclude that during the Vietnam War, Canada did in fact play the role of participants though not explicitly because, it harboured thousands of refugees, it provided the U.S with supplies, and thousands of Canadians volunteered to help out in the war. First of all, Canada was responsible for harbouring tens of thousands of refugees, many of which were seeking safety from being conscripted or being killed due to violence of the war. As the Vietnam War progressed and got more intense, the American Government wanted more soldiers to go out and fight in†¦show more content†¦As Canada sent letters promising to give landed immigrant status to 14,000 South Vietnamese who were capable of escaping Vietnam, they also offered permanent resident status to the 4,000 Vietnamese that stayed in Canada who did not wish to return to Vietnam. (The Vietnam War: Canada s Role, Part Two: The Boat People, http://www.cbc.ca/radio/rewind/the-vietnam-war-canada-s-role-part-two-the-boat-people-1.3048026) Such support, resulted in Canada helping thousands of Vietnamese avoid death back in Vietnam. Moreover, after the Vietnam War ended on April 1975. Canada was responsible for accepting thousands of refugees from Vietnam, Laos and Cambodia. Between 1 975, and 1980, Canada accepted about 70,000 refugees 3,000 of which arrived in 1975 which increased to 9,000 by 1978, and finally accepting nearly 60,000 in just one year from 1979 to 1980. (The Vietnam War: Canada s Role, Part One, http://www.cbc.ca/radio/rewind/the-vietnam-war-canada-s-role-part-one-1.3038110) and (Thakur, 265). Canada constantly demonstrated some if not heavy involvement in the Vietnam War. Accepting refugees throughout the course of the war is not at all an easy task. A lot of money had to be spent to build homes for the refugees, provide them with clothes and food. Second of all, not only was Canada responsible for harbouring refugees, but it was also responsible for supplying the United States of America with goods