Nobel Prize Ideas ‐ Capital Structure with State Prices
Nobel Prize Ideas ‐ Capital Structure with State Prices Fall 2020
Stuffit Corp
Stuffit Corp. is a company with net present value (NPV) in good, medium, and bad states of $500
million, $250 million, and $50 million, respectively.
The firm has $60 million (face value) of perpetuity debt issued many years ago. The debt promises to
pay a 2.625% annual coupon rate and currently has market value of $53.10 million. The long‐term risk‐
free rate is currently 2.5% per year.
The firm has 1 million shares of stock outstanding. Its current stock price is $164.72 per share.
Stuffit faces a corporate tax rate equal to 20%. Moreover, bankruptcy costs equal to 40% of the pre‐tax
asset NPVs in bankruptcy states.
i) Find the state prices that are consistent with current market valuations.
The firm is considering a leveraged recapitalization. The firm would raise $105 million by issuing new
debt, and use the proceeds to buy back its own stock. Because of covenants in outstanding debt, the
new debt would be subordinate to existing debt.
ii) What must be the credit spread of the new debt?
iii) How many shares can be bought back and at which price?
iv) Does the leverage recapitalization create value for shareholders? How much? Use the value decomposition seen in class to show where value comes from.
It turns out, however, that there is a problem. Maria Sardelli, Stuffit Corp’s CFO, carefully read the fine
print of existing debt covenants and realized that they forbid sizable leverage recapitalizations such as
this one.
Maria contacted Stuffit Corp.’s investment bankers to inquire whether existing debtholders would be
nice enough to ignore the no‐recap covenant as new debt would be junior to existing one. The
investment bankers answered that, no, debtholders would indeed block such large leverage
recapitalization. The only solution would be for the firm to buy out existing bondholders, that is, buy
back all existing bonds in order to get rid of the constraints imposed by its covenants.
There is a pre‐specified price for such buy‐out because existing debt is callable, that is, the firm can buy
it back from debtholders at a pre‐specified price. That call price of the Stuffit’s debt is a premium of 5%
of face value. That is, they would have to pay $63 million to existing bondholders in order to retire all
existing debt. The firm is then considering raising $168 million by issuing new debt, and use proceeds
to retire all existing debt for $63 million and buy back $105 million of its own stock.
v) What must be the credit spread of the new debt now?
vi) Does this new version of the leverage recapitalization create value for shareholders? How much? Use the value decomposition seen in class to show where value comes from.
The situation described so far assumes way issuance costs. But Stuffit’s investment bankers would
charge a fee of $7 million to structure the new version of the leverage recapitalization.
vii) Considering the issuance cost, does this new version of the leverage recapitalization create value for shareholders?
In case the leverage recapitalization does not go through because existing debtholders are driving a
hard bargain (and because there are issuance costs), the firm is considering a new project that would
drastically reshape the nature of existing business. This new project is not an investment per se, but
rather a dramatic reorganization/re‐orientation of the firm’s business strategy. Such reorientation does
not require any net cash infusion. Maria Sardelli, Stuffit Corp’s CFO, read the fine print of existing debt
covenants and realized that – perhaps surprisingly – they do not forbid such large business re‐
organization.
The incremental NPVs of the project across the three states is (350,‐240,‐40). In case of bankruptcy,
bankruptcy costs still consume 40% of the total pre‐tax cash flows in bankruptcy states.
viii) Is this a positive NPV project? What is the NPV?
ix) Does the project create value for shareholders? Where does the value come from?