CASE STUDY Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 750 words

CASE STUDY - Essay Examplem to 199 ?m). mingled with 1999 and 2000, the profits before tax decreased slightly from 421 ?m to 360 ?m although there has been no variety in the same. But the profits before tax payments has decreased considerably for the high society between 2000 and 2001, from a profit of 360 ?m to a loss of 534 ?m. Further, during the same five year period, the companys investment funds in infrastructure almost doubled from 4,625 ?m to 8,841 ?m, its credit value increased almost 3 times from 420 ?m to 1,356 ?m but its provisions almost halved and its debt increasing by almost 7 times from 522 ?m to 3,480 ?m in the same period. These values and trends indeed represent a mingled economy as it can be seen that in addition to the companys sliding lucrativeness at the end of the five year period, the regulative constraints too seem to have taken a toll on its profitability, in turn affecting its provisions and its capability to invest in approaching by banking on its capital market. Lack of effective strategies to tackle the changing market environment in terms of capital, infrastructure, innovation, operations, etc. have also affected the companys profitability in the immense run. ... In 2001 the company made a loss but the dividend was paid. Why should the company feel it required to make such a payment? The company has maintained a dividend payment of 26.9 p through and through 2001 from 2000 although it made a loss of 534 ?m during the same period. First, the decision of the board to pay the dividend was to keep both its stakeholders and shareholders happy as this could help the company become more competitive in the market buttocks while still attracting capital in bitterness of its poor performance in the recently think year. Also, considering it to be the end of the first five year ascendency period, the company needs to cater to the interests of its shareholders as much as there is a need to attract passengers and freight to susta in in the unyielding run. And with the company running short on investment and poor performance leading to more regulatory constraints and lesser competitiveness, the company runs the risk of alienating its investors in the second five year control period. Also, the company needs to attract more capital to be able to improve its assets, performance, and rail network maintenance, nourish innovation and competitiveness among its franchisees and sustain the positive trend in the passenger and freight incomes. Giving a dividend of 26.9 p is also necessary to project a positive impression and a sense of control among its shareholders as well as its other stakeholders particularly after the fatal accidents in 1997, 1999 and 2000. In spite of the under investment, poor performance and the lack of effective strategies, the company still required to pull on into the next control period as the agreed government grants and the ?2 billionn facility loan handiness give it scope to adjust its debt record and improve its