FIN 401 - Modigliani-Miller (M&M) Proposition 1 and 2 (no tax) - Part 3

Поделиться
HTML-код
  • Опубликовано: 5 окт 2024
  • www.FIN401.ca

Комментарии • 79

  • @rickydinh9660
    @rickydinh9660 5 лет назад +162

    one video of yours is much more valuable than the whole 2-hour lecture from my professor. Thank you so much!

  • @Skyhuller
    @Skyhuller 5 лет назад +10

    I am loving. I have no words. It is simple and clear. I sometimes spend hours reading and going to classes and I do not understand a thing!

  • @StyleWise101
    @StyleWise101 3 года назад +4

    My God! I finally get it, why can't professors be this clear!

  • @samuelokereke2294
    @samuelokereke2294 4 года назад +9

    I’m taking this as my main lecture room , I’ve downloaded all the topics I’ve seen, please keep up the good work, we’re here to watch your work. Thanks again. For now , no more lectures, we live here .

  • @WeMoomingNow
    @WeMoomingNow 5 лет назад +1

    these videos are the best, quick to the point, explains all the connections, perfect!

  • @WhiteDervish
    @WhiteDervish 5 лет назад +6

    This is the best possible way to explain. So organized, thank you so much!

  • @the_growth_mindset.
    @the_growth_mindset. 4 года назад

    If only I had found this channel sooner. Would have saved so much time.

  • @kasimirheeren2615
    @kasimirheeren2615 4 года назад

    I am german and was just searching for a good explanation video but only tutorials in english were popping up. This just breaks down everything so well. I mean you can build up from here when you start to understand what its really about. But I don't get why in my class they are trying to explain it as complicated as possible... In the end you have 400 pages of theory and 99% of students that won't remember a thing. Just thank you!

  • @tinholly
    @tinholly 2 года назад

    All classes turn to Zoom and my prof just keeps reading out from the ppt slides for a 3-hour-lecture, we don't understand any sxxt! Your simple and useful videos definitely save us and save so much our time! Thanks Patrick!

  • @tshephangrasethora4875
    @tshephangrasethora4875 2 года назад

    He is so great at explaining. Keeps it simple. Keep it up Bro!

  • @wss1916
    @wss1916 2 года назад

    Thank you, you makes M&M a lot more easy and fun to study. Thank you very much🙏🙏💪💪💪

  • @timtam9231
    @timtam9231 5 лет назад

    Thank you so much. Your video is very easy to understand and worth watching

  • @herbinorth5570
    @herbinorth5570 6 лет назад

    You break it down very nicely and very easy to digest. Thank ya.

  • @ambiven10
    @ambiven10 2 года назад

    This guy is such an awesome teacher

  • @yinglinyu4365
    @yinglinyu4365 2 года назад

    Super useful in the whole series !!!!!!!

  • @rishitraj2529
    @rishitraj2529 6 лет назад +3

    Thank you sooooo much.. This video help me a lot.... My exams are coming and I totally understanded what is MM. THANKS 😊😊😊😊

  • @antoinegleize8743
    @antoinegleize8743 6 лет назад

    Hello Patrick, your videos on Corporate Finance are very useful and full of pedagogy. Well done and Thank You !!

  • @riarobinson8511
    @riarobinson8511 2 года назад

    Thank you so much!!! Your videos are so helpful!

  • @youssefsamernarouz8608
    @youssefsamernarouz8608 2 года назад

    God bless you and the stomach that carried you

  • @luvcvchriss6450
    @luvcvchriss6450 3 года назад

    dude i love you so fucking much, your videos >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> university courses

  • @SniffyMon
    @SniffyMon 3 года назад

    Thank you so much my friend.

  • @ABNER518
    @ABNER518 4 года назад

    Graciass!!! Saludo de un autodidacta peruano :)

  • @guswhd1128
    @guswhd1128 5 лет назад +1

    wow your video saved my life. you're wayyyyyy better than my professor. thank you sooooo much

  • @TraTranCaoBungPhe
    @TraTranCaoBungPhe 6 лет назад

    Thanks a lot. Thanks for saving my life with finance haha. Your tutoring helps me a lot in understanding clearly basic concepts in finance. Hopefully you will make more videos relating to finance.

  • @alejandrouribe3574
    @alejandrouribe3574 6 лет назад

    Awesome videos! Your explanations help a ton

  • @savealot2
    @savealot2 4 года назад

    This guy is a genious!

  • @noudie7305
    @noudie7305 4 года назад

    Thank you so much !!! You are a great teacher 🙏💕

  • @hugocheung6369
    @hugocheung6369 6 лет назад

    awesome and clear explantation. Thank you !!

  • @joshuaarulnayagam4994
    @joshuaarulnayagam4994 4 года назад

    God bless you bro this helped me so much

  • @huai-jinzhang6099
    @huai-jinzhang6099 5 лет назад

    Nice lecture!!!! thanks a looooooot!!!!

  • @tingyuliu3943
    @tingyuliu3943 3 года назад

    omg wonderful!!!!!!!!!!

  • @anzhelakayryakova4598
    @anzhelakayryakova4598 6 лет назад

    Thank you! It was really useful.

  • @hanyeoreumk
    @hanyeoreumk 4 года назад

    Really helpful cheers!

  • @philphil7402
    @philphil7402 5 лет назад

    Thank youuu sooo muchh. you safe my life

  • @MissFaizaNaeem
    @MissFaizaNaeem 6 лет назад

    You're amazing!!!! Thank youuuuu

  • @zakkarp674
    @zakkarp674 19 дней назад

    Confused about one thing. What would be the impact on firm valuation if they couldn't do homemade leverage? Thanks.

  • @reservoirdograyh4n
    @reservoirdograyh4n 3 года назад +1

    Why is cost of equity being referred to as return on equity (Return/cost of equity)? When theyre clearly not the same thing. ROE is being referred to as if its a return on equity TO THE SHAREHOLDER. Isnt the ROE a return to the firm? Like, how effectively they use their equity to generate returns?

  • @ajiboyea2
    @ajiboyea2 2 года назад +1

    Your lectures are so rich, can you please create a playlist for all these finance cost. I can't find the lectures in your play list

    • @AllThingsMathematics
      @AllThingsMathematics  2 года назад +1

      they're on my site! Link in description box!

    • @ajiboyea2
      @ajiboyea2 2 года назад

      @@AllThingsMathematics Seen. Thank you

  • @stefanochiappori3154
    @stefanochiappori3154 5 лет назад +2

    I'd like to know how going to the formula of the return on assets to the formula return on equity.. I don't understand

    • @nkule2493
      @nkule2493 4 года назад

      i also got a bit lost there

  • @annienguyen1885
    @annienguyen1885 5 лет назад

    Great explanations! Very helpful! Clear and concise - thank you.
    Ps totally hot too (that always helps with concentration levels) 😜

  • @ivettjiron5942
    @ivettjiron5942 3 года назад +1

    Amazing teaching from London ypu should be paying well for what you offering to all of us thanks so much I have my exam tomorrow how I can get in contact with you for private lesson ? Online

    • @AllThingsMathematics
      @AllThingsMathematics  3 года назад

      thank you :) feel free to shoot me an email at patrick@allthingsmathematics.com

  • @carolwq
    @carolwq 2 года назад

    At 2:05, shouldn’t the cost of equity also increase as equity risk increases? Then the present value of shares will decrease as a result of the increased cost of equity as a discount rate?

  • @hannahreading3536
    @hannahreading3536 4 года назад

    so good

  • @SuryoHady
    @SuryoHady 3 года назад

    I read the paper, there is the third proposition... why everybody doesn't talking about the third proposition ?

  • @michaelsolovyev5140
    @michaelsolovyev5140 3 месяца назад

    Is it should be r0, but not ra? (Cost of capital financed only with equity - r0)

  • @cyc8981
    @cyc8981 6 лет назад +4

    7:15 anyone know why the return on debt (Rd) is at constant level?

    • @sebastiannordstern9103
      @sebastiannordstern9103 5 лет назад

      I think thats because the interest of the debt stays constant regardless the amount of debt

    • @panostolis9147
      @panostolis9147 5 лет назад +3

      The Rd cannot be constant in a real-world environment. The more you add to financial leverage the bigger the default risk becomes and hence the bondholder will demand a premium for this default risk.

    • @cedricvogt2576
      @cedricvogt2576 4 года назад +1

      @@panostolis9147 Yes, but here we are dealing with a theory world, where there are no costs associated with bankruptcy. In my opinion this means that there won't be a premium demanded by bondholders for the increase in debt - or in other words: Rd does not increase. Let me know your thoughts on this and if I got it correctly. Thanks a lot.

  • @mat6685
    @mat6685 5 лет назад +2

    What is Dustin Porier doing giving finance courses :-)

  • @danielfraga
    @danielfraga 5 лет назад

    top!!!

  • @lausgmtz
    @lausgmtz 6 лет назад

    Gracias :D tha's very clear

  • @m.preacher2829
    @m.preacher2829 6 лет назад

    i have a question. Why cost of debt is not equal to the WACC if we only finance by debt according to the diagram (WACC is higher than rd)?

  • @nkule2493
    @nkule2493 4 года назад

    Kindly explain the RoA = WACC again? I got lost there

  • @lordmini76
    @lordmini76 6 лет назад

    thanks!

  • @lantrinhhuong9685
    @lantrinhhuong9685 7 месяцев назад

    but why rD is constant? I still don’t get this point can anyone help

  • @deresse25
    @deresse25 2 года назад

    To the point

  • @vinitkumarkshatri6676
    @vinitkumarkshatri6676 4 года назад

    I am not sure but is ROE and cost of equity the same? i googled it and it says they ain't same. Please help!

  • @jessicazhou8076
    @jessicazhou8076 6 лет назад

    I am confused about debt and equity in this video. As debt and equity are two different financing methods. So what's to do with debt when equity increase risk ?

    • @AmanKhanTM
      @AmanKhanTM 5 лет назад

      I think the meaning is more along the lines of the risk when you invest in the firm increases when your leverage increases.
      So for people investing in an unlevered firm, equity has no risk, while for levered, equity, meaning investing in the company is risky.
      People can't invest in debt of the firm, so risky equity means risky investment in firm.

  • @forambarot2317
    @forambarot2317 4 года назад

    why is the equity more risky in a leveraged firm?

    • @raoufghorbel6092
      @raoufghorbel6092 Год назад

      A Qualitative answer can be beacause the more leveraged a firm is, the more junior the payment to equity holders is going to be ( they will get there money AFTER the bank is paid), and the more leveraged the firm, the higher the risk for equity holders to get paid ( risk of default or bankruptcy which is accounted for in the MM world) . that risk should be compensated in the cost of capital. I know that my reply is late, but I thought that it would be useful for others.

  • @ramakasetty5337
    @ramakasetty5337 5 лет назад

    Can u pls derive the formula

  • @najmakhalil5257
    @najmakhalil5257 3 года назад

    hi, great video but just want to point out that the return on debt would not remain constant as the company takes on more leverage. infact r_D would also increase because as the amount of debt increases there is a higher chance that the company will default. so as the company takes on more leverage, BOTH return on equity and debt increase but WACC will remain constant because it's a weighted average.

  • @leomonteil7257
    @leomonteil7257 4 года назад

    salut t'es mon pote on va boire un café après demain ? merci bise