Financial Themes analysis

Shareholder remuneration is sometimes an issue as it is left to the discretion of companies (within the legal framework). Indeed, they have several means, several strategies to remunerate shareholders and in the best case attract new investors and increase the value of its shares. The questions that arise are therefore the following: how to remunerate shareholders who have “sacrificed" capital to invest in your company? What strategy should be put in place to remunerate them at the fair value of their investment? When and how often should dividends be distributed? We will first look at what the law allows in terms of dividend distribution, before discussing the different strategies and the advantages and disadvantages of each. We will focus here on the legal framework for dividend distribution, which can sometimes be modified to allow companies some more flexibility. To be able to distribute dividend, a company must first be profitable. From the moment it makes a profit, it h...

« It is always more difficult to raise funds than you think. And it always takes longer than expected. Therefore, you need to plan this. », Richard Harroch, investor and Managing Director of VantagePoint Capital Partners. This quote shows us how complicated it can be to find financing for a company and delay entrepreneurs in their projects. Today we will examine the means available for companies to finance themselves, how to choose the right financing method and the problems associated with it.  First of all, it is quite well known that companies can finance themselves through the bank by taking on debt, thus increasing the company's liabilities. Here, the cost of capital is therefore planned in advance, and is equal to the interest rate paid on loans by the company to the bank. The bank is a debt supplier here. However, one of the main problems with bank financing is that the bank must be able to validate the project and ensure that the credit is repaid by the compa...

If the 2008 crisis is a subject that has already been discussed very widely, I will now try to approach it from a different angle. After watching the documentary "The Love of Money, The Age of Risk" (2009), I asked myself about the "golden period" that preceded the crisis, and why the consideration of risk was strongly reconsidered over this period. In this documentary, it seems that part of the reason for the crisis comes from excessive capitalism, deregulation and the disinterest of the state in the economy. First of all, I found it interesting to link the crisis with the political event at the end of the 20th century: the fall of the Berlin Wall and with it the fall of Soviet communism. However, this event was not only political, but had an unprecedented economic impact. With this triumph of capitalism, deregulation has intensified, and a real systemic risk has emerged (i. e. a risk that threatens the survival of the financial system). Indeed, the distrust...