检索规则说明:AND代表“并且”;OR代表“或者”;NOT代表“不包含”;(注意必须大写,运算符两边需空一格)
检 索 范 例 :范例一: (K=图书馆学 OR K=情报学) AND A=范并思 范例二:J=计算机应用与软件 AND (U=C++ OR U=Basic) NOT M=Visual
作 者:李忠余 王慧 Li Zhongyu;Wang Hui(Zhongjing Minxin(Beijing)Assets Appraisals CO.,LTD.,Beijing 100088)
机构地区:[1]中京民信(北京)资产评估有限公司,北京100088 [2]中京民信(北京)资产评估有限公司研发部,北京100088
出 处:《中国资产评估》2022年第9期43-48,共6页Appraisal Journal of China
摘 要:目前在评估实务界,企业价值评估收益法模型主要采用企业自由现金流折现模型或股权自由现金流折现模型,使用上述模型容易产生的主要问题有:1.在预期资本结构变化较大的情况下,仍按不变的资本结构预测,会导致折现率出现较大误差;2.未考虑投入资本回报率是否合理;3.采用企业自由现金流折现模型,未单独预测利息支出,可能导致在测算弥补亏损时出现错误等。笔者通过对三种收益法模型的比较分析,来理清各模型的基本原理、特点、适用性及采用现金流折现模型易出现的主要问题与对策等,希望对评估人员合理选择收益法模型及正确理解并使用现金流折现模型有所帮助。At present, in the field of appraisal practice, income approach model for valuing the enterprise value mainly adopts the FCFF or the FCFE. The main problems easily caused when using the above models are as follows:1. When the expected capital structure changes greatly, it will lead to a large error in the discount rate if the forecast is still based on the unchanged capital structure. 2. Failure to consider whether the rate of return on invested capital is reasonable;3. The FCFF is adopted, if the interest expense is not predicted separately, which may lead to errors in the calculation of loss covering. Through the comparative analysis of the three income approach models, the author tries to clarify the basic principles, characteristics, applicability of each model and the main problems and countermeasures of using the discounted cash flow mode,etc. The author hopes that it will be helpful for valuers to reasonably choose the income approach model and to correctly understand and use the discounted cash flow mode.
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在链接到云南高校图书馆文献保障联盟下载...
云南高校图书馆联盟文献共享服务平台 版权所有©
您的IP:3.133.128.223