Terrell Trucking Company is in the process of setting its target capital structure. The CFO believes that the optimal debt-to-capital ratio is somewhere between 20% and 50%, and her staff has compiled the following projections for EPS and the stock price at various debt levels:

Debt/Capital Ratio Projected EPS Projected Stock Price
20% $3.15 $35.00
30 3.60 35.75
40 3.70 37.00
50 3.55 32.25

Required:
a. Assuming that the firm uses only debt and common equity, what is Terrell's optimal capital structure?
b. At what debt-to-capital ratio is the company's WACC minimized?

From anderson and dahlin, ch1 question 1: suppose a computer system and all of its applications are completely bug free. suppose further that everyone in the world is completely honest and trustworthy. in other words, we do not need to consider fault isolation.

On january 1, 2017, fisher corporation purchased 40 percent (90,000 shares) of the common stock of bowden, inc. for $980,000 in cash and began to use the equity method for the investment. the price paid represented a $48,000 payment in excess of the book value of fisher's share of bowden's underlying net assets. fisher was willing to make this extra payment because of a recently developed patent held by bowden with a 15-year remaining life. all other assets were considered appropriately valued on bowden's books. bowden declares and pays a $90,000 cash dividend to its stockholders each year on september 15. bowden reported net income of $400,000 in 2017 and $348,000 in 2018. each income figure was earned evenly throughout its respective year. on july 1, 2018, fisher sold 10 percent (22,500 shares) of bowden's outstanding shares for $338,000 in cash. although it sold this interest, fisher maintained the ability to significantly influence bowden's decision-making process. prepare the journal entries for fisher for the years of 2017 and 2018. (if no entry is required for a transaction/event, select "no journal entry required" in the first account field. do not round intermediate calculations. round your final answers to the nearest whole dollar.)

In december of 2004, the company you own entered into a 20-year contract with a grain supplier for daily deliveries of grain to its hot dog bun manufacturing facility. the contract called for "10,000 pounds of grain" to be delivered to the facility at the price of $100,000 per day. until february 2017, the supplier provided processed grain which could easily be used in your manufacturing process. however, no longer wanting to absorb the cost of having the grain processed, the supplier began delivering whole grain. the supplier is arguing that the contract does not specify the type of grain that would be supplied and that it has not breached the contract. your company is arguing that the supplier has an onsite processing plant and processed grain was implicit to the terms of the contract. over the remaining term of the contract, reshipping and having the grain processed would cost your company approximately $10,000,000, opposed to a cost of around $1,000,000 to the supplier. after speaking with in-house counsel, it was estimated that litigation would cost the company several million dollars and last for years. weighing the costs of litigation, along with possible ambiguity in the contract, what are three options you could take to resolve the dispute? which would be the best option for your business and why?