There used to exist this thing called positive leverage. Where by using debt you would decrease the equity contribution used to make an acquisition. With a certain level of debt the payments minus the net cash flow while less than just the net cash flow would yield a greater return due to the equity contribution being lessened. So with less equity you are able to increase your returns more so than outright making an acquisition.

 
Most Helpful

Very simple example... Scenario 1: I buy an asset for $100 using $100 of equity. 1 year later, I sell the asset for $120. The return on my equity is 20% (20/100).

Scenario 2: I buy the same asset for $100, using $80 of debt and $20 of equity. 1 year later, I sell this same asset for $120. I pay off the $80 of debt yielding $40 for myself. I double my equity return (40/20).

Question for you - does your profile suggest you are in PE or that you're aspiring to be? This is a fundamental premise of PE.

 

Several reasons:

  1. More debt = more money to expand your business = more revenue -> generally, more net income. If you can get a bank loan of $100 (interest rate of 10%/year) now but you're sure you you can make $150 by the end of the year (which is enough to pay both the principle + interest), does it make sense for you to do it?

Also, the way you framed the example is as follows: company A has equity of $100, no debt, while company B has equity of $80 and $20, so yes, assuming that no dividends are paid and the EBIT line is the same for both companies, then company A will have higher net income.

Then what about this scenario: company A has equity of $100, no debt, while company B has equity of $100 and debt of $100?

  1. Cost of equity is generally higher than cost of debt (when the debt level is low) -> to achieve an optimal capital structure (it's like a U curve where WACC is at the lowest point), therefore a mix of debt and equity is preferred

  2. It's much faster to acquire additional capital by getting bank loans than issuing new shares (at least in my country)

  3. It's not mandatory to pay dividends to shareholders, but when dividends are paid, they are not tax-deductible -> debt is cheaper

 

If your business is big enough to secure non-recourse debt and you have a valid way of using it, then you should always use it because you can pay yourself more in the interim and use leverage to execute on growth initiatives without really increasing risk to the co unless you get excessive leverage.

Being able to pay yourself more in the interim = derisking too. That's why PE funds use divi recaps when interest rates make sense.

 

Feel like the majority has been mentioned above so far, but also inflation works to your advantage as a borrower... $1 today is not worth a $1 in a year as you slowly repay that loan.

 

this is a good point, the government targets 2% inflation, so you already have tailwinds structured in, in the event the governments debt burden gets out of control and their only option is quantitative easing, well, then hyper inflation starts making debt look pretty nice. As baby boomer's social security obligations start piling up, I am happy to be holding loads of debt :)

EDIT: Safe levels of investment debt, consumer debt is a poor mans game, investment debt is the rich mans game

 

As a consumer, having multiple diverse lines of credit increases your credit score. With everything else mentioned above, it's always good to have access to some form of credit.

Quant (ˈkwänt) n: An expert, someone who knows more and more about less and less until they know everything about nothing.
 

Porro temporibus officia accusantium et voluptatem. Ab est tenetur beatae in dolor necessitatibus.

Modi laudantium sed aut nesciunt magnam. Totam quo doloribus nam. Et corporis sit ut ea. Et consequuntur voluptatem soluta quaerat excepturi unde.

Est labore qui ipsum ullam modi maiores possimus. Qui vel et aut sunt voluptas deserunt.

Sint qui eum quam nam dolor. Blanditiis et consequuntur culpa ut aliquid ea atque repudiandae. Sunt necessitatibus aut et recusandae dolore eveniet. Blanditiis qui et magni harum voluptatem quod.

Follow the shit your fellow monkeys say @shitWSOsays Life is hard, it's even harder when you're stupid - John Wayne

Career Advancement Opportunities

April 2024 Investment Banking

  • Jefferies & Company 02 99.4%
  • Goldman Sachs 19 98.8%
  • Harris Williams & Co. New 98.3%
  • Lazard Freres 02 97.7%
  • JPMorgan Chase 03 97.1%

Overall Employee Satisfaction

April 2024 Investment Banking

  • Harris Williams & Co. 18 99.4%
  • JPMorgan Chase 10 98.8%
  • Lazard Freres 05 98.3%
  • Morgan Stanley 07 97.7%
  • William Blair 03 97.1%

Professional Growth Opportunities

April 2024 Investment Banking

  • Lazard Freres 01 99.4%
  • Jefferies & Company 02 98.8%
  • Goldman Sachs 17 98.3%
  • Moelis & Company 07 97.7%
  • JPMorgan Chase 05 97.1%

Total Avg Compensation

April 2024 Investment Banking

  • Director/MD (5) $648
  • Vice President (19) $385
  • Associates (87) $260
  • 3rd+ Year Analyst (14) $181
  • Intern/Summer Associate (33) $170
  • 2nd Year Analyst (66) $168
  • 1st Year Analyst (205) $159
  • Intern/Summer Analyst (146) $101
notes
16 IB Interviews Notes

“... there’s no excuse to not take advantage of the resources out there available to you. Best value for your $ are the...”

Leaderboard

1
redever's picture
redever
99.2
2
BankonBanking's picture
BankonBanking
99.0
3
Betsy Massar's picture
Betsy Massar
99.0
4
Secyh62's picture
Secyh62
99.0
5
CompBanker's picture
CompBanker
98.9
6
kanon's picture
kanon
98.9
7
dosk17's picture
dosk17
98.9
8
GameTheory's picture
GameTheory
98.9
9
numi's picture
numi
98.8
10
Jamoldo's picture
Jamoldo
98.8
success
From 10 rejections to 1 dream investment banking internship

“... I believe it was the single biggest reason why I ended up with an offer...”