Financial and Operational Risk Management - PDF

A critical evaluation of the financial and operational risk management within Apple Inc

Contents
Part 3: Results, analysis, conclusions and recommendations....................................................2
Description of business..............................................................................................................2
3.1: PESTEL analysis:............................................................................................................2
Political Factor....................................................................................................................2
Geopolitical factor..............................................................................................................3
Social..................................................................................................................................4
Technology.........................................................................................................................5
Environmental.....................................................................................................................6
Legal...................................................................................................................................6
3.2: Porter five forces.............................................................................................................7
Threat of competition..........................................................................................................7
Threat to New Entrant.........................................................................................................8
Threat of Substitutes...........................................................................................................9
Bargaining Power of Buyers.............................................................................................10
Bargaining Power of Suppliers.........................................................................................10
3.3: Ratio analysis................................................................................................................11
Profitability Analysis........................................................................................................11
Liquidity Analysis.............................................................................................................14
Capital Structure/Solvency Analysis................................................................................18
Part4: Recommendations and Conclusion...............................................................................20
Part 5: References....................................................................................................................22
P a g e 1 | 26

Part 3: Results, analysis, conclusions and recommendations
Description of business
Apple has attained the position of being the largest information technology company
in terms of revenue owing to its unique consumer electronic products and services. It is also
attributed to be the second largest company involved in manufacturing of mobile phones
followed by Samsung (Angelique and Ellen. 2008). Apple Inc. has achieved a total worth of
US$700 billion in the year 2015 and has become the first ever company in the country to
realise such mark. The company also operates an iTunes Store that has became the world’s
largest music retailer. Apple is believed to be sold over more than a billion products
worldwide as of the year 2016. This is largely due to the high brand loyalty of the customers
for the company developed on the basis of its high quality electronic products and services
(Apple Inc. - The largest information technology company in the U.S, 2018).
3.1: PESTEL analysis:
Political Factor
In the domestic market, political uncertainty arises as President Donald trump is not
an experience politician exposed to concepts of solving political, social and economic issues
but a business man who is pro-capitalism and pro-American. Thus, changes in policy such as
corporate taxes reformed, protectionism policies and exiting the Paris agreement are geared
toward America economy. However, such policies are not beneficial if they are unsustainable
in the long run. As such, the management of Apple need to gain knowledge about the
political uncertainty that can occur due to legislative change. This is essential to identify the
significant operation risk in advance and implementing adequate strategies for overcoming it
(How Donald Trump is retooling politics for the 21st century, 2018).
P a g e 2 | 26

The protectionism policy of Donald Trump represent a significant commodity risk
due to tariff imposed on china products aluminium and steel that can impact the
manufacturing of electronic products and services by the company in short and long-term.
The company in order to mitigate the risk need to identify and select other potential suppliers
from the countries besides the US. The company is recommended to adopt the use of hedging
against such commodity risk for overcoming the potential impact of such risk on the products
and services of the company. Also, the outsourcing activities of the company carried out in
Asia will reduce the impact of tariff changes on its performance (Wolf, 2018).
In addition, the changes in the political policies and actions will have a huge impact
on the stock market and this represents a significant market risk. The market risk is
specifically related to equity risk due to high volatility in the share prices of the company
(John, 2018). The political uncertainty present in the US market can also lead to loss of
confidence of the investors leading to capital outflows. This will consequently cause a decline
in the share prices of the company and a significant increase in equity risk. Thus, it can be
said that in the case of Apple Inc. the tax reformed policies and loss of investor confidence in
the US market represent an opportunity for the company to buy back their shares in the stock
market (Kim, 2018).
Geopolitical factor
Geopolitical climate represents operational risk that affects the company due to its
operations in the different geographical locations (Brett, 2017). The company conducts its
operations both in the USA and internationally, mainly in China and Europe. Apple Inc. has
to comply with different legal rules and regulations present in various geographical locations
of its operations (Fimarkets, 2018). For example, in china Apple Inc. could become the target
of growing anti-Americanism because the china government retaliates to US tariff by
P a g e 3 | 26

imposing similar tariff on US goods which could affect Apple Inc. profit in the particular
region and thereby impacting its market share in China (Mullaney, 2018).
2 0 1 5 2 0 1 6 2 0 1 7
93864 86613 96600
50337 49952 54938
58715 48492 44764
15706 16928 17733
15093 13654 15199
market segment by region
America Europe China Japan Rest of asia pacific
(Source: Statista (2018b), Revenue ofApple by operating segment from the first quarter of
2012 to the first quarter of 2018 (in billion U.S. dollars)
There is large impact of the geopolitical factors on the business operations of Apple
Inc . as more than 60% of total sales revenue is realised from overseas. This also imposes a
significant currency risk as it is exposed to fluctuations in the currency market. The
management of the company is adopting the use of hedging for mitigating the foreign
currency fluctuations (Adninolfi, 2015).
Social
As technology is playing an increasingly vital role in our daily lives. The smartphone
culture has impacted the way we communicate, play, work and gather information. Thus,
P a g e 4 | 26

there is a growing demand for smartphones, as well as a consumerism culture existing to
constantly get newer and better smartphone.
From a sociocultural stand point possessing Apple product considered as a status
symbol in many societies. Apple is an internationally recognizable brand, each time their new
line of iPhone series is launched there will be news of queues showing its popularity as well
as loyal fan base owing to unique functionality and latest feature of the phone as well as the
design.
The Management has done a great job in advertising and marketing their product,
creating very strong brand awareness in the international market. There is an operational risk
that a lack of advertising or bad marketing strategies will cause the brand to lose it appeal to
consumers, leading to a significant fall in sales of their flagship product. Thus, management
must maintain or improve their marketing and advertising strategies to reduce model risk and
people risk (Lombardo, 2017).
Technology
The worldwide success of Apple Inc. is attributed to its use of innovative technology
at an increasing rate in comparison to its competitors. Thus, it is essential for the company to
continually innovate in its technologies by carrying out its R&D activities. This is essential
for maintaining its loyal customer base by reducing the risk of mass customer defections with
the use of better technology systems and processes. The competitors are also incorporating
the use of advanced technology solutions for development of their electronic products and
services such as Samsung. Thus, there is high technology risk on the company due to fierce
competition from the other electronic players
Apple’s manages the above risks by launching new IPhone series annually ensure
customers gets access to new up-to-date technology to create and maintain the strong brand
P a g e 5 | 26

loyalty. Thus, management mitigate competitor risk by having a good understanding of
consumer needs and developing product life cycle by adopting the use of latest technologies
(Alam, 2015).
Environmental
The manufacturing of touch screen by apple consists of 8 out of 17 rare earth metals.
It has also being revealed upon closer investigation that the production of smart phones
requires a total of 16 out of 17 rare earth metals (Brian R. 2015).
The implication is that raising demand of its smartphones will quickly deplete reserves that
could be used in other fields such as satellite and laser construction. In the long run, an
increase in demand for supply of rare earth metal to make smartphones will lead to the risk of
rapid increase in prices of rare earth metals.
The Management can in the short term hedge the prices of raw material to prevent any
sudden price movement that can negatively impact its profitability position. The management
is required to maintain its cost of operations lower for keeping a check on the price of its
products and marinating the customer satisfaction.
In the longer term, Apple need to reduce the usage of rare earth metals and incorporates the
usage of recycled materials to manufacture their products (Earl G. 2017).
Legal
The company due to its international nature of operations also faces significant issues
related to patent protection. Also, it has to comply with the accounting standards of different
countries for maintaining an effective internal control over its business operations. The
auditor judgements regarding the financial statements may vary in different countries
impacting the trust and confidence of the investors and shareholders. Also, the company can
face legal suit to issue such as explosion of iPhone.
P a g e 6 | 26

3.2: Porter five forces
Apple Inc. is mainly involved in a technology-related industry, using Michael porter's
five forces model. It will give an overview of the industry in which the company operates in
and identify the risks relating to its operations in the industry and mitigating the risk
identified.
Threat of competition
Firstly, competitive rivalry in the smartphone and smart devices industry is very
intense due to low switching cost and competitive pricing. There is a potential risk of loss of
market shares. Apple Inc. has managed to establish a strong brand loyalty to retain customers
which prevent customers from considering purchasing rivals brands (Ferguson, 2017). Apple.
The company needs to diversify into other product segments for reducing the risk of high
competitive rivalry. Apple’s recent revenue over the recent 3 years period indicates that its
flagship product the IPhone accounted for more than 60% of the company revenue by market
segment as shown in the chart below:
In
billions
US$
IPhone IPad Mac Services Others Total
revenue
IPhone
percentage
2015 155.04 23.24 25.47 19.92 10.07 233.74 66.3%
2016 136.71 20.63 22.84 24.35 11.13 215.66 63.4%
2017 141.33 19.22 25.84 29.98 12.86 229.23 61.7%
P a g e 7 | 26

2 0 1 5 2 0 1 6 2 0 1 7
155.04 136.71 141.33
23.24 20.63 19.22
25.47 22.84 25.84
19.92 24.35 29.98
10.07 11.13 12.86
Product Market Segment
Iphone Ipad Mac Services Others
(Source: Statista (2018a),Share of Apple’s revenue by product category from the first quarter
of 2012 to the first quarter of 2018.
Threat to New Entrant
Secondly, a natural barrier to entry exists in the form of high capital requirements to
enter into the market and high cost of brand development to consistently compete for market
share. Thus, there is a low threat of new entry in the industry (Ferguson, 2017). As such, its
market share has been increasing over the 3 year period.
Market share
in %
Samsung Apple Huawei OPPO Others
Q1/2015 24.6 18.3 5.2 2.2 49.7
Q2/2015 21.3 13.9 8.6 2.8 53.4
Q3/2015 23.3 13.4 7.6 3.2 52.5
Q4/2015 20.4 18.7 8.2 3.6 49.1
P a g e 8 | 26

Q1/2016 23.8 15.4 8.4 5.9 46.5
Q2/2016 22.7 11.7 9.3 6.6 49.7
Q3/2016 20.9 12.5 9.3 7.1 50.2
Q4/2016 18 18.2 10.5 7.3 46
Q1/2017 23.3 14.7 10 7.5 44.5
Q2/2017 23.3 12 11.3 8.1 45.3
Q3/2017 22.3 12.5 10.5 8.2 46.5
Q4/2017 18.4 19.2 10.2 6.8 45.4
(Source: https://www.statista.com/statistics/271496/global-market-share-held-by-
smartphone-vendors-since-4th-quarter-2009/)
However, the barrier to entry is declining due to technological advancement, potential
new entrants are entering into the market competing with Apple Inc. for market shares. Apple
have to manage this risk by developing a strong brand name and maintaining customer
loyalty with their after sales services. Overall with high natural barrier to entries and
technological advancement the industry will eventually developed into an oligopolistic
market structure (Ferguson, 2017).
Threat of Substitutes
In addition, increasing number of substitutes is entering the market such as Google
and OPPO, which can negatively impact the market share of Apple in the long-term.
However, there is relatively lower threat of substitute products and services for Apple Inc. as
the substitutes have limited features in comparison to Apple Inc. products. Many customers
would prefer to use Apple products because of their more advanced and innovative features.
Thus, the aggressive R&D will effectively mitigate and overcome the risk posed by the
P a g e 9 | 26

substitute products and services to the long-term growth and development of the company
(Ferguson, 2017).
Bargaining Power of Buyers
The industry in which apple operates in has a relatively low switching cost, which
result in strengthening the bargaining power of buyers as a key force for Apple to consider.
There are essentially two types of bargaining powers: the individual bargaining power of
buyers and the collective bargaining power of buyers. For Apple, individual bargaining
power is relatively low as the loss of a single customer will not have a considerable impact on
its revenue. On the other hand, the collective bargaining power of customers is a strong force,
as the defects in products can led to loss of faith of customers.
Apple emphasis on building strong brand loyalty through consistently developing new
and unique products through R&D, such as the recent Air pods and Apple Watch,it has been
able to maintain its market share and diversify. In addition, apple has also acquired many
other companies to gain software and patent rights to stay relevant (Maverick 2018).
Bargaining Power of Suppliers
The bargaining position of Apple suppliers is reduced due to high number of potential
suppliers for component parts for its products. The company at present is having a list of
more than top 200 suppliers on a global level. The bargaining power of suppliers is very low
due to low switching cost from one to another supplier. In addition, Apple is a major source
of revenue creation for most of its parts suppliers, and therefore supplier’s wants to continue
their association with the company over a long-term. This strengthens Apple's position,
conversely weakening suppliers bargaining power which enable apple to buy in bulk with
cost savings (Ferguson, 2017).
P a g e 10 | 26

3.3: Ratio analysis
Ratio analysis helps to analyse the financial performance of the entity and helps the
users of the financial statements to take decisions on the basis of entire performance of the
company. In this report financial performance of the company has been examined using ratio
analysis for last three years (Brealey, Myers and Marcus, 2015). In order to the make the
comparative analysis it has been decided to perform the ratios analysis of Apple Company
and its main competitor Samsung. The ratio analysis has been conducted for years 2015, 2016
and 2017. The financial data for both the companies has been taken from the annual reports
for the last three years as required in the ratio analysis.
Ratio analysis is being divided in many parts and these parts are as follows:
 Profitability Analysis
 Liquidity Analysis
 Capital Structure or Solvency Analysis
Profitability Analysis
Profitability analysis helps to evaluate the ability of the entity to use the resources for
making the revenue. This analysis tells how company make use of resources such as assets,
shareholder’s equity and other resources to earn the sales revenue. In order to make the
profitability analysis there is need to calculate some profitability ratios such as net profit
ratio, gross profit ratio, return on equity and return on assets (Brigham and Michael, 2013).
Profitability Analysis
Financial
Data
Apple Inc. Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd.
2015 2016 2017 2015 2016 2017
USD in millions KRW in millions
Net Revenue 233,7 215,6 229,2 200,653,4 201,866,7 239,580,0
P a g e 11 | 26

15 39 34 82 45 00
Gross Profit
93,62
6
84,26
3
88,18
6
77,171,26
4
81,589,03
0
110,290,0
00
Total Assets
290,4
79
321,6
86
375,3
19
242,179,5
21
262,174,3
24
301,752,1
00
Shareholders’
Equity
119,3
55
128,2
49
134,0
47
172,876,7
67
186,424,3
28
214,491,4
00
Net profit
53,39
4
45,68
7
48,35
1
18,694,62
8
22,415,65
5
42,190,00
0
Profitability Ratios
Ratios 2015 2016 2017 2015 2016 2017
Net Profit
Ratio
22.85
%
21.19
%
21.09
%
9.32% 11.10% 17.61%
Gross Profit
Ratio
40.06
%
39.08
%
38.47
%
38.46% 40.42% 46.03%
Return on
Assets
18.38
%
14.20
%
12.88
%
7.72% 8.55% 13.98%
Return on
Equity
44.74
%
35.62
%
36.07
%
10.81% 12.02% 19.67%
(Annual report: Samsung. 2015, 2016 and 2017) and (Annual report: Apple. 2015, 2016 and
2017)
Profitability position of the Apple Company is much better than the Samsung
Company in all three years of analysis. Net profit margin of the Apple Company has not seen
any much decrease or increase during the last three years but net profit margin of Samsung
Company has been increased a lot during the past three years (Damodaran, 2011). Despite of
P a g e 12 | 26

increase in net profit of Samsung, it is below the profitability position of Apple Inc. The
higher net profit margin helps the company to make expansion decisions in much better way
and also helps to provide better returns to their shareholders. The strong profitability position
helps the company to reduce the risk of going into insolvency. In addition to increased net
profit ratio of Apple Inc. as compare to Samsung Electronics, there was higher return on
assets and also higher return on equity. It clearly shows that Apple Inc. has ability to make
use of assets and other resources in much better way as compare to Samsung Electronics. The
insolvency risk is at minimum level in case of Apple Inc. as company has been successful in
maintaining the strong profitability position as analysed during the last three years (Davies
and Crawford, 2011).
2015 2016 2017
22.85% 21.19% 21.09%
9.32% 11.10%
17.61%
Net Profit Ratio
Apple Inc. Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd.
P a g e 13 | 26

2015 2016 2017
18.38%
14.20% 12.88%
7.72% 8.55%
13.98%
Return on Assets
Apple Inc. Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd.
2015 2016 2017
44.74%
35.62% 36.07%
10.81% 12.02%
19.67%
Return on Equity
Apple Inc. Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd.
Liquidity Analysis
Liquidity analysis helps to ascertain the ability to entity to meet the short term
liabilities that arises during the period. This analysis tells liquidity position of the company
and shows the position of liquid assets in order to pay the short term liabilities. Some of the
important ratios that are calculated to analyse the liquidity position of the company are
current ratio and quick ratio. Below is the calculation of current ratio and quick ratio of both
Apple Inc. and Samsung Electronics (Lumby and Jones, 2011).
Liquidity Analysis
P a g e 14 | 26

Financial Data
Apple Inc.
Samsung Electronics Co.
Ltd.
2015 2016 2017 2015 2016 2017
USD in millions $ in millions
Current Assets 89,378 106,869 128,645 110,329 121,940 129,949
Current Liabilities 80,610 79,006 100,814 44,641 47,165 59,390
Liquidity Ratios
Ratios 2015 2016 2017 2015 2016 2017
Current Ratios 1.11 1.35 1.28 2.47 2.59 2.19
(Annual report: Samsung. 2015, 2016 and 2017) and (Annual report: Apple. 2015, 2016 and
2017)
2015 2016 2017
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
1.11 1.35 1.28
2.47 2.59
2.19
Current Ratios
Apple Inc. Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd.
Apple closest competitor in the market is SAMSUNG, which will be a benchmark of
how Apple Inc. performed against its competitor in the market. The current ratio of Apple’s
in the 3-year period has risen by 15.3%; on the other hand, Samsung’s current ratio has fallen
by 11.3%. However, comparing the two ratios Samsung’s current ratio is still in a much
better position than apple Inc., this means that Apple Inc. has a higher funding liquidity risk.
P a g e 15 | 26

As a result, it may not be able meet short term financial demands and banks are not willing to
loan extra capital on this basis (Madura, 2014).
Liquidity Analysis
Financial Data
Apple Inc.
Samsung Electronics Co.
Ltd.
2015 2016 2017 2015 2016 2017
USD in millions USD in millions
Current Assets 89,378 106,869 128,645 110,329 121,940 129,949
Less: Inventories 2,349 2,132 4,855 16,219 16,227 16,227
Less: Other Current Assets 15,085 8,283 13,936 893 1,163 1,256
Less: Prepaid Expenses 0 0 0 2,734 3,391 3,096
Less: Advances 0 0 0 1,471 1,550 1,273
Quick Assets 71,944 96,454 109,854 89,012 99,609 108,097
Current Liabilities 80,610 79,006 100,814 44,641 47,165 59,390
Liquidity Ratios
Ratios 2015 2016 2017 2015 2016 2017
Quick Ratios 0.89 1.22 1.09 1.99 2.11 1.82
(Annual report: Samsung. 2015, 2016 and 2017) and (Annual report: Apple. 2015, 2016 and
2017)
P a g e 16 | 26

2015 2016 2017
0.89
1.22 1.09
1.98 2.12
1.82
Quick Ratios
Apple Inc. Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd.
Apple Inc.’s quick ratio has improved by 22.5% during the 3-year period, despite a
higher increase of current liabilities than Samsung. On the other hand, Samsung’s quick ratio
has an overall decreasing trend during the same period, falling by 11.4%. In comparison,
Apple Inc. was better at managing their quick ratio despite a greater increase in current
liabilities over the same period (Moles and Kidwekk, 2011).
The main reason for the Apple Inc. relatively lower liquidity ratios is due mainly to
high debt incurred, resulting in high interest repayment and higher current liability.
According to Forbes Magazine, this is part of the CEO strategy to buy back shares using debt,
this strategy in the short run has worsen the company’s liquidity ratio, but in the long run will
increase shareholder value and reduce cost of capital. Thus, Apple Inc. was able to balance 3
different types of risks by incurring higher debt resulting in an increase liquidity risk in the
short run, Apple was able to reduce their cost of operations in the long run and generate more
shareholder value. This balancing act reduces operational risk and equity risk while at the
same time maintaining liquidity ratios at a healthy range (Ross, Jaffe and Kakani, 2008).
P a g e 17 | 26

When comparing the trend of the liquidity ratios it can be inferred that Apple Inc. is
clearly better at managing both current ratio and quick ratio than Samsung. Managing cash
flow using good company policies will help to optimise working capital, affecting debtor
days, creditor days and stock days. A common strategy is to set a buffer using EOQ model to
ensure that working capital is always available and top up when it hits a minimum point
(Weston and Brigham, 2015).
Management is responsible for managing cash flow is required to have a good
understanding of the business operations in order to forecast a budget. Management must take
into considerations any seasonal influences that may cause fluctuations in the need for
working capital. Thus, a good forecast and buffer will improve management of liquidity risk
and help identify areas where improvements to working capital can be implemented
(Zimmerman and Yahya-Zadeh, 2011).
Capital Structure/Solvency Analysis
Solvency Analysis
Financial Data
Apple Inc. Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd.
2015 2016 2017 2015 2016 2017
USD in millions USD in millions
Debt 55,829 78,927 103,703 11,100 13,512 16,633
Shareholder's Equity 119,355 128,249 134,047 154,384 170,601 189,635
Solvency Ratios
Ratios 2015 2016 2017 2015 2016 2017
Debt to Equity 0.468 0.615 0.774 0.072 0.079 0.088
(Annual report: Samsung. 2015, 2016 and 2017) and (Annual report: Apple. 2015, 2016 and
2017)
P a g e 18 | 26

2015 2016 2017
0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
0.46
0.620000000000001
0.770000000000001
0.07 0.08 0.09
Debt Equity Ratio
Apple Inc. Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd.
Due to Apple Inc. strategy of incurring debt to buy back equity, has resulted in
increase in debt nearly doubling in the 3 year period. As such gearing ratio increase
significantly by 67.4%, this is a very alarming trend as the company is highly geared,
indicating high credit risk. Samsung gearing ratio has an increase trend but the level of
gearing at Samsung is relatively low as compared to apple (Arnold, 2013).
Apple Inc. plan for incurring debt could be two fold strategies. Apart from shares buy
back, it could be to utilise the benefits of tax shield arising from interest payment of debt.
This will in turn increase credit risk but reduce all other risks such as market risk, specifically
equity risk is reduce as more value is created due to tax shield. Moreover, it lowers liquidity
risk as the company has excess cash to satisfied short term financial needs and also lower
operational risk as the company will be able to hire more competent employees to reduce
people risk. Overall, the increase in credit risk is justifiable because it improves the company
ability to reduce other category of risk which could be more critical to its survival (Baker and
Nofsinger, 2010).
P a g e 19 | 26

Part4: Recommendations and Conclusion
The report concludes that Apple Inc large success is attributed to its effective
management of operational and financial risk. However, the company is still facing the risk
of political uncertainty in the US and legal compliance at an international level. The major
external risks that can impact the company performance are political and legal risks. In
addition to this, the presence of high competitive rivalry and barging power of buyers can
also impact its performance in the long-term. Therefore, the company is recommend to place
strong efforts for maintaining its competitive position in the global market by providing
unique quality electronic products and services to the customers for maintaining its loyal
customer base. Also, it needs to analyse the political and legal risk present in the business
environment and develop effective strategies in advance for their mitigation.
On the basis of overall financial analysis of Apple Inc. and its comparison with the
Samsung Electronics shows that financial performance of Apple Inc. has been very strong
with minimum or nominal risk of solvency, liquidity and market. Profitability position of
Apple Inc. has been very strongest as compared to its main competitor Samsung that makes it
clear that Apple has much better position in market as compared to Samsung. On the basis of
pestle and porter’s five forces it can be said that Apple Inc. has competitive edge against their
competitors. Apple Inc has been supported by government and has favourable market
condition to grow and succeed in the market. Liquidity position of Apple inc. was little lower
than the Samsung but that does not mean that Apple Inc. has short term credit risk. Apple Inc.
has greater debt equity ratio because Apple Inc. is continuously expanding their business and
also utilising the funds from debt capital to buy back the equity shares.
It is highly recommended for the investors to make investment in the Apple Inc.
because there has been high return and lower risk as compared to its main competitor. Also
Apple Inc. has competitive edge against their rivalries and all the external factors are in
P a g e 20 | 26

favour of Apple Inc. It allows Apple Inc. to grow at rapid speed and also reduces overall
financial risk that provide higher rate of return to the Shareholder.
P a g e 21 | 26

Part 5: References
Adninolfi, J. 2015. Apple saved $4.1 billion hedging against a rising dollar, says Stifel.
[Online]. Available at: https://www.marketwatch.com/story/apple-saved-41-billion-hedging-
against-a-rising-dollar-says-stifel-2015-12-14 [Accessed on: 10 May 2018].
Alam, N. 2015. A Critical Analysis Of Internal And External Environment Of Apple Inc.
[Online]. Available at: http://ijecm.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2015/06/3660.pdf [Accessed
on: 10 May 2018].
Angelique R. and Ellen T .2008. Apple Computer, Inc. [Online]. Available at:
www.loc.gov/rr/business/businesshistory/April/apple.html [Accessed on: 10 May 2018].
Annual report: Apple. 2015. [Online]. Available at: http://investor.apple.com/sec.cfm?
DocType=Annual&ndq_keyword [Accessed on: 10 May, 2018].
Annual report: Apple. 2016. [Online]. Available at: http://investor.apple.com/sec.cfm?
DocType=Annual&ndq_keyword [Accessed on: 10 May, 2018].
Annual report: Apple. 2017. [Online]. Available at: http://investor.apple.com/sec.cfm?
DocType=Annual&ndq_keyword [Accessed on: 10 May, 2018].
Annual report: Samsung. 2015. [Online]. Available at: http://www.samsung.com/global/ir/
[Accessed on: 10 May, 2018].
Annual report: Samsung. 2016. [Online]. Available at: http://www.samsung.com/global/ir/
[Accessed on: 10 May, 2018].
Annual report: Samsung. 2017. [Online]. Available at: http://www.samsung.com/global/ir/
[Accessed on: 10 May, 2018].
P a g e 22 | 26

Apple Inc. - The largest information technology company in the U.S. 2018. [Online].
Available at: http://uskings.us/news/us-records/apple-inc-the-largest-information-technology-
company-in-the-u-s [Accessed on: 10 May 2018].
Arnold, G., 2013. Corporate financial management. Pearson Higher Ed.
Baker, H.K. and Nofsinger, J.R. 2010. Behavioral Finance: Investors, Corporations, and
Markets. John Wiley & Sons.
Brealey, R., Myers, S.C. and Marcus, A.J., 2015. FundamentalsofCorporate Finance. Mc
Graw Hill, New York.
Brett H. 2017. Where would Apple and Google in rank terms of World’s Richest Countries?
[Online]. Available at: https://www.benzinga.com/news/17/05/9515019/where-would-apple-
and-google-rank-in-terms-of-worlds-richest-countries [Accessed on: 10 May 2018].
Brian R. 2015, Smartphones: Smart Chemistry. [Online]. Available at:
https://www.acs.org/content/acs/en/education/resources/highschool/chemmatters/past-
issues/archive-2014-2015/smartphones.html [Accessed on: 10 May 2018].
Brigham, F., and Michael C. 2013. Financial management: Theory & practice. Cengage
Learning.
Damodaran, A, 2011. Applied corporate finance. John Wiley & sons.
Davies, T. and Crawford, I., 2011. Business accounting and finance. Pearson.
Earl G. 2017. Apple vows to stop using rare earth minerals to build its electronics devices…
did it have a choice?. [Online]. Available at: https://www.naturalnews.com/2017-05-11-
apple-vows-to-stop-using-rare-earth-minerals-to-build-its-electronic-devices-did-it-have-a-
choice.html [Accessed on: 10 May 2018].
P a g e 23 | 26

Ferguson, E. 2017. Apple Inc. Five Forces Analysis (Porter’s Model). [Online]. Available at:
http://panmore.com/apple-inc-five-forces-analysis-porters-model-case-study Accessed on: 10
May 2018].
Fimarkets. 2018. The Operational Risk. [Online]. Available at:
https://www.fimarkets.com/pagesen/operational-risk.php. [Accessed on: 10 May 2018].
How Donald Trump is retooling politics for the 21st century. 2018. [Online]. Available at:
http://theconversation.com/how-donald-trump-is-retooling-politics-for-the-21st-century-
90836 [Accessed on: 10 May 2018].
John D. 2018. Apple PESTEL Analysis. [Online]. Available at: https://research-
methodology.net/apple-pestel-analysis-4/ [Accessed on: 10 May 2018].
Kim, T. 2018. Buy Apple because it could acquire more than $120 billion of its stock in two
years, UBS says. [Online]. Available at: https://www.cnbc.com/2018/01/08/buy-apple-
because-it-could-buy-back-more-than-120-billion-of-stock.html [Accessed on: 10 May
2018].
Lombardo, J. 2017. Apple Inc. PESTEL/PESTLE Analysis & Recommendations. [Online].
Available at: http://panmore.com/apple-inc-pestel-pestle-analysis-recommendations
[Accessed on: 10 May 2018].
Lumby,S and Jones,C. 2011. Corporate finance theory & practice. Thomson.
Madura, J. 2014. Financial Markets and Institutions. Cengage Learning.
Maverick J.B. 2018, Analyzing Porter’s Five Forces on Apple (AAPL). [Online]. Available
at: https://www.investopedia.com/articles/investing/111015/analyzing-porters-five-forces-
apple.asp [Accessed on: 10 May 2018].
Moles, P. and Kidwekk, D. 2011. Corporate finance. John Wiley &sons.
P a g e 24 | 26