HACS Company: Detailed Financial Analysis and Performance (2010-2013)

This report presents a financial analysis of HACS Company from 2010 to 2013, focusing on revenue, expenses, net profit, and dividend payouts. It examines investor expectations, borrowings, share buybacks, and key financial ratios such as interest coverage and debt-to-assets. The report also assesses operational aspects like plant decisions, production levels, inventory management, and worker productivity. Furthermore, it discusses initiatives for efficient productivity, investments, and their impact. The learning and development strategies employed by HACS are explored, along with marketing efforts and their impact on customer engagement. The conclusion highlights the company's marketing position and financial improvements, particularly noting the peak performance in 2012. The executive summary reiterates the company's overall progress and favorable financial figures in 2013.

Your Company Name
Executive Meeting – 2011 Results
Marketing Manager – Your Name(s)
Operations Manager – Your Name (s)
Human Resources Manager – Your Name (s)
NOTE: You are all Financial Managers

TABLE OF CONTENT
• FINANCIAL SUMMARY
• INVESTOR EXPECTATIONS
• FINANCIAL ANALYSIS
• OPERATIONS
• LEARNING AND DEVELOPMENT
• MARKETING (CUSTOMERS)
• CONCLUSION
• REFERENCES

Financial Summary
Total Revenue-
• The total revenues of the HACS has been
432646$. in 2010 but it made a strategic
change in 2011 discontinued P-Lable.
Total Expenses
• In 2010 it was 392646, in 2011 554819,
and for 2012 it has been 763304 and in
2013 531827 so the organization was able
to reduce the overall expenses. it can be
seen that the organization has occurred
higher total expensed.
432646
453530
485343
563701
Total Revenue
2010 2011 2012 2013
3926
46
554819
763304
531827
Total expenses
2010 2011 2012 2013

Continued…
Net Profit
• For the year 2010 it was 40000,
2011 it has been 13416 and for
2012 it was 71811 so from this
analysis is can be seen that the
profits got down in the year 2011.
Dividend paid
• In 2010 it paid dividend of 20000
and in 2011 paid 30000 but in the
year 2012 it has been null. 2010 2011 2012 2013
0
5000
10000
15000
20000
25000
30000
35000
20000
30000
0 0
Dividend paid
2010 2011 2012 2013
0
20000
40000
60000
80000
40000
13416
71811 66052
Net profit

Investor Expectations
2010 (weighted average) 2011 2012 2013
EPS 2 2.28 4.45 3.30
ROE 20% 22.6% 37.7% 20.7%
Credit rating B B+ C+ B
Stock price 30 44.02 83.09 36.42
Image rating 70 88 67 75

70
8867
75
Image rating
2010 (weighted average) 2011
2012 2013

Financial Analysis
Borrowings
• It can be seen that for the year 2010 the long term loans were 97200 but in the year 2011 it
jumped to 157500 and for the year 2012 it has been 140000.
Share buybacks
• In the year 2010 it was 0 so the organization did not do anything. for 2011 it has been again 0
and in 2012 it brought shares of 46800.
Reasons for variances
• It can be seen that the profits of the organization for the year 2010 was 40000 and for 2011 it
has been 13416 and at the end for the year 2012 it was 71811, at the end for the year 2013 it
has been 66052 so the key reason behind this was interest cost which had been -16261.
Key ratios – explain and discuss
• Interest coverage ratio for 2010 was 6.62, for 2011 was 8.49 and for the year 2012 has been
5.55 and for 2013 it was 6.80.
• Debt to assets ratio has been for the year 2010= 0.39, 2011= 4.11 and for the year 2012 2012
was 0.51. and for 2013 it has been 0.29%.

Operations
Plant decisions?
• The overall fixed assets have been 244710 in 2010 which jumped to 294238 and for
the year 2012 it has been 271408 so the organization and in 2013 it has been 313885.
Production levels and capacity?
• In the year 2010 it has produced of 432646 in term of revenue from sales, in 2011=
455429 and 2012= 532479. So it can be said that the organization is not working on
its capacity.
Inventory?
• in the year 2010 it was 0, in 2011= 24000, and 2012= 0 but in 2013 it was again 0.
SO it can be concluded that the performing or operational efficiency is going up.
Worker productivity?
• On the basis of the profit generations it can be said that the productivity of workers
got improved in the year 2012-2013. In this year the inventory amount has been 0
and the profits were at their highest level.

Operations
• Initiatives undertaken to achieve efficient productivity
• The organization has taken some initiates such as it made its borrowing higher
in 2011 but it caused losses so in the year 2012 it has been toppled.
•
• Investments made and their effect on productivity
• It has borrowed higher in 2011 and made investments but it did not result as
same as expected so the policy was changed and attention got shifted to retain
earnings. in 2012 the DPS has been 0 and entire profit amount was retained by
the organization. Again in 2013 it kept the DPS.
•
• Link of decision with main strategy
• The decision can be linked with its strategy. as it can be seen that in the year
2011 the borrowing or long term loan amount has been higher so it can be
deciphered that the organization was striving to expand its operations.

Learning and development
• Strategies that has been used by H.A.C.S can make use of in order to
improve their worker engagement such as Top Quality Mange men
framework can be used in order to build long term success of its
employees that include both top and lower level executives.
• The main principle of TQM is to gain customer satisfaction as well as
it allows member to participate in enhancing products and services in
which it work.
• Moreover, another strategy that has been used by H.A.C.S is
incentive in bonus which is one of the most common tactic for
increasing the moral of the employees as well as to collaborate with
them (Rasool and et.al., 2021).

Marketing (Customers)
• In year of 2010 company has invested in Brand operation that have grown in
year of 2011 as compared to 2010 that represent if production cost is
decrease than there will be increase in supply.
• Moreover, if manufacture cost has increased then there will be less material
sold in the same price (Morgan and et.al., 2019).
• In year of 2011 there has been good brand recognition as compare to 2010
as company has made use of good strategic alliance such as high quality
content, SEO and marketing campaign.
• Along with this, in year of 2013 it has been sees that company has invested
less in the brand operation but rating was good compare to last year.

Conclusion
• From the above report it can be state that marketing
position of company is very good and due to that it is
able to attract large customer.
• In addition to this, it has been concluded that
financial position of the company has been improving
from year to year and in 2012 it was in the best
position.