FINA 408 Individual Final Company Analysis Project-- Waste Management Inc. Analysis
The paper is graded on a 100-point scale. The following describes the breakdown of points available:
25 points for ORGANIZATION
This is a long and complicated paper, so it is essential that you are organized in your presentation of the information. Please be sure to present each item in the order suggested by the outline and have clear headings and sub-headings to make it easy to follow. Also, it is important to organize the paper in a way that prevents the reader from having to flip back and forth from one section to another to follow the discussion (e.g., ensure that each ratio/calculation is discussed immediately after it is presented, rather than having a separate table elsewhere in the report.
25 points for ANALYSIS
To receive the full amount of points for this category, be sure to provide thorough discussion of your analysis process and an explanation of what the ratio/calculation means. It is important to demonstrate that you have a good understanding of why each calculation was done, and what information can be learned from it. Also, in this section I remove points for any situation where I feel that the analysis presented is not the students’ original work (i.e., taken from another source without attribution.) While you can certainly refer to other analysts’ work regarding your company, please be sure to conduct your own analyses and draw your own conclusions throughout the paper. If citations are not provided for others’ analyses in several instances throughout the paper, the appropriate academic sanctions will be imposed.
25 points for THOROUGHNESS
In order to receive the full amount of points available for this portion of the paper, you must include every item listed on the general outline provided at the beginning of the course. Points will be removed if any item is missing from the analysis.
25 points for CONTENT
In this category, I am assessing the extent to which the entire report provides a complete analysis of the company, utilizing the steps we practiced throughout the course. Do you tie it all together with connecting themes and findings? Or, is it just a list of the various calculations with a sentence or two in between explaining each. A successful paper will present a congruous and thorough analysis of the company with insightful and thoughtful commentary throughout.
Waste Management Inc. Analysis
Waste Management Inc. Analysis
Purpose of Project
This paper is a comprehensive evaluation of the Waste Management Inc., with a specific emphasis on its communication and corporate strategies, financial health, and strategic analysis. The research will be based on factual information published by the company and other reputable sources. Specifically, the paper will draw from such sources as the company’s 10K SEC filings, proxy statements, and other corporate publications to delve into its different aspects highlighted above. The financial aspect of the company will be evaluated from 2015 to 2017, in a bid to present the real picture of the company’s financial performance and form a basis for a three-year forecast.
Description of the Company
As such, it is imperative to start by describing the company expostulated upon in this project. Waste Management Inc. is a holding company founded in 1971 and incorporated on April 28, 1995. It is headquartered in Houston, Texas. Through its subsidiaries, the company provides waste management environmental services which span three countries which are the U.S, Canada and Puerto Ricco (Waste Management Inc., 2018a). The company focuses Solid Waste management, Strategic Business Solutions, landfill gas-to-energy operations, recycling brokerage services among other operations which have a connection with the environment. Essentially, the company collaborates with its customers in managing and reducing waste at each stage from collection to disposal. Additionally, it recovers valuable resources and uses them to create valuable renewable energy. As at the start of 2017, the company operated 243 solid waste landfills as well as five secure hazardous waste landfills (Waste Management Inc., 2018a). Additionally, the company operates 293 active landfill disposal site, 367 collection operations, 346 transfer stations, 111 beneficial-use landfill gas projects, 146 recycling plants and six independent power production plants (Waste Management Inc., 2018a). The company boasts of the largest trucking fleet in the waste industry which encompasses 26,000 collection and transfer vehicles which enables it, together with its main competitor, Republic Services, Inc., to handle more than half of all garbage collection and recycling in the United States of America (Bloomberg, 2018).
Governance and Communication Analysis
The company’s current CEO is James C Fish who succeeded his predecessor; David P. Steiner in the year 2016. However, James C Fish does not head the company’s board of directors. In retrospect, Waste Management Inc.’s nine member board of directors is headed by Bradbury (Brad) H. Anderson as from February 27, 2017 (Waste Management Inc., 2018a). In making the decision to have a CEO and also a chairman for the board of directors, the company made a wise decision. The CEO is a company's top decision-maker focusing on strategic issue such as the operations to implement to gain competitive advantage and all other executives answer to him or her whereas the chairman is responsible for protecting investors' interests which encompasses ensure ng the company’s stability and profitability. The balance of power between the CEO and the chairman ensures that that there is accountability and adherence to responsibility in leadership and hence ensure that a company is led effectively to actualize its objectives (Waste Management Inc., 2018a).
Audit Committee Membership
The board’s Audit Committee is made up of six independent members of the board of directors. (Waste Management Inc., 2018b). The members of the company’s audit committee include Mr. Gross, who is the chairman, and other members, including Messrs. Anderson, Clark, Gluski, and Weidemeyer and Ms. Holt. It is also imperative to note that all the members of the committee have satisfactorily met the requirements of the NYSE independence standards for audit committees as outlined in Section 10A of the exchange Act. It is also critical to highlight that, all the six members of the audit committee are qualified audit committee financial experts. The ascertainment of their audit committee financial expertise is rooted on their different academic achievements as well as vast experiences in finance and public companies (Waste Management, Inc., 2018b). For instance, Mr. Gross is a qualified engineer with a MBA from the Stanford University Graduate School of Business and other qualifications. He also possesses vast business experience from previous tenures, including those at American Management Systems Inc., and The Lovell group. Anderson is a graduate from the University of Denver while Clark and Gluski are graduates from DePaul University and University of Virginia respectively. Moreover, they all possess vast business experiences. Therefore, I agree with the designations of the different individuals who serve in the company’s audit committee due to their outstanding qualifications and demonstrated abilities to serve in the committee.
Common Stock- Outstanding
It is evident that the company only operates one class of common stock outstanding. As at the close of the financial year 2017, on 8th February 2018, the company total number of common stock outstanding ($0.01 par value) was 433,673,878 shares (Waste Management, Inc., 2018a). It is imperative to note that, according to the company’s proxy statement, every shareholder is entitled to a single vote since the company operates one class of stocks. Moreover, the common stockholders do not have cumulative voting rights. Overall, the company’s voting rights are entirely vested and controlled by the board of directors (Waste Management, 2015).
It is imperative to note that the company’s shareholding is significantly dominated by institutional shareholders, who cumulatively own up to 76.22% of the total portfolio. For instance, the Vanguard Group Inc. is the...