Comparison Of Fixed Asset Turnover Ratios Between BB&B And P

Comparison of Fixed Asset Turnover Ratios Between BB B and Pier 1

Comparison of Fixed Asset Turnover Ratios Between BB&B and Pier 1

The assignment prompts students to analyze and compare financial ratios, specifically the fixed asset turnover ratio, of a particular company (in this case, Bed Bath & Beyond, abbreviated as BB&B) with another company in the same industry to understand their operational efficiency and asset management strategies. The core task involves selecting an appropriate comparison company, justifying this choice, and interpreting what the comparison reveals about each company's performance.

In the provided example, the student calculates BB&B's fixed asset turnover ratio for 2011 as 7.8355, indicating that for every dollar invested in fixed assets, the company generates approximately $7.84 in sales. To contextualize this figure, the student compares it against BB&B's historical ratios from previous years, which were lower (around 6.35 to 6.90), demonstrating improvement over time. Furthermore, the student compares BB&B’s ratio to that of Pier 1 Imports, another competitor, whose ratio in 2011 was significantly higher at 23.1568, reflecting a far greater efficiency in using fixed assets to generate sales.

This comparison is meaningful because it highlights differences in operational efficiency between the two companies. Pier 1's higher ratio suggests it is more effective at leveraging its fixed assets to produce sales, possibly due to differences in business models, inventory management, or asset utilization strategies. The comparison indicates that although BB&B has improved its ratio and is making strides in asset management, the company still lags behind its competitor, revealing potential areas for operational improvements and more effective asset utilization.

Analysis of the Comparison and Its Implications

Choosing Pier 1 as a comparison company is appropriate because both BB&B and Pier 1 operate within the home furnishings retail industry, which involves significant investments in fixed assets such as inventory, store fixtures, and warehouse equipment. The industries' similarities—for example, reliance on retail locations and inventory turnover—make the ratio comparison meaningful. Such benchmarking helps identify relative strengths and weaknesses, guiding strategic decisions.

The markedly higher ratio for Pier 1 could imply several strategic differences. Pier 1 might have a more aggressive or effective inventory management system, higher sales volume relative to its fixed assets, or perhaps a business model that emphasizes higher turnover of its assets. Conversely, BB&B’s lower ratio might suggest a more conservative approach to asset investment or challenges in converting its fixed assets into sales efficiently. While a higher fixed asset turnover ratio generally indicates better utilization of assets, it must also be considered in the context of profitability, inventory turnover, and overall financial health. For instance, an excessively high ratio might indicate aggressive asset utilization that could compromise quality or customer service.

From a managerial perspective, analyzing these ratios enables strategic decisions related to asset acquisition, disposal, or leasing strategies. It also influences operational measures such as store layouts, inventory levels, and supply chain efficiencies. Recognizing the gap with competitors like Pier 1 encourages BB&B to explore best practices and implement strategies that enhance asset productivity without compromising customer experience or long-term growth.

Conclusion

In summary, comparing BB&B’s fixed asset turnover ratio with that of Pier 1 provides valuable insight into operational efficiency and asset management within the retail industry. While BB&B shows a positive trend in improving its ratio, the stark difference with Pier 1's higher ratio underscores opportunities for enhancing asset utilization. This comparison illustrates the importance of industry benchmarks and competitive analysis in strategic planning. Future improvements in fixed asset management, possibly through better inventory control, store optimization, or technological integration, can help BB&B close the gap and improve overall financial performance.

References

  • Assets, Fixed. (2016). "Bed Bath & Beyond Inc." Growth, Profitability, and Financial Ratios for (BBBY) from Morningstar.com. Retrieved April 20, 2016, from https://www.morningstar.com
  • Annual Reports & Proxy Statements. (2016). "Pier 1 Imports." Annual Reports & Proxy Statements. Retrieved April 20, 2016, from https://www.sec.gov
  • Higgins, R. C. (2012). Analysis for Financial Management. McGraw-Hill Education.
  • Brigham, E. F., & Ehrhardt, M. C. (2016). Financial Management: Theory & Practice. Cengage Learning.
  • Ross, S. A., Westerfield, R. W., & Jordan, B. D. (2013). Fundamentals of Corporate Finance. McGraw-Hill Education.
  • Gibson, C. H. (2012). Financial Reporting & Analysis. Cengage Learning.
  • Weygandt, J. J., Kimmel, P. D., & Kieso, D. E. (2015). Financial Accounting. Wiley.
  • DeFusco, R. A., McLeavey, D., Pinto, J. E., & Runkle, D. E. (2015). Quantitative Investment Analysis. CFA Institute Investment Series.
  • Clarke, C. (2015). Business Ratios and Formulas: A Comprehensive Guide for Managers. McGraw-Hill Education.
  • Kaplan, R. S., & Norton, D. P. (2004). Measuring the Strategic Readiness of Intangible Assets. Harvard Business Review.

Related Assignments