M&As and ESG = PROFIT?

SPONSOR

http://www.MARCINKOASSOCIATES.com

By Staff Reporters

***

***

Companies’ ESG efforts can prove profitable when it comes to M&As, according to a recent KPMG US ESG survey, which showed that 41% of business leaders see ESG as a major source of financial value during M&As.

ESG: https://medicalexecutivepost.com/2023/03/27/on-socially-responsible-investing-2/

The survey polled 201 business leaders with ESG responsibilities at companies with more than $1 billion in revenue. Respondents were asked to rate how much value ESG brought them in different areas on a seven-point scale. KPMG interpreted scores of six or seven as indicative of major financial value.

Maybe Not: https://medicalexecutivepost.com/2023/07/18/esg-investing-reversal-of-fortune/

The findings are in line with KPMG’s recent ESG Due Diligence Survey, which found that ESG weaknesses can spell trouble during M&As. In that survey, 53% of corporate investors said they had canceled business deals because of ESG weaknesses uncovered during due diligence. A recent BDO survey likewise found that more than 80% of private equity fund managers have walked away from a deal due to ESG concerns.

VENTURE CAPITAL: https://marcinkoassociates.com/fmv-appraisals/

***

COMMENTS APPRECIATED

Thank You

***

***

RELATED TEXTBOOKS

DOCTORS:

“Insurance & Risk Management Strategies for Doctors” https://tinyurl.com/ydx9kd93

“Fiduciary Financial Planning for Physicians” https://tinyurl.com/y7f5pnox

“Business of Medical Practice 2.0” https://tinyurl.com/yb3x6wr8

HOSPITALS:

“Financial Management Strategies for Hospitals” https://tinyurl.com/yagu567d

“Operational Strategies for Clinics and Hospitals” https://tinyurl.com/y9avbrq5

***

Socially Responsible and ESG Investing!

S.R.I.

[By Rick Kahler CFP®]

The concept of socially responsible investing is far from new; the first SRI fund appeared in 1952. Since then, these funds have used social and ethical screens to exclude companies selling products like tobacco, alcohol, or firearms.

You may not have heard of the next generation of SRI funds, called ESG funds, which means environmental, social and governance funds. Social responsibility is just one-third of the expanded focus of these funds, which also look to include companies that are sensitive to the environment and have more holistic corporate governance.

Updates

In recent years, ESG investing has exploded. According to a July 11, 2018, article in Forbes, The Remarkable Rise of ESG, by Georg Kell, over $20 trillion is invested in ESG funds. This accounts for 25% of all the professionally managed assets in the world. There are currently 275 ESG mutual funds and ETF’s from which to choose.

Yet one facet of investing in ESG funds is widely misunderstood. While ESG investing may help you feel better about yourself, it does not actually impact or hamper the companies you choose not to own.

This may come as a surprise to many ESG investors, who commonly believe that by not owning the shares of an offensive company they are restricting the flow of capital to that company, thereby imperiling its existence. For the most part, that isn’t the case.

The offenders

Listed among the worst offending companies by several ESG organizations are Philip Morris, WalMart, Tyson Foods, Pepsi Corporation, Coca-Cola, and Chevron. No dedicated ESG investors would have these companies in their portfolios. None of these companies would care or be hurt in the least if you didn’t own any of their shares.

Why?

The only time a company benefits from a sale of stock is when the company initially goes public (called an initial public offering, or IPO) or issues additional new shares to raise capital. These are actually fairly rare events.

Most stocks are bought and sold in the “secondary” market through exchanges like the New York Stock Exchange. These platforms facilitate transactions between individuals or institutions wanting to buy or sell shares in a company. The money moves between the buyer and the seller; none of the money goes to the company.

Another way companies receive funding to support their ventures is to borrow money from investors. This is called issuing a bond and is similar to an IPO, only the investor receives a promise from the company to pay them back at some future date and receives interest on the loan in the meantime.

Just like stocks, bonds are only issued by a company once. From then on, buying and selling bonds is done on the open market, and none of the money paid or received goes to the company.

So if you want to punish a company, don’t buy stocks or bonds it issues directly. Otherwise, excluding its shares from your portfolio has no effect on the company’s profits or cash flow.

***

big

***

Assessment

But if no one bought a company’s shares on the secondary market, wouldn’t that have an impact? Yes, it most certainly would. If the demand for the shares of a company dried up, the company’s stock price would plummet.

The problem is the demand for the shares of these companies isn’t going away as long as they remain profitable. If 25% of investors purchase ESG funds,  that leaves 75% of the market willing to buy these companies. This includes the 20% of stocks owned by passive index funds, which own the entire market.

CONCLUSION

Your thoughts and comments on this ME-P are appreciated. Feel free to review our top-left column, and top-right sidebar materials, links, URLs and related websites, too. Then, subscribe to the ME-P. It is fast, free and secure.

Speaker: If you need a moderator or speaker for an upcoming event, Dr. David E. Marcinko; MBA – Publisher-in-Chief of the Medical Executive-Post – is available for seminar or speaking engagements.

Book Marcinko: https://medicalexecutivepost.com/dr-david-marcinkos-bookings/

Subscribe: MEDICAL EXECUTIVE POST for curated news, essays, opinions and analysis from the public health, economics, finance, marketing, IT, business and policy management ecosystem.

DOCTORS:

“Insurance & Risk Management Strategies for Doctors” https://tinyurl.com/ydx9kd93

“Fiduciary Financial Planning for Physicians” https://tinyurl.com/y7f5pnox

“Business of Medical Practice 2.0” https://tinyurl.com/yb3x6wr8

HOSPITALS:

“Financial Management Strategies for Hospitals” https://tinyurl.com/yagu567d

“Operational Strategies for Clinics and Hospitals” https://tinyurl.com/y9avbrq5

***

Risk Management, Liability Insurance, and Asset Protection Strategies for Doctors and Advisors: Best Practices from Leading Consultants and Certified Medical Planners™8Comprehensive Financial Planning Strategies for Doctors and Advisors: Best Practices from Leading Consultants and Certified Medical Planners™

SOCIAL IMPACT INVESTING AND THE MSFT CORPORATION?

SOCIAL IMPACT INVESTING & THE MODERN CORPORATION?

Courtesy: https://lnkd.in/eBf-4vY

Microsoft to Erase its Carbon Footprint by 2030?

Microsoft Corporation [MSFT] just said it aims to remove more carbon from the atmosphere than it emits by 2030 and that by 2050, it hopes to have taken out enough to account for all the direct emissions the company has ever made.

QUERY: So, what is the purpose of a modern corporation today? Has it changed and who does it serve – Shareholders -OR- Stakeholders?

ESSAY: https://lnkd.in/ehwyC22

Assessment: Your thoughts and comments are appreciated.

BUSINESS, FINANCE, INVESTING & INSURANCE TEXTS FOR DOCTORS:

1 – https://lnkd.in/ebWtzGg

2 – https://lnkd.in/ezkQMfR

3 – https://lnkd.in/ewJPTJs

THANK YOU

Product DetailsProduct Details

***

On Socially Responsible Investing

Join Our Mailing List

Balancing profits, people and the planet

Rick Kahler MS CFP

By Rick Kahler MS CFP®  http://www.KahlerFinancial.com

Balancing profits, people, and the planet can be tricky. Many physicians and other investors prefer to put their funds into companies that not only make money, but that also reflect the investors’ values. Some take this concept, often described as “socially conscious” or “socially responsible” investing, very seriously. There are also financial advisors who specialize in this niche.

Yet investing in companies whose values align with your own is not as simple as it may seem.

Business owners and corporate executives

In my experience with business owners and corporate executives, most of them take an interest in bettering the people who work with them, the planet, and their own lives. They run their companies with integrity. They don’t break the law. They respect their customers and don’t take advantage of them, but give them fair value in exchange for their money. They offer compensation and working conditions that will attract and retain good employees. Ultimately, they understand that ethical business practices are not only the right thing to do, but the best way to run profitable businesses.

But, how do you as an investor know whether a company is bettering  people and the planet while it is making a profit? One method is to choose companies in which to invest by using some type of socially responsible screening. Such screening looks to exclude companies producing products that harm people or the earth, or companies judged to have poor corporate cultures.

The challenges

One challenge with using such screens is that we don’t all have the same definitions of what may be socially or morally offensive. Investor A may not want to own stock in oil or mining companies. Investor B may be concerned about goods produced in unsafe working conditions. Investor C may not want to support companies that sell tobacco or alcohol.

A second challenge is that companies change. They may expand, diversify, or merge with other companies until it’s difficult to pinpoint their values, products, and company culture. A company may sell a lot of great products that do a lot of good for people, but have one division that produces a product some investors may find offensive. And it’s even harder to screen for companies that have good cultures—especially since there’s no clear definition of a “good” culture.

Choices

Investors can choose mutual funds that include only socially responsible companies, but any such fund is almost guaranteed to include companies that you would otherwise exclude.

If you are serious about investing only in companies that support your values, it’s essential to research them before you invest and monitor them regularly to ensure their practices or products don’t change. You also may find it necessary to give companies or SRI funds a little leeway—settling for perhaps 95% compliance with your values rather than insisting on 100%.

But sadly, even if you could invest your money in the shares of companies that totally support your values, doing so may not have much impact on that company, its people, or the planet. One reason for this is that your investment is likely to be a miniscule fraction of the company’s stock.

In addition, most often when we invest in stocks, we do not buy shares directly from the company. We buy shares, through a stock exchange, that are being sold by other investors. The profits or losses involved in trading those stocks accrue to the third-party buyers and sellers. They don’t directly affect the company’s bottom line.

***

gv

***

Assessment

For most small investors, making a difference through socially responsible investing may be an illusory goal. Its only real impact may be to help us feel better about ourselves.

Conclusion

Your thoughts and comments on this ME-P are appreciated. Feel free to review our top-left column, and top-right sidebar materials, links, URLs and related websites, too. Then, subscribe to the ME-P. It is fast, free and secure.

Speaker: If you need a moderator or speaker for an upcoming event, Dr. David E. Marcinko; MBA – Publisher-in-Chief of the Medical Executive-Post – is available for seminar or speaking engagements. Contact: MarcinkoAdvisors@msn.com

OUR OTHER PRINT BOOKS AND RELATED INFORMATION SOURCES:

***

[WHERE LEARNING IS A plus+]

Career Development, Products and Services

“The informed voice of a new generation of fiduciary advisors for healthcare”

CMP logo

http://www.CertifiedMedicalPlanner.org 

 Our New Text – “Take a Peek Inside – Now Available

Comprehensive Financial Planning Strategies for Doctors and Advisors: Best Practices from Leading Consultants and Certified Medical Planners(TM)

Front Matter with Foreword by Jason Dyken MD MBA

logos

“BY DOCTORS – FOR DOCTORS – PEER REVIEWED – FIDUCIARY FOCUSED”

***