COMPARATIVE BALANCE SHEET and INCOME STATEMENT The comparative balance sheet of the company reveals that during

2010 th ere has been an increase in fixed assets of P 811,490.00 or 10%. In December 201 0, SMFI offered for sale and subscription to the public Philippine peso-denomina ted fixed rate and floating rate notes with principal amount of P800.0 million a nd P3,700.0 million, respectively. Both types of notes have a term of five years and one day beginning on December 10, 2010 (Issue Date) and ending on December 11, 2015. The fixed rate note has a fixed interest rate of 5.4885% per annum whi le the floating rate note has a floating interest rate based on three-month PDST -F plus an agreed margin resulting in P 4,460,807.00 long term debt (net of debt issue costs). Proceeds from the issuance of the notes will be used to fund any expansion or any investment in new businesses by SMFI and for other general corp orate purposes. The current assets have increased by 12%, cash has increased by 78% and the current liabilities decreased by 7%. The carrying amounts of cash and cash e quivalents and receivables approximate fair values primarily due to the relative ly short-term maturities of these financial instruments. The carrying amounts of notes payable and trade payables and other current liabilities approximate fair values due to the relatively short-term maturities of these financial instrumen ts. These are the assumptions made by the management to estimate the fair value of each class of financial instruments. The over all financial position of the company is satisfactory. Revenues reached 79 billion, 6% higher than in 2009 while income from op erations grew to 5.9 billion, up by 27% from the previous year. As a result, Ear nings before interest, taxes, depreciation and amortization (EBITDA) rose 27% to 7.9 billion, and net income increased by 53% to 4 billion. The cost of sales has increased by 3%. This has resulted in increase of gross profit by 17.53%. Operating expenses have increased by 12.50%. The increas e in gross profit is sufficient to cover the operating expenses. There is also a n increase in net profit after tax of 52.68%. It is concluded from the above analysis that there is sufficient progres s in the performance of the company and the overall profitability of the company is good.

COMMON SIZE STATEMENTS AND TRENDS ANALYSIS An analysis pattern of financing of both the companies shows that Univer sal Robina is more traditionally financed as compared to San Miguel Purefoods. T he former company has depended more on its own funds as shown by balance sheet. San Miguel Purefoodss 32% out of 100% of its total liabilities and equity compris es trade payables and other current liabilities. Non-trade payables consist of f reight payable, contract growers/breeders fees, tolling fees, guarantee deposits, gift certificates payable and expenses payable. Others include tax-related and pa yroll-related accruals, accrued interest payable, and dividends payable and deri vative liabilities. Derivative liabilities included under Others amounted to P3.1 million and P13.4 million as at December 31, 2010 and 2009, respectively. While

in Universal Robina its long term debt is 17.16% of its total liabilities and eq uity compare to San Miguel Purefoods showing only 9%, meaning UR has depended mo re upon outsiders fund. Both the companies have good levels of working capitals. The percentage of current liabilities is less than the percentage of current assets in both com panies. On the whole 2010 is more profitable than 2009. In 2010 there is an incr ease in revenues as well as in gross profit. The figure in 2010 of the comparative income statement reveals that ther e is an increase of 5.63% in revenues, 17.53% in gross profit and 3% in cost of sales. This has resulted in almost half or 52.68% increase in net income.

RATIO ANALYSIS LIQUIDITY RATIO 1. Current Ratio = total current asssets total current liabilitiy 2010 2009 = 32, 069, 996 = 28, 595, 652 20, 480, 666 21, 950, 096 = 1.51 = 1.30 It is financially strong because they have 32, 062, 996 of total current assets to pay the 20, 480, 666 total current liability when it is due. 2. Quick Ratio = *total quick assets total current liabilities 2010 2009 = 14, 801, 616 = 12, 974, 299

20, 480, 666 21, 950, 096 = = *total quick assets 2010 Cash and cash equivalent 3, 950, 346 Trade and other receivables 9, 023, 096 2009 7, 041, 345 7, 760, 271 14, 801, 616 12, 974, 299 It is financially strong because they have 14, 801, 616 quick assets to pay all the short-term debts of the company and it is more liquid because they have high er quick assets than the inventories which is 12, 123, 435. 3. Working Capital to total assets = *working capital total assets 2010 2009 = 11, 584, 330 = 6, 645,556 47, 518, 089 40, 175, 873 = 0.24 = 0.17 0.59 0.72

*working capital = current assets- current liabilities 2010 2009 Current assets 28, 595, 652 Current liability (21, 950, 096) Working capital 6, 645, 556 32, 064 996 (20, 480, 666) 11, 584, 330

It is financially strong that the company can continue the operation because the y have 11, 584,330 working capital that can sell and receive payment for produc ts and services. DEBT RATIOS DR= 25,300,091/47,518,089 = 0.53 Purefoods has financed more than half of its assets with debt. A/E = 47,518,089/22,217,998 = 2.14 The resulting value indicates that Purefoods assets in 2010 is 2 times greater t han its equity. D/E = 4,460,870/22,217,998 = 0.20 The companys long term debts are therefore only 20% as large as it stockholders eq uity. TIE = 5,532, 511/359,415 = 15.39 The times interest earned ratio for Purefoods in 2010 indicates that the firm co

uld experience substantial decline in profit on earnings but can still meet its interest obligation.