论文代写价格-流动性比率的短期债务衡量。流动性比率是衡量一个公司在短期内偿还债务能力的财务比率。因此，这是对短期偿债能力的考验。明显的研究表明，流动性会对债务比率产生负面影响，因为流动性比率较高的组织会利用这些来为投资融资。非金融性质的中小企业在英国环境中通过使用短期债务比长期债务面临流动资金的需求,这意味着低流动性将显示结果的比率高短期债务依赖组织,以满足他们当前的义务。Laureano等人(2012)同时描述了流动性比率较高的组织更倾向于发行长期债务而不是短期债务(Alter and Schijler, 2012)。当组织产生必要的现金流时，股东和管理者之间的冲突就开始恶化。据以及和詹森(1986)和(1990),它已经表明,组织更高的现金流有倾向发行债务,以沉溺于纪律和激励经理人努力地工作和采取正确的投资决策,而不是沉溺于浪费这样的项目内的现金流低于资本成本。本篇论文代写价格-流动性比率的短期债务衡量分享给留学生阅读。
The ratio of liquidity is a ratio of finance which indulges in measuring the ability of a company to meet the liabilities in the short term. And therefore, it is a test of solvency in the short term. The evident research suggests that liquidity indulges in having a negative influence on ratios of debt, as organizations with higher ratios of liquidity would utilize these towards financing of investment (Harris et al., 1991). The small and medium enterprises of non-financial nature within UK context are featured through use of more short term debt than long term debt so as to face the needs of working capital, which implies that low ratios of liquidity will indicate consequently high short term debt dependence for organizations to meet their current obligations. On the contrary, as per the reports of CBF (2012), the initial business cause towards default over its debts is the inadequacy of liquidity, so low ratios of liquidity might be regarded through the external creditors. As such, organizations have more likeliness towards defaults. Laureano et al., (2012), at the same time, depicted that organizations with higher ratios of liquidity have a preference towards issuing long term debts instead of short term debts (Alter and Schijler, 2012). The conflict present between shareholders and also managers start to worsen when organizations generate essential flow of cash. According to Stulz and Jensen (1986) and (1990), it has been indicated that organizations with higher flow of cash have a tendency of issuing higher debt, so as to indulge in discipline and motivate managers for working in a hard manner and to take the correct decisions of investment rather than indulging in wasting such flows of cash within projects that are below the capital cost. Mira and Garcia (2003), in a more detailed and recent research studied the SMEs across Spain and it was found that there is a negative type of relationship between flow of cash and debts as organizations mostly prefer to finance their investments with inner funds generation rather than access of external debts (Hall et al., 2004). Poza and Kishida (2004), moreover presented argument that problems of agency between managers and shareholders have a tendency to be not essential within non-financial firms of UK, as the managers are the owners of the companies in most of the cases. This is particularly true for small and medium enterprises.
Within the late half of 1950s, Modigliani et al. (1960), proposed that the decisions of finances are not relevant to the values of firm under the perfect capita market condition. Within a perfect market, there are not any costs for agency, taxes costs of finance distress and costs of bankruptcy (Ariff, Taufiq and Shamsher, 2008). Under such assumptions, financing of internal and external nature might be apparent as a substitute of perfect nature (Hsiao, 2007). After such influenced findings, research of capital structure has focused over whether decisions of finances have become relevant when the assumptions involve relaxed perspective. Several views can further be advanced wherein the methods to finance considerations exist.And within capital structure determinants, there are several theories playing an essential role. 2 of the theories which will be discussed in this perspective are trade off theories and theories of pecking order.