Corporate financial policy and the

value of cash

This research report tells, the which financial policies

formed by different firms in the case of cash flows are
more frequent and what effects its produce according to
the nature of the firm. The firms which strong growth
opportunity, riskier cash flows, and more limited access
to capital markets hold higher cash balance. The marginal
value of cash declines with large cash holdings. A small
increase in cash reserves partially goes to increasing debt
value, not solely to increase equity value. The marginal
value of cash should decline as cash holdings increase
because as the cash position of the firm improves, firms
become more likely to distribute funds and less likely to
raise cash. Marginal value should be effected by liquidity,
debts, capital structure, and the firm type consolidated or
unconsolidated. Some of them have less opportunity for
external gains so its very important to expand business.
Another situation which is cash flows distributed as a
dividend and to repurchase stock. Different organizational
structure behaves Nemours under same circumstances.
THIS refers to the article `Banking on military justice` (March 8) by
Zahid Husain on the issue of outsourcing the important
responsibility of justice to the military.

What is the use of so many judicial officers when they cannot

discharge their duties? Why don`t we align our judicial system with
the military, which is known for quick and timely delivery of justice?
Isn`t it unfair and hypocritical on our part that on the one hand, we
decry military interventions and then, on the other, we burden them
with more responsibilities? Why did we fail to deliberate on the
restructuring of our criminal justice system? Our politicians have
miserably failed to live up to their lofty promises and they must not
malign the military for their sheer ineptitude. Amid many
mindboggling versions, we have been fed with stories that it is
military which desperately wants the revival of the military courts.

But politicians skillfully hide their own lack of will and interest in
revamping the judicial system. Isn`t it sheer negligence to
deliberately ignore the issue? Is it only the military which should
fight the war on terror? If the military justice system lacks openness,
is against the established principles of the international law and the
general jurisprudence of our own courts, why then do our parliament
and senate pay lip-service to the issue? Why don`t we fix
responsibilities and move on? Why do we prove to our enemies that
we are wilful fools? Muhammad ArifKhan Lahore