(1) The sheets in this Excel file illustrate how financial analysts at leading investment banks determine fair

values per share using standard and Monte Carlo discounted cash flow models. We used Baidu.com (ticker: BIDU) as an example. Baidu.com is the No. 1 search engine in China known as "Google of China". The models are discussed in detail in Part I and Part II of Viebig et al., Models of Leading Investment Banks, Wiley (2) Please note that the Monte Carlo Free Cash Flow to the Firm (MCFCFF) models provided in this Excel sheet only run on your computer if Palisade's @Risk is installed properly on your PC. @Risk software is a sophisticated add-in to Microsoft Excel. You can download a trial version of @Risk from Palisade's webpage: (3) Inputs of discounted cash flow (DCF) models are highly uncertain, especially, if companies are at a very early stage of their life cycle like Baidu.com. The example illustrates why we recommend using Monte Carlo simulation when valuing equities. Monte Carlo simulation allows analysts to incorporate uncertainty into the valuation framework. (4) The models are for educational purposes only. Please do not make investment decisions on the basis of these models: The models are based on public information, but are not necessarily accurate, complete, and reliable. We will not update the input variables of the models provided in this Excel sheet when new information becomes available. In addition, never confuse fair values with market prices. Market prices can deviate longer from fair values than you are liquid. Please note that the author of these models works as a portfolio manager for DWS Investment GmbH, an affiliate of Deutsche Bank. Please assume that investment professionals are always guided by selfinterests when they talk or write about investments. The author and his current employer buy and sell shares of Baidu.com and might be involved in investment banking and other business relationships with

This sheet shows how analysts at leading investment banks estimated the fair value per share (cell D31) of Baidu.com in Fall 2005. to illustrate the structure of a standard FCFF model. The model is discussed in detail in: Viebig et al., Models of Leading Investment

in thousands of RMB (if not otherwise stated) For the Year Ended December 31, Growth in net revenues Total net revenues in thousands of RMB EBIT (adjusted) margin EBIT (adjusted) tax rate [% of EBIT (adjusted)] EBIT(1-t) adjusted plus total D&A minus total NWC less cash minus total Capex FCFF Discount factor (WACC): Discounted FCFF (1) Sum of discounted FCFF (2) Terminal value FCFF in T TV growth rate TV discount factor (WACC) (3) Non operating assets (4) Long-term debt Enterprise value (1)+(2)+(3)+(4): RMB/USD Enterprise value in million USD Number of shares outstanding (diluted) [in million] Fair value per share in USD

Year t-1 2003 38,638 -11% -4,186 0% 4,888 11,590

Year 0 2004 187% 110,909 25% 27,514 2% 9,943 17,281

1 2005E 149% 275,609 22% 60,648 9% 55,387 30,667 41,667 (81,000) 46,720 1.13 41,345 2,430,567 5,674,107 327,352 4% 10% 957,000 0 9,061,674 8.11 1,117 32 34.9

2 2006E 70% 467,157 29% 137,451 9% 125,144 42,000 46,333 (65,667) 147,811 1.28 115,758

3 2007E 58% 33% 244,564 9% 222,648 52,333 65,000 (92,333) 247,648 1.44 171,632

4 2008E 47% 34% 369,666 12% 326,390 56,000 75,667 (113,333) 344,723 1.63 211,425

735,772 1,077,906

(7,958) (39,475) 13%

Fair values per share (cell D30) are highly sensitive to changes in input variables. Inputs of discounted cash flow models are highly which are at a very early stage of their life cycle. Baidu.com is a perfect example illustrating why we recommend using Monte Carlo into the valuation framework.

er share (cell D31) of Baidu.com in Fall 2005. We used average broker estimates n: Viebig et al., Models of Leading Investment Banks, Wiley 2008 .

5 2009E 36% 38% 550,279 12% 485,712 60,333 78,667 (140,333) 484,379 1.84 262,901

6 2010E 28% 39% 736,613 12% 649,413 65,667 82,667 (158,667) 639,080 2.08 306,962

7 2011E 21% 39% 889,957 10% 802,975 64,500 107,000 (180,000) 794,475 2.35 337,700

8 2012E 18% 2,668,686 41% 1,082,337 15% 924,943 60,000 113,000 (251,000) 846,943 2.66 318,586

9 2013E 12% 2,988,929 41% 1,237,254 13% 1,075,075 62,000 79,000 (204,000) 1,012,075 3.00 336,904

10 2014E 10% Broker Estimates 3,287,822 42% Broker Estimates 1,392,015 13% Broker Estimates 1,208,220 64,000 Broker Estimates 63,000 Broker Estimates (224,000) Broker Estimates 1,111,220 3.39 327,352

1,465,953 1,869,090 2,261,599

uts of discounted cash flow models are highly uncertain, especially for companies rating why we recommend using Monte Carlo simulation to incorporate uncertainty

This sheet shows how analysts at leading investment banks estimated the fair value per share (cell C36) of Baidu.com in 2007 after results. We used average broker estimates to illustrate the structure of a standard FCFF model. The model is discussed in detail in: Investment Banks, Wiley 2008 .
[In millions of RMB (if not otherwise stated)] Year 0 For the Year Ended December 31, 2006 Growth in net revenues 163% Net revenues 786 EBIT margin [as % of total revenues] 33% EBIT 259 Tax on EBIT 12 Tax rate [as % of EBIT] 5% EBIT (1-t) 247 plus share-based compensation 48 EBIT(1-t) adjusted 295 plus total D&A 63 D&A-to-net revenues 8% total NWC less cash 90 NWC less cash-to-net revenues 11% minus total Capex (194) capex-to-net revenues -25% FCFF 254 Discount factor (WACC): 13% Discounted FCFF (1) Sum of discounted FCFF (2) Terminal value FCFF in T TV growth rate TV discount factor (WACC) (3) Non operating assets (Cash Q1 2007) (4) Long-term debt Enterprise value (1)+(2)+(3)+(4): RMB/USD Enterprise value in million USD Number of shares outstanding (diluted) [in million] Per share value in USD 149% 1 2007E 96% 1,541 33% 508 9 2% 499 63 562 164 11% 131 9% (350) -23% 507 1.13 449 10,221 24,817 1,432 4% 10% 1,169 0 36,207 7.72 4,690 35 135.1 2 2008E 64% 2,527 33% 834 43 5% 791 116 907 245 10% 111 4% (498) -20% 765 1.28 599 3 2009E 48% 3,739 35% 1,309 215 16% 1094 168 1,262 315 8% 100 3% (660) -18% 1,017 1.44 705 4 2010E 36% 5,085 36% 1,831 299 16% 1532 269 1,801 368 7% 109 2% (794) -16% 1,484 1.63 910 4 2011E 29% 6,560 37% 2,427 574 24% 1853 346 2,199 430 7% 85 1% (957) -15% 1,757 1.63 1,078

The fair value per share (cell C36) is much higher in 2007 than in Fall 2005. The main reason for the increase is that Baidu.com rep exceeded analysts' expectations.

alue per share (cell C36) of Baidu.com in 2007 after the company reported FY2006 rd FCFF model. The model is discussed in detail in: Viebig et al., Models of Leading

6 2012E 25% 8,200 38% 3,116 728 23% 2388 432 2,820 491 6% 64 1% (1,114) -14% 2,261 2.08 1,086

7 2013E 23% 10,086 39% 3,934 910 23% 3024 531 3,555 554 5% 47 0% (1,268) -13% 2,888 2.35 1,227

8 2014E 21% 12,204 39% 4,760 1,120 24% 3640 641 4,281 616 5% 16 0% (1,410) -12% 3,503 2.66 1,318

9 2015E 17% 14,279 40% 5,712 1,303 23% 4409 747 5,156 675 5% (68) 0% (1,503) -11% 4,260 3.00 1,418

10 2016E 13% 16,135 40% 6,454 1,468 23% 4986 847 5,833 729 5% (157) -1% (1,545) -10% 4,860 3.39 1,432

Broker Estimates Broker Estimates Broker Estimates

Broker Estimates Broker Estimates Broker Estimates Broker Estimates

e main reason for the increase is that Baidu.com reported revenues which substantially

This sheet shows how analysts can estimate Baidu's value per share (cell C36) using Monte Carlo simulation. Please note that this Simulation, financial analysts can incorporate uncertainty into the valuation framework. We simulated revenue growth rates - arguab yellow, red, and blue). The model is discussed in detail in: Viebig et al., Models of Leading Investment Banks, Wiley 2008 .

[In millions of RMB (if not otherwise stated)] For the Year Ended December 31, Growth in net revenues Net revenues EBIT margin [as % of total revenues] EBIT Tax on EBIT Tax rate [as % of EBIT] EBIT (1-t) plus share-based compensation EBIT(1-t) adjusted plus total D&A D&A-to-net revenues total NWC less cash NWC less cash-to-net revenues minus total Capex capex-to-net revenues FCFF Discount factor (WACC): Discounted FCFF (1) Sum of discounted FCFF (2) Terminal value FCFF in T TV growth rate TV discount factor (WACC) (3) Non operating assets (Cash Q1 2007) (4) Long-term debt Enterprise value (1)+(2)+(3)+(4): RMB/USD Enterprise value in million USD Number of shares outstanding (diluted) [in million] Per share value in USD

Year 0 2006 163% 786 33% 259 12 5% 247 48 295 63 8% 90 11% (194) -25% 254 13%

1 2007E #NAME? #NAME? 33% #NAME? #NAME? 2% #NAME? 63 #NAME? #NAME? 11% #NAME? 8% #NAME? -23% #NAME? 1.13 #NAME? #NAME? #NAME? #NAME? 4% 10% 1,169 0 #NAME? 7.72 #NAME? 35 #NAME?

2 2008E #NAME? #NAME? 33% #NAME? #NAME? 5% #NAME? 116 #NAME? #NAME? 10% #NAME? 5% #NAME? -20% #NAME? 1.28 #NAME?

3 2009E #NAME? #NAME? 35% #NAME? #NAME? 16% #NAME? 168 #NAME? #NAME? 8% #NAME? 3% #NAME? -18% #NAME? 1.44 #NAME?

Inputs Monte Carlo Simulation: Growth in net revenues

149% in RMB million 2007-2009 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Goldman Sachs 27-Apr-07 1545 2694 3921 Morgan Stanley 27-Apr-07 1539 2,526 3,728 5,057 6,504 8,125 9,979 12,048 14,039 15,917

97% 74% 46%

2010-2012

2013-2016

using Monte Carlo simulation. Please note that this sheet requires that @Risk is installed properly on your PC. Applying Monte Carlo ework. We simulated revenue growth rates - arguably the main value driver of Baidu.com - over three explicit growth periods (marked f Leading Investment Banks, Wiley 2008 .

4 2010E #NAME? #NAME? 36% #NAME? #NAME? 16% #NAME? 269 #NAME? #NAME? 7% #NAME? 11% #NAME? -16% #NAME? 1.63 #NAME?

4 2011E #NAME? #NAME? 37% #NAME? #NAME? 24% #NAME? 346 #NAME? #NAME? 6% #NAME? 5% #NAME? -15% #NAME? 1.63 #NAME?

6 2012E #NAME? #NAME? 38% #NAME? #NAME? 23% #NAME? 432 #NAME? #NAME? 6% #NAME? 3% #NAME? -14% #NAME? 2.08 #NAME?

7 2013E #NAME? #NAME? 39% #NAME? #NAME? 23% #NAME? 531 #NAME? #NAME? 7% #NAME? 2% #NAME? -13% #NAME? 2.35 #NAME?

8 2014E #NAME? #NAME? 39% #NAME? #NAME? 24% #NAME? 641 #NAME? #NAME? 6% #NAME? 0% #NAME? -12% #NAME? 2.66 #NAME?

9 10 2015E 2016E #NAME? #NAME? #NAME? #NAME? 40% 40% #NAME? #NAME? #NAME? #NAME? 23% 23% #NAME? #NAME? 747 847 #NAME? #NAME? #NAME? #NAME? 6% 4% #NAME? #NAME? -3% -6% #NAME? #NAME? -11% -10% #NAME? #NAME? 3.00 3.39 #NAME? #NAME?

Morgan Stanley 27-Apr-07 96% 64% 48% 36% 29% 25% 23% 21% 17% 13%

Distribution triangular triangular triangular

parameter 1 type value min 80% min 30% min 20%

Own estimates parameter 2 type value most likely 100% most likely 70% most likely 60% standard deviation

parameter 3 type max max max

normal

mean

25%

25%

normal

mean

20%

standard deviation

40%

Last Update: 16-07-2007

erly on your PC. Applying Monte Carlo r three explicit growth periods (marked

Monte Carlo Simulation Broker Estimates Broker Estimates

Broker Estimates Broker Estimates Broker Estimates Broker Estimates

parameter 3 value 120% 110% 100%

This sheet shows how analysts can estimate Baidu's value per share (cell C36) using Monte Carlo simulation. Please note that this Simulation, financial analysts can incorporate uncertainty into the valuation framework. We simulated six main value drivers (revenu net revenues, and capex-to-net revenues) over three explicit growth periods (marked yellow, red, and blue). The model is discussed

[In millions of RMB (if not otherwise stated)] For the Year Ended December 31, Growth in net revenues Net revenues EBIT margin [as % of total revenues] EBIT Tax on EBIT Tax rate [as % of EBIT] EBIT (1-t) plus share-based compensation EBIT(1-t) adjusted D&A D&A-to-net revenues NWC less cash NWC less cash-to-net revenues Capex Capex-to-net revenues FCFF Discount factor (WACC): Discounted FCFF (1) Sum of discounted FCFF (2) Terminal value FCFF in T TV growth rate TV discount factor (WACC) (3) Non operating assets (Cash Q1 2007) (4) Long-term debt Enterprise value (1)+(2)+(3)+(4): RMB/USD Enterprise value in million USD Number of shares outstanding (diluted) [in million] Per share value in USD

Year 0 2006 163% 786 33% 259 12 5% 247 48 295 63 8% 90 11% (194) -25% 254 15%

1 2007E #NAME? #NAME? #NAME? #NAME? #NAME? #NAME? #NAME? 63 #NAME? #NAME? #NAME? #NAME? #NAME? #NAME? #NAME? #NAME? 1.15 #NAME? #NAME? #NAME? #NAME? 4% 10% 1,169 0 #NAME? 7.72 #NAME? 35 #NAME?

2 2008E #NAME? #NAME? #NAME? #NAME? #NAME? #NAME? #NAME? 116 #NAME? #NAME? #NAME? #NAME? #NAME? #NAME? #NAME? #NAME? 1.32 #NAME?

3 2009E #NAME? #NAME? #NAME? #NAME? #NAME? #NAME? #NAME? 168 #NAME? #NAME? #NAME? #NAME? #NAME? #NAME? #NAME? #NAME? 1.52 #NAME?

Inputs Monte Carlo Simulation: Growth in net revenues in RMB million 2007-2009 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Goldman Sachs 27-Apr-07 1545 97% 2694 74% 3921 46% Morgan Stanley 27-Apr-07 1539 2,526 3,728 5,057 6,504 8,125 9,979 12,048 14,039 15,917

2009-2012

2013-2016

EBIT margin [as % of total revenues] in RMB million 2007-2009 2007 2008 2009 Goldman Sachs 27-Apr-07 35% 38% 39% Morgan Stanley 27-Apr-07 501 843 1317

2009-2012

2013-2016

2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016

1845 2422 3079 3847 4726 5574 6383

Tax rate [as % of EBIT] in RMB million 2007-2009 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Goldman Sachs 27-Apr-07 Morgan Stanley 27-Apr-07 9 43 215 299 574 728 910 1,120 1,303 1,468

2009-2012

2013-2016

D&A-to-net revenues in RMB million 2007-2009 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Goldman Sachs 27-Apr-07 155 10% 200 7% 280 7% Morgan Stanley 27-Apr-07 164 245 315 368 430 491 554 616 675 729

2009-2012

2013-2016

NWC less cash-to-net revenues in RMB million 2007-2009 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Goldman Sachs 27-Apr-07 Morgan Stanley 27-Apr-07 131 111 100 109 85 64 47 16 -68 -157

2009-2012

2013-2016

Capex-to-net revenues in RMB million 2007-2009 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 Goldman Sachs 27-Apr-07 (347) -22% (404) -15% (549) -14% Morgan Stanley 27-Apr-07 (350) (498) (660) (794) (957) (1114)

2009-2012

2013-2016

2013 2014 2015 2016

(1268) (1410) (1503) (1545)

ng Monte Carlo simulation. Please note that this sheet requires that @Risk is installed properly on your PC. Applying Monte Carlo ork. We simulated six main value drivers (revenue growth rates, EBIT margins, tax rates, D&A-to-net revenues, change in NWC-tod yellow, red, and blue). The model is discussed in detail in: Viebig et al., Models of Leading Investment Banks, Wiley 2008 .

4 2010E #NAME? #NAME? #NAME? #NAME? #NAME? #NAME? #NAME? 269 #NAME? #NAME? #NAME? #NAME? #NAME? #NAME? #NAME? #NAME? 1.75 #NAME?

4 2011E #NAME? #NAME? #NAME? #NAME? #NAME? #NAME? #NAME? 346 #NAME? #NAME? #NAME? #NAME? #NAME? #NAME? #NAME? #NAME? 1.75 #NAME?

6 2012E #NAME? #NAME? #NAME? #NAME? #NAME? #NAME? #NAME? 432 #NAME? #NAME? #NAME? #NAME? #NAME? #NAME? #NAME? #NAME? 2.31 #NAME?

7 2013E #NAME? #NAME? #NAME? #NAME? #NAME? #NAME? #NAME? 531 #NAME? #NAME? #NAME? #NAME? #NAME? #NAME? #NAME? #NAME? 2.66 #NAME?

8 2014E #NAME? #NAME? #NAME? #NAME? #NAME? #NAME? #NAME? 641 #NAME? #NAME? #NAME? #NAME? #NAME? #NAME? #NAME? #NAME? 3.06 #NAME?

9 10 2015E 2016E #NAME? #NAME? Monte Carlo Simulation #NAME? #NAME? #NAME? #NAME? Monte Carlo Simulation #NAME? #NAME? #NAME? #NAME? #NAME? #NAME? Monte Carlo Simulation #NAME? #NAME? 747 847 Broker Estimates #NAME? #NAME? #NAME? #NAME? #NAME? #NAME? Monte Carlo Simulation #NAME? #NAME? #NAME? #NAME? Monte Carlo Simulation #NAME? #NAME? #NAME? #NAME? Monte Carlo Simulation #NAME? #NAME? 3.52 4.05 #NAME? #NAME?

Morgan Stanley 27-Apr-07 96% 64% 48% 36% 29% 25% 23% 21% 17% 13%

Distribution triangular triangular triangular

parameter 1 type value min 80% min 30% min 20%

Own estimates parameter 2 type value most likely 100% most likely 70% most likely 60% standard deviation

type

parameter 3 value max max max

120% 110% 100%

normal

mean

25%

25%

normal

mean

20%

standard deviation

40%

Morgan Stanley 27-Apr-07 33% 33% 35%

Distribution triangular triangular triangular

parameter 1 type value min 30% min 30% min 30%

Own estimates parameter 2 type value most likely 35% most likely 35% most likely 35%

type

parameter 3 value max max max

40% 40% 40%

36% 37% 38% 39% 39% 40% 40%

normal

mean

35%

standard deviation

5%

normal

mean

40%

standard deviation

5%

Morgan Stanley 27-Apr-07 2% 5% 16% 16% 24% 24% 24% 24% 23% 23%

Distribution triangular triangular triangular

parameter 1 type value min 2% min 2% min 10%

Own estimates parameter 2 type value most likely 4% most likely 6% most likely 15% standard deviation

type

parameter 3 value max max max

6% 8% 20%

normal

mean

20%

4%

normal

mean

20%

standard deviation

4%

Morgan Stanley 27-Apr-07 11% 10% 8% 7% 7% 6% 6% 5% 5% 5%

Distribution triangular triangular triangular

parameter 1 type value min 8% min 8% min 6%

Own estimates parameter 2 type value most likely 10% most likely 10% most likely 8% standard deviation

type

parameter 3 value max max max

12% 12% 10%

normal

mean

7%

2%

normal

mean

5%

standard deviation

2%

Morgan Stanley 27-Apr-07 9% 4% 3% 2% 1% 1% 0% 0% 0% -1%

Distribution triangular triangular triangular

parameter 1 type value min 8% min 2% min 0%

Own estimates parameter 2 type value most likely 10% most likely 4% most likely 2% standard deviation

type

parameter 3 value max max max

12% 6% 4%

normal

mean

0%

2%

normal

mean

0%

standard deviation

2%

Morgan Stanley 27-Apr-07 -23% -20% -18% -16% -15% -14%

Distribution triangular triangular triangular

parameter 1 type value min -25% min -25% min -20%

Own estimates parameter 2 type value most likely -23% most likely -20% most likely -15% standard deviation

type

parameter 3 value max max max

-20% -15% -10%

normal

mean

-15%

4%

-13% -12% -11% -10%

normal

mean

-10%

standard deviation

4%

This sheet show how finacial analysts at leading investment banks calculated Baidu.com's long-term invested capital in Fall 2005. The model is discussed in detail in: Viebig et al., Models of Leading Investment Banks, Wiley 2008 . in thousands of RMB
2004 Cash and cash equivalents Accounts receivable - net of allowance for doubtful accounts Add Adj.: Allowance for doubtful accounts Inventories Add Adj.: LIFO reserve adjustment Prepaid expenses and other current assets Deferred tax assets net of valuation allowance Total current assets Customer deposits Accrued expenses and other current liabilities Deferred revenue Deferred income Total current liabilities Net Working Capital leasehold improvements - gross computer equipment and servers - gross capitalized internal use software costs - gross office equipment - gross motor vehicles - gross Fixed Assets-gross less accumulated depreciation Fixed Assets-net Payment for land use rights Other depreciating assets Intangible assets- net Add Adj.: inflation adjustment Goodwill Investments Deferred tax assets noncurrent Add Adj.: valuation allowance noncurrent deferred tax assets Add Adj.: capitalized operating lease Add Adj.: capitalized R&D Noncurrent assets Long-term invested capital Long-term invested capital less cash and cash equivalents 200,196 9,645 627 0 0 2,421 0 212,889 25,990 21,900 6,302 0 54,192 158,697 1,774 43,924 5,783 2,345 773 54,599 (18,667) 35,932 0 1,059 12,953 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 49,944 208,641 8,445 2005 900,593 22,353 (4,643) 0 0 10,957 1,449 930,709 70,327 53,137 7,658 124 131,246 799,463 6,782 126,863 6,392 3,423 2,271 145,731 (49,311) 96,420 77,200 0 13,303 0 9,287 2,018 2,843 1,598 0 0 202,669 1,002,132 101,539

in thousands of USD
2004 24,188 1,165 76 0 0 292 0 25,721 3,140 2,646 762 0 6,548 19,173 214 5,307 699 283 94 6,597 2,255 4,342 0 128 1,565 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6,035 25,208 1,020 2005 111,595 2,770 (575) 0 0 1,358 179 115,327 8,715 6,584 949 15 16,263 99,064 840 15,720 792 424 282 18,058 (6,110) 11,948 9,566 0 1,648 0 1,151 250 352 199 0 0 25,114 124,178 12,583

@RISK Correlation Sheet

NewMatrix (20x20) MC-FCFF multivariate!C3 Growth in net revenues / 2007E MC-FCFF multivariate!D3 Growth in net revenues / 2008E MC-FCFF multivariate!E3 Growth in net revenues / 2009E MC-FCFF multivariate!F3 Growth in net revenues / 2010E MC-FCFF multivariate!G3 Growth in net revenues / 2011E MC-FCFF multivariate!H3 Growth in net revenues / 2012E MC-FCFF multivariate!I3 Growth in net revenues / 2013E MC-FCFF multivariate!J3 Growth in net revenues / 2014E MC-FCFF multivariate!K3 Growth in net revenues / 2015E MC-FCFF multivariate!L3 Growth in net revenues / 2016E MC-FCFF multivariate!C5 EBIT margin [as % of total revenues] / 2007E MC-FCFF multivariate!D5 EBIT margin [as % of total revenues] / 2008E MC-FCFF multivariate!E5 EBIT margin [as % of total revenues] / 2009E MC-FCFF multivariate!F5 EBIT margin [as % of total revenues] / 2010E MC-FCFF multivariate!G5 EBIT margin [as % of total revenues] / 2011E MC-FCFF multivariate!H5 EBIT margin [as % of total revenues] / 2012E MC-FCFF multivariate!I5 EBIT margin [as % of total revenues] / 2013E MC-FCFF multivariate!J5 EBIT margin [as % of total revenues] / 2014E MC-FCFF multivariate!K5 EBIT margin [as % of total revenues] / 2015E

MC-FCFF multivariate!C3 Growth in net revenues / 2007E 1

MC-FCFF multivariate!D3 Growth in net revenues / 2008E

0.4

0.4

MC-FCFF multivariate!L5 EBIT margin [as % of total revenues] / 2016E

MC-FCFF multivariate!E3 Growth in net revenues / 2009E

MC-FCFF multivariate!F3 Growth in net revenues / 2010E

MC-FCFF multivariate!G3 Growth in net revenues / 2011E

0.4

0.4

0.4

MC-FCFF multivariate!H3 Growth in net revenues / 2012E

MC-FCFF multivariate!I3 Growth in net revenues / 2013E

MC-FCFF multivariate!J3 Growth in net revenues / 2014E

0.4

0.4

0.4

MC-FCFF multivariate!K3 Growth in net revenues / 2015E

MC-FCFF multivariate!L3 Growth in net revenues / 2016E

MC-FCFF multivariate!C5 EBIT margin [as % of total revenues] / 2007E

0.4

0.4

MC-FCFF multivariate!D5 EBIT margin [as % of total revenues] / 2008E

MC-FCFF multivariate!E5 EBIT margin [as % of total revenues] / 2009E

MC-FCFF multivariate!F5 EBIT margin [as % of total revenues] / 2010E

MC-FCFF multivariate!G5 EBIT margin [as % of total revenues] / 2011E

MC-FCFF multivariate!H5 EBIT margin [as % of total revenues] / 2012E

MC-FCFF multivariate!I5 EBIT margin [as % of total revenues] / 2013E

MC-FCFF multivariate!J5 EBIT margin [as % of total revenues] / 2014E

MC-FCFF multivariate!K5 EBIT margin [as % of total revenues] / 2015E

MC-FCFF multivariate!L5 EBIT margin [as % of total revenues] / 2016E