Analysis of Graphs

...

working capital of the GCSL had a decrease in the first three years (2005-08), becoming zero in the third year. The levels increased during the final year (2008-09).

While its competitor had the same process of increments and decrements, yet the levels of the competitor were more than the GCSL, and the levels never decreased below to zero.

7.3.07

While the asset turnover (turnover/CE) of the GCSL was quite unstable for the whole period 2005-09 with having the highest turnover in the year 2007-08, its competitor had a normal growth in the initial three years (2005-08), which then decreased a bit in the final year of 2008-09. During the whole period, GCSL’s competitor remained at par with GCSL.

7.3.08

The GCSL’s current ratio faced a decrease in the initial year (2005-06), but attained a stable growth in the following three years (2006-09). On the other hand, its competitor kept increasing from the initial year to the final year.

While GCSL’s competitor had a lower current ratio than GCSL in the initial year, it remained at par in the following three years (2006-09).

7.3.09

While GCSL’s debt of equity remained the highest in the initial year (2005-06), with just less than 0.25, the following year saw a decrease in its debt of equity to almost 25% that of the initial year.

In the following couple of years, its debt kept decreasing, becoming the least in the final year (2008-09).

7.3.10

7.3.11

The % contribution (EH Variant A1+) of the GCSL kept a stable growth in the initial three years (2005-08), which then decreased to the least during the whole period (2005-09).

7.3.12

Though the % contribution (EH Variant A1) of the GCSL kept increasing in the initial three years of 2005-08, it was not quite stable, with not much increase in the second year (2006-07) and an observable increase in the following year (2007-08). Not much, but the levels decreased in the final year 2008-09.

7.3.13

Though the % contribution (EH Variant A++) of the GCSL kept increasing in the initial three years of 2005-08, it was not quite stable, with almost 50% (as that of 2005-06) growth in the second year (2006-07) and more than 200% growth in the third year (2007-08). The levels decreased in the final year 2008-09.

7.3.14

The series of increment and decrement in the graph for the % contribution (WL Variant L1) of the GCSL was almost the same as that of the graph for the % contribution (EH Variant A++), with a continuous increase in the initial three years (2005-08) and a decrease in the final year 2008-09.

7.3.15

The series of increment and decrement in the graph for the % contribution (CR Variant C1) of the GCSL was almost the same as that of the graph for the % contribution (EH Variant A1), with a continuous increase in the initial three years (2005-08), with not much increase in the second year (2006-07) and an observable increase in the third year (2007-08), and a decrease in the final year 2008-09.

7.3.16

While the graph of the % market share (product group EH) for the GCSL remained stagnant for the four years (2005-09), it increased by a bit during the target year, and it remained at par with its competitors.

While competitor 1 had the highest in the initial year and least equalling to zero in the target year. During the middle years (2006-09), the levels decreased by a bit and remained constant.

Whereas competitor 4 had the least % market share during the whole period as compared to GCSL and competitor 1. It remained constant for the first couple of years (2005-07), and then decreased in the following couple of years (2007-09), with becoming zero in the target year.