This document provides a financial analysis of Adidas Group from 1998-2007. It includes: 1) An environmental analysis examining the key markets, economic factors, and China's importance. 2) A financial analysis using ratios to assess performance, including average 22.84% ROCE and increasing asset turnover and net profit margins over time. 3) Charts showing Adidas growing to seriously compete with Nike in sales by 2006 after acquiring Reebok, and maintaining a healthy gross profit margin around 47%. The analysis finds Adidas generally performs well financially but economic downturns may impact future earnings potential until markets stabilize.

1. MA Sports Management Philip Barnes, Paul Borelan,
Mikolaj Chelstowski & Sun Yan
Sports Finance
Financial Report – Adidas Group
Contents
Section 1 - Introduction
2 - Environmental Analysis
3 - Financial Analysis
4 - Summary
5 - Recommendations
6 - Bibliography
Page No. 1

2. MA Sports Management Philip Barnes, Paul Borelan,
Mikolaj Chelstowski & Sun Yan
Section 1 - Introduction
1.1. When Jesse Owens dazzled the crowds (and dismayed a furious Hitler) by
winning four gold medals in the 1936 Berlin Olympics, he was wearing
Adidas running shoes, and when Armin Hary became the first athlete to run
the 100-metre sprint in 10 seconds, he was wearing Adidas running shoes
(Haig, 2006 pg 7). Since Adi Dassler made his first pair of shoes in 1920, his
goal was to provide every athlete with the best possible equipment, and on 18th
August 1949 Adidas was registered as a company, providing world class
athletes with world class equipment ever since. Adidas has know grown to be
one of the world’s leading sports brands with a turnover of €10.3 billion in
2007, and is now known as the Adidas Group due to the takeover of
TaylorMade Golf in 1997 and Reebok International Limited in 2006.
However, as large a company as Adidas is, it is still seen as having second
place status to that of Nike, with both companies providing fierce competition
within the market. According to Islam (2006) the sportswear market is a case
of ‘Stripes versus Swoosh’ which Haig (2006, p.9) sees as a healthy rivalry by
stating, ‘Nike and Adidas may hate each others guts but the aggressive
competition has ultimately made them both stronger.’
1.2 The aim of this document is to provide a financial investigation and analysis
into the organisation’s financial performance using appropriate financial models and
concepts. In order to accomplish this, an environmental analysis and financial
analysis will be carried out, with a summary and recommendations for potential future
investors.
Page No. 2

3. MA Sports Management Philip Barnes, Paul Borelan,
Mikolaj Chelstowski & Sun Yan
Section 2 – Environmental Analysis
2.1. The business environment of the adidas firm consists of all the external
influences that affect its decision and performance (Grant 2005). In order to plan for
any harmful external influence on the firm, a commonly used and immensely valuable
technique for analysing the external environment is a PEST (Political, Economic,
Social and Technological) analysis (Gregory 2000, Curtis & Cobham 2005), which
divides the overall environment into four areas and covers almost everything that can
affect the company. By looking at the political, social and technological factors,
currently none of these pose a major threat to the adidas, as the firm has a serious
responsibility to the environment and the people connected to the organisation,
whether they are employees, customers or shareholders. Adidas also continues to be
innovative with regards to sporting technology and continues to keep up with changes
in sporting fashion.
2.2. However amidst the current global financial crisis, economic factors have to
be monitored so that the crisis does not have any long-term effects on the adidas
company. Wilson (2008) reports that ‘Global economic jitters may cloud the outlook
for Adidas,’ meaning that it may prove difficult to predict potential future earnings
and to set future financial targets and budgets. The main reason for this is the
economic slowdown within some of adidas’ key markets such as the United States
and United Kingdom, where most of the population is suffering from a ‘credit
crunch’, leading them to refrain from purchasing luxury items, such as adidas
sportswear (See Section 3.2).
2.3. Due to the 2008 Beijing Olympic Games, China has emerged as a key market
for major sportswear companies, particularly Nike and Adidas which Branigan (2008)
reported as ‘the multibillion-dollar fight between two giant brands intent on
conquering the fastest-growing sportswear market in the world’. Close to 50% of
Adidas products are produced in China (Wilson 2008) with a total of 264 Chinese
plants that employ about 300,000 workers (Hejuan 2008). However, according to
Hejuan (2008), ‘Adidas is switching its emphasis away from factories toward
department stores, because rising manufacturing costs have led the sportswear giant to
adjust its Chinese business model in order to capitalize on China’s growing consumer
Page No. 3

4. MA Sports Management Philip Barnes, Paul Borelan,
Mikolaj Chelstowski & Sun Yan
market’. This is important to the company in order to keep up with other leading
sports brands as well as reducing production costs by relocating some of its
production factories to other countries.
2.4. Using data from the Adidas Group Annual Reports (2000-2007), we can see
the diversity of their worldwide market and how each market has expanded over the
past decade. As we can see in Figure 1, North American sales have developed much
weaker than the other three identified markets, with a coefficient (R²) of 0.2497. To
help stabilise this development, the Adidas Group purchased Reebok, a sports brand
heavily involved within the North American sports market, in particular the National
Basketball Association (NBA). This acquisition helped to more than double sales in
North America the following two years. On the contrary, sales in Asia have shown
particularly positive growth with a coefficient of 0.9168. The sponsorship of the 2008
Beijing Olympic Games has further enhanced the reputation of the Adidas brand
throughout Asia alongside the emergence of China as a key market (See Section 2.3).
Figure 1 – Adidas Group International Sales
Adidas Group Worldwide Market
5000
4500
4000 2
R = 0.7327
3500
Sales (Euro Million)
Europe
3000
North America
2500 2 Asia
R = 0.2497
2000 Latin America
1500
2
R = 0.9168
1000
2
R = 0.7393
500
0
1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008
Year
Source: Adidas Group Annual Reports (2000-2007)
Page No. 4

5. MA Sports Management Philip Barnes, Paul Borelan,
Mikolaj Chelstowski & Sun Yan
Section 3 - Financial Analysis
3.1. The following analysis is compiled from previous financial statements from
the Adidas-Salomon Annual Reports (2000-2007) together with data from the London
Stock Exchange and the Bureau van Dijk Fame Financial database. All financial
observations are in euro (€) million unless otherwise stated. The Adidas Group’s
financial state will be appraised using relevant accounting ratios along with
theoretical examinations, demonstrating the efficacy of the company’s solvency,
ownership, strength and profitability characteristics. Some of the ratios ‘are
meaningful in themselves, but their value mainly lies in their comparison with the
equivalent ratio last year, a target ratio or a competitor’s ratio (Mott 2005, p.93).’
3.2. In addition to this, ‘many also believe that the history of the market itself
contains “patterns” that give clues to the future (Roberts 1959, p.1);’ quite an outdated
ideal which is still crucially important today given the current state of the global
economy. If we look at the Adidas Share compared to two crucial stock market
indices, the Dow Jones 30 and the FTSE 100 (Figure 1), we see that its status follows
the market with quite significance. The global economic recession is visually shown
to be the catalyst causing Adidas to follow suit.
Figure 1 - Adidas Share to Market Comparison
Source: Yahoo/London Stock Exchange 2008
Page No. 5

6. MA Sports Management Philip Barnes, Paul Borelan,
Mikolaj Chelstowski & Sun Yan
3.3. With net sales reaching €10.3 billion in 2007, the Adidas Group firmly
emerged as a true competitor for the market leader Nike Inc, producing estimated
1
sales of €11.2 billion (Figure 2). As displayed, Adidas only began to seriously
compete with Nike in 2006, primarily due to the acquisition of Reebok which
dramatically increased the Adidas Group’s market reach (Figure 3).
Figure 2 – Nike and Adidas Net Sales Comparison
Net Sales - Nike vs Adidas
€ 14,000.00
€ 12,000.00
€ 10,000.00
€ Million
€ 8,000.00
Nike Inc
Adidas AG
€ 6,000.00
€ 4,000.00
€ 2,000.00
€ 0.00
2003 2004 2005 2006 2007
Year
Source: Adidas AG Annual Report 2007, Nike Inc Annual Report 2007
Figure 3 - Adidas Group Subsidiaries
Source: Adidas Group Annual Report 2007
Performance Ratios
1
Nike Inc 2007 Annual Report - $16,326 calculated at a January 2007 exchange rate of 1.45517 Dollars to the Euro
Page No. 6

7. MA Sports Management Philip Barnes, Paul Borelan,
Mikolaj Chelstowski & Sun Yan
Return on Capital Employed
Year 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007
Profit before Tax and
Interest -670 2269 2409 2480 2428 3166.93 3674 1303.49 3050 3450
Total Assets less
Current Liabilities -327 1,096 1,417 1,485 1,445 1,433 1,336 264 1,733 1,708
Return on Capital
Employed (%) 20.5 20.7 17 16.7 16.8 22.1 27.5 49.3 17.6 20.2
3.4. Return on Capital Employed (ROCE) is essential when making a financial
assessment; the higher the indicator, the better the company’s performance (Orsucci
& Sala 2008). Averaging an ROCE of 22.84% over ten years, the Adidas Group
proves to be extremely reliable generating good return from investments. As for the
extraordinary result of 49.3%, according to the Adidas Annual Report, 2005 was a
milestone year with the sale of the Salomon business segment helping to deliver this
excellent result.
Asset Turnover
Year 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007
5,06 10,08
Total Sales 5 5,354 5,835 6,112 6,523 6,267 5,860 6,636 4 10,299
Total Assets less
Current Liabilities -327 1,096 1,417 1,485 1,445 1,433 1,336 2,644 1,733 1,708
Asset Turnover (%) -15.5 4.9 4.1 4.1 4.5 4.4 4.4 2.6 5.8 6
3.5. A fundamental responsibility of management is to use the company’s assets to
generate sales (Gorman 2003). Asset Turnover is the perfect measure for this, with
the Adidas Group slowly becoming more efficient at generating sales from assets
throughout this ten year period. Looking at the extremely weak result of 1998, we
must take into account the initial financial set back from the acquisition of the
TaylorMade Golf brand at the start of the year.
Net Profit Margin
Year 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007
Profit before Tax and 2268.7 2408. 2479.9 2427. 3050.0
Interest -670.35 2 9 5 6 3166.93 3674 1303.49 8 3450.16
Sales Turnover 5,065 5,354 5,835 6,112 6,523 6,267 5,860 6636 10,084 10,299
Net Profit Margin -13.23 42.37 41.28 40.58 37.22 50.53 62.70 19.64 30.25 33.50
3.6. Excluding the two years Adidas Group purchased TaylorMade Golf and
Reebok (1998 and 2005 respectively), the average net profit margin is a solid
42.3%. The incredible result of 62.7% in 2004 could be somewhat down to
Page No. 7

8. MA Sports Management Philip Barnes, Paul Borelan,
Mikolaj Chelstowski & Sun Yan
the first ever global brand advertising campaign (Adidas Group Annual Report
2004). Looking at Figure 4, we can see that the Adidas Group continue to
maintain a healthy operating margin. With the increased net sales from
Reebok in 2006, the company is striving to improve their operating margin
further by ‘refining distribution through expanding controlled space and
improving retail relationships (Adidas Group Annual Report 2007, p.2).’
Figure 4 - Net Sales vs. Operating Margin
Source: Adidas Group Annual Report 2007
Gross Profit Margin
Year 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007
Gross Profit 2,124 2,352 2,528 2,601 2,819 2,814 2,813 3,197 4,495 4,882
Total Sales 5,065 5,354 5,835 6,112 6,523 6,267 5,860 6,636 10,084 10,299
Gross Profit Margin (%) 41.93 43.93 43.32 42.56 43.22 44.90 48.00 48.18 44.58 47.40
3.7. Gross profit can be compared with net sales to essentially demonstrate the
efficiency of the company (Figure 5). A coefficient (R²) of 0.6 highlights the
increasingly resourceful business of the Adidas Group. Each year, they are generating
more profit from their sales. This may be through various characteristics such as
better management, marketing, distribution, cheaper production or stronger demand
inflating the price of products for example.
Page No. 8

9. MA Sports Management Philip Barnes, Paul Borelan,
Mikolaj Chelstowski & Sun Yan
Figure 5 – Gross Profit in % of Net Sales Comparison
Profit from Sales Efficiency
49
48
47
Profit from Sales (%)
46
R2 = 0.5921
45
44
43
42
41
1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008
Year
Source: Adidas Group Annual Report (2000-2007)
Stock Turnover
Year 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007
1,29
Stock 4 1,273 1,190 1,164 1,155 1,230 1,607 1,629
Days 365 365 365 365 365 365 365 365
3,30
Cost of Sales 6 3,511 3,704 3,453 3,047 3,439 5,589 5,417
Stock Turnover (Days) 143 132 117 123 138 131 105 110
3.8. With the takeover of Reebok in 2006, the Adidas Group has obviously gained
more stock. However, together with an increase in stock came a network of
distribution chains through North America and a retail link with Foot Locker. This
has helped to reduce the time it takes the business to sell its stock, seen through the
gradual decrease in time taken over this period.
Trade Debtors Turnover
Year 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007
Trade Debtors 532 630 668 592 592 684 752 849
Days 365 365 365 365 365 365 365 365
5,86 6,63 10,08
Total Sales 5,835 6,112 6,523 6,267 0 6 4 10,299
Trade Debtors Turnover (Days) 33 38 37 34 37 38 27 30
Page No. 9

10. MA Sports Management Philip Barnes, Paul Borelan,
Mikolaj Chelstowski & Sun Yan
3.9. This is a below average turnover highlighting the reputation of the Adidas
Group brands and their associated credit customers who are primarily major sporting
retail chains and professional sports teams worldwide.
Trade Creditors Turnover
Year 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007
Trade Creditors 1,113 1,253 1,293 1,075 1,046 965 1,415 1,459
Days 365 365 365 365 365 365 365 365
Total Sales 5,835 6,112 6,523 6,267 5,860 6,636 10,084 10,299
Trade Creditors Turnover (Days) 70 75 72 63 65 53 51 52
3.10. The Adidas Group are ever reducing this turnover, paying for their supplies
sooner each year. This reduction coincides with a dramatic increase in sales turnover
and quite an insignificant increase of money borrowed.
Investment Ratios
Dividend Yield
Year 31/12/2004 31/12/2005 31/12/2006 31/12/2007 27/11/2008
Share Price 118.75 160 37.73 51.26 25.18
Dividend 1.30 1.30 0.42 0.50 0.50
Earnings Per Share 6.88 8.19 2.37 2.71 2.71
Price Earnings Ratio 17.26 19.54 15.92 18.92 9.25
Dividend Yield (%) 1.09 0.81 1.11 0.98 1.99
3.11. Dividend yield can help predict future long term return for investors (Christie
1990, Chen & Zhang 2007). Dividend Yield was steady for four years and recently is
sitting at double the figure. This gives such a result as the share price is sitting very
low due to the current economic recession. In comparison with the equivalent Nike
Inc yield of 0.47, Adidas show the strength of their future potential ahead of their
closest competitor.
Dividend Cover
Year 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007
Net Income 182 208 229 260 314 383 483 551
Ordinary Dividends (Thousand) 42 42 42 45 45 60 66 85
Dividend Cover (%) 4.33 4.95 5.45 5.78 6.98 6.38 7.32 6.48
3.12. The increasing values of dividend cover reflect the escalating profits of the
company as it grows. This analysis shows how stable the level of dividends
are, in essence guaranteeing dividend cover even in the exceptional instance of
Page No. 10

11. MA Sports Management Philip Barnes, Paul Borelan,
Mikolaj Chelstowski & Sun Yan
profits dropping, thus showing how safe an investment in the Adidas Group
would be.
Financial Status
Liquity Working Capital Ratio
Year 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007
Current Assets 2,786 2,878 2,826 2,777 3,035 4,367 3,925 4,138
Current Liabilities 1,369 1,394 1,381 1,344 1,699 1,790 2,192 2,429
Liquity Working Capital Ratio 2.04 2.06 2.05 2.07 1.79 2.44 1.79 1.70
3.13. This is the main liquity measure which assesses if a business can pay off its
short term liabilities. The Adidas Group continue to make solid profit due to their
prominent market position and maintain a healthy figure year after year.
Quick Asset Ratio
Year 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007
Current Assets 2,786 2,878 2,826 2,777 3,035 4,367 3,925 4,138
Less Stock 1,294 1,273 1,190 1,164 1,155 1,230 1,607 1,629
Current Liabilities 1,369 1,394 1,381 1,344 1,699 1,790 2,192 2,429
Quick Asset Ratio 1.09 1.15 1.18 1.20 1.11 1.75 1.06 1.03
3.14. This is a secondary liquity measure where the optimum level ranges from 0.75
to 1.25. One instance out of seven lies outside this period, and coincidentally is the
year the Adidas Group focused all their efforts and resources on purchasing Reebok.
Gearing Ratio
Year 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007
Long Term Debt 1,791 1,679 1,498 1,018 665 -551 2,231 3,023
Preference Shares 815 1,015 1,081 1,285 1,544 2,684 2,828 1,766
Total Assets less Current Liabilities 1,417 1,485 1,445 1,433 1,336 2,644 1,733 1,708
Gearing Ratio (%) 18.39 18.14 17.85 16.07 16.53 8.07 29.19 28.04
3.15. This is the main solvency measure which assesses if a business can pay off its
long term liabilities; the higher the indicator, the riskier the business. The Adidas
Group boast excellent results with an average gearing ratio of 19.04. Muradoglu et al
(2005, p.801) suggest that if one ‘pursues an investment strategy based on extremely
positive gearing ratios together with a minimum holding period of three years, market
returns in excess of 9.9% are attainable.’ The Adidas Group mirrors the authors
requirements, thus would be an excellent middle to long term investment.
Page No. 11

12. MA Sports Management Philip Barnes, Paul Borelan,
Mikolaj Chelstowski & Sun Yan
Interest Cover
Year 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007
Profit before Taxation and Interest 2408.9 2480 2428 3167 3674 1303.49 3050 3450.16
(Gross) Interest Payable 105.3 110 79.1 60.2 65 67.6 158 161
Interest Cover 22.88 22.5 30.7 52.6 56.5 19.28 19.3 21.43
3.16. A basic assessment of financial stability, interest cover determines how many
times the business can pay off its interest. A figure over 2 is usually needed to
remain a safe company. There is no question here, with the Adidas Group
capable of paying off its interest multiple times year after year.
Section 4 – Summary
Page No. 12

13. MA Sports Management Philip Barnes, Paul Borelan,
Mikolaj Chelstowski & Sun Yan
4.1. The Adidas Group is a large ambitious company with one main aim, to be the
market leader. They continue to engage in a ‘multibillion-dollar fight between two
giant brands intent on conquering the fastest-growing sportswear market in the world
(Branigan 2008, p.1).’ This competition helps keep the company in immaculate
condition with Haig (2006) suggesting this rivalry has been the coming of Adidas.
4.2. Reebok may prove to be the key to success after the brand has been
successfully repositioned as a premium product. The recent acquisition of
Ashworth Golf Clothing by TaylorMade Adidas will ensure the business
continue to increase their force on the lucrative international golf market.
4.3. The company is in peak financial condition, proving to be extremely reliable
generating good return from investments. With the increased net sales from Reebok,
the company is striving to further improve their operating margin primarily through
excellent distribution and retail positioning. The company associate themselves with
major sporting retail chains, successful professional sports teams and famous sporting
individuals worldwide, providing the best marketing ploy through sport itself.
4.4. Despite the economic recession hindering the ability to predict potential future
earnings and set future financial targets and budgets, the Adidas Share is almost
guaranteed to return to its usual high level once again. As seen in Section 3.2, the
share follows the markets, thus confirming its significant relationship with the current
economic climate. There is room for serious investment with these stocks as the price
is low, the risk is lower and the only setback is the length of time needed for the
market to return to normal. Adidas is a brand that ‘retains credibility, in the worlds of
street fashion and sport, by being proud of its past and confident of its future, and by
staying innovative (Haig, 2006, p.9).’
Section 5 – Recommendations
Page No. 13

14. MA Sports Management Philip Barnes, Paul Borelan,
Mikolaj Chelstowski & Sun Yan
5.1. For a long term profitable investment, the Adidas Group is an ideal company
for someone to devote their financial interests to. We recommend that this business is
not a suitable short term investment and thus the potential investor should look to
other areas of the market.
5.2. Whilst the market is in no sign to stabilise any time soon, one should watch
the market and the Adidas Group shares carefully for the next two to three
months. This is important to think carefully about the investment whilst
watching the status of the market itself, but primarily this time will help the
investor maximise their investment profitability. When the share price seems
to have hit its lowest point, this would be the ideal time to buy.
5.3. When the stock is at its lowest, the investor is recommended to purchase a
large quantity, safe in the knowledge that they are investing in a major corporation
with huge future potential. Once the market returns to normal following yet another
slight economic recession, this investment will prove to be a sound and profitable one.
5.4. As there is an element of risk in an investment, one should think carefully of
the size of their venture and have the time and patience to let it mature and come
good. Ultimately, the investor has to ‘accept the risk if they want the opportunity to
make profitable investment (Atrill & McLaney 2006).’ The risk is very low and the
chance to make a profitable investment is very high according to this analysis of the
Adidas Group.
Section 6 - Bibliography
Adidas-Salomon, 2000. Annual Report 2000. Herzogenaurach: Adidas-Salomon.
Page No. 14

15. MA Sports Management Philip Barnes, Paul Borelan,
Mikolaj Chelstowski & Sun Yan
Adidas-Salomon, 2001. Annual Report 2001. Herzogenaurach: Adidas-Salomon.
Adidas-Salomon, 2002. Annual Report – Passion for Sport 2002. Herzogenaurach:
Adidas-Salomon AG.
Adidas-Salomon, 2003. Annual Report – We Will 2003. Herzogenaurach: Adidas-
Salomon AG.
Adidas-Salomon, 2004. Annual Report – Impossible is Nothing 2004.
Herzogenaurach: Adidas-Salomon AG.
Adidas-Salomon, 2005. Annual Report – Scoring on all Fields 2005. Herzogenaurach:
Adidas-Salomon AG.
Adidas-Salomon, 2006. Annual Report – Setting the Pace 2006. Herzogenaurach:
Adidas AG.
Adidas-Salomon, 2007. Annual Report –United by Sport 2007. Herzogenaurach:
Adidas AG.
ATRILL, P. MC LANEY, E.J. 2006. Accounting and Finance for Non-Specialists.
Essex: Pearson Education.
BRANIGAN, T. 18th August 2008. The Real Olympics Competition: Nike and Adidas
Claim China’s Heroes. [Online]. Available:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/2008/aug/18/olympics2008.retail [26th November
2008]
CHEN, A.S., ZHANG, T.W. Autocorrelation, Structural Breaks and the Predictive
Ability of Dividend Yield. Applied Economics, 39(5):645-652, March 2007
CHRISTIE, W.G. Dividend Yield and Expected Returns: The Zero - Dividend Puzzle.
Journal of Financial Economics, 28(1-2):95-125, 1990
CURTIS, G, Cobham, D. 2005. Business Information Systems. Essex: Pearson
Education
DOLLESCHAL, C. 2008. Adidas Equity Research. Frankfurt: Commerzbank.
GORMAN, T. 2003. The Complete Idiot’s Guide to MBA Basics. London: Alpha
Books.
GRANT, R. 2005. Contemporary Strategy Analysis. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing
GREGORY, A. 2000. Planning and Managing Public Relations Campaigns. London:
Kogan Page Publishers.
HAIG, M. 2006. Brand Royalty. London: Kogan Page Publishers
Page No. 15

16. MA Sports Management Philip Barnes, Paul Borelan,
Mikolaj Chelstowski & Sun Yan
HEJUAN, Z. 29th October 2008. Adidas May Slow China Production Growth.
[Online]. Available: http://english.caijing.com.cn/2008-10-29/110024345.html [26th
November 2008]
ISLAM, F. 28th May 2006. Stripes versus Swoosh in the Marketing World Cup.
[Online]. Available:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2006/may/28/business.advertising [25th November
2008]
MOTT, G. 2005. Accounting for Non-Accounting Students. London: Kogan Page
Publishers.
MURADOGLU, G., BAKKE, M., KVERNES, G.L. An Investment Strategy based on
Gearing Ratio. Applied Economics Letters, 12(13):801-804, October 2005
Nike Inc, 2007. Annual Report 2007. Oregon: NIKE Inc.
ORSUCCI, F., SALA, N. 2008. Relaxing Interfaces. Hershey: Idea Group Inc.
ROBERTS, H.V. Stock Market “Patterns” and Financial Analysis: Methodological
Suggestions. The Journal of Finance, 14(1):1-10, March 1959
WILSON, B. 23rd June 2008. Brands Chase Beijing Games Boost. [Online].
Available: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/7463085.stm [26th November 2008]
WILSON, J. 3rd November 2008. Corporate Diary. [Online]. Available:
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/a9d0fbb4-a947-11dd-a19a-000077b07658.html [25th
November 2008]
YAHOO FINANCE. 2008. Adidas ADS.DE Stock Quote. [Online].
http://uk.finance.yahoo.com/q/bc?s=ADS.DE&t=my&l=off&z=l&q=l&c=%5EFTSE,
%5EDJI. [21st November 2008]
Page No. 16