Página principal



A formatação da revista obedece à 6ª edição das normas apa

Descargar 2.1 Mb.

A formatação da revista obedece à 6ª edição das normas apa





Descargar 2.1 Mb.
Página14/22
Fecha de conversión24.11.2018
Tamaño2.1 Mb.
1   ...   10   11   12   13   14   15   16   17   ...   22

Fuentes Bibliográficas

MarcadorDePosición1: , (Dwyer y Kim),

Rod03: , (Rodríguez D. y Guisado T.),

Ote06: , (Otero),

Wor13: , (World Economic Forum),

Bog12: , (Euro Cost Internacional),

Pro13: , (Proexport Colombia),

Min08: , (Ministerio de Comercio, Industria y Turismo. Viceministerio de Turismo),

Uni10: , (Universidad Tecnológica de Pereira- Red Alma Máter),

Min11: , (Ministerio de Cultura de Colombia.),

Min103: , (Ministerio de Comercio, Industria y Turismo),











Determinants of Cash Holdings in the Accommodation Industry



Flávio Morais
Departamento de Gestão e Economia – Universidade da Beira Interior

Pedro Silva
Departamento de Gestão e Economia – Universidade da Beira Interior & NECE – Núcleo de Estudos em Ciências Empresariais












Morais, F. & Silva, P. (2013). Determinants of cash holdings in the accommodation industry. Tourism and Hospitality International Journal, 1, 95-136.


Abstract

This study analyzes the determinants of cash holdings for the accommodation industry in South European countries (Spain, Greece, Italy and Portugal) using a sample of 5964 firms during the period 2003-2011. A fixed-effects panel data model revealed that larger companies, higher leveraged, where most debt is short-term and that maintain better relationships with financial institutions exhibit lower cash to assets ratios. Liquid assets substitutes, capital expenditures and asset tangibility also have a negative effect on cash levels. As expected, cash holdings are positively influenced by cash-flow and cash-flow volatility. The results reveal the negative and significant impact of the 2008 financial crisis on cash holdings in the sector, which at the end of 2011 had not yet returned to pre-crisis levels. Empirical results reject the generalized argument put forward, over more than a decade, to explain high cash holdings and its tendency to rise until the crisis, emphasizing the little importance of the precautionary motive as an incentive to accumulate cash.

Keywords: cash holdings, cash ratio, financial crisis, accommodation industry
















1. Introduction

The study of the determinants of cash holdings has been given great importance in the literature, especially in the last decade. Research in this area has been motivated by the finding that firms have systematically increased their level of cash holdings as a percentage of assets. Dittmar & Mahrt-Smith (2007) find a constant increase in the Cash/Assets5 ratio which stretches, according to Bates, Kahle & Stulz (2009), over the last three decades. These authors report that the average value more than doubled between 1980 and 2006 in listed industrial firms in the USA, rising from 10.5% to 23.2% of assets. High levels of cash ratio are also reported by Gao, Harford, & Li (2013) indicating an average value of 20.45% of assets in 2011 in listed firms in the USA. Iskandar-Datta & Jia (2012) revealed that the tendency was not confined to the USA, being identical in a set of industrialized countries6. The study by Ferreira & Vilela (2004), which uses a sample of Eurozone7 countries, reveals that non-financial European firms have on average around 15% of assets in cash holdings8. Such significant values would allow for the amortization of a considerable proportion of these firms' liabilities (Bates et al., 2009). Interestingly, this phenomenon coincides with the internationally increase of the zero leverage phenomenon (Bessler et al., 2012). McLean (2011) estimates that share issues mostly end up increasing cash levels. Specifically in 1970, $1 issued resulted in $0.23 of cash retention, whereas in the decade of 2000 $1 issued resulted in $0.60 for increased cash holdings.

In this context, authors such as Zhou (2009) draw attention to the different evolution of cash holdings among sectors. The author concludes that high-technology firms increased their cash holdings more significantly, but from 2000 the increase in cash holdings has come to be generalized, as a response to adverse macroeconomic shocks (Ehling & Haushalter, 2013).

In any case, with cash holdings being the most liquid asset held by firms and at the same time apparently the least productive and the one guaranteeing least return, why do firms maintain such high levels of cash? In a perfect capital market firms would not need to accumulate cash reserves to be able to carry out their investment plans since they could easily resort to external financing at a fair price whenever internal funds were insufficient. However, the existing market imperfections induce firms to have a level of cash holdings which allows them to continue to finance investments with a positive net present value (NPV) when other financing sources are not available. Having cash holdings is particularly beneficial for firms with financing restrictions allowing them to make investments which otherwise would have to be abandoned (Denis & Sibilkov, 2010).

Fresard (2010) emphasizes the strategic dimension of the cash holding policy stating that firms with high levels of cash have systematic gains in market share over industry rivals, a result that is more evident in industries where competition is considerable.

Naturally, due to this major increase in cash holdings over the last decades, attempts have been made to find explanations for the phenomenon, researching the determinants that lead firms to keep high levels of cash holdings. However, only a limited number of studies try to understand why certain sectors have consistently low levels of cash. For example, despite this general tendency to increase cash holding levels, the hotel sector remains one of the least intensive in reserves of cash holdings (Kusnadi, 2005; Gao et al., 2013)9. Although some studies report the reduced level of cash in the accommodation sector, as far as we know, only Woods, Kim & Kim (2011) and Koh & Jang (2011) researched deeper into its determinants, both using samples of listed lodging firms in the USA. These authors find cash levels of 8.8% and 8.6% of assets, respectively. Our own exploratory analysis for the period of 2003 to 2011 shows that in all the countries analyzed, the cash level in lodging firms is under the average for all industries.

Some characteristics of lodging firms could lead to unique cash holding policies. In the first place, a great proportion of their assets is in the form of fixed assets (buildings and equipment) which financed through debt guaranteed by those assets implies they are highly leveraged (Jang, Tang, & Chen, 2008)10. On the other hand, operational risks associated with the seasonal nature of tourism increase the volatility of operational cash-flow (Jang et al., 2008). Therefore, the industry is characterized by high financial and operational risks in a competitive and saturated market, and so it is particularly interesting to investigate what determines over time the maintenance of low levels of cash holding. We do so in this study, using a sample of 5964 South European firms located in Spain, Greece, Italy and Portugal. Besides the homogeneous characteristics of tourism, particularly in the accommodation sector, these countries are also among those to suffer most from the financial crisis of 2008-2009 and from the current sovereign debt crisis, creating an atmosphere of extreme uncertainty and challenge in tourism activity in general. The financial crisis of 2008-2009 put a temporary end to the boom registered in tourism in these countries (Eurostat, 2008). The sample and time period studied allows us to give some insights on the influence of the 2008 financial crisis and the following sovereign debt crisis that affected these countries, a factor that should lead to increases in cash holdings attributable to precautionary reasons.

Using a fixed effects panel data model and contrary to studies in general, our results emphasize the little importance of precautionary reasons in determining cash holdings in the accommodation sector, rejecting the generalized argument put forward, over the last years, to explain high cash holdings and its tendency to rise until the crisis. Our results reveal the negative and significant impact of the crisis on cash holdings in the sector, which at the end of 2011 had not yet returned to pre-crisis levels.


2. Theoretical framework and literature review

2.1. Theoretical framework

The academic literature on reserves of cash and cash equivalents was first developed in the early work of Keynes (1936). There, Keynes discusses the preference for liquidity, indicating three reasons for holding currency: (i) transaction motives, (ii) precautionary motives and (iii) speculation motives. The first arises from the need for cash for current business transactions due to time lags between fund inflows and outflows. For Keynes, precautionary motives arise from the desire for security with regard to uncertainties and the desire to take advantage of unforeseen opportunities. Finally, Keynes interprets money as a way of preserving wealth as an alternative to investing in risky assets (speculation motive).

It is in recognizing the benefits and costs of cash holdings that the Trade-Off Theory, originally proposed by Baumol (1952) and Tobin (1956), seeks an optimal level of cash holdings. Later, Miller & Orr (1966) developed an extension of the Trade-Off model which also considers the volatility of cash-flow, emphasizing precautionary reasons. Minimizing the transaction costs (of having to resort to external finance or liquidate existing assets), carrying out investment policies when other sources of finance are not available or too expensive (Opler et al., 1999) and reducing the risk of financial difficulties (Ferreira & Vilela, 2004) are presented as the benefits of cash reserves. As for the costs, if we consider that the manager maximizes shareholder wealth, the only cost of keeping cash holdings is the reduced return obtained in relation to other riskier investments (Kim, Mauer, & Sherman, 1998).

However, some factors make cash holdings deviate from their optimal level. Myers & Majluf (1984) suggest that asymmetric information between managers and investors make external finance too expensive and, to avoid it, firms should create financial slack accumulating cash holdings (Myers, 1984). These implications are at the basis of the Pecking Order Theory by Myers & Majluf (1984). The theory argues that to reduce information asymmetries and financing costs, a firm should finance itself firstly through retained profits, then low-risk debt and high-risk debt and only as a last resort should it turn to share issue. We can therefore expect that liquidity reserves are used as a “buffer between retained earnings and investment needs” (Ferreira & Vilela, 2004).

Agency costs are another factor determining a deviation from the optimal level of cash holdings. According to Jensen & Meckling (1976) the agency costs of debt appear when there is a conflict of interest between shareholders and creditors or when the conflict arises between various categories of creditors making more difficult and costly to resort to external finance. A way to prevent them and lessen the probability of financial distress is by keeping a low level of leverage or keeping high levels of cash holdings. On the other hand, Free Cash-Flow Theory by Jensen (1986) states that conflicts between managers and shareholders are more serious in the presence of high free cash-flows that give the manager greater discretionary power in the firm's decisions. Indeed, managers who pursue their own interests prefer to increase cash and cash equivalents rather than make payments to shareholders. A way to reduce the agency costs of managerial discretion could be simply to reduce firms' levels of cash holdings.

The recent literature on cash holdings tends to emphasize a new motive, of a fiscal nature, which leads to deviations from the optimal level of cash holdings. The taxing of foreign profits at the time of their repatriation can motivate firms with profitable subsidiaries to retain profits abroad, accumulating cash, if there are no attractive investment opportunities (Foley et al., 2007).


2.2. Empirical evidence

The main line of research on cash holdings tries to uncover which firms' characteristics determine the level of cash holdings. Pioneering studies were developed by Kim et al. (1998) and Opler et al. (1999). Using a sample of 915 industrial firms in the USA, between 1975 and 1994, Kim et al. (1998) showed evidence that firms tend to have an optimal cash level which increases with the cost of external financing and with the variability of future cash-flow. On the contrary, the differential of return between physical assets and liquid assets leads to decreased cash holdings, confirming the significance of the opportunity cost of investing in cash holdings. Again with a sample of US firms Opler et al. (1999) find that firms with greater growth opportunities and activities of greater risk retain high cash levels. On the other hand, firms with easy access to the capital market tend to have lower cash holdings. In their sample of US industrial firms, Bates et al. (2009) identified increased cash ratios and explain it as the result of holding lower working capital, having less capital expenditure and greater R&D expenses. However, the authors present cash-flow volatility as the main determinant of this increase since greater increases occur in industries where cash-flow volatility is higher. The three studies carried out in the USA provide strong evidence supporting Trade-Off Theory, giving a prominent role to the precautionary motive for increased cash holdings (Bates et al., 2009), since they all highlight cash-flow volatility as one of the determinants with the most positive influence on cash levels. Opler et al. (1999) also find partial support for Pecking Order Theory, showing the positive impact of cash-flow on cash ratios. These studies do not find evidence to support the role of agency costs in the level of cash and cash equivalents11.

The work by Powell & Baker (2010) presents similar results but differs from previous studies and the literature as a whole, in that it gathers data through surveys of the CFOs of the 1000 largest listed non-financial firms in the USA in 2008.

Pinkowitz & Williamson (2001) also promoted comparisons between various countries using a sample of industrial firms in the USA, Germany and Japan, aiming to identify what determinants explain the differences in cash holding levels between countries. The study shows that Japanese firms retain more liquid assets than their counterparts in the USA and Germany, which could be justified by the great power of Japanese banks and the absence of other monitoring forces. This result arouses interest because when banks are responsible for disciplining firms, agency costs and information asymmetries should be reduced (facilitating access to external finance). Nevertheless, according to the authors, Japanese banks encourage firms to keep high liquid reserves, aiming to extract income from them or reduce monitoring costs.

Considering that firms' cash levels vary from one country to another mostly because of the characteristics of the country rather than those of the firm, cross-country studies focus the analysis on the subject of corporate governance, studying topics such as the role of the level of investor and creditor protection, the development of financial markets, ownership concentration and managerial ownership over cash holdings12.

Foley et al. (2007) used a sample of multinational firms in the USA to test the importance of the fiscal context in cash holdings. The findings sustain that the fiscal motive can explain increased cash holdings, by revealing that firms facing greater tax costs with the repatriation of gains retain more cash reserves in their subsidiaries. This tendency is less pronounced in the case of firms with financing difficulties in their country of origin. The conclusions of Foley et al. (2007) tie in with the report by Standard & Poor's (2012) “The credit overhang: Follow the Money - Where’s all the cash on US corporate balance sheets?”, by stating that the ten firms with greatest cash holdings in the USA retain 77% of cash holding reserves abroad. The report highlights that the tax rate on repatriated income can reach 35%. In Europe, countries generally have a system of tax exemption for foreign income, which cancels out this motive.

Some studies go further and investigate topics such as the impact of national culture on cash holdings (Chang & Noorbakhsh, 2009; Ramírez & Tadesse, 2009) or the possibility of firms gradually adjusting their level of cash holdings over time (Bruinshoofd & Kool, 2004) in the attempt to reach an optimal cash ratio. The study by Opler et al. (1999) tested the hypothesis of cash holdings converging on a target level, checking whether the variation in cash level reverts to the average. In subsequent studies, this hypothesis is tested including the lagged dependent variable in the set of explanatory variables of the equation to estimate. In this regard, Ozkan & Ozkan (2004) provide evidence that firms have target cash levels, adjusting gradually towards them whenever there are deviations in previous periods13.

An alternative line of investigation seeks to quantify the impact of cash holdings on firms' market value, estimating the value of an additional dollar retained in cash. Bates, Chang & Chi (2011) specify that in the decade of the 1980s that figure was $0.61, in 1990 it was $1.04 and in the decade of the 2000s it rose to $1.1214.

A considerable number of authors examine the association between cash holdings and company performance without reaching consensus. Harford (1999) explains the decline in operational performance in firms with greater cash holdings by their precipitated strategy of mergers and acquisitions, contrary evidence to that of Mikkelson & Partch (2003) who studied the performance of firms with more than 25% of cash ratio15.

Only recently have some studies concentrated on the tourism industry. Woods et al. (2011) researched the determinants of cash holdings in 67 listed hotel firms in the USA between 1997 and 2008. They conclude that firms with better access to the capital market (proxied by company size) and with higher operational cash-flow present lower levels of cash holdings. On the contrary, hotel firms with greater investment opportunities, more capital expenditure and more leverage tend to have more cash and cash equivalents.

Koh & Jang (2011) analyze a sample of 47 US hotel firms between 1988 and 2008, studying the variables determining cash levels, separated in two samples of firms with and without financing restrictions. The authors find that irrespective of financing conditions, cash holdings are negatively related to leverage, a result that supports Pecking Order Theory. The authors show that firms in the accommodation sector could be accessing the debt market relatively easily with their assets serving as collateral, diminishing the incentive to increase levels of cash holdings as a precaution. They find, however, that restricted firms retain more cash holdings from their cash-flow, not finding any systematic relationship in firms without restrictions, a result that supports the precautionary motive.

2.3. Hypotheses and Variables

Cash ratio: In our study we will use the cash-to-assets ratio (CASH1), the most common approach in the literature, and as a robustness test the cash to net assets (CASH2) first used by Opler et al. (1999).

Size: The existence of less information asymmetries facilitating the access to financing and the greater diversification of activities of larger companies (Rajan & Zingales, 1995) suggest a negative relationship between cash reserves and size. According to the theory and the empirical evidence we hypothesize a negative relation between the cash ratio and size. Company size (SIZE) will be proxied by the natural logarithm of total assets.

Growth opportunities: Information asymmetries should be more important for companies with high growth opportunities (Myers & Majluf, 1984). Bankruptcy costs should be higher, as well, due to the greater intangibility of the value of the company. Therefore, it is suggested that companies with high growth opportunities should keep larger cash reserves. Then, following García-Teruel & Martínez-Solano (2008), we used the GROWOP variable computed as the percentage increase in turnover from last year as the proxy for future growth opportunities assuming past growth is correlated with growth opportunities16.

Cash-flow: Empirically and theoretically the relation between cash and cash-flow is ambiguous. According to the Pecking Order Theory firms prefer internal financing which justifies a positive relation between cash holdings and cash-flow and, according to the Trade-Off Theory, precautionary motives should make credit constrained companies retain more cash from cash-flow (Almeida, Campello, & Weisbach, 2004). However, cash-flow generation could be seen as a substitute for cash reserves implying a contrary relationship. The CFLOW variable was calculated as the ratio between cash-flow (net profit plus depreciations and amortizations) and total assets and as a robustness test we used the EBITDA to total assets ratio.

Cash-flow volatility: The Trade-Off Theory and particularly the precautionary motive states that companies with more volatile cash-flows should maintain higher cash levels (Miller & Orr, 1966). Accordingly, and in coherence with the empirical evidence, we hypothesize a positive relation between this variable and the cash ratio. This variable (VOLCFLOW) was computed as the standard deviation of the cash-flows divided by mean total assets as in Ozkan & Ozkan (2004) and Bigelli & Sánchez-Vidal (2012).

Leverage: The association between leverage and cash ratios is ambiguous, as well. The Pecking Order Theory assumes that when investment exceeds retained earnings, debt increases and cash is reduced. However, if companies try to avoid bankruptcy and agency costs associated with high leverage it could be possible to find a positive relation between leverage and cash. Our hypothesis according to the majority of empirical evidence is that a negative relation exists between both variables. The LEV variable proxying for leverage is measured as the ratio between total debt and total assets.

Debt structure: Precautionary motives should also lead companies with predominance of short-term debt to retain higher cash levels as a measure to reduce refinancing risks. Then, a positive relation is expected between the cash ratio and debt structure measured as the ratio between short term debt and total debt (STDEBT).

Relationships with banks: The existence of a close relationship between firms and financial institutions ensures easier access to financing and refinancing, lowering the level of cash needed for precautionary reasons (Ferreira & Vilela, 2004; Ozkan & Ozkan, 2004). Therefore we expect a negative association between the variables. As a proxy for the Relationships with banks our variable BANKR was computed as the ratio between total bank debt and total debt.

Net Working Capital: As non-cash liquid assets are cash substitutes the empirical evidence supports a negative relation between net working capital and the cash ratio which we expect to find, too, for lodging firms. Our variable NWC was calculated as the ratio between net working capital (current assets net of cash and equivalents minus current liabilities) and total assets.

Capital Expenditure: According to the Pecking Order Theory a negative relation between cash and capital expenditure should be expected since firms prefer internal sources to finance investments. In our study the CAPEX variable will reflect last year capital expenditure and, therefore, we anticipate a negative relation between CAPEX and the cash ratio. The CAPEX estimate was computed as the annual variation in tangible and intangible assets plus depreciations and amortizations divided by total assets.

Asset tangibility: The availability of tangible assets that can be liquidated to avoid cash shortages decreases the need for cash. Furthermore, tangible assets can perform an important role as collateral for debt financing (Titman & Wessels, 1988). Consequently, we hypothesize a negative association between both variables. Asset tangibility (TANG) was measured as the ratio between tangible assets and total assets.

Crisis dummy: The observation of the impact of the financial crisis seems to justify the introduction of a dummy in the main regression model assuming the value of 1 for the period 2008-2011 and 0 otherwise. The aim of using this dummy is to capture the macroeconomic effect of the financial crisis on sample firms' cash levels, considering that the countries studied are still suffering the effects of the crisis.


3. Data and Methodology

To test the hypotheses empirically we collected accounting and financial information on firms belonging to NACE 55 (Accommodation) with headquarters in Spain, Greece, Italy and Portugal for the period 2003-2011 from the Amadeus database supplied by Bureau van Dijk. We obtained a total of 32479 firms, corresponding to 292311 firm-year observations. Subsequently, microenterprises17 were taken out of the sample so as to minimize missing values and accounting errors. Firm-year observations with obvious accounting errors were also eliminated. The variable GROWOP which is computed as the growth in turnover was truncated at 1% and 99% aiming to exclude from the sample years in which firms begin or cease activity, and consequently, detain abnormal cash holdings. Finally, for each year, complete information relating to the variables studied was required and at least three consecutive years of complete data was required for each firm. Therefore, the sample includes surviving and non-surviving firms that have appeared in Amadeus at any time during the sample period. The criteria yield an unbalanced panel of 40129 firm-year observations for 5964 firms, of which 2318 are Spanish, 831 Greek, 2188 Italian and 627 Portuguese.

In this study, we will use panel data methodology. Compared to purely time-series or cross-section methods, this technique allows more precise inferences by dealing with a greater number of observations and degrees of freedom; and using multiple observations for the same firm allows better control of their non-observed characteristics (Baltagi, 2005). This model can be represented as follows:

yit = a + Xit × b + uit, i = 1, . . . , N; t = 1, ..., T (1)

where yit is the dependent variable, i represents firms (cross-section dimension) and t represents time (time-series dimension); a is the constant term, b represents the regression coefficient and Xit represents the explanatory variables. It is assumed that:

uit = μi + νit (2)

where μi indicates the firm's non-observable individual effects and νit the remaining disturbance.

In our case, the base model to estimate will be:

CASHit= a +b1 LEVit + b2 NWCit + b3 SIZEit + b4 GROWOPit + b5 BANKRit + b6 STDEBTit + b7 CAPEXit +
+ b
8 TANGit + b9 CFLOWit + b10 VOLCFLOWit+b11 CRISISit + μi + νit (3)

A fixed effect (FE) model assumes that μi is correlated with the independent variables contrary to a random effect (RE) model. The choice between these models will depend on the results of the Hausman test (Hausman, 1978) which evaluates the null hypothesis of absence of correlation between the firm's non-observable individual effects and the determinants of cash holding level, against the alternative hypothesis of existence of correlation.


4. Results

The descriptive statistics for the main variables used in the analysis are presented in table 1. It can be seen that for the period 2003-2011, on average (median), firms have a cash ratio of 7.91% (2.71%), a lower value than that generally reported in the literature18.

The average value of total assets is around €12.8 million and the debt ratio (LEV) shows that, on average, sample firms present high levels of leverage (63%), above those reported in the literature19, a fact that seems to highlight their capacity to access external financing. Around 55% of total debt is short-term and 46%, on average, is from banks. The mean of the TANG variable shows that approximately 61% of total assets is made up of tangible fixed assets, a high figure considering what is reported in the literature20. On average, and as in the research by Woods et al. (2011), we find that the value of net working capital as a percentage of total assets is negative, something that can be explained by the low average collection period practiced in the sector. Annual investment in capital (CAPEX) represent on average 7.2% of assets, a figure higher than the average of the CFLOW variable (5.6% of total assets). Volatility of cash-flow is approximately 4.9% whereas the GROWOP variable has an average value of 5.3%. Table 2 shows the mean of the variables studied by country, revealing statistically significant differences between them in terms of average cash ratio21. Greece (9.62%) presents the highest value with Italy presenting the lowest (6.52%), less than what was found by Bigelli & Sánchez-Vidal (2012) for private Italian firms (10%). Portugal and Spain present intermediate cash levels (7.07% and 8.91%, respectively).

Table 1: Descriptive statistics


Variable

Obs.

Mean

St. Dev.

p25

p50

p75

Min

Max

CASH1

40129

0.0791

0.1226

0.0063

0.0271

0.0976

0

0.9675

LEV

40129

0.6333

0.3556

0.3885

0.6466

0.8593

0.0001

11.6738

NWC

40129

-0.1283

0.2806

-0.2371

-0.0949

0.0003

-10.7373

0.9532

ASSETS

40129

12829.07

70739.99

1516.05

3705.384

8995.05

10.446

3535943

SIZE

40129

8.2425

1.4157

7.3239

8.2175

9.1044

2.3462

15.0785

GROWOP

31429

0.0533

0.2507

-0.0563

0.0230

0.1032

-0.5202

2.6180

BANKR

40129

0.4617

0.3383

0.0817

0.5172

0.7731

0

1

STDEBT

40129

0.5462

0.3078

0.2758

0.5155

0.8428

0

1

CAPEX

31429

0.0723

0.2009

0.0100

0.0353

0.1003

-11.9928

1.5222

TANG

40129

0.6102

0.2848

0.3848

0.6860

0.8574

0

0.9984

CFLOW

40129

0.0560

0.1282

0.0177

0.0529

0.0976

-6.4381

1.5902

VOLCFLOW

40129

0.0494

0.0591

0.0187

0.0315

0.0557

0.0007

1.1529


1   ...   10   11   12   13   14   15   16   17   ...   22

Similar:

A formatação da revista obedece à 6ª edição das normas apa iconNormas de la apa para la redacción de resultados de investigacióN
A pesar de que existe un amplio consenso sobre estas normas algunas revistas puede hacer ligeras variaciones de las que siempre encontraremos...
A formatação da revista obedece à 6ª edição das normas apa iconNormas apa 2017 6ta (sexta) edición
Desde el año 1929, cuando sale a luz el primer esbozo de las normas, hasta el presente, apa se ha convertido en un extenso manual...
A formatação da revista obedece à 6ª edição das normas apa iconCapa da revista 3a Edição
O itegam-jetia – Journal of Engineering and Technology for Industry Applications (jetia) é uma publicação do
A formatação da revista obedece à 6ª edição das normas apa icon258193358-Libro-Manual-de-Publicaciones-APA-Re.pdf [formulario apa sexta edicion]

A formatação da revista obedece à 6ª edição das normas apa iconFormato apa – quinta edicióN
El estilo apa, como es presentado en este folleto, es ampliamente aceptado en las
A formatação da revista obedece à 6ª edição das normas apa iconEl formato apa
American Psychological Association (apa) ha sido adoptado internacionalmente por numerosas instituciones académicas, revistas científicas...
A formatação da revista obedece à 6ª edição das normas apa iconNormas apa sexta Edición
Figura X. Hillutet aut ut fugit, optatiam velibusa voluptate aliquost, tem as dita co
A formatação da revista obedece à 6ª edição das normas apa iconXv seminário Luso-Espanhol de Economia Empresarial “o papel das Organizações na Sustentabilidade das Economias em Crise”
Economia da Empresa
A formatação da revista obedece à 6ª edição das normas apa iconForderungsanmeldung im Insolvenzverfahren
Anmeldungen sind stets nur an den Insolvenzverwalter (Treuhänder, Sachwalter) zu senden, nicht an das Gericht. Bitte beachten Sie...


Descargar 2.1 Mb.