DHL 2009 Annual Report Download - page 195

  lower by the balance sheet date, the fair value of the put and
call options would have increased on the asset side by   million,
net. An increase in the Postbank share would have had the opposite
e ect and would have resulted in a charge to net  nance costs / net
 nancial income.
 e forward transaction embedded in the mandatory ex-
changeable bond must be separated in accordance with   and
be treated as an uncompleted transaction as it is de nitely excluded
from the scope of  . Since no consideration was paid upon the
conclusion of the transaction, the cost of the forward transaction
is zero.
E ective  January , the  clari ed the scope exemp-
tion in  . (g), with regard to the maturities for the settlement
of required transactions related to the sale of shares. Forward trans-
actions no longer fall under the exemption provided by  . (g)
if it is clear upon the conclusion of a contract that the settlement of
such transactions exceeds the time required. In the present case, the
forward’s term exceeds usual maturities.
 us, e ective  January , the forward transaction must
now also be recognised in pro t or loss at its fair value of  , mil-
lion along with the options (third tranche). Changes in the fair value
on the following reporting dates a ect net  nance costs / net  nancial
income.  is may increase the volatilities of Deutsche Post ’s and
the Group’s net  nance costs / net  nancial income. Future changes
in fair value of derivative  nancial instruments re ect the perform-
ance of the Postbank share. A positive trend of the Postbank share
will adversely impact net  nance costs / net  nancial income.
A fair value measurement of the Postbank shares still owned
a er deconsolidation would largely o set the e ect on pro t or loss
from the derivative  nancial instruments.  is is not permitted
under .  e remaining Postbank shares are to be recognised
and measured as an equity-accounted investment until the manda-
tory exchangeable bond is exercised. Most of the e ects from the
disposal of the equity-accounted carrying amount and the measure-
ment of the derivative  nancial instruments will have been o set by
 February .
Upon conclusion of the contract, the income from the transfer
of the Postbank shares for tranche  and tranche  was  xed already.
 e gains and losses from the recognition and measurement of the
derivative  nancial instruments re ect the fair value trend of the
Postbank shares.  e gain or loss on the disposal of the Postbank
investment also depends on the fair value of the Postbank share,
since on the investment’s disposal the respective derivative  nancial
instruments are derecognised with e ect on pro t or loss. If the fair
value approximates the forward sales price and / or the  xed price
of the options, the deconsolidation e ect increases accordingly,
since the values of the derivative  nancial instruments decrease in
largely the same amount. If the fair value of the Postbank share de-
creases, the fair value of the derivatives increase, which may result
in a loss on disposal.  e e ects from the measurement of deriva-
tive  nancial instruments would then have anticipated the income
on disposal.
A sensitivity analysis is performed to present the interest-rate
risks in accordance with  .  is method is used to determine
the e ects hypothetical changes in market interest rates have on in-
terest income, interest expense and on equity at the reporting date.
 e following assumptions are taken as a basis for the sensitivity
analysis:
Primary variable interest  nancial instruments are subject
to interest rate risks and will therefore have to be included in the
sensitivity analysis. Primary variable-interest  nancial instruments
which were transformed into  xed-interest  nancial instruments in
a cash  ow hedge are not included. Changes in market interest rates
in derivative  nancial instruments used as a cash  ow hedge a ect
equity by a change in fair values and must therefore be included in
the sensitivity analysis. Fixed-interest  nancial instruments meas-
ured at amortised cost are not subject to interest rate risk.
Designated fair value hedges of interest rate exposures are
not included in the sensitivity analysis, because the interest-related
changes in fair value of the hedged item and the hedging transaction
almost fully o set each other in pro t or loss for the period. Only
the variable portion of the hedging instrument a ects net  nance
costs / net  nancial income and must be included in the sensitivity
analysis.
Interest-rate derivatives outside the scope of a hedging rela-
tionship which would a ect net  nance costs / net  nancial income
due to changes in market rates were not in the portfolio as at  De-
cember .
If the market interest rate level as at  December  had
been  basis points higher, pro t would have increased by   mil-
lion (previous year:  – million).  e change of sign from the pre-
vious year re ects the cash in ows from the Postbank sale. A mar-
ket rate level  basis points lower would have had the opposite
e ect. A change in the market interest rate level by  basis points
would a ect the fair values of the interest rate derivatives recog-
nised in equity. A rise in interest rates would have increased equity
by   million (previous year:   million); a reduction would have
reduced equity by   million (previous year:   million).
Market price risk
As part of the “Amendment Agreement Regarding the Ac-
quisition of Shares in Deutsche Postbank ”, Deutsche Post 
acquired derivative  nancial instruments relating to the transfer
of Postbank shares.  ese are conditional put and call options on
,, Deutsche Postbank shares and an unconditional forward
sale on ,, Deutsche Postbank  shares. Contractual
partner in both cases is Deutsche Bank .
 e put and call options were recognised at fair value through
pro t or loss at the conclusion of the contract.  is resulted in
income of   million recognised in net  nance cost / net  -
nancial income.  e put option was recognised at a fair value of
  million, the call option was to be recognised under liabilities
at  – million. Changes in the options’ fair value are included in
net  nance costs / net  nancial income until the time they are ex-
ercised or forfeited. Had the fair value of the Postbank share been
Deutsche Post DHL Annual Report 
178