The formula of the single stage residual income valuation is the following:
V0=B0+ (ROE-R)B0/(r-g).
If this formula is similar as to when we do the constant dividend growth model where p=d0(1+g)/(r-g). Why isnt the numerator of the single stage residual income valuation also multiplied by (1+g). Arent we not assuming that the RI grows constantly forever?
For Gordon growth model. Note that the numerator is the next period dividend.
V_0 = \frac{D_1}{r-g} = \frac{D_0(1+g)}{r-g}
In the same way for the single stage RI model, the numerator must be the next period RI (in this case RI_1). And
RI_1 = E_1 - r \times B_0 = (ROE - r) \times B_0
There is no R_0 usually so you do not see R_0(1+g). But the formula assumes that in subsequent periods, the RI will grow at a constant rate of g, i.e. RI_2=RI_1(1+g) and so on.
The Residual Income Valuation is often compared to the justified price to book ratio and the curriculum explains how they are related to each other. I just dont see that relationship