Aes Case

To make the most informed decision the IRRs and payback periods of the projects should be compared in conjunction with the NPVs of the two projects. The NPV analysis of the two projects under consideration indicates that the MMDC Project is the better of the two projects.

Finally, in order to complete a more accurate comparison between the two projects, we utilized the EANPV as the deciding factor. Under current accepted financial practice, NPV is generally considered the most accurate method of predicting the performance of a potential project. The duration of the projects is different, one lasts four years and one lasts six years. To account for the variation in time frames for the projects and to further refine our selection we calculated the EANPV to compare performance on a yearly basis.

In conclusion, the difference between the U.S. and Pakistan projects is 16.60%. Obviously, the U.S. project looks much more favorable.

If the IRR exceeds the required rate of return (10%), the project should be accepted. Otherwise, it should be rejected.

592 Week 1 DQ 1 WBS Construction PROJ 592 Week 1 DQ 2 Project Cost Estimates and Assumptions PROJ 592 Week 2 DQ 1 Cost Components PROJ 592 Week 2 DQ 2 Estimating Processes PROJ 592 Week 3 DQ 1 Project Schedules PROJ 592 Week 3 DQ 2 Sensitivity Analysis PROJ 592 Week 4 DQ 1 Resource Allocation and Leveling PROJ 592 Week 4 DQ 2 Advanced Schedule Techniques PROJ 592 Week 5 DQ 1 Earned Value Calculation PROJ 592 Week 5 DQ 2 Project Monitoring and Control & EV PROJ 592 Week 6 DQ 1 Forecasting Project Completion Cost PROJ 592 Week 6 DQ 2 Project Control PROJ 592

Capital planning and budgeting is a very vital piece in the Public Budgeting System process. It is an essential implement in the financial management practice and is effective in both public and private organizations. It is the method which consists of the determination and the evaluation of the investments and the possible expenses by an organization. As explicate by Lee, Johnson, & Joyce (2008), capital budgets help in determining how much of each form of investment is needed, and it supports an organization in assessing the available revenue which includes loans is required to finance those investments (p. 475). Capital budgeting is a central part of the universal

7) See Table 1 NPV=42,318.71 IRR = 14% MIRR = 12% Payback period= 2.93 years. Yes the project should be undertaken.

Financial Analysis The sensitivity analysis on IRR provided by the case in Exhibit 9 is demonstrated in Table 3 in Appendix. With reference to the calculated WACC, 11.22%, most of the circumstances considered in the sensitivity analysis suggest the acceptance of the 7E7 project. However, if the air travel demand worsened and sold only 1500 in the first 20 years, the project will be abandoned even if there is a 5% premium in price. If the unit volume sold is equal to

All else equal, the WACC of a firm increases as the beta and rate of return on equity increases, as an increase in WACC notes a decrease in valuation and a higher risk (1). Since Hansson believes the risk of the firm will increase, a higher WACC should be applied to the project

The key to AES projects financing lies with the precise forecasting of cash flows. In effect, the possibility of estimating cash flows with an acceptable level of uncertainty allows for allocation of risks among various interested parties. The ensuing certainty in cash flows allows for high level of leverage and enables project assets to be separated from the parent company.

Given our recommendation to accept the new investment opportunity, this project will impact the forecasted financial statements from 2010 onwards. Please refer to Exhibits 6 and 7 for the revised projections.

4. Based on the information provided in the case, our group calculated the NPV for the project under both tax environment and tax-free condition, respectively, by using the excel spreadsheet and the NPV function. (For a detailed calculation of NPV, please refer to Appendix Under 15-yr.) According to our calculation, we have the following results: In the first case scenario, which the firm is in a tax environment (35% income tax), the NPV of the project equals to -$6,366,054.53

This case study focuses on where financial theory ends and practical application of the weighted average cost of capital (WACC) begins. It presents evidence on how some of the most financially complex companies and financial advisors estimated capital costs and focuses on the gaps found between theory and application. The approach taken in the paper differed from their predecessors in several various respects. Prior published information was solely based on written, closed-end surveys sent to a large number of firms, without a focused topic. The study set out to see if financial theory, specifically cost-of-capital, is truly ubiquitous in true business applications.

Capital budgeting is the most important management tool that enables managers of the organization to select the investment option that yields comprehensive cash flows and rate of return. For managers availability of capital whether in form of debt or equity is very limited and thus it become imperative for them to invest their limited and most important resource in perfect option that could prove to beneficial for the organization in the long run (Hickman et al, 2013). However, while using capital budgeting tool managers must understand its quantitative and qualitative considerations that are discussed below.

This article mainly discusses the cost of capital, the required return necessary to make a capital budgeting project worthwhile. Cost of capital includes the cost of debt and the cost of equity. Theorist conclude that the cost of capital to the owners of a firm is simply the rate of interest on bonds.