Caledonia Products

After evaluating the Super Project for General Foods, the two main things that management needed to address were the relevant incremental and non-incremental cash flows discussed below and incorporate the NPV and the net cash flows (yearly) to make a decision on whether to accept or reject the project. The start-up costs were determined by splitting up the costs of $160,000 in 1967 and $40,000 in 1968. To calculate the yearly cash flows, I used year 1 through 10, and the gross profit was calculated by subtracting out relative cash flows and the before tax depreciation. The NPV of $169,530 is positive for the 10% discount rate, which is less than the IRR of 11.4%.

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.

The first project proposal is Match My Doll Clothing line expansion consisted of expanding matching doll and child’s clothing and accessories. The second project proposal is Design Your Own Doll by creating customizable “one of a kind” doll features through the company’s website. The project selection criteria would base on quantitative and qualitative analysis. The quantitative analysis would base on the evaluation of discounting cash flow forecasts to determining the Net Present Value (NPV), Internal Rate of Return (IRR), and the Payback period of each proposed project. The qualitative analysis would include the potential project value of the company’s overall strategy, innovation, key project risks, and the project interdependencies to the whole company.

We recommend based on economical analysis determines that accepting processing plant project is not viable to meet the minimum required rate of return set by the Harris Seafood Inc. for shareholder’s equity. Your concerned about accepting this project would reduce the company’s high rate of return on invested capital is absolutely correct after this analysis. The Free Cash Flow provides a possible scenario of receiving certain principle and interest payments that Harris may receive. Please be advised that our Cash Flow projects and forecast provides great uncertainty, consequently we compensate that uncertainty with the discount rate of 15%, the higher discount rate resulted in lower present value which

General Foods is a large corporation organized by product lines. They are evaluating Super Project, the manufacture of a new powdered dessert. Crosby Sanberg, a financial analysis manager, must determine the value in accepting the proposal, along with J.C. Kresslin, the Corporate Controller. The Super Project will increase profit with a payback period of less than ten years. The proposed capital investment for the project is $200,000 ($80,000 for building modifications and $120,000 for machinery and equipment) and production would take place

Star Appliance is looking to expand their product line and is considering three different projects: dishwashers, garbage disposals, and trash compactors. We want to determine which project would be worth doing by determining if they will add value to Star. Thus, the project(s) that will add the most value to Star Appliance will be worth pursuing. The current hurdle rate of 10% should be re-evaluated by finding the weighted average cost of capital (WACC). Then by forecasting the cash flows of each project and discounting them by the WACC to find the net present value, or by solving for the internal rate of return, we should be able to see which projects Star should undertake.

Our approach to valuing the processing plant can easily be decomposed into three distinct steps first, find the value of the foreseeable free cash flows. Next, calculate the terminal value of the project. Finally, take the present value of those flows. The next few paragraphs walk through each of these steps in order of progression.

In January 2003, Michael Pogonowski, the chief financial officer of Aurora Textile Company, was questioning whether the company should install a new ring-spinning machine, the Zinser 351, in the Hunter production facility. This new machine has ability to produce a finer-quality yarn that would be used for higher-quality and higher-margin products. In deciding whether or not to invest this new machine, NPV and the payback period are critical factors. Firstly, we need to forecast the cash flows that the Zinser 351 will generate in the future. After calculation, the ten-year NPV will be $3, 172,582. Secondly, we use the payback period to analyze the acceptance of this project. Based on this analysis,

Make sure you correctly identify which of your two companies is “Company A”. Note also that you were allocated randomly drawn and randomly paired companies. Therefore, Company B is probably not a useful comparable for Company A’s new project.

The Carded Graphics president and owner, Murry Pitts understands that purchasing a new sheeter is the best option for the company. The new sheeter will help the company develop a better, more agile product that can compare with competitors. The analysis will illustrate the returns on the project will greatly exceed the cost; this will add great value to the company. To determine if the project is worth taking on, some of the criteria to look at are the NPV, IRR, and payback period. If the project produces a positive NPV, an IRR greater than the required rate of return, and a short payback period, the company should obtain the new sheeter. After conducting the analysis, Pitts should proceed with investing in a new sheeter.

In the case of Worldwide Paper Company we performed calculations to decide whether they should accept a new project or not. We calculated their net income and their cash flows for this project (See Table 1.6 and 1.5). We computed WPC’s weighted average cost of capital as 9.87%. We then used the cash flows to calculate the company’s NPV. We first calculated the NPV by using the 15% discount rate; by using that number we calculated a negative NPV of $2,162,760. We determined that the discount rate of 15% was out dated and insufficient. To calculate a more accurate NPV for the project, we decided to use the rate of 9.87% that we computed. Using this number we got the NPV of $577,069. With the NPV of $577,069 our conclusion is to accept this

The present value of the net incremental cash flows, totaling $5,740K, is added to the present value of the Capital Cost Allowance (CCA) tax shield, provided by the Plant and Equipment of $599K, to arrive at the project’s NPV of $6,339K. (Please refer to Exhibit 4 and 5 for assumptions and detailed NPV calculations.) This high positive NPV means that the project will add a significant amount of value to FMI. In addition, using the incremental cash flows (excluding CCA) generated by the NPV calculation, we calculated the project’s IRR to be 28%. This means that the project will generate a higher rate of return than the company’s cost of capital of 10.05%. This is also a positive indication that the company should undertake the project.

The four measures were net present value (NPV), internal rate of return (IRR), the payback period and increases in earnings per share (EPS). Other strategic factors must be considered that are not reflected in the financial tests. James Fawn and his ICG analyst team must decide which project is the best value for the short-term and the long-term. Utilizing these financial hurdles and contemplating other strategic factors, Victoria Chemicals will choose the project that will give the firm the most value.

Rainbow Products is considering the purchase of a paint-mixing machine to reduce labor costs.The savings are expected to result in additional cash flows to Rainbow of $5,000 per year. Themachine costs $35,000 and is expected to last for 15 years. Rainbow has determined that the cost ofcapital for such an investment is 12%.[A] Compute the payback, net present value (NPV), and internal rate of return (IRR) for this machine.Should Rainbow purchase it? Assume that all cash flows (except the initial purchase) occur at the endof the year, and do not consider taxes. Rainbow Products is considering the purchase of a paint-mixing machine to reduce labor costs.The savings are expected to result in additional cash flows to Rainbow of $5,000 per

Overall, the ranking lists shown that the project of Strategic Acquisition should be accept by the board directors, because it has a highest IRR and NPV, the second high Profitability Index and 5 years payback, although the initial investment is really big but still the return is worse to do. The total investment of this project will be EUR55 million. The second recommend project will be the project of Southward Expansion. This project has a high IRR and NPV, the initial investment is EUR30 million, it is the 3rd in the ranking list of Project Spending and it is the 2nd in the ranking list of Project Net Cash Flow about EUR56.25 million, The payback is 5 years too. Because the project of Effuent-Water Treatment at Four Plants is highly recommend so right now we have total capital budget EUR91 million. Based on all the ranking list, the project of the Artificial Sweetener will be the last recommendation for the new year capital budget. This project has the 3rd highest IRR and NPV, the return is the 4th in the list about EUR42.75 million and payback is also 5 years. They expenditure for this project is EUR27 million. So the total budget will be EUR118 million include Strategic Acquisition, Southward Expansion, Artificial Sweetener and Effuent-Water Treatment at Four Plants.