Case Analysis on Capital Structure Pioneer Petroleum

The too high estimated cost of capital means that Midland may miss out on investment opportunities and will under value the investment at hand. Furthermore, it is possible for shareholders to see a lower return on their investment. On the other hand, a too low estimated cost of capital

Diageo was created when Grand Metropolitan, plc and Guiness, plc merged in 1997. While the Diageo name is not well known to consumers, its brands are among the most famous including Guinness, Smirnoff, Johnnie Walker and Cuervo. The company recently decided to focus on a strategy to grow through its spirits, wine and beer businesses and divest of its Pillsbury and Burger King subsidiaries. This case study will focus on the proposed capital structure decisions of Diageo.

In contrast, when capital rationing constraints occur over multiple periods and when there are numerous projects, Baumol and Quandt (1965) suggest that mathematical programming may be used to evaluate investments. The linear programming technique is widely used as the model is specifically designed to search through combinations of projects achieving the highest NPV whilst subject to a budget constraint. However, Brealy et al (2008) note that a main disadvantage to using linear programming may be the models can be highly complex and costly.

At the new WACC of 19%, the home appliance and agricultural machinery projects are valued based on their inherent levels of risk. The beta of the industry average home appliance project is 0.95, whereas the beta for the industry average agricultural machine project is calculated as 0.88. CAPM was then employed to find the cost of capital of each project. The cost of capital for the home appliance and agricultural machinery projects were found to be 10.4% and 9.92%, respectively (Appendix B). This analysis allows Star Company to allocate funds to projects that create returns greater than the industry cost of capital for each specific project.

Hypothetical Answer: It would be a huge loss if the new projects undertaken would not yield a good rate of return. The rate of return on invested capital is the most important thing and maximizing shareholder value is the most important thing. Would you help in this decision making process so I do not take on risky

In real live project with more cash flow after the pay back period would be more valuable than Project with no cash flow, yet its payback and discounted payback make it look worse. This is the reason, the shorter the payback period, other things held constant, the greater the project’s liquidity. Apart from this, since cash flows expected in the distant future are generally riskier than near-term cash flows, the payback is often used as an indicator of a project’s riskiness because the longer the payback period the higher is the risk associated with the project (Brigham, 2004) (Fabuzzi, 2003).

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.

Without the correct risk adjustment the firms stock will lose value by taking on high risk projects. The firm could also be considered uncompetitive if they reject low cost/low risk projects.

Furthermore, a sensitivity analysis of factors such as the cost of raw materials, selling price per unit and capacity utilization demonstrates that a small change in any one of these variables could have a major impact on the project’s bottom line. In Appendix B, I examine a scenario in which the selling price per unit decreases by 1% and the cost of raw materials per unit increases by 1% at the outset of the project. In this scenario, the resulting NPV changes from a positive $5.4 million to a loss of $666,000, and the IRR falls below the discount rate to 9.15%. This, to me, reveals that the potential upside of this project is not large enough to account for discrepancies due to imprecise projections, flawed assumptions, or unforeseen risks.

The TexasAgs oil company case study gave us insights on different aspects of a negotiation that can happen in real world scenarios. It elegantly portrayed the importance of having a BATNA, setting target and restriction points, impact of the fluctuating markets on the ongoing negotiations, downside of the emotional behavior, importance of having a third party member or mediator in the negotiation. The case illustrates that the negotiations should be based assumptions as they may or may not be right. Having facts and understanding the other parties true objectives and goals are truly essential in negotiation. It is a typical example of how the current power on one side can dominate and take complete advantage of their position.

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 use of an accounting rate of return also underscores a project 's true future profitability because returns are calculated from accounting statements that list items at book or historical values and are, thus, backward-looking. According to the ARR, cash flows are positive due to the way the return has been tabulated with regard to returns on funds employed. The Payback Period technique also reflects that the project is positive and that initial expenses will be retrieved in approximately 7 years. However, the Payback method treats all cash flows as if they are received in the same period, i.e. cash flows in period 2 are treated the same as cash flows received in period 8. Clearly, it ignores the time value of money and is not the best method employed. Conversely, the IRR and NPV methods reflect that The Super Project is unattractive. IRR calculated is less then the 10% cost of capital (tax tabulated was 48%). NPV calculations were also negative. We accept the NPV method as the optimal capital budgeting technique and use its outcome to provide the overall evidence for our final decision on The Super Project. In this case IRR provided the same rejection result; therefore, it too proved its usefulness. Despite that, IRR is not the most favorable method because it can provide false results in the case where multiple negative

The purpose of the report is to understand the capital structure of the chosen company on the basis of the financial statements of the company which includes the income statement, balance sheet and the cash flow statement of the company and do the capital analysis of the company as well to find out the advantages and disadvantages in working capital of the company and suggest company logical and useful ways for growing their economy.

The following paper analyzes a project from financial perspectives using the capital budgeting techniques like Net Present Value (NPV) and Internal Rate of Return (IRR).

In finance, capital structure refers to the way a corporation finances its assets through some combination of equity, debt, or hybrid securities. A firm 's capital structure is then the composition or 'structure ' of its liabilities. Simply, capital structure refers to the mix of debt and equity used by a firm in financing its assets. The capital structure decision is one of the most important decisions made by financial management. The capital structure decision is at the center of many other decisions in the area of corporate finance. These include dividend policy, project financing, issue of long term securities, financing of mergers, buyouts and so on. One of the many objectives of