Chapter 10 Homework Solution

1.1. Review principles of estimating project cash flows. Suggested reading: Ch. 9 “Capital Budgeting and Cash Flow Analysis” in “Contemporary Financial Management”, 11th ed. by Moyer, McGuigan, and Kretlow.

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.

The relatively well posed project with promises of great future pay offs must be examined closely nevertheless to determine its true profitability. As such, the Super Project’s NPV must be calculated, however before we proceed we must acknowledge the relevant cash flows. The project incurred an expense of testing the market. This expense, however, must not be included in our cash flow analysis because it can be considered a sunk cost. This expense is required for ‘taking a temperature’ of the market and will not be recovered. Other sources of cash flow include:

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.

After reading the above statement, did you miss any species in your gut content sampling? If so, which ones?

EEC calculated the amount of time involved the anticipation of its cost ($3 million). The timeline in recovering their cost of investment ($2 million) initially for the foundation of this investment any profit made in the future of this investment will be justified as a profit for the company. If EEC can anticipate a fast return on its investment it is a profitable wise decision in making the investment financial, it is considered to be an easier way of formulating investments financially. On the basis of one year all cash flows is added together equal to the sum of $2 million originally invested, then it is divided by the annual cash flow of $500,000. The calculation of the payback period would equal four years. After this time frame any financial proceeds will be considered profitable for the company. I conclude that the timeframe is adequate in comparison of the investment in this worthwhile investment financial venture for the company.

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

Focus on cash flows, not profits. One wants to get as close as possible to the economic reality of the project. Accounting profits contain many kinds of economic fiction. Flows of cash, on the other hand, are economic facts.

1. Incremental cash flows are ultimately the relevant cash flows to be used in project analysis. It is the difference between the cash flows the firm will have if it implements the project, and the cash flows the firm will have if it rejects the project. Although they are a cash expense, interest expenses are not included in project cash flows. We discount a projects cash flows by using its weighted average cost of capital (WACC), which already includes the cost of debt. Therefore, we do not include interest expenses in cash flows because it would essentially be counting them twice.

The company should be interested in incremental after-tax cash flows. The incremental cash flow will allow Caledonia to see the profits or losses of a project by comparing cash flows with and without the project on an after tax basis.

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

In fully investigating all of our calculations we are fully invested in using the Net Present Value figures we calculated as a means of ranking the eight projects. In doing so we found reasons in which why the Net Present Value was our benchmark for ranking the projects and why we did not use the Payback Method. The Payback Method ignores the time value of money, requires and arbitrary cutoff point, ignores cash flows beyond the cutoff date, and is biased against long-term projects, such as research and development and new projects. When comparing the Average Accounting Return Method to the Net Present Value method we found that the Average Accounting Return Method is a worse option than using the Payback Method. The Average Accounting Return Method is not a true rate of return and the time value of money is ignored, it uses an arbitrary benchmark cutoff rate, and is based on accounting net income and book values, not cash flows and market values. Plain and simply put, the Net Present Value method is the best criterion to use when ranking these eight

There are several traditional methods that can be used in appraising investment decisions. For instance, the net present value method (NPV) which entails estimating the costs and revenues of a project and discounting these figures to get their present values. Projects with the biggest positive net present value are the ones chosen as they represent the best stream of benefits of investing in the project over and above recovering the cost of initiating the projects. The discount rate is another method which is similar to the net present value method but reflects more on the time preference. This approach may focus on the opportunity cost of

1. Define the term “incremental cash flow”. Since the project will be financed in part by debt, should the cash flow analysis include the interest expense?

The internal rate of return (IRR) and the net present value (NPV) techniques are 2 investment decision tools that satisfy the 2 major criteria for the correct evaluation of capital projects. This criterion is that the techniques should incorporate the use of cash flows and the use of the time value of money. This makes them viable techniques for evaluating investment proposals.