Chicago Value Company Case

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%.

IRR uses all cash flows and incorporates the time value of money. When evaluating independent projects, IRR will always lead to the same decision as NPV. Because IRR assumes that cash flows will be reinvested at the internal rate of return, which is not always or even usually the case, it can rank mutually exclusive projects incorrectly. With certain patterns of cash flows, the IRR equation has more than one solution, which confuses the decision rule. IRR is slightly more

5. What is the project’s MIRR? What is the difference between the IRR and the MIRR? Which is

30) Calculate the IRR for the following investment project: initial investment is $75,000; inflows are $20,000 for the next five years; required rate of return is 15%. (Round your answer to the nearest whole percentage)

Any type of project should be accepted if the NPV is positive and rejected if it is negative.

"e. What is each project's MIRR at a cost of capital of 12%? At r = 18%? (Hint: Consider Period 7 as the end of

IRR is the rate at which the net present value becomes zero (Ross, Westerfield & Jordan, 2013). Additionally, IRR is calculated first by determining the Net Present Value. The Net Present Value is the variance concerning the market value and its cost (Ross, Westerfield & Jordan, 2013). Net present value is calculated by first finding the present value. For instance, 21.83 million (year 1 revenue from above) divided by 1 plus the companies rate of return of 12%. Thus, 21.83/(1+.12)= 19.49 is the present value for year 1. Furthermore, by adding the total revenue over the next 5 years we get 21.85+ 28.025+36.875+30.975+23.6=132.325 million is the expected value of revenue. That amount now needs to be placed into the present value equation previously discussed only this time with the exponent of 5 to cover the next 5 years. 132.325/(1+.12)^5=75.08 (rounded). Moreover, if

A project may have more than one IRR, especially when returns of an investment yield negative cash flows following positive cash flows.

The machine will have a depreciation of $140,000 for the first five years; this is determined by dividing the initial investment by five. The old machine will be sold in 2010 for $25,000 which is below the current book value of $36,000. This is why there is a capital gain of $3,850 that will add to the incremental savings plus the depreciation for that year. The new sheeter will be sold at the end of the last year for $120,000 which will be taxed at 35; this is why a cost of $42,000 appears for the last cash flow (Exhibit 1). The NPV is a positive $1,063,567 and the IRR is 36%, this shows that the project will add value to the company along with having a great return. The payback period for the project is 2.45…Using the growth rate of 3%, the sales are projected to be nearly doubled from 2009 with the new sheeter. However, Pitts believes that he would not be surprised to see them increase by 7% or

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.

6.The Year 0 net investment outlay for the project is $-475,000. This computed by adding the price of the machinery, installation, shipping, and the change in net working capital. The non-operating cash flow when the project is

The actual production would begin in the third quarter of this year, therefore only half year’s depreciation should be counted on Equipment and IT communication in 2004 (According to Appendix A). The following years (2005-2008) incremental cash flows are computed by the same method. However as the IT equipment and furnishings would be depreciated on a straight line basis over 3 years, thus in year four (2007), there would be only half a year’s deprecation left and after that it will be used up. The last year’s net cash flow in 2009 should be included the extra terminal Value on that year, which includes 24 years’ residual value on building and one year and a half residual value on equipment totaled $2,990,412 with two assumptions of by using residual book values for the building and operating equipment and there will be no further NWS advantage after year 2009. Finally, by obtaining 6 years’ incremental cash-flows and discounting them back to time zero (with the estimate rate of return by 15%) lessing initial cost to get an appealing NPV of $1190528 (Luehrman, p. 3).

NPV and IRR: When examining the NPV and the IRR of the Merseyside project, the numbers were very attractive. It had a positive net present value and an IRR above 10 percent. By these numbers, along with others,

If we look at the financial summary of M.L.I we can calculate how much Winkler can bid for this company. We can calculate Net Present Value, Indicial Rate of Return and Payback period for this project. If we take last year and estimated after tax Income as a projection and investment of $2 million we can calculate:

Yes, in the investment center. The managers are responsibility for the segments,investmentand asset base as well as the profits. Usually, evaluate based on the return on assetsemployed, evaluation might include a variety of measures such as profit, return oninvestment, residual income, economical valued added and a range of non-financialmeasures. Hence the manager in the districts should consider about the acquisition of newequipment which is an investment for the segment. And also, they evaluated equipments andaccounts receivable etc. based on the return on assets employed. May be it can also be the profit center because the managers usually evaluated in terms of effectiveness in raisingsegment profit level and controlling costs.QMSC should use EVA instead of ROA as the measure of district and manager performance. Since EVA is the best proxy for shareholder value at the business unit level, improving EVA will also improve the companys overall performance. The managers district objectives will then be congruent with the companys overall objectives. This will induce Mr. Richards to employ additional assets