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%.
NPV analysis uses future cash flows to estimate the value that a project could add to a firm’s shareholders. A company director or shareholders can be clearly provided the present value of a long-term project by this approach. By estimating a project’s NPV, we can see whether the project is profitable. Despite NPV analysis is only based on financial aspects and it ignore non-financial information such as brand loyalty, brand goodwill and other intangible assets, NPV analysis is still the most popular way evaluate a project by companies.
Target Corporation’s (NYSE:TGT) share price declined nearly 7.5% in the last month alone, amid the potential threat of higher taxes from Donald Trump’s new administration. Aside from higher taxes, the company looks in a very solid position to expand its profitability and dividends.
Grappling with the potential purchase of Olive Hill Farm, we decided to conduct a financial analysis to determine whether the project should be taken or not. Our financial analysis include scenarios for the best, worse, and most likely outcomes of purchasing the farm. For each scenario a Net Present Worth (NPW) and an Internal Rate of Return (IRR) was calculated and compared. This revealed that there was little gain for the worst case scenario and large gains for the other two scenarios. A sensitivity analysis and a break-even analysis was also conducted. The sensitivity analysis identified the most influential factors on the NPW. In the end, the analysis favored buying Olive Hill Farm because it would be a low risk, high reward investment.
It can be seen from above table that most of the competitors of Toll Brothers have temporary competitive advantage, so their position is weak in the market as compared to Toll Brothers.
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.
Mr. Carl Robins, who is a new campus recruiter for ABC, Inc., fell short on planning and execution of the new employee orientation. His lack of planning and execution could imply that either Carl is not fully qualified, or ABC, Inc. does not have a very solid mentoring program. Being a new employee of only six months, Carl's supervisor/manager should have been monitoring Carl's planning of the new employee's orientation and offer assistance if needed.
Financial risks include the short payback period. A 3-year payback period would not allow Hansson the opportunity to breakeven. With a negative NPV in the first 3 years Hansson’s decision to invest in the project would be based on his ability to negotiate a longer contract time. The Net Present Value (NPV) would have to be examined in tandem with the other non-financial variables.
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
The positives of this project are that it has the highest NPV, highest total R&P sales, highest population, and highest percent of adults with four plus years of college. First, Whalen Court not only has the highest NPV but they have the greatest opportunity. If sales increase by 10% it would be over $16 million more than the prototype. Second, this projects sales could be by far the greater than the prototypes of any other projects. The 1st and 5th year sales equivalents would be over $52 and $69 million respectively. Compare this to the other projects and they are 10’s of millions more. Third, the Whalen Court project has the highest population at 632,000, which means they have the largest customer pool. Their population is almost three times greater than the second closest project. Lastly, this project has the highest percentage of adults with four plus years of college. This is very important because these are the customers Target is trying to attract the most. Now, there are some negatives of this project as well. First, the investment size is much greater than the typical prototype. It is actually 409% (Appendix 1) more than the prototype. The next closest project is only 31% more, which makes this project very concerning. Next, is the building cost versus the prototype. The project is for a lease of a building and the cost are very high compared to the other projects at over $15 million more than the prototype. Add in the fact that Target usually
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.
As a manufacture of private label personal care products, Hansson Private Label, Inc. has a considerable amount (28%) of market share in its specific industry. However, private labels as a whole constitute less than 19% in the entire personal care industry. Therefore, growth of HPL depends on the growth of the industry and more importantly the growth of private label component within the industry. In terms of the personal care industry, market growth will not improve significantly in the future. As proven in the past four years, unit volumes in the industry increases less than 1% in each year and the dollar sales growth was only driven by modest price increases. Therefore, the opportunity for private labels
Private labels are products marketed by retailers and other members of the distribution chain. Private labels are often referred to as store brands when they actually adopt the names of the store itself in some way and should not be confused with generics. These type of brands typically cost less to make and sell in comparison to national or manufacturer brands. “Thus, the appeal to consumers of buying private labels and store brands often is the cost savings involved; the appeal to retailers of selling private labels and store brands is that their gross margin is often 25 percent to 30 percent – nearly twice that if national brands”. (Keller, 2013, pg.182) This provides a distinct competitive advantage for private labels.