3264 Words14 Pages

UNIVERSITY OF LA VERNE
La Verne, California
Tesca Case
A Paper Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for
BUS 635 CRN 1105 – Managing Financial Resources
Nepal Plummer
College of Business and Public Management
Department of Management and Leadership
March 3, 2014
TESCA CASE STUDY
SUMMARY RESULTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS The proposed refrigerator manufacturing and sales project for Tesca Works, Inc. is a financially complicated project which on the surface, given the increase in energy costs and customer demand may seem like a winning proposition. However, when we delve further into the details of the financial projections along with projections of the*…show more content…*

The price per kilowatt hour has increased almost 50% in 10 years (EIA, 2014). Thus to the consumer the price of energy is a big concern and the costs will most likely continue into the future. There is potential for an increased demand to replace aging inefficient appliances that are causing increased electrical bills for consumers. The energy cost and potential benefits to the consumer are of importance when determining the future of this project. The project is forecast to be of a positive value if the demand for refrigerators is at an average or strong demand from consumers. However, the realization of a high or average demand is mainly based on ‘gut-feeling’ rather than on sound financial information. There are too many variables in the marketplace that could cause demand to be weaker than projected. Such variables as a weak economy or recession could cause sales to drop which in turn would cause the project to lose its value quickly. 2) What is the project’s cost of equity? What is the appropriate discount factor to use for evaluating the refrigerator project? As seen in Exhibit I below, the project’s cost of equity (COE) is calculated to be 13.487%. We found this value by using the Capital Asset Pricing Model (CAPM) formula by adding the treasury note yield with the beta value, then taking the market return rate and subtracting the treasury note yield. We then multiply those values together to attain the cost of equity value of 13.487%. This means

The price per kilowatt hour has increased almost 50% in 10 years (EIA, 2014). Thus to the consumer the price of energy is a big concern and the costs will most likely continue into the future. There is potential for an increased demand to replace aging inefficient appliances that are causing increased electrical bills for consumers. The energy cost and potential benefits to the consumer are of importance when determining the future of this project. The project is forecast to be of a positive value if the demand for refrigerators is at an average or strong demand from consumers. However, the realization of a high or average demand is mainly based on ‘gut-feeling’ rather than on sound financial information. There are too many variables in the marketplace that could cause demand to be weaker than projected. Such variables as a weak economy or recession could cause sales to drop which in turn would cause the project to lose its value quickly. 2) What is the project’s cost of equity? What is the appropriate discount factor to use for evaluating the refrigerator project? As seen in Exhibit I below, the project’s cost of equity (COE) is calculated to be 13.487%. We found this value by using the Capital Asset Pricing Model (CAPM) formula by adding the treasury note yield with the beta value, then taking the market return rate and subtracting the treasury note yield. We then multiply those values together to attain the cost of equity value of 13.487%. This means

Related

## Net Present Value Calculation for PowerCo Project

490 Words | 2 PagesIntroduction The purpose of this analysis is to make a determination about a project that the PowerCo is considering. The project runs for twelve years. The discount rate is 8%. There are costs for the first two years and then there are net positive cash flows for the subsequent ten years. A net present value calculation will be used in order to determine if the company should undertake this project or not. The present value calculations will be done according to this formula: INCLUDEPICTURE "http://i

## The Caledonia Project: An Analysis of Net Present Value Calculation

494 Words | 2 PagesThe project will be analyzed with a net present value calculation. The future cash flows will be calculated and then discounted to present day, then tabulated so that the net present value of the project is determined. This NPV will allow management to make a decision with respect to whether or not the project should be undertaken or not. Caledonia should focus on free cash flows for the project rather than accounting profit. The reason for this is that the free cash flows are the actual value

## Net present value (NPV), payback period (PBP) and internal rate of return (IRR) approaches for a project evaluation

2931 Words | 12 PagesAbstract This essay will discuss the net present value (NPV), payback period (PBP) and internal rate of return (IRR) approaches for a project evaluation. It is often said that NPV is the best approach investment appraisal, which I why I will compare the strengths and weaknesses of NPV as well as the two others to se if the statement is actually true. Introduction To start of, the essay will attempt to explain the theoretical rationale of the net present value approach to investment appraisal as

## Discuss Net Present Value (NPV) Payback has certain advantages, but disadvantages for long term project appraisal. Discuss.

1285 Words | 6 PagesINVESTMENT APPRAISAL Characteristically, a decision to invest in a capital project involves a largely irreversible commitment of resources that is generally subject to a significant degree of risk. Such decisions have far-reaching effects on a company's profitability and flexibility over the long term, thus requiring that they be part of a carefully developed strategy that is based on reliable appraisal and forecasting procedures. In order to handle these decisions, firms have to make an assessment

## Case02 Piedmont

1133 Words | 5 Pagesyears. Using a discount rate of 8 percent, the net present value of all benefits is $1,732,836.16; the net present value of all costs is $1,640,384.79; the overall net present value is $92,451.36, and the project breaks even in approximately 3.84 years. Using a 10 percent discount rate, the net present value of all benefits is $1,645,201.46; the net present value of all costs is $1,576,173.19; the overall net present value is $69,028.27, and the project breaks even in approximately 4.04 years. Using

## Investment Detective

868 Words | 4 Pagesdifferent projects. Before doing any calculations we came up with the assumption that we could not rank the projects simply by inspecting the cash flows. Without the ability to rank the projects based off of cash flows solely, we had to use some analytical criteria as a capital budgeting analyst to provide some thorough support and reasoning for how we ranked the four best projects. In this case we are only using quantitative considerations that we deem to be relevant and no other project characteristics

## Cash Flow Per Period Of A Project

790 Words | 4 Pagesof a project depends on whether the cash flow per period of the project is even or uneven. In case they are even, the formula to calculate payback period is: Payback Period = Initial Investment Cash Inflow per Period When cash inflows are uneven, we need to calculate the cumulative net cash flow for each period and then use the following formula for payback period: Payback Period = A + B C In the above formula, A is the last period with a negative cumulative cash flow; B is the absolute value of cumulative

## Capital Expenditure Valuation Methods

1130 Words | 5 Pagestime it takes for a project or investments cash outflows to be recovered by cash inflows generated from the same project or investment. It is a very simple and commonly used capital budgeting technique. The formula used to compute the payback period is initial investment divided by cash inflow per period. You generally want to choose the investment that provides the shortest payback period, because you will get you cash back and it can be put toward other investments or projects. The longer the payback

## Chapter 12

8816 Words | 36 Pagesevaluation of projects, and the reevaluation of prior decisions. | | | |

## Diamond Chemicals

1788 Words | 8 Pagestwo mutually exclusive projects, the Merseyside project and the Rotterdam project, for the production of polypropylene When considering the Merseyside project, senior-management wants a positive impact on earnings per share. The addition to earnings per share was £28,800 with an average addition of £2,000 per year2. Calculated with erosion, the addition to earnings per share was £18,800 with an average addition of £1,100 per year2. The payback period for the project was 3.10 years, when considering

### Net Present Value Calculation for PowerCo Project

490 Words | 2 Pages### The Caledonia Project: An Analysis of Net Present Value Calculation

494 Words | 2 Pages### Net present value (NPV), payback period (PBP) and internal rate of return (IRR) approaches for a project evaluation

2931 Words | 12 Pages### Discuss Net Present Value (NPV) Payback has certain advantages, but disadvantages for long term project appraisal. Discuss.

1285 Words | 6 Pages### Case02 Piedmont

1133 Words | 5 Pages### Investment Detective

868 Words | 4 Pages### Cash Flow Per Period Of A Project

790 Words | 4 Pages### Capital Expenditure Valuation Methods

1130 Words | 5 Pages### Chapter 12

8816 Words | 36 Pages### Diamond Chemicals

1788 Words | 8 Pages

- Fresno - A City Addicted to Meth
- Compare and contrast Piaget‚Äôs and Vygotsky‚Äôs theories of cognitive development in children
- Three branches of government
- Zappo¬¥s Case Study
- ‚ÄúDiscuss the relationship between stress, anxiety, habits and phobias and describe how you would treat these issues with hypnotherapy‚Äù.
- breaking & entering