Risk Free Interest Rate

b) The decision to invest in projects increases the shareholders value of the company. This is consistent with the growth and from the NPV criteria, positive NPV of projects increases the shareholder's value.

The project team can also use the technique of calculating the rate of return using the investment value of the project wherein the increase in the rate of return indicates for the growth of the organization.

Now we want to examine the analysis business report concerning the cost of capital that has been increased at 28% in accordance with the Net Present Value which is $500,000 the question being would still be worth it to make the investment to the company (Needles, 2010). While at the same time the internal rate of return is still at 21% which is lower than the 25% in the expenditures. In reflection of these calculations the investment would not

Should the corporate cost of capital as developed above be used for all projects? If not, what type of adjustments should be made?

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

The rule of internal rate of return is that the project with the higher rate of return must be accepted because its gives the clear indication that the project will succeed

All else equal, the WACC of a firm increases as the beta and rate of return on equity increases, as an increase in WACC notes a decrease in valuation and a higher risk (1). Since Hansson believes the risk of the firm will increase, a higher WACC should be applied to the project

a) Weighting of Capital Structure: Use of book values of capital rather than the market values

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

If the financing of the project comes partially from issuing debt and cash infusion from the owners, the available cash will increase without as much interest expense. This will cause the company books to look bad because of lower EPS, however the company will have a choice not to pay dividends if necessary rather than being bound to pay interest expense.

WACC = (Weight of Equity * Equity Cost of Capital) + (Weight of Debt * Debt Cost of Capital)

The WACC for the Marriot Corporation is calculated using the formula based on following data:

If the IRR is less than the capital then that project should be rejected because it is not very feasible. If the Internal Rate of Return is larger than the capital required for the project, it should be accepted while if the IRR is just equal to the capital then the project could be considered because it is at the very least earning its cost of capital and should therefore be accepted at the margin.

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).