lOMoARcPSD|4779556

FM12 Ch 10 Mini Case - FM12 Ch 10 Mini Case

Global Financial Mgmt (University of Memphis)

StuDocu is not sponsored or endorsed by any college or university

Downloaded by Zahid Zahid (zahideme@gmail.com)
 lOMoARcPSD|4779556

A B C D E F G H I J K
1 4/11/2010
2
3 Chapter 10. Mini Case
4
5 Situation
6 You have just graduated from the MBA program of a large university, and one of your favorite courses was "Today's
7 Entrepreneurs." In fact, you enjoyed it so much you have decided you want to "be your own boss." While you were in the
8 master's program, your grandfather died and left you $1 million to do with as you please. You are not an inventor, and you do not
9 have a trade skill that you can market; however, you have decided that you would like to purchase at least one established
franchise in the fast-foods area, maybe two (if profitable). The problem is that you have never been one to stay with any project
10
for too long, so you figure that your time frame is three years. After three years you will go on to something else.
11
12
13 You have narrowed your selection down to two choices: (1) Franchise L, Lisa's Soups, Salads, & Stuff, and (2) Franchise S,
14 Sam's Fabulous Fried Chicken. The net cash flows shown below include the price you would receive for selling the franchise in
15 Year 3 and the forecast of how each franchise will do over the 3-year period. Franchise L's cash flows will start off slowly but will
16 increase rather quickly as people become more health conscious, while Franchise S's cash flows will start off high but will trail off
17 as other chicken competitors enter the marketplace and as people become more health conscious and avoid fried foods. Franchise
L serves breakfast and lunch, while Franchise S serves only dinner, so it is possible for you to invest in both franchises. You see
these franchises as perfect complements to one another: You could attract both the lunch and dinner crowds and the health
conscious and not so health conscious crowds without the franchises directly competing against one another.
18
Here are the net cash flows (in thousands of dollars):

19
20
21 Expected Franchise S
22 Net Cash Flows
23 Year (t) Franchise S Franchise L 0 1 2 3
24 0 ($100) ($100) (100) 70 50 20
25 1 70 10
26 2 50 60 Franchise L
27 3 20 80
28 0 1 2 3
29 (100) 10 60 80
30
31 Depreciation, salvage values, net working capital requirements, and tax effects are all included in these cash flows.
32
33 You also have made subjective risk assessments of each franchise and concluded that both franchises have risk characteristics
34 that require a return of 10%. You must now determine whether one or both of the franchises should be accepted.
35
36 a. What is capital budgeting? Answer: See Chapter 10 Mini Case Show
37
38 b. What is the difference between independent and mutually exclusive projects? Answer: See Chapter 10 Mini Case Show
39
40 c. (1.) Define the term net present value (NPV). What is each franchise's NPV?
41
42 Net Present Value (NPV)
43 To calculate the NPV, we find the present value of the individual cash flows and find the sum of those discounted cash flows. This
44 value represents the value the project add to shareholder wealth.
45
46 WACC = 10%
47
48 Franchise S
49 Time period: 0 1 2 3
50 Cash flow: (100) 70 50 20
51 Disc. cash flow: (100) 64 41 15
52
53 NPV(S) = $19.98 = Sum disc. CF's. or $19.98 = Uses NPV function.
54

Downloaded by Zahid Zahid (zahideme@gmail.com)

 lOMoARcPSD|4779556

A B C D E F G H I J K
55 Franchise L
56 Time period: 0 1 2 3
57 Cash flow: (100) 10 60 80
58 Disc. cash flow: (100) 9 50 60
59
60 NPV(L) = $18.78 $18.78 = Uses NPV function.
61
62 (2.) What is the rationale behind the NPV method? According to NPV, which franchise or franchises should be accepted if they
63 are independent? Mutually exclusive?
64
65 The NPV method of capital budgeting dictates that all independent projects that have positive NPV should accepted. The
66 rationale behind that assertion arises from the idea that all such projects add wealth, and that should be the overall goal of the
67 manager in all respects. If strictly using the NPV method to evaluate two mutually exclusive projects, you would want to accept
68 the project that adds the most value (i.e. the project with the higher NPV). Hence, if considering the above two projects, you
would accept both projects if they are independent, and you would only accept Project S if they are mutually exclusive.
69
70
71
72 (3.) Would the NPVs change if the cost of capital changed? Answer: See Chapter 10 Mini Case Show
73
74 d. (1.) Define the term internal rate of return (IRR). What is each franchise's IRR?
75
76 Internal Rate of Return (IRR)
77
The internal rate of return is defined as the discount rate that equates the present value of a project's cash inflows to its outflows.
78 It is the discount rate that forces the PV of the inflows to equal the initial cost. In other words, the internal rate of return is the
79 interest rate that forces NPV to zero. The calculation for IRR can be tedious, but Excel provides an IRR function that merely
80 requires you to access the function and enter the array of cash flows. The IRR's for Franchises S and L are shown below, along
81 with the data entry for Franchise S.
82
83 Expected
84 net cash flows
85 Year (t) Franchise S Franchise L
86 0 ($100) ($100)
87 1 70 10 IRR S = 23.56%
88 IRR L = The IRR function assumes
2 50 60 18.13%
payments occur at end of
89 3 20 80 periods, so that function
90 does not have to be
91 adjusted.
92
93 Notice that for IRR you must
94 specify all cash flows,
95 including the time zero cash
96 flow. This is in contrast to
97 the NPV function, in which
98 you specify only the future
99 cash flows.
100
101
102
103
104 (2.) How is the IRR on a project related to the YTM on a bond?
105
106 Constant Cash Flows
107
108 Year (t) Cash Flow
109 0 ($100) 0 1 2 3
110 1 40 (100) 40 40 40
111 2 40
112 3 40
113 IRR = 9.70% Note: You can use the Rate function if
114 payments are constant.
115 Similarity to a bond:
116
117 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
118 (1,134) 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 1,090
119
120 IRR = 7.08%
121

Downloaded by Zahid Zahid (zahideme@gmail.com)

 lOMoARcPSD|4779556

A is the logic behind

(3.) What B the IRRCmethod? According
D to IRR,Ewhich franchises
F should beGaccepted if they
H are independent?
I J K
122
123 Mutually exclusive?
124 (4.) Would the franchises' IRRs change if the cost of capital changed?
125
126
The IRR method of capital budgeting maintains that projects should be accepted if their IRR is greater than the cost of capital.
127
Strict adherence to the IRR method would further dictate that mutually exclusive projects should be chosen on the basis of the
128 greatest IRR. In this scenario, both franchises have IRRs that exceed the cost of capital (10%) and both should be accepted, if
129 they are independent. If, however, the franchises are mutually exclusive, we would choose Franchise S. Recall, that this was our
130 determination using the NPV method as well. The question that naturally arises is whether or not the NPV and IRR methods will
131 always arrive at the same conclusion.
132
133 When dealing with independent projects, the NPV and IRR methods will always yield the same accept/reject result. However, in
the case of mutually exclusive projects, NPV and IRR can give conflicting results. One shortcoming of the internal rate of return
134
is that it assumes that cash flows received are reinvested at the project's internal rate of return, which is not usually true. The
135 nature of the congruence of the NPV and IRR methods is further detailed in a latter section of this model.
136
137
138 NPV Profiles
139 e. Draw NPV profiles for Franchises L and S. At what discount rate do the profiles cross?
140
141 Franchise S Franchise L
142 WACC $19.98 WACC $18.78
143 0% 40.00 0% 50.00
144 2% 35.53 2% 42.86
145 4% 31.32 4% 36.21
146 6% 27.33 6% 30.00
147 8% 23.56 8% 24.21
148 10% 19.98 10% 18.78
149 12% 16.60 12% 13.70
150 14% 13.38 14% 8.94
151 16% 10.32 16% 4.46
152 18% 7.40 18% 0.26
153 20% 4.63 20% (3.70)
154 22% 1.98 22% (7.43)
155 24% (0.54) 24% (10.95)
156
157
NPV ($) NPV Profile of Franchises S and L
158
159 60.00
160 50.00 Project L
161 Crossover Rate =
40.00
162 8.7%
163 30.00
Project S
164 20.00
165 10.00
166 0.00 Franchise
167 S- IRR
(10.00) 0% 2% 4% 6% 8% 10% 12% 14% 16% 18% 20% 22% 24%
168
(20.00)
169 Cost of Capital Franchise L- IRR
170
171
172 (2.) Look at your NPV profile graph without referring to the actual NPVs and IRRs. Which franchise or franchises should be
173 accepted if they are independent? Mutually exclusive? Explain. Are your answers correct at any cost of capital less than
174 23.6%?
175
176
Previously, we had discussed that in some instances the NPV and IRR methods can give conflicting results. First, we should
177
attempt to define what we see in this graph. Notice, that the two franchises' profiles (S and L) intersect the X-axis at costs of
178 capital of 18.13% and 23.56%, respectively. Not coincidently, those are the IRRs of the franchises. If we think about the
179 definition of IRR, we remember that the internal rate of return is the cost of capital at which a project will have an NPV of zero.
180 Looking at our graph, it is a logical conclusion that the project IRR is defined as the point at which its profile intersects the
181 X-axis.
182
183 f. (1.) What is the underlying cause of ranking conflicts between NPV and IRR?
184
185 (2.) What is the "reinvestment rate assumption," and how does it affect the NPV versus IRR conflict? Answer: See Chapter
186 10 Mini Case Show
187

Downloaded by Zahid Zahid (zahideme@gmail.com)

 lOMoARcPSD|4779556

A B C D E F G H I J K
188 (3.) Which method is the best? Why? Answer: See Chapter 10 Mini Case Show
189
190 Looking further at the NPV profiles, we see that the two franchises profiles intersect at a point we shall call the crossover rate.
191 We observe that at costs of capital greater than the crossover rate, the franchise with the greater IRR (Franchise S, in this case)
192 also has the greater NPV. But at costs of capital less than the crossover rate, the franchise with the lesser IRR has the greater
193 NPV. This relationship is the source of discrepancy between the NPV and IRR methods. By looking at the graph, we see that the
crossover rate appears to occur at approximately 8.7%. Luckily, there is a more precise way of determining the crossover rate.
194
To find the crossover rate, we will find the difference between the two franchises' cash flows in each year, and then find the IRR
195 of this series of differential cash flows. This IRR is the crossover rate.
196
197 Expected
198 Net Cash Flows Cash Flow
199 Year (t) Franchise S Franchise L Differential
200 0 ($100) ($100) 0
201 1 70 10 60
202 2 50 60 (10)
203 3 20 80 (60)
204
205 IRR = Crossover rate = 8.68%
206
207
208 The intuition behind the relationship between the NPV profile and the crossover rate is as follows: (1) Distant cash flows are
heavily penalized by high discount rates--the denominator is (1 + r)t, and it increases geometrically; hence, it gets very large at
209
high values of t. (2) Long-term projects like L have most of their cash flows coming in the later years, when the discount penalty
210 is largest; hence, they are most severely impacted by high capital costs. (3) Therefore, Franchise L's NPV profile is steeper than
211 that of S. (4) Since the two profiles have different slopes, they cross one another.
212
213 Modified Internal Rate of Return (MIRR)
214 g. (1.) Define the term modified IRR (MIRR). Find the MIRRs for Franchises L and S.
215
216 The modified internal rate of return is the discount rate that causes a project's cost (or cash outflows) to equal the present value of
217 the project's terminal value. The terminal value is defined as the sum of the future values of the project's cash inflows,
218 compounded at the project's cost of capital. To find MIRR, calculate the PV of the outflows and the FV of the inflows and then
219 find the discount rate that equates the two. Or, you can solve using Excel's MIRR function.
220
221 WACC = 10% MIRRS = 16.89%
222 Franchise S MIRRL = 16.50%
223 10%
224 0 1 2 3
225 (100) 70 50 20
226
227 Franchise L
228
229 0 1 2 3
230 (100) 10 60 80
231 66
232 12.1
233
234 PV: (100) TV = 158.1
235
236 (2.) What are the MIRR's advantages and disadvantages vis-a-vis the regular IRR? What are the MIRR's advantages and
237 disadvantages vis-a-vis the NPV?
238
239 The advantage of using the MIRR, relative to the IRR, is that the MIRR assumes that cash flows received are reinvested at the
240 cost of capital, not the IRR. Since reinvestment at the cost of capital is more likely, the MIRR is a better indicator of a project's
241 profitability. Moreover, it solves the multiple IRR problem, as a set of cash flows can have but one MIRR .
242 Note that if negative cash flows occur in years beyond Year 1, those cash flows would be discounted at the cost of capital and
243 added to the Year 0 cost to find the total PV of costs. If both positive and negative flows occurred in some year, the negative flow
244 should be discounted, and the positive one compounded, rather than just dealing with the net cash flow. This makes a difference.
245 Also note that Excel's MIRR function allows for discounting and reinvestment to occur at different rates. Generally, MIRR is
246 defined as reinvestment at the WACC, though Excel allows the calculation of a special MIRR where reinvestment occurs at a
247 different rate than WACC.
248
249 Finally, it is stated in the text, when the IRR versus the NPV is discussed, that the NPV is superior because (1) the NPV assumes
250 that cash flows are reinvested at the cost of capital whereas the IRR assumes reinvestment at the IRR, and (2) it is more likely, in
a competitive world, that the actual reinvestment rate is more likely to be the cost of capital than the IRR, especially if the IRR is
251
quite high. The MIRR setup can be used to prove that NPV indeed does assume reinvestment at the WACC, and IRR at the IRR.
252

Downloaded by Zahid Zahid (zahideme@gmail.com)

 lOMoARcPSD|4779556

A B C D E F G H I J K
253
254 PROFITABILITY INDEX
255 h. What does the profitability index (PI) measure? What are the PI's for Franchises S and L?
256
257 The profitability index is the present value of all future cash flows divided by the intial cost. It measures the PV per dollar of
258 investment.
259
260 For Franchise S:
261 PI(S) = PV of future cash flows ÷ Initial cost
262 PI(S) = $119.98 ÷ $100
263 PI(S) = 1.1998
264
265 For Franchise L:
266 PI(L) = PV of future cash flows ÷ Initial cost
267 PI(L) = $118.78 ÷ $100
268 PI(L) = 1.1878
269
270 i. (1.) What is the payback period? Find the paybacks for Franchises L and S.
271
272 Payback Period
273 The payback period is defined as the expected number of years required to recover the investment, and it was the first formal
274 method used to evaluate capital budgeting projects. First, we identify the year in which the cumulative cash inflows exceed the
275 initial cash outflows. That is the payback year. Then we take the previous year and add to it the fraction calculated as the
unrecovered balance at the end of that year divided by the following year's cash flow. Generally speaking, the shorter the
276 payback period, the better the investment.
277
278 Franchise S
279 Time period: 0 1 2 3
280 Cash flow: (100) 70 50 20
281 Cumulative cash flow: (100) (30) 20 40
282
283
284 Payback: 1.599
285
286
287
288 Franchise L
289 Time period: 0 1 2 3
290 Cash flow: (100) 10 60 80
291 Cumulative cash flow: (100) (90) (30) 50
292
293
294 Payback: 2.376
295
296 (2.) What is the rationale for the payback method? According to the payback criterion, which franchise or franchises should
297 be accepted if the firm's maximum acceptable payback is 2 years, and if Franchise L and S are independent? If they are
298 mutually exclusive? Answer: See Chapter 10 Mini Case Show
299
300 (3.) What is the difference between the regular and discounted payback periods?
301
302 Discounted Payback Period
303 Discounted payback period uses the project's cost of capital to discount the expected cash flows. The calculation of discounted
304 payback period is identical to the calculation of regular payback period, except you must base the calculation on a new row of
305 discounted cash flows. Note that both projects have a cost of capital of 10%.
306
307 WACC = 10%
308
309 Franchise S
310 Time period: 0 1 2 3
311 Cash flow: (100) 70 50 20
312 Disc. cash flow: (100) 64 41 15 Cash Flows Discounted back at 10%.
313 Disc. cum. cash flow: (100) (36) 5 20
314
315
316 Discounted Payback: 1.9
317

Downloaded by Zahid Zahid (zahideme@gmail.com)

 lOMoARcPSD|4779556

A B C D E F G H I J K
318 Franchise L
319 Time period: 0 1 2 3 4
320 Cash flow: (100) 10 60 80 0
321 Disc. cash flow: (100) 9 50 60 0
322 Disc. cum. cash flow: (100) (91) (41) 19 19
323
324
325 Discounted Payback: 2.7
326
327 (4.) What is the main disadvantage of discounted payback? Is the payback method of any real usefulness in capital budgeting
328 decisions?
329
330
The inherent problem with both paybacks is that they ignore cash flows that occur after the payback period mark and neither
331 provides a specific acceptance rule. While the discounted method accounts for timing issues (to some extent), it still falls short of

332 fully analyzing projects. However, all else equal, these two methods do provide some information about projects' liquidity and
risk.
333
334 Multiple IRRs
335 j. As a separate project (Project P), you are considering sponsoring a pavilion at the upcoming World's Fair. The pavilion would
336 cost $800,000, and it is expected to result in $5 million of incremental cash inflows during its 1 year of operation. However, it
337 would then take another year, and $5 million of costs, to demolish the site and return it to its original condition. Thus, Project
338 P's expected net cash flows look like this (in thousands of dollars):
339
340 Project M: 0 1 2
341 (800) 5,000 (5,000)
342
343 The project is estimated to be of average risk, so its cost of capital is 10%.
344
345 (1.) What are normal and nonnormal cash flows? Answer: See Chapter 10 Mini Case Show
346
347 (2.) What is Project P's NPV? What is its IRR? Its MIRR?
348
349 We will solve this IRR twice, the first time using the default guess of 10%, and the second time we will enter a guess of 200%.
350 Notice, that the first IRR calculation is exactly as it was above.
351
352 NPVM = ($386.78)
353
354 IRR M 1 = 25.0% MIRR = 5.6%
355
356
357
358
359 IRR M 2 = 400%
360
361
362
363
364
365
366
367
368 The two solutions to this problem tell us that this project will have a positive NPV for all costs of capital between 25% and 400%.
369 We illustrate this point by creating a data table and a graph of the project NPVs.
370
371 0 1 2
372 (800.0) 5,000 (5,000)
373

Downloaded by Zahid Zahid (zahideme@gmail.com)

 lOMoARcPSD|4779556

A B C D E F G H I J K
374 (3.) Draw Project P's NPV profile. Does Project P have normal or nonnormal cash flows? Should this project be accepted?
375
376 r = 25.0%
377 NPV = 0.00
378 NPV
379 r $0.0 Multiple Rates of Return
380 0% (800.00) NPV ($)
381 25% 0.00
600.00
382 50% 311.11
383 75% 424.49 400.00
384 100% 450.00 Max.
385 125% 434.57 200.00
386 150% 400.00
387 175% 357.02 0.00
388 200% 311.11 -100% 0% 100% 200% 300% 400% 500%
(200.00)
389 225% 265.09
250% 220.41 Cost of Capital
390 (400.00)
391 275% 177.78
392 300% 137.50 (600.00)
393 325% 99.65
394 350% 64.20 (800.00)
395 375% 31.02
400% 0.00 (1,000.00)
396
397 425% (29.02)
398 450% (56.20)
399 475% (81.66)
400 500% (105.56)
401 525% (128.00)
402 550% (149.11)
403
404 PROJECTS WITH UNEQUAL LIVES
405 k. In an unrelated analysis, you have the opportunity to choose between the following two mutually exclusive projects:
406
407 Year Project S Project L
408 0 ($100,000) ($100,000)
409 1 60,000 33,500
410 2 60,000 33,500
411 3 33,500
412 4 33,500
413
414 The projects provide a necessary service, so whichever one is selected is expected to be repeated into the foreseeable future. Both
415 projects have a 10% cost of capital.
416
417 (1.) What is each project’s initial NPV without replication?
418
419 Project L WACC: 10.0%
420 End of Period:
421
422 0 1 2 3 4
423 ($100) $33.5 $33.5 $33.5 $33.5
424
425 NPV $6.19
426
427 Project S
428 End of Period:
429
430 0 1 2 3 4
431 ($100) $60 $60
432
433 NPV $4.13
434

Downloaded by Zahid Zahid (zahideme@gmail.com)

 lOMoARcPSD|4779556

A B C D E F G H I J K
435 (2.) What is each project’s equivalent annual annuity?
436
437 Equivalent Annual Annuity (EAA) Approach
438 Here are the steps in the EAA approach.
439 1. Find the NPV of each project over its initial life (we already did this in our previous analysis).
440 NPVL = $6.19
441 NPVS = $4.13
442
443 2. Convert the NPV into an annuity payment with a life equal to the life of the project.
444 EAAL = $1.95 Note: we used Excel's PMT function by using the function wizard.
445 EAAS = $2.38
446
447 (3.) Now apply the replacement chain approach to determine the projects’ extended NPVs. Which project should be chosen?
448
449 Project S
450 End of Period:
451
452 0 1 2 3
453 ($100) $60 $60
454 ($100) $60 $60
455 ($100) $60 ($40) $60 $60
456
457 NPV $7.55
458
459 (4.) Now assume that the cost to replicate Project S in 2 years will increase to $105,000 because of inflationary pressures.
460 How should the analysis be handled now, and which project should be chosen?
461
462 Project S
463 End of Period:
464
465 0 1 2 3
466 ($100) $60 $60
467 ($105) $60 $60
468 ($100) $60 ($45) $60 $60
469
470 NPV $3.42
471
472 ECONOMIC LIFE VS. PHYSICAL LIFE
473 l. You are also considering another project which has a physical life of 3 years; that is, the machinery will be totally worn out
474 after 3 years. However, if the project were terminated prior to the end of 3 years, the machinery would have a positive salvage
475 value. Here are the project’s estimated cash flows:
476
Operating Salvage
477
Year Cash Flow Value
478 0 ($5,000) $5,000
479 1 $2,100 $3,100
480 2 $2,000 $2,000
481 3 $1,750 $0
482
483 (1.) Using the 10% cost of capital, what is the project's NPV If it is operated for the full 3 years?
484
PV of PV of
485 3-Year NPV = Initial Cost + Operating + Salvage
Cash Flow Value
486 = ($5,000.00) + $4,876.78 + $0.00
487 3-Year NPV = ($123.22)
488
489 The asset has a negative NPV if it is kept for three years. But even though the asset will last three years, it might be better to
490 operate the asset for either one or two years, and then salvage it.
491
492 (2.) Would the NPV change if the company planned to terminate the project at the end of Year 2?
493
PV of PV of
494 2-Year NPV = Initial Cost + Operating + Salvage
Cash Flow Value
495 = ($5,000.00) + $3,561.98 + $1,652.89

Downloaded by Zahid Zahid (zahideme@gmail.com)

 lOMoARcPSD|4779556

A B C D E F G H I J K
496 2-Year NPV = $214.88
497
498 (3.) At the end of Year 1? PV of PV of
Operating Salvage
499 1-Year NPV = Initial Cost + +
Cash Flow Value
500 = ($5,000.00) + $1,909.09 + $2,818.18
501 1-Year NPV = ($272.73)
502
503 (4.) What is the project’s optimal (economic) life?
504
505 The project's NPV will only be positive when it is operated for 2 years. Therefore, the project's economic life is 2 years.
506
507 m. After examining all the potential projects, you discover that there are many more projects this year with positive NPVs than
508 in
509 a normal year. What two problems might this extra large capital budget cause? Answer: S ee Chapter 10 Mini Case Show

Downloaded by Zahid Zahid (zahideme@gmail.com)

 lOMoARcPSD|4779556

L M N O P Q R S T U
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17

18

19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
Notice that the NPV function isn't really a Net present value.
50
Instead, it is the present value of future cash flows. Thus, you specify
51 only the future cash flows in the NPV function. To find the true
52 NPV, you must add the time zero cash flow to the result of the NPV
53 function.
54

Downloaded by Zahid Zahid (zahideme@gmail.com)

 lOMoARcPSD|4779556

L M N O P Q R S T U
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121

Downloaded by Zahid Zahid (zahideme@gmail.com)

 lOMoARcPSD|4779556

L M N O P Q R S T U
188
189
190
191
192
193
194
195
196
197
198
199
200
201
202
203
204
205
206
207
208
209
210
211
212
213
214
215
216
217
218
219
220
221
222
223
224
225
226
227
228
229
230
231
232
233
234
235
236
237
238
239
240
241
242
243
244
245
246
247
248
249
250
251
252

Downloaded by Zahid Zahid (zahideme@gmail.com)

 lOMoARcPSD|4779556

L M N O P Q R S T U
253
254
255
256
257
258
259
260
261
262
263
264
265
266
267
268
269
270
271
272
273
274
275
276
277
278
279
280
281
282
283
284
285
286
287
288
289
290
291
292
293
294
295
296
297
298
299
300
301
302
303
304
305
306
307
308
309
310
311
10%.
312
313
314
315
316
317

Downloaded by Zahid Zahid (zahideme@gmail.com)