Documente Academic
Documente Profesional
Documente Cultură
Learning Outcomes
By the end of the lecture you should be able to : Explain the concept on net present value (NPV) and internal rate of return (IRR); Calculate NPV, IRR, payback period and accounting rate of return; Justify the superiority of NPV over IRR; Explain the limitations of payback and accounting rate of return methods; Evaluate mutually exclusive projects with unequal lives; Explain capital rationing and the optimum combination of investments when capital is rationed for a period.
We can use investment appraisal techniques to judge between choices and whether to do something or do nothing. Remember, doing nothing can be a valid choice
Payback Period
Main methods of investment appraisal Illustration data: Cost now of asset Cash inflow 1 years time Cash inflow 2 years time Cash inflow 3 years time Cash inflow 4 years time Cash inflow 5 years time Disposal proceeds of asset sale
Payback period the length of time it takes to repay the initial investment out of the cash inflows.
How long does it take to payback the investment?
Payback Period
Year Year 0 Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Year 5 Payback lies between years 2 and 3 Yr 2 = (40,000) ; Yr 3 = 20,000; Movement = +60,000 in 12 months Inflow Cumulative cash flow (100,000) (80,000) (40,000) 20,000 80,000 100,000 120,000
Payback Period
Advantages: Disadvantages:
ARR =
= (Inflows (200,000) + Proceeds (20,000) Investment (100,000)) / 5 ( 100,000 + 20,000) / 2 = (120,000) / 5 60,000 = 24,000 = 40% 60,000 initial investment + disposal value 2
Average investment =
This gives us a percentage return that can be compared between projects or to a minimum required.
Important: You need to calculate the annual average profit and the average investment for ARR. Note it is profit not cashflow, so you may need to make an adjustment for depreciation in a question
Advantages:
Disadvantages:
Positive NPVs enhance shareholders wealth so accept. Negative NPVs reduce shareholders wealth so reject. The one with the biggest NPV is the best one to adopt.
Disadvantages The only real problem is choosing the right rate to discount at. It may vary from project to project or a company may apply the same rate to all projects.
= 29.28%
The hardest part of any business plan or investment decision is always predicting the future. Interest rates Inflation Availability of raw materials, energy and other resources Will the business be viable, changes in law, demand, competition, alternative products etc
What will any scrap, facilities etc. be worth at the end
The main factors that influence the selection of a discount rate are:
Clearly, the additional 4% is the level of additional rate of return that is required to compensate for the level of risk inherent in investing in the stock market. Not every investment carries the same level of risk as investing in equities. For example, Property is considered to be half as risky as the stock market. You would only then need half the risk premium over the Treasury Bond rate, here that would be an additional 2%. So you would use a discount rate of 4+2 = 6%. Allowing for inflation at 1% this would give you a real rate of return of 5%. (Obviously these figures change with varying economic circumstances).
Problems can arise in a number of situations where you are calculating the NPV.
If a project has a positive NPV at the companys cost of capital then it can be done. If you can do every project with a positive NPV, which one will you do? Usually though, the company doesnt have money to follow up every good idea that managers have, it can only do a few. This is a situation usually described as being where there is . In this case it will usually choose the ones with the highest NPV
What if the projects are of a different size? Clearly, a project with an NPV of 80,000 looks much better than one with an NPV of 50,000 and it would be the right choice if the two projects required the same capital investments. But what if they required different investments. Example in Drury p 508 (5th edition p 470).
Initial investment Project C Project D 50,000 100,000 Present Net Present value of Value inflows 100,000 180,000 50,000 80,000
We compare the Present Value (that is the value in todays terms of the cash inflows) to the Investment made to earn those monies. Note it is the Present Value, not the Net Present Value.
Profitability Index = Present Value of inflows / Initial Investment Project C 100,000 = 2 50,000 180,000 = 1.8 100,000
Project D
Usually a company would have far more than two projects to consider between. The process would be to rank them in order of NPV if there was no capital rationing. If there were a restriction on the availability of capital then the projects would be by index. The company would then start with the projects with the profitability index, doing as many as the available capital would allow. This may mean that we dont use all the capital available in the period.
With a cost of capital of 10%, which machine should Bothnia choose to buy?
We can initially look at the cash flows. In this case, they are all cash outflows. Machine Year 0 Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 PV at 10%
X Y
(1,200) (600)
(240) (360)
(240) (360)
(240) -
(1,796.832) (1,224.78)
On the face of it, the PV of costs is lower for Machine Y so it should be chosen. Unfortunately, it means we wont be doing any work in Year Three unless we buy another machine then.
How can we take this mismatch into account? There are three main methods: Evaluate the two over a period equal to the lives. Calculate an . Estimate a
of the two
When one lasts for two years and the other for three, then the lowest common multiple method would be to work out the costs over six years. At the end of the six years, two Machine Xs would have been bought and three Machine Ys would have been bought and we would be about to buy a new one of each.
Machine Year 0 Year 1 (240) Year 2 (240) Year 3 (240) (1200) (360) Year 4 (240) Year 5 (240) Year 6 (240) PV at 10% (3,146.76)
(360)
(360) (600)
(360) (600)
(360)
(360)
(3,073.44)
We can see that it is cheaper to buy Machine Y even though we will have to buy three of them If we are going to buy a new machine at Year 6 we could choose Machine Y, but whether we do or not will depend on how long we are going to need machines for in the future. Doing this method can be tedious, especially if the lowest common multiple is a lot of years (7 years and 3 years = 21 years). In that case we may prefer the next method.
Machine X present value is (1,796.832) for three years (from our earlier calculation) and for machine Y is (1224.74). X Factor PV Y Factor PV (1,200) 1.000 (1,200) (600) 1.000 (600.00) (240) 0.9080 (218.16) (360) 0.9080 (327.24) (240) 0.8264 (198.33) (360) 0.8264 (297.50) (240) 0.7513 (180.31) 2.4868 (1,796.8) 1.7354 (1,224.74)
The annuity factor is obtained from annuity tables (also called cumulative discount tables) for the number of years (3 in this case) and at the appropriate discount factor (10% in this case).
If there isnt an annuity table to hand, you can calculate it from an NPV table. 1 2 3 = = = = 0.9091 0.8264 0.7513 2.4868
Equivalent annual cost for Machine Y. (1,224.780) 1.7355 = (705.722) Cost at the end of year 1 year; 2; year 3 ; etc.