Response Time

98%

31128

Tutor Profile

Subjects

Finance, Marketing, Accounting, Economics, HR

Capital budgeting evaluation

MEMO

Date: 18th May 2019

To: DuoLever’s CEO

From:

Subject: Capital Budgeting Analysis of Alternative Options

Dear Sir,

I am hereby presenting the findings about the analysis done for evaluating alternative options available for running the business in environmentally and socially responsible way. After reviewing the case study, it appears that Duo Limited is trying to determine whether to add production of recycled sachet plastic to company’s portfolio of business or license the use of its patented method to partner company Clean World Ltd. The following is the expected net profit of the company if none of the option is selected:

DUO Limited

Years

0

1

2

3

4

5

 Sales

 

        200.0

        208.0

        216.3

        225.0

        234.0

 Variable Packaging Cost

 

          22.0

          22.7

          23.3

          24.0

          24.8

 Sell, Adm & General Cost

 

            1.0

            1.0

            1.0

            1.0

            1.0

 Net Profit

 

        177.0

        184.3

        192.0

        199.9

        208.2

The assumptions associated with above analysis are:

  1. The sales for first year are expected to be $200 million with a growth rate of 4% every year.
  2. The variable packaging cost is $22 million with a growth rate of 3% every year.
  3. The selling, administration and general cost are expected to be $1 million.

OPTION 1:

It appears that the option 1 has an initial investment outlay of $20,000,000 with $2,000,000 depreciation expense every year. The following incremental benefits and costs are expected to flow to Duo Ltd. if the option 1 is selected:

Years

1

2

3

4

5

INCREMENTAL BENEFITS

         

Increased Sales @2%

          4.00

          4.16

          4.33

          4.50

          4.68

Reduced VC @15%

          3.30

          3.40

          3.50

          3.61

          3.71

Avoiding SM @10%

          0.33

          0.34

          0.35

          0.36

          0.37

INCREMENTAL COSTS

         

New Partner Payment @10%

        (0.33)

        (0.34)

        (0.35)

        (0.36)

        (0.37)

Selling, Admin and General Expenses

        (2.00)

        (2.00)

        (2.00)

        (2.00)

        (2.00)

Lease Payments

        (1.40)

        (1.40)

        (1.40)

        (1.40)

        (1.40)

NET OPERATING INCOME

          3.90

          4.16

          4.43

          4.71

          4.99

Depreciation Expense (20/5)

        (4.00)

        (4.00)

        (4.00)

        (4.00)

        (4.00)

EBIT

        (0.10)

          0.16

          0.43

          0.71

          0.99

Taxes @25%

        (0.03)

          0.04

          0.11

          0.18

          0.25

NET INCOME

        (0.08)

          0.12

          0.32

          0.53

          0.75

Add Back Depreciation

          4.00

          4.00

          4.00

          4.00

          4.00

CASH FLOW FROM OPERATIONS

          3.93

          4.12

          4.32

          4.53

          4.75

The above analysis is done based on following assumptions:

  1. Additional sales benefits will flow to Duo Ltd. at 2%.
  2. The variable cost will reduce by 15%.
  3. Due to avoiding supplier margin, the variable cost will further decrease by 10% however a new partner payment of 10% will offset this benefit.
  4. The additional selling, administration and general expenses associated to option 1 is expected to be $2 million annually.
  5. The whole project is funded through loan at interest payment of $1.40 million annually.
  6. The machinery used for producing recycled plastic will depreciate at 20% straight line method for 5 years with cost of $20 million. So, depreciation expense of $4 million is expected annually.
  7. The tax rate is given to be 25%.

Option 2:

Option 2 will allow Duo Ltd. to allow Clean World Ltd. for using the patented recycling method researched and developed by Dup. Ltd. If this option is followed, no initial investment has to be made and the supply cost will remain fixed for next five years. This method will also allow Duo to enjoy additional sales revenue as calculated under option 1 with no extra selling and administration expenses. So, no additional cost is expected to arise in this option however additional benefits are as follows:

OPTION 2

 
 

Years

1

2

3

4

5

 

Incremental Benefits

           

Additional Sales Revenue

          4.00

          4.16

          4.33

          4.50

          4.68

 

Supplier Margin @10%

          2.20

          2.27

          2.33

          2.40

          2.48

 

Incremental Costs

           

None

           

Net Operating Profit

          6.20

          6.43

          6.66

          6.90

          7.16

 

Taxes @25%

          1.55

          1.61

          1.67

          1.73

          1.79

 

Net Income

          4.65

          4.82

          5.00

          5.18

          5.37

 

Read More

The above analysis is made under following assumptions:

  1. Additional sales revenue will be 2%.
  2. Supplier margin will reduce variable cost by 10%.
  3. No incremental costs are expected and no initial investment is required. The variable cost will remain as it is as found in base figures in table 1 above.
  4. Taxes are made at 25%.

Method

For analyzing a capital investment project, Net Present Value is used. This method was used as it considers time value of money while overall analysis of the profitability of project (Peterson & Fabozzi, 2004)       . All the future cash inflows that are likely to flow to firm during the full lifetime of the project are discounted using the given company’s weighted average cost of capital for determining the present values. The future cash inflows are prepared using the predictions or assumptions made by the firm (Dayananda, et al., 2002).

Rule of Thumb

If the present value of the initial investment is lower than the present value of the future cash inflows, the NPV is positive. A positive NPV indicates an optimistic view of the project and allows the company to accept the project (Dayananda, et al., 2002). However, a negative NPV indicates unfavorable conditions under which the project is considered to be loss-bearing. By comparing both option’s NPVs, the project with higher NPV will be chosen.

Option 1 NPV:

Years

0

1

2

3

4

5

Initial Investment

     (20.00)

         

Cash Flow from Operations

 

          3.93

          4.12

          4.32

          4.53

          4.75

Residual Value

 

0

0

0

0

0

Total Cash Flow for the Year

     (20.00)

          3.93

          4.12

          4.32

          4.53

          4.75

Present Value Factor @8%

1

0.9259

0.8573

0.7938

0.7350

0.6806

Present Value

     (20.00)

          3.63

          3.53

          3.43

          3.33

          3.23

NPV

 $(2.64)

         

 

Option 2 NPV:

OPTION 2

 
 

Years

1

2

3

4

5

 

Net Income

          4.65

          4.82

          5.00

          5.18

          5.37

 

Present Value Factor @8%

0.9259

0.8573

0.7938

0.7350

0.6806

 

Present Value

          4.31

          4.13

          3.97

          3.81

          3.65

 

NPV

$15.96

         

Decision

The above NPV analysis indicates a higher NPV for option 2 of $15.96 million and a negative NPV for option 1 of -$2.64 million. Hence, it is recommended for Duo Ltd. to choose option 2. Duo Ltd. needs to outsource the patented method of recycled plastic sachet production to partner company Clean World Ltd.

REFERENCES

Dayananda, D. I. R., Harrison, S. & Herbohn, J. R. P., 2002. Capital Budgeting: Financial Appraisal of Investment Projects. London: Cambridge University Press.

Peterson, P. P. & Fabozzi, F. J., 2004. Capital Budgeting: Theory and Practice. New York: John Wiley & Sons.

Get Assignment Help from Me

TOP
Order Notification

[variable_1] from [variable_2] has just ordered [variable_3] Assignment [amount] minutes ago.