Capital budgeting
-
Upload
metnashikiom2011-13 -
Category
Education
-
view
945 -
download
0
description
Transcript of Capital budgeting
![Page 1: Capital budgeting](https://reader034.fdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022050801/54beadd84a7959bf088b45eb/html5/thumbnails/1.jpg)
11 - 1
Chapter 11: Capital Budgeting: Decision Criteria
n Overview and “vocabulary” n Methods
l Payback, discounted payback l NPV l IRR, MIRR l Profitability Index
n Unequal lives n Economic life
![Page 2: Capital budgeting](https://reader034.fdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022050801/54beadd84a7959bf088b45eb/html5/thumbnails/2.jpg)
11 - 2
What is capital budgeting?
n Analysis of potential projects. n Long-term decisions; involve large
expenditures. n Very important to firm’s future.
![Page 3: Capital budgeting](https://reader034.fdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022050801/54beadd84a7959bf088b45eb/html5/thumbnails/3.jpg)
11 - 3
Steps in Capital Budgeting
n Estimate cash flows (inflows & outflows).
n Assess risk of cash flows. n Determine r = WACC for project. n Evaluate cash flows.
![Page 4: Capital budgeting](https://reader034.fdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022050801/54beadd84a7959bf088b45eb/html5/thumbnails/4.jpg)
11 - 4
What is the difference between independent and mutually exclusive
projects?
Projects are: independent, if the cash flows of one are unaffected by the acceptance of the other.
mutually exclusive, if the cash flows of one can be adversely impacted by the acceptance of the other.
![Page 5: Capital budgeting](https://reader034.fdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022050801/54beadd84a7959bf088b45eb/html5/thumbnails/5.jpg)
11 - 5
What is the payback period?
The number of years required to recover a project’s cost, or how long does it take to get the business’s money back?
![Page 6: Capital budgeting](https://reader034.fdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022050801/54beadd84a7959bf088b45eb/html5/thumbnails/6.jpg)
11 - 6
Payback for Franchise L (Long: Most CFs in out years)
10 80 60
0 1 2 3
-100
=
CFt Cumulative -100 -90 -30 50
PaybackL 2 + 30/80 = 2.375 years
0 100
2.4
![Page 7: Capital budgeting](https://reader034.fdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022050801/54beadd84a7959bf088b45eb/html5/thumbnails/7.jpg)
11 - 7
Franchise S (Short: CFs come quickly)
70 20 50
0 1 2 3
-100 CFt
Cumulative -100 -30 20 40
PaybackS 1 + 30/50 = 1.6 years
100
0
1.6
=
![Page 8: Capital budgeting](https://reader034.fdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022050801/54beadd84a7959bf088b45eb/html5/thumbnails/8.jpg)
11 - 8
Strengths of Payback: 1. Provides an indication of a
project’s risk and liquidity. 2. Easy to calculate and understand.
Weaknesses of Payback:
1. Ignores the TVM. 2. Ignores CFs occurring after the
payback period.
![Page 9: Capital budgeting](https://reader034.fdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022050801/54beadd84a7959bf088b45eb/html5/thumbnails/9.jpg)
11 - 9
10 80 60
0 1 2 3
CFt
Cumulative -100 -90.91 -41.32 18.79 Discounted payback 2 + 41.32/60.11 = 2.7 yrs
Discounted Payback: Uses discounted rather than raw CFs.
PVCFt -100
-100
10%
9.09 49.59 60.11
=
Recover invest. + cap. costs in 2.7 yrs.
![Page 10: Capital budgeting](https://reader034.fdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022050801/54beadd84a7959bf088b45eb/html5/thumbnails/10.jpg)
11 - 10
( ).
10t
tn
t rCFNPV+
=∑=
NPV: Sum of the PVs of inflows and outflows.
Cost often is CF0 and is negative.
( ).
1 01
CFr
CFNPV tt
n
t
−+
=∑=
![Page 11: Capital budgeting](https://reader034.fdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022050801/54beadd84a7959bf088b45eb/html5/thumbnails/11.jpg)
11 - 11
What’s Franchise L’s NPV?
10 80 60
0 1 2 3 10%
Project L:
-100.00
9.09 49.59 60.11 18.79 = NPVL NPVS = $19.98.
![Page 12: Capital budgeting](https://reader034.fdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022050801/54beadd84a7959bf088b45eb/html5/thumbnails/12.jpg)
11 - 12
Calculator Solution
Enter in CFLO for L:
-100
10
60
80
10
CF0
CF1
NPV
CF2
CF3
I = 18.78 = NPVL
![Page 13: Capital budgeting](https://reader034.fdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022050801/54beadd84a7959bf088b45eb/html5/thumbnails/13.jpg)
11 - 13
Rationale for the NPV Method
NPV = PV inflows - Cost = Net gain in wealth.
Accept project if NPV > 0. Choose between mutually exclusive projects on basis of higher NPV. Adds most value.
![Page 14: Capital budgeting](https://reader034.fdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022050801/54beadd84a7959bf088b45eb/html5/thumbnails/14.jpg)
11 - 14
Using NPV method, which franchise(s) should be accepted?
n If Franchise S and L are mutually exclusive, accept S because NPVs > NPVL .
n If S & L are independent, accept both; NPV > 0.
![Page 15: Capital budgeting](https://reader034.fdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022050801/54beadd84a7959bf088b45eb/html5/thumbnails/15.jpg)
11 - 15
Internal Rate of Return: IRR
0 1 2 3
CF0 CF1 CF2 CF3 Cost Inflows
IRR is the discount rate that forces PV inflows = cost. This is the same as forcing NPV = 0.
![Page 16: Capital budgeting](https://reader034.fdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022050801/54beadd84a7959bf088b45eb/html5/thumbnails/16.jpg)
11 - 16
( ).
10
NPVr
CFt
tn
t
=+
∑=
( )t
nt
tCFIRR=
∑+
=0 1
0.
NPV: Enter r, solve for NPV.
IRR: Enter NPV = 0, solve for IRR.
![Page 17: Capital budgeting](https://reader034.fdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022050801/54beadd84a7959bf088b45eb/html5/thumbnails/17.jpg)
11 - 17
What’s Franchise L’s IRR?
10 80 60
0 1 2 3 IRR = ?
-100.00
PV3
PV2
PV1
0 = NPV
Enter CFs in CFLO, then press IRR: IRRL = 18.13%. IRRS = 23.56%.
![Page 18: Capital budgeting](https://reader034.fdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022050801/54beadd84a7959bf088b45eb/html5/thumbnails/18.jpg)
11 - 18
40 40 40
0 1 2 3 IRR = ?
Find IRR if CFs are constant:
-100
Or, with CFLO, enter CFs and press IRR = 9.70%.
3 -100 40 0 9.70%
N I/YR PV PMT FV INPUTS
OUTPUT
![Page 19: Capital budgeting](https://reader034.fdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022050801/54beadd84a7959bf088b45eb/html5/thumbnails/19.jpg)
11 - 19
Rationale for the IRR Method
If IRR > WACC, then the project’s rate of return is greater than its cost-- some return is left over to boost stockholders’ returns. Example: WACC = 10%, IRR = 15%.
Profitable.
![Page 20: Capital budgeting](https://reader034.fdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022050801/54beadd84a7959bf088b45eb/html5/thumbnails/20.jpg)
11 - 20
Decisions on Projects S and L per IRR
n If S and L are independent, accept both. IRRs > r = 10%.
n If S and L are mutually exclusive, accept S because IRRS > IRRL .
![Page 21: Capital budgeting](https://reader034.fdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022050801/54beadd84a7959bf088b45eb/html5/thumbnails/21.jpg)
11 - 21
Construct NPV Profiles
Enter CFs in CFLO and find NPVL and NPVS at different discount rates:
r 0 5
10 15 20
NPVL
50 33 19
7
NPVS
40 29 20 12
5 (4)
![Page 22: Capital budgeting](https://reader034.fdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022050801/54beadd84a7959bf088b45eb/html5/thumbnails/22.jpg)
11 - 22
-10
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
0 5 10 15 20 23.6
NPV ($)
Discount Rate (%)
IRRL = 18.1%
IRRS = 23.6%
Crossover Point = 8.7%
r 0 5
10 15 20
NPVL 50 33 19
7 (4)
NPVS 40 29 20 12
5
S
L
![Page 23: Capital budgeting](https://reader034.fdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022050801/54beadd84a7959bf088b45eb/html5/thumbnails/23.jpg)
11 - 23 NPV and IRR always lead to the same accept/reject decision for independent projects:
r > IRR and NPV < 0.
Reject.
NPV ($)
r (%) IRR
IRR > r and NPV > 0
Accept.
![Page 24: Capital budgeting](https://reader034.fdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022050801/54beadd84a7959bf088b45eb/html5/thumbnails/24.jpg)
11 - 24
Mutually Exclusive Projects
r 8.7 r
NPV
%
IRRS
IRRL
L
S
r < 8.7: NPVL> NPVS , IRRS > IRRL CONFLICT
r > 8.7: NPVS> NPVL , IRRS > IRRL NO CONFLICT
![Page 25: Capital budgeting](https://reader034.fdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022050801/54beadd84a7959bf088b45eb/html5/thumbnails/25.jpg)
11 - 25
To Find the Crossover Rate
1. Find cash flow differences between the projects. See data at beginning of the case.
2. Enter these differences in CFLO register, then press IRR. Crossover rate = 8.68%, rounded to 8.7%.
3. Can subtract S from L or vice versa, but better to have first CF negative.
4. If profiles don’t cross, one project dominates the other.
![Page 26: Capital budgeting](https://reader034.fdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022050801/54beadd84a7959bf088b45eb/html5/thumbnails/26.jpg)
11 - 26
Two Reasons NPV Profiles Cross
1. Size (scale) differences. Smaller project frees up funds at t = 0 for investment. The higher the opportunity cost, the more valuable these funds, so high r favors small projects.
2. Timing differences. Project with faster payback provides more CF in early years for reinvestment. If r is high, early CF especially good, NPVS > NPVL.
![Page 27: Capital budgeting](https://reader034.fdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022050801/54beadd84a7959bf088b45eb/html5/thumbnails/27.jpg)
11 - 27
Reinvestment Rate Assumptions
n NPV assumes reinvest at r (opportunity cost of capital).
n IRR assumes reinvest at IRR. n Reinvest at opportunity cost, r, is
more realistic, so NPV method is best. NPV should be used to choose between mutually exclusive projects.
![Page 28: Capital budgeting](https://reader034.fdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022050801/54beadd84a7959bf088b45eb/html5/thumbnails/28.jpg)
11 - 28
Managers like rates--prefer IRR to NPV comparisons. Can we give them a
better IRR?
Yes, MIRR is the discount rate which causes the PV of a project’s terminal value (TV) to equal the PV of costs. TV is found by compounding inflows at WACC.
Thus, MIRR assumes cash inflows are reinvested at WACC.
![Page 29: Capital budgeting](https://reader034.fdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022050801/54beadd84a7959bf088b45eb/html5/thumbnails/29.jpg)
11 - 29
MIRR = 16.5%
10.0 80.0 60.0
0 1 2 3 10%
66.0 12.1 158.1
MIRR for Franchise L (r = 10%)
-100.0 10%
10%
TV inflows -100.0
PV outflows MIRRL = 16.5%
$100 = $158.1 (1+MIRRL)3
![Page 30: Capital budgeting](https://reader034.fdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022050801/54beadd84a7959bf088b45eb/html5/thumbnails/30.jpg)
11 - 30
To find TV with 10B, enter in CFLO:
I = 10 NPV = 118.78 = PV of inflows. Enter PV = -118.78, N = 3, I = 10, PMT = 0. Press FV = 158.10 = FV of inflows. Enter FV = 158.10, PV = -100, PMT = 0, N = 3. Press I = 16.50% = MIRR.
CF0 = 0, CF1 = 10, CF2 = 60, CF3 = 80
![Page 31: Capital budgeting](https://reader034.fdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022050801/54beadd84a7959bf088b45eb/html5/thumbnails/31.jpg)
11 - 31
Why use MIRR versus IRR?
MIRR correctly assumes reinvestment at opportunity cost = WACC. MIRR also avoids the problem of multiple IRRs. Managers like rate of return comparisons, and MIRR is better for this than IRR.
![Page 32: Capital budgeting](https://reader034.fdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022050801/54beadd84a7959bf088b45eb/html5/thumbnails/32.jpg)
11 - 32
Normal Cash Flow Project: Cost (negative CF) followed by a series of positive cash inflows. One change of signs.
Nonnormal Cash Flow Project: Two or more changes of signs. Most common: Cost (negative CF), then string of positive CFs, then cost to close project. Nuclear power plant, strip mine.
![Page 33: Capital budgeting](https://reader034.fdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022050801/54beadd84a7959bf088b45eb/html5/thumbnails/33.jpg)
11 - 33
Inflow (+) or Outflow (-) in Year
0 1 2 3 4 5 N NN
- + + + + + N
- + + + + - NN
- - - + + + N
+ + + - - - N
- + + - + - NN
![Page 34: Capital budgeting](https://reader034.fdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022050801/54beadd84a7959bf088b45eb/html5/thumbnails/34.jpg)
11 - 34
Pavilion Project: NPV and IRR?
5,000 -5,000
0 1 2 r = 10%
-800
Enter CFs in CFLO, enter I = 10. NPV = -386.78 IRR = ERROR. Why?
![Page 35: Capital budgeting](https://reader034.fdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022050801/54beadd84a7959bf088b45eb/html5/thumbnails/35.jpg)
11 - 35 We got IRR = ERROR because there are 2 IRRs. Nonnormal CFs--two sign changes. Here’s a picture:
NPV Profile
450
-800
0 400 100
IRR2 = 400%
IRR1 = 25%
r
NPV
![Page 36: Capital budgeting](https://reader034.fdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022050801/54beadd84a7959bf088b45eb/html5/thumbnails/36.jpg)
11 - 36
Logic of Multiple IRRs
1. At very low discount rates, the PV of CF2 is large & negative, so NPV < 0.
2. At very high discount rates, the PV of both CF1 and CF2 are low, so CF0 dominates and again NPV < 0.
3. In between, the discount rate hits CF2 harder than CF1, so NPV > 0.
4. Result: 2 IRRs.
![Page 37: Capital budgeting](https://reader034.fdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022050801/54beadd84a7959bf088b45eb/html5/thumbnails/37.jpg)
11 - 37 Could find IRR with calculator: 1. Enter CFs as before. 2. Enter a “guess” as to IRR by
storing the guess. Try 10%: 10 STO IRR = 25% = lower IRR Now guess large IRR, say, 200: 200 STO IRR = 400% = upper IRR
![Page 38: Capital budgeting](https://reader034.fdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022050801/54beadd84a7959bf088b45eb/html5/thumbnails/38.jpg)
11 - 38
When there are nonnormal CFs and more than one IRR, use MIRR:
0 1 2
-800,000 5,000,000 -5,000,000
PV outflows @ 10% = -4,932,231.40. TV inflows @ 10% = 5,500,000.00. MIRR = 5.6%
![Page 39: Capital budgeting](https://reader034.fdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022050801/54beadd84a7959bf088b45eb/html5/thumbnails/39.jpg)
11 - 39
Accept Project P?
NO. Reject because MIRR = 5.6% < r = 10%. Also, if MIRR < r, NPV will be negative: NPV = -$386,777.
![Page 40: Capital budgeting](https://reader034.fdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022050801/54beadd84a7959bf088b45eb/html5/thumbnails/40.jpg)
11 - 40
S and L are mutually exclusive and will be repeated. r = 10%. Which is
better? (000s)
0 1 2 3 4
Project S: (100) Project L: (100)
60 33.5
60 33.5
33.5
33.5
![Page 41: Capital budgeting](https://reader034.fdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022050801/54beadd84a7959bf088b45eb/html5/thumbnails/41.jpg)
11 - 41
S L CF0 -100,000 -100,000 CF1 60,000 33,500 Nj 2 4 I 10 10 NPV 4,132 6,190
NPVL > NPVS. But is L better? Can’t say yet. Need to perform common life analysis.
![Page 42: Capital budgeting](https://reader034.fdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022050801/54beadd84a7959bf088b45eb/html5/thumbnails/42.jpg)
11 - 42
n Note that Project S could be repeated after 2 years to generate additional profits.
n Can use either replacement chain or equivalent annual annuity analysis to make decision.
![Page 43: Capital budgeting](https://reader034.fdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022050801/54beadd84a7959bf088b45eb/html5/thumbnails/43.jpg)
11 - 43
Franchise S with Replication:
NPV = $7,547.
Replacement Chain Approach (000s)
0 1 2 3 4
Franchise S: (100) (100)
60 60
60 (100) (40)
60 60
60 60
![Page 44: Capital budgeting](https://reader034.fdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022050801/54beadd84a7959bf088b45eb/html5/thumbnails/44.jpg)
11 - 44
Compare to Franchise L NPV = $6,190.
Or, use NPVs:
0 1 2 3 4
4,132 3,415 7,547
4,132 10%
![Page 45: Capital budgeting](https://reader034.fdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022050801/54beadd84a7959bf088b45eb/html5/thumbnails/45.jpg)
11 - 45
If the cost to repeat S in two years rises to $105,000, which is best? (000s)
NPVS = $3,415 < NPVL = $6,190. Now choose L.
0 1 2 3 4
Franchise S: (100)
60
60 (105) (45)
60
60
![Page 46: Capital budgeting](https://reader034.fdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022050801/54beadd84a7959bf088b45eb/html5/thumbnails/46.jpg)
11 - 46
Year 0 1 2 3
CF ($5,000) 2,100 2,000 1,750
Salvage Value $5,000 3,100 2,000 0
Consider another project with a 3-year life. If terminated prior to Year 3, the machinery will have positive salvage
value.
![Page 47: Capital budgeting](https://reader034.fdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022050801/54beadd84a7959bf088b45eb/html5/thumbnails/47.jpg)
11 - 47
1.75
1. No termination
2. Terminate 2 years
3. Terminate 1 year
(5)
(5)
(5)
2.1
2.1
5.2
2
4
0 1 2 3
CFs Under Each Alternative (000s)
![Page 48: Capital budgeting](https://reader034.fdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022050801/54beadd84a7959bf088b45eb/html5/thumbnails/48.jpg)
11 - 48
NPV(no) = -$123. NPV(2) = $215. NPV(1) = -$273.
Assuming a 10% cost of capital, what is the project’s optimal, or economic life?
![Page 49: Capital budgeting](https://reader034.fdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022050801/54beadd84a7959bf088b45eb/html5/thumbnails/49.jpg)
11 - 49
n The project is acceptable only if operated for 2 years.
n A project’s engineering life does not always equal its economic life.
Conclusions
![Page 50: Capital budgeting](https://reader034.fdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022050801/54beadd84a7959bf088b45eb/html5/thumbnails/50.jpg)
11 - 50
Choosing the Optimal Capital Budget
n Finance theory says to accept all positive NPV projects.
n Two problems can occur when there is not enough internally generated cash to fund all positive NPV projects:
l An increasing marginal cost of capital.
l Capital rationing
![Page 51: Capital budgeting](https://reader034.fdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022050801/54beadd84a7959bf088b45eb/html5/thumbnails/51.jpg)
11 - 51
Increasing Marginal Cost of Capital
n Externally raised capital can have large flotation costs, which increase the cost of capital.
n Investors often perceive large capital budgets as being risky, which drives up the cost of capital.
(More...)
![Page 52: Capital budgeting](https://reader034.fdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022050801/54beadd84a7959bf088b45eb/html5/thumbnails/52.jpg)
11 - 52
n If external funds will be raised, then the NPV of all projects should be estimated using this higher marginal cost of capital.
![Page 53: Capital budgeting](https://reader034.fdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022050801/54beadd84a7959bf088b45eb/html5/thumbnails/53.jpg)
11 - 53
Capital Rationing
n Capital rationing occurs when a company chooses not to fund all positive NPV projects.
n The company typically sets an upper limit on the total amount of capital expenditures that it will make in the upcoming year.
(More...)
![Page 54: Capital budgeting](https://reader034.fdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022050801/54beadd84a7959bf088b45eb/html5/thumbnails/54.jpg)
11 - 54
Reason: Companies want to avoid the direct costs (i.e., flotation costs) and the indirect costs of issuing new capital. Solution: Increase the cost of capital by enough to reflect all of these costs, and then accept all projects that still have a positive NPV with the higher cost of capital. (More...)
![Page 55: Capital budgeting](https://reader034.fdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022050801/54beadd84a7959bf088b45eb/html5/thumbnails/55.jpg)
11 - 55
Reason: Companies don’t have enough managerial, marketing, or engineering staff to implement all positive NPV projects. Solution: Use linear programming to maximize NPV subject to not exceeding the constraints on staffing.
(More...)
![Page 56: Capital budgeting](https://reader034.fdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022050801/54beadd84a7959bf088b45eb/html5/thumbnails/56.jpg)
11 - 56
Reason: Companies believe that the project’s managers forecast unreasonably high cash flow estimates, so companies “filter” out the worst projects by limiting the total amount of projects that can be accepted. Solution: Implement a post-audit process and tie the managers’ compensation to the subsequent performance of the project.