Basic Questions & Problems (1-19)
Given: Initial Cost = \$7,700. Cash Flows: Year 1 = \$1,900, Year 2 = \$3,000, Year 3 = \$2,300, Year 4 = \$1,700.
Step 1: Calculate cumulative cash flows.
End of Year 1: \$1,900
End of Year 2: \$1,900 + \$3,000 = \$4,900
End of Year 3: \$4,900 + \$2,300 = \$7,200
At the end of Year 3, we have recovered \$7,200, which is less than the initial cost of \$7,700. We still need to recover $\$7,700 - \$7,200 = \$500$. The cash flow in Year 4 is \$1,700.
Step 2: Calculate the fractional payback period.
Step 3: Sum the whole years and the fraction.
Tricky Area:
The payback period ignores the time value of money, so you simply add the cash flows sequentially until they equal the initial investment. Don't discount the cash flows for this problem!
Given: Annual Cash Flow = \$835. Project life = 8 years.
Case 1: Initial Cost = \$1,900
The payback period is the initial cost divided by the annual cash flow.
Case 2: Initial Cost = \$3,600
Case 3: Initial Cost = \$7,400
Tricky Area:
The project life is 8 years. In this last case, the payback period is longer than the project life, which means the project never pays back. This highlights a key limitation of the payback rule.
Given: Payback Cutoff = 3 years.
Project A: Initial Cost = \$40,000
End of Year 1: \$14,000
End of Year 2: \$14,000 + \$18,000 = \$32,000
Amount needed in Year 3: $\$40,000 - \$32,000 = \$8,000$.
Since 2.47 years is less than the 3-year cutoff, **Project A should be accepted**.
Project B: Initial Cost = \$55,000
End of Year 1: \$11,000
End of Year 2: \$11,000 + \$13,000 = \$24,000
End of Year 3: \$24,000 + \$16,000 = \$40,000
At the end of Year 3, the cumulative cash flow is only \$40,000, which is less than the initial cost of \$55,000. Therefore, the payback period is greater than 3 years. **Project B should be rejected**.
Given: Discount Rate = 9%.
Step 1: Calculate the discounted cash flows (DCF).
Year 1: $\frac{\$2,800}{1.09} = \$2,568.81$
Year 2: $\frac{\$3,700}{1.09^2} = \$3,113.16$
Year 3: $\frac{\$5,100}{1.09^3} = \$3,934.19$
Year 4: $\frac{\$4,300}{1.09^4} = \$3,043.95$
Step 2: Calculate the cumulative DCF.
End of Year 1: \$2,568.81
End of Year 2: \$2,568.81 + \$3,113.16 = \$5,681.97
End of Year 3: \$5,681.97 + \$3,934.19 = \$9,616.16
End of Year 4: \$9,616.16 + \$3,043.95 = \$12,660.11
Case 1: Initial Cost = \$5,200
At the end of Year 1, the cumulative DCF is \$2,568.81. We need to recover $\$5,200 - \$2,568.81 = \$2,631.19$ in Year 2. The DCF for Year 2 is \$3,113.16.
Case 2: Initial Cost = \$6,400
At the end of Year 2, the cumulative DCF is \$5,681.97. We need to recover $\$6,400 - \$5,681.97 = \$718.03$ in Year 3. The DCF for Year 3 is \$3,934.19.
Case 3: Initial Cost = \$10,400
At the end of Year 3, the cumulative DCF is \$9,616.16. We need to recover $\$10,400 - \$9,616.16 = \$783.84$ in Year 4. The DCF for Year 4 is \$3,043.95.
Given: Initial Cost = \$19,000, Annual Cash Flow = \$5,100 for 6 years.
Case 1: Discount Rate = 0%
When the discount rate is 0%, the discounted payback is the same as the regular payback.
Case 2: Discount Rate = 5%
We need to find the present value of the cash flows until they equal \$19,000.
PV of 3 years' cash flows = $\$5,100 \times \left[ \frac{1 - 1/1.05^3}{0.05} \right] = \$13,858.91$
PV of 4 years' cash flows = $\$5,100 \times \left[ \frac{1 - 1/1.05^4}{0.05} \right] = \$18,103.73$
PV of 5 years' cash flows = $\$5,100 \times \left[ \frac{1 - 1/1.05^5}{0.05} \right] = \$22,042.86$
The payback is between Year 4 and Year 5. We need to recover $\$19,000 - \$18,103.73 = \$896.27$ in Year 5. The discounted cash flow for Year 5 is $\frac{\$5,100}{1.05^5} = \$4,000.41$.
Case 3: Discount Rate = 19%
PV of 6 years' cash flows = $\$5,100 \times \left[ \frac{1 - 1/1.19^6}{0.19} \right] = \$17,994.46$. This is less than the initial cost of \$19,000. Therefore, the project **never pays back** on a discounted basis at 19%.
Tricky Area:
A project can have a positive payback period but never pay back on a discounted basis if the discount rate is high enough to make the present value of all cash flows less than the initial cost.
Given: Initial Cost = \$12.6M, life = 4 years. Net Incomes for each year are provided.
Step 1: Calculate the average net income.
Step 2: Calculate the average book value.
Step 3: Calculate the AAR.
Tricky Area:
The AAR is an accounting measure, not an economic one. It does not consider the time value of money, and the "rate of return" it provides is not comparable to market-based returns like a discount rate.
Given: Initial Cost = \$41,000. Cash Flows: Year 1 = \$20,000, Year 2 = \$23,000, Year 3 = \$14,000. Required Return = 14%.
Step 1: Set up the NPV equation and solve for IRR.
Using a financial calculator or spreadsheet, we find that IRR is approximately **15.75%**.
Step 2: Apply the IRR rule.
Since the IRR of 15.75% is greater than the required return of 14%, the firm **should accept** the project.
Given: Cash flows from Problem 7. Initial Cost = \$41,000. Cash Flows: Year 1 = \$20,000, Year 2 = \$23,000, Year 3 = \$14,000.
Case 1: Required Return = 11%
Since the NPV is positive, the firm **should accept** the project.
Case 2: Required Return = 24%
Since the NPV is negative, the firm **should reject** the project.
Given: Initial Cost = \$74,000. Annual Cash Flow = \$15,300 for 9 years.
Case 1: Required Return = 8%
Since the NPV is positive, this is a **good project** at 8%.
Case 2: Required Return = 20%
Since the NPV is negative, this is **not a good project** at 20%.
Indifferent Discount Rate (IRR):
You would be indifferent when the NPV is zero, which is the IRR. We need to find the rate that makes the present value of a 9-year, \$15,300 annuity equal to \$74,000.
Using a financial calculator or spreadsheet, the rate that corresponds to this annuity factor is approximately **14.39%**. This is the IRR.
Given: Initial Cost = \$18,700. Cash Flows: Year 1 = \$9,400, Year 2 = \$10,400, Year 3 = \$6,500.
Step 1: Set up the NPV equation and solve for IRR.
Using a financial calculator or spreadsheet, the IRR is approximately **19.34%**.
Given: Cash flows from Problem 10. Initial Cost = \$18,700. Cash Flows: Year 1 = \$9,400, Year 2 = \$10,400, Year 3 = \$6,500.
Case 1: Discount Rate = 0%
Case 2: Discount Rate = 10%
Case 3: Discount Rate = 20%
Case 4: Discount Rate = 30%
Given: Initial Cost = \$41,300 for both projects.
a. IRR and IRR Rule:
Project A IRR: The IRR is approximately **24.57%**.
Project B IRR: The IRR is approximately **22.58%**.
Using the IRR decision rule, the company should accept Project A because its IRR is higher. However, this decision is not necessarily correct because these are mutually exclusive projects, and the IRR rule can lead to incorrect rankings.
b. NPV at 11%:
Using the NPV rule, the company should choose Project B because it has a higher NPV.
Tricky Area:
This problem demonstrates the conflict between the NPV and IRR rules for mutually exclusive projects. The IRR rule says to pick A, but the NPV rule, which is the correct one, says to pick B.
c. Crossover Rate:
To find the crossover rate, we take the difference in cash flows (e.g., A - B) and find the IRR of that new project. The difference in cash flows is [0, \$12,800, \$3,600, -\$2,700, -\$21,900].
The IRR of this differential cash flow is approximately **19.86%**. This is the crossover rate. Below this rate, Project B has a higher NPV. Above this rate, Project A has a higher NPV.
The company would choose Project B for required returns between 0% and 19.86% and Project A for required returns between 19.86% and the IRR of Project A (24.57%).
Given: Initial Cost = \$30,000 for both projects.
NPV Profiles:
The crossover rate is the discount rate at which the NPV of both projects is equal. We can find this by taking the difference in cash flows (X - Y) and finding the IRR of that new project. The difference in cash flows is [0, -\$1,900, \$2,000, \$100].
Using a financial calculator or spreadsheet, the IRR of the differential cash flows is approximately **3.40%**. This is the crossover rate.
Given: Initial Cost = -\$52M. Cash Flows: Year 1 = \$74M, Year 2 = -\$12M.
a. NPV at 12%:
Since the NPV is positive, the company **should accept** the project.
b. IRR and Nonconventional Cash Flows:
The cash flows are nonconventional (negative, positive, negative). According to Descartes' Rule of Signs, there can be up to two IRRs. We can find them by setting NPV to zero.
This is a quadratic equation. Solving for IRR, we find two possible values: **13.43%** and **14.28%**. Since both IRRs are greater than the 12% required return, the IRR rule would suggest accepting the project. This is consistent with the positive NPV we found in part (a).
This illustrates the multiple rates of return problem. The IRR rule is not reliable because there are two IRRs. The NPV rule, however, gives a clear answer.
Given: Initial Cost = \$14,800. Cash Flows: Year 1 = \$8,400, Year 2 = \$7,600, Year 3 = \$4,300.
Step 1: Calculate the present value (PV) of future cash flows for each rate.
10%: PV = $\frac{\$8,400}{1.10} + \frac{\$7,600}{1.10^2} + \frac{\$4,300}{1.10^3} = \$7,636.36 + \$6,280.99 + \$3,230.82 = \$17,148.17$
15%: PV = $\frac{\$8,400}{1.15} + \frac{\$7,600}{1.15^2} + \frac{\$4,300}{1.15^3} = \$7,304.35 + \$5,749.50 + \$2,827.67 = \$15,881.52$
22%: PV = $\frac{\$8,400}{1.22} + \frac{\$7,600}{1.22^2} + \frac{\$4,300}{1.22^3} = \$6,885.25 + \$5,108.62 + \$2,357.73 = \$14,351.60$
Step 2: Calculate the Profitability Index (PI).
10%: PI = $\frac{\$17,148.17}{\$14,800} = \textbf{1.1587}$
15%: PI = $\frac{\$15,881.52}{\$14,800} = \textbf{1.0731}$
22%: PI = $\frac{\$14,351.60}{\$14,800} = \textbf{0.9697}$
Given: Required return = 10%. Projects I and II are mutually exclusive.
Step 1: Calculate the present value (PV) of cash flows for both projects.
Project I: PV = $\frac{\$37,600}{1.10} + \frac{\$37,600}{1.10^2} + \frac{\$37,600}{1.10^3} = \$34,181.82 + \$31,074.38 + \$28,249.44 = \$93,505.64$
Project II: PV = $\frac{\$11,200}{1.10} + \frac{\$11,200}{1.10^2} + \frac{\$11,200}{1.10^3} = \$10,181.82 + \$9,256.20 + \$8,414.73 = \$27,852.75$
a. PI Rule:
Project I: PI = $\frac{\$93,505.64}{\$82,000} = \textbf{1.1403}$
Project II: PI = $\frac{\$27,852.75}{\$21,700} = \textbf{1.2835}$
Based on the PI rule, the company should accept Project **II** because it has a higher PI.
b. NPV Rule:
Project I: NPV = $\$93,505.64 - \$82,000 = \textbf{\$11,505.64}$
Project II: NPV = $\$27,852.75 - \$21,700 = \textbf{\$6,152.75}$
Based on the NPV rule, the company should take Project **I** because it has a higher NPV.
c. Explanation:
The answers are different because the two projects are mutually exclusive. The PI measures the value created per dollar invested, while the NPV measures the total value created. Project II has a higher "rate of return" per dollar invested, but Project I creates more total value for the firm. The NPV rule is the correct one to use when choosing between mutually exclusive projects because the goal is to maximize total shareholder wealth.
Given: Required return = 11%. Projects A and B are mutually exclusive.
a. Payback:
Project A: Payback is between Year 3 and Year 4. Amount needed in Year 4: $\$291,000 - (\$37,000 + \$55,000 + \$55,000) = \$144,000$. Payback = $3 + \frac{\$144,000}{\$366,000} = \textbf{3.39 years}$.
Project B: Payback is between Year 2 and Year 3. Amount needed in Year 3: $\$41,600 - (\$20,000 + \$17,600) = \$4,000$. Payback = $2 + \frac{\$4,000}{\$17,200} = \textbf{2.23 years}$.
Based on the payback rule, choose Project **B** because it has a shorter payback period.
b. Discounted Payback:
The discounted cash flows for Project A never recover the initial investment, as the NPV is negative. Therefore, Project A has no discounted payback. Project B has a discounted payback of **2.97 years**. Based on the discounted payback rule, choose Project **B**.
c. NPV:
Project A: NPV = $-\$291,000 + \frac{\$37,000}{1.11} + \frac{\$55,000}{1.11^2} + \frac{\$55,000}{1.11^3} + \frac{\$366,000}{1.11^4} = \textbf{-\$21,079.91}$
Project B: NPV = $-\$41,600 + \frac{\$20,000}{1.11} + \frac{\$17,600}{1.11^2} + \frac{\$17,200}{1.11^3} + \frac{\$14,000}{1.11^4} = \textbf{\$6,039.46}$
Based on the NPV rule, choose Project **B** because it has a positive NPV, while Project A has a negative NPV.
d. IRR:
Project A: IRR is approximately **7.21%**.
Project B: IRR is approximately **17.84%**.
Based on the IRR rule, choose Project **B** because its IRR is greater than the required return of 11%, while Project A's IRR is less than 11%.
e. PI:
PV of cash flows for Project A = \$269,920.09. PV of cash flows for Project B = \$47,639.46.
Project A: PI = $\frac{\$269,920.09}{\$291,000} = \textbf{0.9276}$
Project B: PI = $\frac{\$47,639.46}{\$41,600} = \textbf{1.1452}$
Based on the PI rule, choose Project **B** because its PI is greater than 1, while Project A's PI is less than 1.
f. Final Choice:
The best choice is Project **B**. In this case, all criteria point to the same decision. This is because Project A has a negative NPV, making it a bad investment. The primary goal is to accept only positive NPV projects, and Project B is the only one that meets that condition.
Given: Initial Cost = -\$574,380. Cash Flows: Year 1 = \$216,700, Year 2 = \$259,300, Year 3 = \$214,600, Year 4 = \$167,410.
Case 1: Discount Rate = 0%
At a 0% discount rate, the NPV is simply the sum of all cash flows (undiscounted) minus the initial cost.
Case 2: Discount Rate = $\infty$
As the discount rate approaches infinity, the present value of all future cash flows approaches zero. Therefore, the NPV approaches the negative of the initial cost.
Case 3: NPV = 0 (IRR)
The discount rate that makes NPV zero is the IRR. Using a financial calculator or spreadsheet, the IRR is approximately **20.44%**.
Given: Cash flows: Year 0 = -\$53,000, Year 1 = \$16,700, Year 2 = \$21,900, Year 3 = \$27,300, Year 4 = \$20,400, Year 5 = -\$8,600. Required return = 10%.
Tricky Area:
This is a nonconventional cash flow problem (negative cash flows at the beginning and end), which is a perfect scenario for using the MIRR to avoid multiple IRRs.
Method 1: Discounting Approach
Discount all negative cash flows to the present. The negative cash flow at Year 5 is discounted back to Year 0.
Method 2: Reinvestment Approach
Compound all cash flows to the end of the project's life (Year 5). The initial cost is not compounded, and the Year 5 negative cash flow is already at the end of the project.
Method 3: Combination Approach
This method combines the previous two. Discount negative cash flows to the present and compound positive cash flows to the future.