Project - PPT 5 Additional Reading
Project - PPT 5 Additional Reading
Project - PPT 5 Additional Reading
1. Ranking by Inspection
By simple inspection it is possible to determine
which of the two or more investment projects
is more desirable. 2
1. Ranking by Inspection
There are two cases under consideration
(i) When two projects have identical cash flows but
different project life, i.e.,
One has shorter life
while the other has longer project life
then, the project with the longer life would be
more desirable.
(ii) When two projects have the same initial outlay the
same earning life and earn the same total proceeds
(profits), but one project has more of the flow
earlier in the time sequence,
Then we choose the project having higher proceeds
in the earlier period than later.
3
Ranking by Inspection (cont…)
6
The Payback Period (Cont…)
If a project involves cash outlay of Birr 600,000
and generates cash inflows of
Birr 100,000,
Birr 150,000,
13
Proceeds per Unit of Outlay (Cont…)
14
Proceeds per Unit of Outlay (Cont…)
17
The average annual proceeds per unit
of outlay (Cont…)
18
The average annual proceeds per unit
of outlay (Cont…)
24
Net Present Value (NPV) (Cont…)
The discounted rate should be either
the actual rate of interest on long term loans in
the capital market
or the interest rate paid by the borrower
Since capital markets do not function properly
in developing countries, the discount rate should
reflect the opportunity cost of capital
This is the minimum rate of return below which
it does not pay to invest (Cut off rate)
25
Net Present Value (NPV) (Cont…)
The discounting period is normally equal to the
life of the project.
This period is the economic life of the project
and varies from project to project.
Having determined discount rate, The project is
acceptable if the discounted net benefits is
greater than or equals to zero.
The economic criterion of project appraisal is to
accept all projects that show positive or zero
NPV at the predetermined discount rate and
reject all projects that show negative NPV.
Thus, the decisions is to accept if NPV > 0.
26
Net Present Value (NPV) (Cont…)
Year 0 1 2 3 4 5
Therefore,
1,000,000 200,000 200,000 300,000 300,000 550,000
NPV 0
1
2
3
4
5
118,913
(1.10) (1.10) (1.10) (1.10) (1.10) (1.10)
27
Net Present Value (NPV) (Cont…)
We can also use the discount factor (PVIF r, n) from
present value tables and compute the NPV as shown in
following table
Year Cash flow PV Discount PV
Factor
0 -1,000,000 1 (1,000,000)
1 200,000 .909091 181,818
2 200,000 .826446 165,259
3 300,000 .751315 225,395
4 300,000 .683013 204, 904
5 550,000 .620921 341,507
28
NPV 118,913
Net Present Value (NPV) (Cont…)
Independent projects are projects that are
not in any way substitutes for each other.
In such cases the decision rule is to
accept the project having positive NPV
Which means, if two projects have
positive NPV and there is no budget
constraint both could be accepted and we
do not need to choose the one with higher
NPV.
29
Net Present Value (NPV) (Cont…)
41
The Internal Rate of Return (Cont…)
This can be written as,
1 1 1 1 1
10,000 3,000
5
(1 r ) (1 r ) (1 r ) (1 r ) (1 r )
1 2 3 4
100806.5 100,000 15 X
X 15.3718
(100,806.5 98637.5) (15 16)
Thus, the IRR would be 15.3711
2000
1671 at 5%
1000
91 @ at 13%
Discount rate
1 5 10 15 20
IRR -221 @ 15%
49
The Internal Rate of Return (Cont…)
Once the IRR is identified, the decision rule is
‘accept the project if the IRR is greater than
the cost of capital, say r (cost of borrowing).
That is, all projects with an internal rate of
return greater than some target rate of return,
should be accepted.
The target rate is usually the same rate used as
the discount rate employed in the computation of
the projects net present value.
Note that the use of IRR does not preclude the
need for discount rate, as sometimes claimed,
but merely delays the need to use it until the
IRR has been computed
50
The Internal Rate of Return (Cont…)
From our discussions it is clear that both the
NPV and the IRR methods can and do rank
investment projects in more rational manner
than the other methods previously considered.
In general, it can be said that the NPV method
is simpler, easier, and more direct and more
reliable.
In some situations, both the NPV and the IRR
criteria give the same accept or reject
decision.
51
The Internal Rate of Return (Cont…)
Disadvantages of IRR
The IRR is inappropriate to use for
mutually exclusive projects
It assumes that cash flows over the life
of the project are reinvested at the IRR
Requires detailed long term forecasts of
the projects incremental costs and
benefits
53
Modified Internal Rate of Return
The major drawback of the IRR relative to the
NPV is the reinvestment rate assumption made
by the IRR.
The IRR assumes that all cash inflows over the
life of the project are reinvested at IRR until
the termination of the project.
The MIRR will correct this shortcoming by
making alternative assumption that,
all cash inflows over the life of the project are
reinvested at the required rate of return.
The MIRR, will take all the annual after cash
inflows (ATCI) and find their future value at the
end of the projects life, compounded at the
required rate of return. 54
Modified Internal Rate of Return (Cont…)
55
Modified Internal Rate of Return (Cont…)
TV
PVoutflows
(1 MIRR ) t
Where,
ACOFt = all cash outflow in time period t
ACIFt = the annual after tax cash inflows in time
period t
TV = terminal value of the project
n = Project’s expected value
MIRR = Modified IRR
56
Modified Internal Rate of Return (Cont…)
58
Modified Internal Rate of Return (Cont…)
0 1 2 3
-6000 2000 3000 4000
4000
3300
2420
9720 = TV
-6000
MIRR = 17.45%
59
Modified Internal Rate of Return (Cont…)
6000= 9720/(1+MIRR)3
MIRR= 17.45%
=1 =0 Indifferent
?
71
Problem with Project Ranking (Cont…)
1. Size Disparity Problem
The size disparity problem occurs when mutually
exclusive projects of unequal size are compared.
Project A Project B
300 inflow
1900 inflow
Year 1 1 year
200 outflow 1500 outflow
74
Problem with Project Ranking (Cont…)
If there is capital constraint,
then focuses is on what can be done with
the additional 1300 (1500-200=1300) that
is freed if project A is chosen?
76
Problem with Project Ranking (Cont…)
2. Unequal Projects’ life
The other problem of project ranking of
mutually exclusive projects is problem
associated with unequal life.
Is it appropriate to compare two projects
having different life span?
Example
Suppose a firm with a 10% required rate of
return is faced with the problem of selecting
between two projects having different life
time.
77
Project A Project B
1 2 3 years
1 2 3 4 5 6years
1000 outflow
1000 outflow
78
Problem with Project Ranking (Cont…)
When we examine these two projects we find
that the NPV, and BCR criteria indicate that
project B is better project.
But the IRR criteria favors project A.
In this case the decision is a difficult one as
the two projects are not comparable.
The problem of incomparability of projects with
different life time arises, because
future profitable project proposals may be
rejected without being included in the analysis.
In our example, the comparison of the NPV
alone would be misleading. . 79
Problem with Project Ranking (Cont…)
If the project A is taken, the firm could replace
it at its termination by another project and
receive additional benefits.
But acceptance of the project with longer life
span would exclude this probability.
As a result the key question here becomes,
Does today’s investment decision include all
future profitable investment proposals in its
analysis?
82
Problem with Project Ranking (Cont…)
iii) The final technique is to assume that
reinvestment opportunity in the future will be
similar to the current one.
Meaning creating a replacement chain to
equalized life span.
In the replacement chain, we can create two chain
cycle for project A.
That is, we can assume that project A can be
replaced with a similar investment at the end of
three years.
Thus, project A would be viewed as two A
projects occurring back to back as illustrated
below.
83
Problem with Project Ranking (Cont…)
Project A
1 2 3 4 5 6 years
87
Problem with Project Ranking (Cont…)
For project A
The PVIFA10%, 3years = 2.4869
EAA = 243.5/2.487 = 97.91
For project B
The PVIFA10%, 6years = 4. 3553
EAA = 306.5/4.355 = 70.38
Since both EAA are annual annuity they
are now comparable
88
Problem with Project Ranking (Cont…)