Special Offer!Use code first15 and
Get 15% off your first order
Table of Contents
To obtain the cost of capital for the firm, the following calculation is done.
Percentage of capital  Rate of Return  Product  
Stocks  60%  14%  8.400%  
Bonds  40%  6%  2.400%  
Sum  10.800% 
Therefore, the company will use 10.8% as the cost of capital, or the minimum rate of return. The company will proceed and evaluate the project using different methods which are net present value, internal rate of return and payback method.
This method discounts inflows and outflows and ascertains the net present value by deducting discounted outflows from discounted inflows to obtain the net present cash inflows i.e. the present value method will involve the selection of rate acceptable to the management or equal to the cost of finance, and this will be used to discount inflows and outflows and the net present value will be equivalent to the present value of inflow minus the present value of outflows. If the net present value is positive, the board should invest, and if NPV is negative, the board should not invest (Bank, Tak, & Squire, 2000).
PV (inflow) – PV (outflows) = NPV



Year  0  1  2  3  4  5  
Sales  2,000,000  2,000,000  2,000,000  2,000,000  2,000,000  
Less  
Less Manufacturing cost  800,000  800,000  800,000  800,000  800,000  
Less Depreciation  600,000  600,000  600,000  600,000  600,000  
Income Before tax  600,000  600,000  600,000  600,000  600,000  
Less tax @ 34%  204000  204000  204000  204000  204000  
Net income  396,000  396,000  396,000  396,000  396,000  
Add back depreciation  600,000  600,000  600,000  600,000  600,000  
Cash flow after tax  996,000  996,000  996,000  996,000  996,000  
Initial investment  3,000,000  
PVIF @ 11%  1  0.9009009  0.8116224  0.7311914  0.658731  0.5934513  
Present Value of cash inflows  897297.3  808375.94  728266.62  656096.05  591077.52  
Total cash inflows  3681113.4  
Less initial cash outflow  3,000,000  
NPV  681,113  
NPV is positive. Therefore, SAC should accept the project. 
The advantage of using this method is that it recognizes the time value of money, and as such, appreciates that a pound now is more valuable than a pound tomorrow, and the two can only be compared, if they are at their present value. Secondly, it takes into account the entire inflows or returns, and as such, it is a realistic gauge of the profitability of a venture. Thirdly, it is consistent with the value of a share, in so far as a positive NPV will have the implication of increasing the value of a share. Finally, the method follows the objective of maximizing the wellbeing of an owner, because a positive NPV will increase the net worth of owners.
However, NPV method has its own limitations, since it is difficult to use. In addition, it ignores the implicit costs. Therefore, it is ideal for assessing the viability of an investment under certainty, because it ignores the element of risk.
IRR (Internal Rate of Return)
IRR is the cash flow discounted technique which follows the principle of NPV. Usually, it is defined as the rate that endeavors to equate present value of the cash outflows of the investment into the initial cash outlay of the venture (Czaczkes & Benninga, 2000).
IRR = PV (cash inflows) = PV (cash outflows) or IRR is the cost of capital, when NPV = 0.
It is also called internal rate of return because it depends wholly on the outlay of investment and proceeds, associated with the project and not a rate determined outside the venture.
A = inflow for each period
C = Cost of investment
Acceptance Rule of IRR
IRR will accept a venture, if its IRR is higher than or equal to the minimum required rate of return. The minimum rate of return is usually the cost of finance, also known as the cut off rate or hurdle rate. IRR will be the highest rate of interest a firm would be ready to pay to finance the project using borrowed funds and without being financially worse off by paying back the loan (the principal and accrued interest) out of cash flows generated by that project. Thus, IRR is the breakeven rate of borrowing from commercial banks (Drury, 2007)
Year  0  1  2  3  4  5  
Sales  2,000,000  2,000,000  2,000,000  2,000,000  2,000,000  
Less  
Less Manufacturing cost  800,000  800,000  800,000  800,000  800,000  
Less Depreciation  600,000  600,000  600,000  600,000  600,000  
Income Before tax  600,000  600,000  600,000  600,000  600,000  
Less tax @ 34%  204000  204000  204000  204000  204000  
Net income  396,000  396,000  396,000  396,000  396,000  
Add back depreciation  600,000  600,000  600,000  600,000  600,000  
Cash flow after tax  996,000  996,000  996,000  996,000  996,000  
Initial investment  3,000,000  
PVIF @ 11%  1  0.900901  0.811622  0.731191  0.658731  0.593451  
Present Value of cash inflows  897297.3  808375.9  728266.6  656096.1  591077.5  
Total cash inflows  3681113  
Less initial cash outflow  3,000,000  
NPV  681,113  
Year  0  1  2  3  4  5  
Sales  2,000,000  2,000,000  2,000,000  2,000,000  2,000,000  
Less  
Less Manufacturing cost  800,000  800,000  800,000  800,000  800,000  
Less Depreciation  600,000  600,000  600,000  600,000  600,000  
Income Before tax  600,000  600,000  600,000  600,000  600,000  
Less tax @ 34%  204000  204000  204000  204000  204000  
Net income  396,000  396,000  396,000  396,000  396,000  
Add back depreciation  600,000  600,000  600,000  600,000  600,000  
Cash flow after tax  996,000  996,000  996,000  996,000  996,000  
Initial investment  3,000,000  
PVIF @ 30%  1  0.769231  0.591716  0.455166  0.350128  0.269329  
Present Value of cash inflows  766153.8  589349.1  453345.5  348727.3  268251.8  
Total cash inflows  2425827  
Less initial cash outflow  3,000,000  
NPV  574,173  
IRR= lower discounting rate + (Higher discounting rate NPVlower discounting rate NPV)/ (lower discounting rate NPV)* Rates difference
Therefore,
IRR  =  19.680995291 
In this case, SAC should purchase the equipment. This is because the IRR (19.68%) is higher than the cost of capital (11%). The method of calculating internal rate of return is advantageous, since it considers the time value of money. In addition, it considers the cash flows over the entire life of the project. Unlike the NPV method, it does not use the cost of finance to discount inflows, and for this reason, it will indicate a rate of return of the interval to the project, against which various ventures can be assessed as to their viability (Needles, Cross, & Powers, 2010). However, the board of SAC may find it difficult to use IRR, since the method is expensive. It requires the trained manpower and may use computers, especially where inflows are of large magnitude.
This method gauges the viability of a venture by taking the inflows and outflows over time to ascertain how soon a venture can payback, and for this reason, PBP (or payout period or payoff) is that period, of time or duration, it will take an investment venture to generate the sufficient cash inflows to payback the cost of such investment. This is a popular approach among the traditional financial managers because it helps them ascertain the time it will take to recover in the form of cash from operations the original cost of the venture. This method is usually an essential preliminary screening stage of the viability of the venture, and it may yield clues to profitability, although, in principle, it will measure how fast a venture may payback, rather than how much a venture will generate in profits, and yet the main objectives of an investment are not to recoup the original cost, but to profit for the owners or investors (Ehrhardt & Brigham, 2010).
Payback = Initial investment/ Annuity
= 3,000,000/996,000
= 3.01years
Consequently, SAC should accept the project, since it takes 3 years only to recoup back the initial investment. In this case, the project is advantageous, and the company should immediately implement the plan.
This method is advantageous, since it compares the returns of a machine with the initial cost. This makes it easy for the company to identify profitable projects at an early stage. However, this method does not recognize the time value of the money. Consequently, a decision based on this method may be unrealistic.