Capital Rationing Decision for a Service Company Involving Four Proposals
Renaissance Capital Group is considering allocating a limited amount of capital investment funds among four proposals. The amount of proposed investment, estimated income from operations, and net cash flow for each proposal are as follows:
Investment | Year | Income from Operations | Net Cash Flow | |||
Proposal A: | $680,000 | 1 | $ 64,000 | $ 200,000 | ||
2 | 64,000 | 200,000 | ||||
3 | 64,000 | 200,000 | ||||
4 | 24,000 | 160,000 | ||||
5 | 24,000 | 160,000 | ||||
$240,000 | $ 920,000 | |||||
Proposal B: | $320,000 | 1 | $ 26,000 | $ 90,000 | ||
2 | 26,000 | 90,000 | ||||
3 | 6,000 | 70,000 | ||||
4 | 6,000 | 70,000 | ||||
5 | (44,000) | 20,000 | ||||
$ 20,000 | $340,000 | |||||
Proposal C: | $108,000 | 1 | $ 33,400 | $ 55,000 | ||
2 | 31,400 | 53,000 | ||||
3 | 28,400 | 50,000 | ||||
4 | 25,400 | 47,000 | ||||
5 | 23,400 | 45,000 | ||||
$142,000 | $ 250,000 | |||||
Proposal D: | $400,000 | 1 | $100,000 | $ 180,000 | ||
2 | 100,000 | 180,000 | ||||
3 | 80,000 | 160,000 | ||||
4 | 20,000 | 100,000 | ||||
5 | 0 | 80,000 | ||||
$300,000 | $700,000 |
The company's capital rationing policy requires a maximum cash payback period of three years. In addition, a minimum average rate of return of 12% is required on all projects. If the preceding standards are met, the net present value method and present value indexes are used to rank the remaining proposals.
Present Value of $1 at Compound Interest | |||||
Year | 6% | 10% | 12% | 15% | 20% |
1 | 0.943 | 0.909 | 0.893 | 0.870 | 0.833 |
2 | 0.890 | 0.826 | 0.797 | 0.756 | 0.694 |
3 | 0.840 | 0.751 | 0.712 | 0.658 | 0.579 |
4 | 0.792 | 0.683 | 0.636 | 0.572 | 0.482 |
5 | 0.747 | 0.621 | 0.567 | 0.497 | 0.402 |
6 | 0.705 | 0.564 | 0.507 | 0.432 | 0.335 |
7 | 0.665 | 0.513 | 0.452 | 0.376 | 0.279 |
8 | 0.627 | 0.467 | 0.404 | 0.327 | 0.233 |
9 | 0.592 | 0.424 | 0.361 | 0.284 | 0.194 |
10 | 0.558 | 0.386 | 0.322 | 0.247 | 0.162 |
Required:
1. Compute the cash payback period for each of the four proposals.
Cash Payback Period | |
Proposal A | |
Proposal B | |
Proposal C | |
Proposal D |
2. Giving effect to straight-line depreciation on the investments and assuming no estimated residual value, compute the average rate of return for each of the four proposals. If required, round your answers to one decimal place.
Average Rate of Return | |
Proposal A | % |
Proposal B | % |
Proposal C | % |
Proposal D | % |
3. Using the following format, summarize the results of your computations in parts (1) and (2) by placing the calculated amounts in the first two columns on the left and indicate which proposals should be accepted for further analysis and which should be rejected. If required, round your answers to one decimal place.
Proposal | Cash Payback Period | Average Rate of Return | Accept or Reject | |
A | % | |||
B | % | |||
C | % | |||
D | % |
4. For the proposals accepted for further analysis in part (3), compute the net present value. Use a rate of 15% and the present value of $1 table above. Round to the nearest dollar.
Select the proposal accepted for further analysis. | ||
Present value of net cash flow total | $ | $ |
Less amount to be invested | $ | $ |
Net present value | $ | $ |
5. Compute the present value index for each of the proposals in part (4). If required, round your answers to two decimal places.
Select proposal to compute Present value index. | ||
Present value index (rounded) |
6. Rank the proposals from most attractive to least attractive, based on the present values of net cash flows computed in part (4).
Rank 1st | |
Rank 2nd |
7. Rank the proposals from most attractive to least attractive, based on the present value indexes computed in part (5).
Rank 1st | |
Rank 2nd |
8. The present value indexes indicate that although Proposal has the larger net present value, it is not as attractive as Proposal in terms of the amount of present value per dollar invested. Proposal requires the larger investment. Thus, management should use investment resources for Proposal before investing in Proposal , absent any other qualitative considerations that may impact the decision.
Answer to Question No.1 | |||
Cash Pay Back Period - Non Discounted | |||
Proposal A | |||
Year | CFAT | Unrecovered Cash Flow | |
0 | -680000 | -680000 | |
1 | 200000 | -480000 | |
2 | 200000 | -280000 | |
Base Year | 3 | 200000 | -80000 |
4 | 160000 | 80000 | |
5 | 160000 | ||
Formula | |||
Base Year + | (Unrecovered Cash Flow of the base year/Cash Flow of the next Year) *12 | ||
Pay back period: | |||
3 Years | 6.00 | Months | |
Proposal B | |||
Year | CFAT | Unrecovered Cash Flow | |
0 | -320000 | -320000 | |
1 | 90000 | -230000 | |
2 | 90000 | -140000 | |
Base Year | 3 | 70000 | -70000 |
4 | 70000 | 0 | |
5 | 20000 | ||
Pay back period: | |||
3 Years | 12.00 | Months | |
i.e. 4 Years | |||
Proposal C | |||
Year | CFAT | Unrecovered Cash Flow | |
0 | -108000 | -108000 | |
Base Year | 1 | 55000 | -53000 |
2 | 53000 | 0 | |
3 | 50000 | 50000 | |
4 | 47000 | 97000 | |
5 | 45000 | ||
Pay back period: | |||
1 Years | 12.00 | Months | |
i.e 2 Years | |||
Proposal D | |||
Year | CFAT | Unrecovered Cash Flow | |
0 | -400000 | -400000 | |
1 | 180000 | -220000 | |
Base Year | 2 | 180000 | -40000 |
3 | 160000 | 120000 | |
4 | 100000 | 220000 | |
5 | 80000 | ||
Pay back period: | |||
2 Years | 3.00 | Months | |
Summary | |||
Proposal | Pay Back Period | ||
Proposal A | 3 years 6 Months | ||
Proposal B | 4 Years | ||
Proposal C | 2 Years | ||
Proposal D | 2 Years 3 Months | ||
Answer to Question No.2 | |||
Average Rate of Return | |||
Proposal A | |||
Year | CFAT | Depreciation(SLM) | Profit after Tax (PAT) |
0 | -680000 | ||
1 | 200000 | -136000 | 336000 |
2 | 200000 | -136000 | 336000 |
3 | 200000 | -136000 | 336000 |
4 | 160000 | -136000 | 296000 |
5 | 160000 | -136000 | 296000 |
1600000 | |||
Average Profits | 320000 | ||
ARR= | Average PAT/Initial/Average Investment | ||
Based on Initial Investment | |||
47% | |||
47.05882353 | |||
Based on Average Investment | |||
24% | |||
23.52941176 | |||
Average Investment = Simple average of Begining Value of Investment and Ending Value of the invetment | |||
Proposal B | |||
Year | CFAT | Depreciation(SLM) | Profit after Tax (PAT) |
0 | -320000 | ||
1 | 90000 | -64000 | 154000 |
2 | 90000 | -64000 | 154000 |
3 | 70000 | -64000 | 134000 |
4 | 70000 | -64000 | 134000 |
5 | 20000 | -64000 | 84000 |
660000 | |||
132000 | |||
Based on Initial Investment | |||
41% | |||
41.25 | |||
Based on Average Investment | |||
21% | |||
20.625 | |||
Proposal C | |||
Year | CFAT | Depreciation(SLM) | Profit after Tax (PAT) |
0 | -108000 | ||
1 | 55000 | -64000 | 119000 |
2 | 53000 | -64000 | 117000 |
3 | 50000 | -64000 | 114000 |
4 | 47000 | -64000 | 111000 |
5 | 45000 | -64000 | 109000 |
570000 | |||
114000 | |||
Based on Initial Investment | |||
106% | |||
105.5555556 | |||
Based on Average Investment | |||
53% | |||
52.77777778 | |||
Proposal D | |||
Year | CFAT | Depreciation(SLM) | Profit after Tax (PAT) |
0 | -400000 | ||
1 | 180000 | -64000 | 244000 |
2 | 180000 | -64000 | 244000 |
3 | 160000 | -64000 | 224000 |
4 | 100000 | -64000 | 164000 |
5 | 80000 | -64000 | 144000 |
1020000 | |||
204000 | |||
Based on Initial Investment | |||
51% | |||
51 | |||
Based on Average Investment | |||
26% | |||
25.5 | |||
Summary | |||
Proposal | ARR (Initial Investment) | ARR (Average Investment) | |
Proposal A | 47 | 24 | |
Proposal B | 41 | 21 | |
Proposal C | 106 | 53 | |
Proposal D | 51 | 26 | |
Answer to Question No.3 | |||
Proposal | Pay Back Period | ARR (Initial Investment) | Accept/Reject |
Proposal A | 3 years 6 Months | 47 | Reject |
Proposal B | 4 Years | 41 | Reject |
Proposal C | 2 Years | 106 | Accept |
Proposal D | 2 Years 3 Months | 51 | Accept |
Answer to Question No.4 | |||
Net present value Analysis (NPV) | |||
Proposal C | 15.00% | ||
PV Factor | |||
Year | CFAT | D.F 15% | DCFAT |
0 | -108000 | 1 | -108000 |
1 | 55000 | 0.87 | 47850 |
2 | 53000 | 0.756 | 40068 |
3 | 50000 | 0.658 | 32900 |
4 | 47000 | 0.572 | 26884 |
5 | 45000 | 0.497 | 22365 |
Net Present Value(NPV) | 62067 | ||
170067 | PV of Inflow | ||
15.00% | |||
Proposal D | PV Factor | ||
Year | CFAT | D.F 15% | DCFAT |
0 | -400000 | 1 | -400000 |
1 | 180000 | 0.87 | 156600 |
2 | 180000 | 0.756 | 136080 |
3 | 160000 | 0.658 | 105280 |
4 | 100000 | 0.572 | 57200 |
5 | 80000 | 0.497 | 39760 |
Net Present Value(NPV) | 94920 | ||
494920 | PV of Inflow | ||
Answer to Question No.5 | |||
Present value Index | |||
Proposal C | |||
PI= | PV of Inflow/PV of Outflow | ||
PI | 1.574694444 | (170067/108000) | |
Proposal D | |||
PI | 1.2373 | (494920/400000) | |
Answer to Question No.6 | |||
Rankin Based on Q4 Above (NPV) | |||
Proposal | Rank | ||
Proposal C | 2 | ||
Proposal D | 1 | ||
Answer to Question No.7 | |||
Rankin Based on Q5 Above PI | |||
Proposal | Rank | ||
Proposal C | 1 | ||
Proposal D | 2 |
Capital Rationing Decision for a Service Company Involving Four Proposals Renaissance Capital Group is considering allocating...
Capital Rationing Decision for a Service Company Involving Four Proposals Renaissance Capital Group is considering allocating a limited amount of capital investment funds among four proposals. The amount of proposed investment, estimated operating income, and net cash flow for each proposal are as follows: Investment Year Operating Income Net Cash Flow Proposal A: $680,000 1 $ 64,000 $ 200,000 2 64,000 200,000 3 64,000 200,000 4 24,000 160,000 5 24,000 160,000 $240,000 $ 920,000 Proposal B: $320,000 1 $ 26,000...
Capital Rationing Decision for a Service Company Involving Four Proposals Renaissance Capital Group is considering allocating a limited amount of capital investment funds among four proposals. The amount of proposed investment, estimated income from operations, and net cash flow for each proposal are as follows: Investment Year Income from Operations Net Cash Flow Proposal A: $680,000 1 $ 64,000 $ 200,000 2 64,000 200,000 3 64,000 200,000 4 24,000 160,000 5 24,000 160,000 $240,000 $ 920,000 Proposal B: $320,000 1...
Capital Rationing Decision for a Service Company Involving Four Proposals Renaissance Capital Group is considering allocating a limited amount of capital investment funds among four proposals. The amount of proposed investment, estimated operating income, and net cash flow for each proposal are as follows: Investment Year Operating Income Net Cash Flow Proposal A: $680,000 1 $ 64,000 $ 200,000 2 64,000 200,000 3 64,000 200,000 4 24,000 160,000 5 24,000 160,000 $240,000 $ 920,000 Proposal B: $320,000 1 $ 26,000...
Capital Rationing Decision for a Service Company Involving Four Proposals Renaissance Capital Group is considering allocating a limited amount of capital investment funds among four proposals. The amount of proposed investment, estimated income from operations, and net cash flow for each proposal are as follows: Investment Year Income from Operations Net Cash Flow Proposal A: $680,000 1 $ 64,000 $ 200,000 2 64,000 200,000 3 64,000 200,000 4 24,000 160,000 5 24,000 160,000 $240,000 $ 920,000 Proposal B: $320,000 1...
-NM PR 11-6B Capital rationing decision for a service company involving Obj. 2, 3,5 four proposals Clearcast Communications Inc. is considering allocating a limited amount of capital investment funds among four proposals. The amount of proposed investment, estimated income from operations, and net cash flow for each proposal are as follows: Income from Net Cash Investment Year Operations Flow Proposal A: $450,000 $ 30,000 $120,000 30,000 120,000 20,000 110,000 10,000 100,000 (30,000) 60,000 $ 60,000 $510,000 Proposal B: $200,000 $...
Capital Rationing Decision for a Service Company Involving Four Proposals Clearcast Communications Inc. is considering allocating a limited amount of capital investment funds among four proposals. The amount of proposed investment, estimated Operating income, and net cash flow for each proposal are as follows: Investment Year Operating Income Net Cash Flow Proposal A: $450,000 1 $30,000 $120,000 2 30,000 120,000 3 20,000 110,000 4 10,000 100,000 5 (30,000) 60,000 $60,000 $510,000 Proposal B: $200,000 1 $60,000 $100,000 2 40,000 80,000...
Renaissance Capital Group is considering allocating a limited amount of capital investment funds among four proposals. The amount of proposed investment, estimated operating income, and net cash flow for each proposal are as follows: Investment Year Operating Income Net Cash Flow Proposal A: $680,000 1 $ 64,000 $ 200,000 2 64,000 200,000 3 64,000 200,000 4 24,000 160,000 5 24,000 160,000 $240,000 $ 920,000 Proposal B: $320,000 1 $ 26,000 $ 90,000 2 26,000 90,000 3 6,000 70,000 4 6,000...
Information on four investment proposals is given below: Investment Proposal A В D $ (390,000) $ ( 30,000) $ (40,000) $ (600,000) 41,000 Investment required Present value of cash inflows 800,000 551,000 64,100 $ 161,000 $ 11,000 $ 24,100 $ 200,000 Net present value Life of the project б уears 7 years 6 years 5 years Required: 1. Compute the project profitability index for each investment proposal. (Round your answers to 2 decimal places.) 2. Rank the proposals in terms...
Information on four investment proposals is given below: Investment Proposal Investment required Present value of cash inflows Net present value Life of the project $(420,000) $(200,000) $(170,000) $(2,400,000) 589,700 276,400 259, 700 3,203,000 $ 169, 700 $ 76,400 $ 89, 700 $ 803,000 5 years 7 years 6 years 6 years Required: 1. Compute the project profitability index for each investment proposal (Round your answers to 2 decimal places.) 2. Rank the proposals in terms of preference. Project Profitability Index...
Exercise 12-5 Preference Ranking (LO12-5] Information on four investment proposals is given below: Investment required Present value of cash inflows Net present value Life of the project Investment Proposal А $(150,000) $ ( 80,000) $ (160,000) $ (910,000) 211,800 110,400 241,600 1,214,500 $ 61,800 $ 30,400 $ 81,600 $ 304,500 5 years 7 years 6 years 6 years Required: 1. Compute the project profitability index for each investment proposal. (Round your answers to 2 decimal places.) 2. Rank the proposals...