Evaluation Of Replacement Printers

Initial Investment

This report has been prepared on a case study which explains about a company CQU printers. This company is managing its operations through an old printer but the new managing director of the company has suggested to the company to make few changes into its current machinery and replace the machineries with new printer. Further, in this report, the cash flows of new printers have been evaluated and it has been found that which proposal is the best option for the company (Brown, Beekes & Verhoeven, 2011). Capital budgeting techniques makes it easy for the companies to evaluate 1 or more investment proposal easily. Following is the exact case:

Save Time On Research and Writing
Hire a Pro to Write You a 100% Plagiarism-Free Paper.
Get My Paper

Production units

 $         50,000

Old Printer

Installed cost

Save Time On Research and Writing
Hire a Pro to Write You a 100% Plagiarism-Free Paper.
Get My Paper

 $      4,00,000

Life

5

Years

Sales value after 3 years

 $      4,20,000

Sales value after 5 years

 $      1,50,000

Current book value

 $      1,16,000

New Printer (A)

Installed cost

 $      8,70,000

Life

5

Years

Sales value after 5 years

 $      4,00,000

Book value after 5 years

 $         43,500

New Printer (B)

Installed cost

 $      6,60,000

Life

5

Years

Sales value after 5 years

 $      3,30,000

Book value after 5 years

 $         33,000

Tax rate

30%

Cost of capital

14%

Profit before depreciation and taxes for CQU printers

Year

Old printer

Printer A

Printer B

1

120000

250000

210000

2

120000

270000

210000

3

120000

300000

210000

4

120000

330000

210000

5

120000

370000

210000

In this part, the initial investment, operating cash inflows and terminal cash flows of both the projects have been calculated:

The below table explain that the initial investment of printer A is $ 4,50,000 and initial investment of project B is $ 2,40,000 which explain that the investment of printer B is quite lesser.

Calculation of initial investment

New Mach (A)

New Mach (B)

Installed cost

 $    8,70,000

 $ 6,60,000

Less: Selling Price

 $    4,20,000

 $ 4,20,000

Initial Investment

 $    4,50,000

 $ 2,40,000

(Atrill & McLaney, 2006)

W.N:

Calculation of current net profit

Installed cost

 $      4,00,000

Less: Depreciation of 3 years

 $      1,50,000

Value after 3 years

 $      2,50,000

Current Selling value

 $      4,20,000

Profit

 $      1,70,000

Net profit

 $      1,70,00

More, operating cash flows of both the projects explain that the total operating cash inflow of Printer A is $ 7,26,5550 and on the other hand, total operating cash flow of printer B is $ 4,28,100 (Gitman, 2009).  Following is the calculation of operating cash flows:

Differential Cash Flows from Operations

Initial

YEAR 1

YEAR 2

YEAR 3

YEAR 4

YEAR 5

DIFFERENTIATED DEPRECIATION

-1,15,300

-1,15,300

-1,15,300

-1,15,300

-1,15,300

Cash inflows from new machinery

2,50,000

2,70,000

3,00,000

3,30,000

3,70,000

Cash inflows from old machinery

-1,20,000

-1,20,000

-1,20,000

-1,20,000

-1,20,000

DIFFERENTIATED Earnings Before Interest &Taxes

14,700

34,700

64,700

94,700

1,34,700

TAXES

-4,410

-10,410

-19,410

-28,410

-40,410

DIFFERENTIATED EBIAT

10,290

24,290

45,290

66,290

94,290

DIFF Operational CF

 

1,25,590

1,39,590

1,60,590

1,81,590

2,09,590

Changes in operating assets and liabilities

Changes in cash

-25400

 

Changes in Accounts Receivable

-120000

 

Inventories

20000

 

Changes in Accounts Payable

35000

 

-90,400

1,25,590

1,39,590

1,60,590

1,81,590

2,09,590

 

Total Operational Cash flows

7,26,550

Differential Cash Flows from Operations

Initial

YEAR 1

YEAR 2

YEAR 3

YEAR 4

YEAR 5

DIFFERENTIATED DEPRECIATION

-75,400

-75,400

-75,400

-75,400

-75,400

Cash inflows from new machinery

2,10,000

2,10,000

2,10,000

2,10,000

2,10,000

Cash inflows from old machinery

-1,20,000

-1,20,000

-1,20,000

-1,20,000

-1,20,000

-1,20,000

DIFFERENTIATED Earnings Before Interest &Taxes

14,600

14,600

14,600

14,600

14,600

TAXES

-4,380

-4,380

-4,380

-4,380

-4,380

DIFFERENTIATED EBIAT

10,220

10,220

10,220

10,220

10,220

DIFF Operational CF

85,620

85,620

85,620

85,620

85,620

Total Operational Cash flows

4,28,100

(Falope & Ajilore, 2009)

W.N.

Years 1 to 5

Differential Depreciation

DEPRECIAT NEW MACHIN

-1,65,300

-1,25,400

DEPRECIAT OLD MACHIN

50,000

50,000

Differential Depreciation

-1,15,300

-75,400

More, terminal cash flows of both the projects explain that the total terminal cash inflow of Printer A is $ 3,56,500 after the end of 5 years and on the other hand, total terminal cash flow of printer B is $ 2,97,000.  Following is the calculation of terminal cash flows:

Calculation of terminal cash flows

Printer A

Printer B

Salvage Value

 $          43,500

 $          33,000

Book Value

 $       4,00,000

 $       3,30,000

Capital Gain

 $       3,56,500

 $       2,97,000

Net cash flow

 $       3,56,500

 $       2,97,000

Accoridng to the part A, following is the cash flow stream of both the printers of the company: 

Cash Flows Stream

Initial

YEAR 1

YEAR 2

YEAR 3

YEAR 4

YEAR 5

Initial Investment

-4,50,000

DIFFERENTIATED DEPRECIATION

-115300

-115300

-115300

-115300

-115300

Cash inflows from new machinery

250000

270000

300000

330000

370000

Cash inflows from old machinery

-120000

-120000

-120000

-120000

-120000

DIFFERENTIATED Earnings Before Interest &Taxes

14700

34700

64700

94700

134700

TAXES

-4410

-10410

-19410

-28410

-40410

DIFFERENTIATED EBIAT

10290

24290

45290

66290

94290

DIFF Operational CF

-4,50,000

125590

139590

160590

181590

209590

Changes in operating assets and liabilities

Changes in cash

-25400

 

Changes in Accounts Receivable

-120000

 

Inventories

20000

 

Changes in Accounts Payable

35000

 

-5,40,400

125590

139590

160590

181590

209590

 

Salvage Value

 

 

 

 

 

43500

 

Book Value

 

 

 

 

 

400000

 

Capital Gain

 

 

 

 

 

356500

 

Tax on capital gain

 

 

 

 

 

 

Net cash flow

 

 

 

 

 

356500

 

Total Operational Cash flows

-540400

125590

139590

160590

181590

566090

6,33,050

Present value factor

1

0.8772

0.7695

0.6750

0.5921

0.5194

Present value

-540400

110167

107410

108394

107516

294009

1,87,096

Cash Flows Stream

Initial

YEAR 1

YEAR 2

YEAR 3

YEAR 4

YEAR 5

 

Initial Investment

-2,40,000

DIFFERENTIATED DEPRECIATION

-75400

-75400

-75400

-75400

-75400

Cash inflows from new machinery

210000

210000

210000

210000

210000

Cash inflows from old machinery

-120000

-120000

-120000

-120000

-120000

-120000

DIFFERENTIATED Earnings Before Interest &Taxes

14600

14600

14600

14600

14600

TAXES

-4380

-4380

-4380

-4380

-4380

DIFFERENTIATED EBIAT

10220

10220

10220

10220

10220

DIFF Operational CF

-2,40,000

85620

85620

85620

85620

85620

Salvage Value

33000

Book Value

330000

Capital Gain

297000

Tax on capital gain

Net cash flow

297000

Total Operational Cash flows

-2,40,000

85,620

85,620

85,620

85,620

3,82,620

4,85,100

Present value factor

1

0.8772

0.7695

0.6750

0.5921

0.5194

Present value

-240000

75105.3

65881.8

57791.1

50693.9

198720.8

2,08,193

(Arnold, 2008)

It explains that the cash flows stream of both the projects are $ 1,87,906 and $ 2,08,193 (Davies & Crawford, 2011).

Further, the capital budgeting techniques have been applied over both the projects to evaluate the best project:

Payback period:

Payback period calculations are as follows:

Calculation of Payback period (Printer A)

Year

Cash Outflow

Cash Inflow

C.F

0

-540400

-540400

1

125590

-414810

2

139590

-275220

3

160590

-114630

4

181590

66960

5

209590

276550

Payback Period

2.37

Calculation of Payback period (Printer B)

Year

Cash Outflow

Cash Inflow

C.F

0

-240000

-240000

1

85620

-154380

2

85620

-68760

3

85620

16860

4

85620

102480

5

85620

188100

Payback Period

1.20

(Ching, Novazzi & Gerab, 2011)

Net present value:

Net present value of the projects is as follows:

Net present value (Printer A)

Year

Cash Outflow

Cash Inflow

P.V. Factor

P.V.

0

-540400

1

-540400

1

125590

0.877

110167

2

139590

0.769

107410

3

160590

0.675

108394

4

181590

0.592

107516

5

566090

0.519

294009

Net present value

187096

Net present value (Printer B)

Year

Cash Outflow

Cash Inflow

P.V. Factor

P.V.

0

-2,40,000

1

-240000

1

85,620

0.877

75105

2

85,620

0.769

65882

3

85,620

0.675

57791

4

85,620

0.592

50694

5

3,82,620

0.519

198721

Net present value

208193

(David, 2011)

Internal rate of return:

Internal rate of return of both the projects are as follows:

IRR

Year

Cash Outflow

Cash Inflow

0

-540400

1

125590

2

139590

3

160590

4

181590

5

566090

IRR

24.40%

IRR

Year

Cash Outflow

Cash Inflow

0

-240000

1

85620

2

85620

3

85620

4

85620

5

382620

IRR

37.93%

(Jiashu, 2009)

The above calculation of IRR, NPV and payback period explain that the Printer B is  better than printer A because the IRR, NPV of printer B is higher than printer B and payback period do printer A is quite higher.

Operating Cash Inflows

Through the above calculation of NPV an IRR and the above draw graph, it has been found that the net present value of printer A is $ 1,87,096 and the NPV of printer B is $ 2,08,193 which explains that the project b would offer more return to the company in comparison of printer A (Bierman and Smidt, 2012). On the other hand, the IRR of both the projects have been evaluated and it has been found that the printer a would offer 24.40% return to the company that means the company would be able to earn 24.40% profit and on the other hand, printer B would offer 37.93% return to the company. It expresses that printer B would offer more return to the company and this internal rate of return is quite higher than the total cost of capital of the company which is 14%. It explains that the printer B is on top of the list and Printer A is on 2nd number in the list.

Further, if the unlimited funds aspect and Capital rationing aspects are taken into the concern than the decision could be changed about the best printer which would offer more return to the company (Horngren et al, 2005). In case of unlimited funds, company could raise the money for all the profitable projects basically through paying cost of capital to the fund holder. In the given case, unlimited fund aspect depict that both the projects are profitable for the company and both would offer a great return to the company so the company should adopted both the projects and enhance its revenues (Gitman & Zutter, 2012).

Further capital rationing explains that the company is not willing to enhance the fund and pay the required rate of return and thus the company should only invest in those projects which would offer high return to the company (Du & Girma, 2009). Thus, the case explains that the printer B must be adopted by the company and the investment must be done in this printer as it would offer high return to the company and the initial investment of this printer is also lower than the printer A (Deegan, 2013). It explains that the printer must be accepted by the company.

If the operating cash flows of printer A are very risky and the operating cash flows of printer b are less risky than it is recommended to the company to choose printer b only (Romney, Steinbart, Zhang & Xu, 2006). As the capital budgeting methods and capita; rationing model explain that the project B would offer high return to the company and the case explain that the associated risk with project B is lesser and thus the project b would be the best opportunity for the company to made (Kaplan & Atkinson, 2015). The above calculation of IRR, NPV and payback period explain that the Printer B is  better than printer A because the IRR, NPV of printer B is higher than printer B and payback period do printer A is quite higher (Shapiro, 2005).

Conclusion:

To conclude, both the projects would offer high return to the company and the invested amount would be got back by the company soon. But the Printer b is much better than Printer A in context with the NPV, IRR and Payback and thus it is concluded that the project b would be the best opportunity for the company to made.

References:

Afza T & Nazir M.S. (2007). Is it Better to be Aggressive or Conservative in Managing Working Capital? Journal of Quality and Technology Management, 3 (2)

Arnold, G. (2008). Corporate Financial Management. 3rd Ed. England: Pearson Education

Atrill, P. & McLaney, E.J., (2006). Accounting and Finance for Non-specialists. Pearson Education.

Bierman Jr, H. and Smidt, S., 2012. The capital budgeting decision: economic analysis of investment projects. Routledge.

Brown, P., Beekes, W. & Verhoeven, P., (2011). Corporate governance, accounting and finance: A review. Accounting & finance, 51(1), pp.96-172.

Ching HY, Novazzi A,& Gerab F. ( 2011).Relationship between Working Capital Management and Profitability in Brazilian Listed Companies. Journal of Global Business and Economics, 3 (1) Evidence from panel data analysis of selected quoted companies in Nigeria. Research

David, F.R., (2011). Strategic management: Concepts and cases. Peaeson/Prentice Hall.

Davies, T. & Crawford, I., (2011). Business accounting and finance. Pearson.

Deegan, C., (2013). Financial accounting theory. McGraw-Hill Education Australia.

Du, J. & Girma, S., (2009). Source of finance, growth and firm size: evidence from China (No. 2009.03). Research paper/UNU-WIDER.

Falope OI, Ajilore OT. (2009).Working Capital Management and Corporate Profitability:

Gitman, L. (2009). Principles O fManajerial Finance. Journal of Business Management Limited. Profitability: Empirical Evidence from India. “Global Business Review”

Gitman, L.J. & Zutter, C.J., (2012). Principles of managerial finance. Prentice Hall.

Horngren, C.T., Sundem, G.L., Stratton, W.O., Burgstahler, D. & Schatzberg, J., (2005). Introduction to management accounting. Upper Saddle River, New Jersey: Prentice Hall.

Jiashu, G., (2009). Study on Fair Value Accounting——on the essential characteristics of financial accounting [J]. Accounting Research, 5, p.003.

Kaplan, R.S. & Atkinson, A.A., (2015). Advanced management accounting. PHI Learning.

Kavanagh, M.H. & Drennan, L., (2008). What skills and attributes does an accounting graduate need? Evidence from student perceptions and employer expectations. Accounting & Finance, 48(2), pp.279-300.

Romney, M.B., Steinbart, P.J., Zhang, R. & Xu, G., (2006). Accounting information systems. Pearson Education.

Shapiro, A.C., (2005). Capital budgeting and investment analysis. Prentice Hall.

Initial investment: