Assignment 31: You Have Been Hired As A Project Management C

Assignment 31 You Have Been Hired As A Project Management Consultant

You have been hired as a project management consultant to assist the Acme Company in evaluating two different project proposals that they are considering. Proposal A calls for the construction of a new plant which will require three years to complete and will have much greater capacity than the old plant. Because the plant will have to be built on the current site, the old plant will have to be razed. Proposal B involves the renovation of this plant.

This renovation will require two years to complete, but the plant can remain in operation in a reduced capacity during this upgrade. Once the renovation is complete, revenue will be increased by 25% per year; however, annual maintenance will be 50% higher than Proposal A.

Questions to Address:

1. What is the profit associated with the project carried out in Proposal A? Proposal B?
2. When does payback occur on the project carried out in Proposal A? Proposal B?
3. What is the present value of revenue for the project carried out in Proposal A? Proposal B? (In computing present value, do not discount the value for the first year being examined.) (Assume i = 0.10)
4. What is the present value of expenses for the project carried out in Proposal A? Proposal B? (In computing present value, do not discount the value for the first year being examined.) (Assume i = 0.10)
5. What is the net present value for the project described in Proposal A? Proposal B? (In computing present value, do not discount the value for the first year being examined.) (Assume i = 0.10)
6. What is the internal rate of return for the project described in Proposal A? Proposal B?
7. Which project would you recommend? Why? What are the merits? What are the risks?

Paper For Above instruction

Evaluating project proposals requires a comprehensive financial analysis to determine viability, profitability, and risk. This paper compares two proposals from Acme Company: Proposal A involving the construction of a new, capacity-expanding plant, and Proposal B focusing on renovating an existing plant for improved performance. The analysis considers profit, payback period, present value of revenue and expenses, net present value, and internal rate of return, culminating in a strategic recommendation.

Profit Analysis of Proposal A and Proposal B

Profitability assessment begins with estimating revenues and expenses. Proposal A involves constructing a new plant over three years with substantial capacity gains, implying higher future revenues. The initial costs include land, construction, demolition of the old plant, and other capital expenditures. Since specific numerical data are not provided in the prompt, assumptions based on typical project costs suggest that Proposal A's profit can be derived from the difference between increased revenues from the expanded capacity and associated costs. Conversely, Proposal B entails renovating the existing plant over two years, allowing continuous operation at reduced capacity during renovations, thus generating ongoing revenue streams, albeit with higher operational expenses post-renovation due to increased maintenance costs of 50% over Proposal A.

Payback Period Computation

The payback period indicates the time required to recover initial investments through net cash inflows. For Proposal A, the three-year construction timeline prolongs the payback period relative to Proposal B, which reduces operational downtime. Assuming detailed cash flows, the payback occurs when cumulative net inflows equal the initial investments, typically around the point where revenues offset costs. Given Proposal B's shorter renovation period and continued operations, it likely achieves payback sooner, provided the increased operational costs do not outweigh the revenue gains.

Present Value of Revenue and Expenses

Present value calculations discount future cash flows to their current worth, utilizing a discount rate of 10%. For Proposal A, the revenue over several years from increased production capacity is discounted accordingly, with the caveat of not discounting the first year's revenue as per instructions. Proposal B's revenue increase, starting after renovation, is similarly discounted, including considerations of ongoing operations during renovation. Expenses, including initial capital outlays, operational costs, and increased maintenance, are discounted in parallel to revenue streams to evaluate project viability.

Net Present Value (NPV) Calculations

NPV represents the difference between total discounted revenues and total discounted expenses. A positive NPV indicates a profitable project, while a negative one signals potential losses. Applying the provided assumptions and discount rate, the NPVs for both proposals help determine the more financially sound choice. Typically, a higher NPV favors the project, provided strategic and risk considerations align.

Internal Rate of Return (IRR) Analysis

IRR is the discount rate at which the NPV of cash flows equals zero. It serves as a measure of the project’s profitability. Calculation involves solving for the rate where the present value of inflows equals outflows. The project with the higher IRR relative to the company's cost of capital (10%) is generally more attractive.

Recommendation and Strategic Considerations

Based on the financial analyses, Recommendation involves selecting the proposal that maximizes profitability, minimizes risk, and aligns with strategic objectives. Proposal A might be favored if the return outweighs the longer construction period and higher upfront investment. Conversely, Proposal B offers shorter implementation, continuous operation, and potentially quicker ROI, but with increased operational costs. Risks include project delays, cost overruns, and operational disruptions. Merits of Proposal A include capacity expansion and long-term growth; Proposal B's merits encompass lower initial investment and faster payback. Risks involve market fluctuations, rising costs, and technological obsolescence.

In conclusion, detailed quantitative data would enable precise calculations, but the strategic recommendation hinges on balancing financial metrics against operational risks and company objectives. Typically, Proposal B's shorter timeline and ongoing revenues make it a compelling choice, provided increased maintenance costs do not outweigh gains.

References

• Ross, S. A., Westerfield, R. W., & Jaffe, J. (2019). Corporate Finance (12th ed.). McGraw-Hill Education.
• Hillier, D., Grinblatt, M., & Titman, S. (2018). Financial Markets and Corporate Strategy. McGraw-Hill Education.
• Black, K. (2015). Business and Management Research Methods. John Wiley & Sons.
• Hull, J. C. (2017). Risk Management and Financial Institutions. Wiley.
• Brealy, R., Myers, S., & Allen, F. (2017). Principles of Corporate Finance (12th ed.). McGraw-Hill Education.
• Pyron, D. (2016). Financial Analysis with Microsoft Excel. Addison-Wesley.
• Gallo, A. (2014). The End of Financial Planning. Harvard Business Review.
• Brigham, E. F., & Ehrhardt, M. C. (2019). Financial Management: Theory & Practice. Cengage Learning.
• Damodaran, A. (2012). Investment Valuation: Tools and Techniques for Determining the Value of Any Asset. Wiley.
• Ross, S. A., & Westerfield, R. W. (2020). Essentials of Corporate Finance. McGraw-Hill Education.