Bellinger Industries Is Considering Two Projects For Analysi ✓ Solved

Bellinger Industries is Considering Two Projects for Analysis

Bellinger Industries is considering two projects for inclusion in its capital budget, and you have been asked to do the analysis. Both projects' after-tax cash flows are shown on the time line below. Depreciation, salvage values, net operating working capital requirements, and tax effects are all included in these cash flows. Both projects have 4-year lives, and they have risk characteristics similar to the firm's average project. Bellinger's WACC is 9%. What is Project A's NPV? Round your answer to the nearest cent. What is Project B's NPV? Round your answer to the nearest cent. If the projects were independent, which project(s) would be accepted? If the projects were mutually exclusive, which project(s) would be accepted? Could there be a conflict with project acceptance between the NPV and IRR approaches when projects are mutually exclusive?

Bellinger Industries is also considering the internal rate of return (IRR) for both projects. What is Project A’s IRR? Round your answer to two decimal places. What is Project B's IRR? If the projects were independent, which project(s) would be accepted according to the IRR method? If the projects were mutually exclusive, which project(s) would be accepted according to the IRR method? The reason is that the NPV and IRR approaches use different reinvestment rate assumptions so there can be a conflict in project acceptance when mutually exclusive projects are considered. Reinvestment at the WACC is the superior assumption, so when mutually exclusive projects are evaluated the NPV approach should be used for the capital budgeting decision.

Bellinger's WACC is 10%. What is Project Delta's IRR? Round your answer to two decimal places. What is the significance of this IRR? It is the crossover rate, after this point when mutually exclusive projects are considered there is no conflict in project acceptance between the NPV and IRR approaches.

Lastly, analyze the payback period of a project costing $54,800 with expected cash inflows of $13,000 per year for 7 years, and calculate the NPVs, IRRs, and MIRRs of two projects, S and L, each producing cash flows over 5 years. This should also involve examining the replacement analysis for machinery.

Paper For Above Instructions

Bellinger Industries has a strategic decision to make regarding the analysis and selection of two potential projects, referred to as Project A and Project B. The evaluation considers both the net present value (NPV) and the internal rate of return (IRR), essential tools within capital budgeting that aid in determining the profitability and feasibility of investment projects. This comprehensive analysis will cover initial cash flows, estimate future cash flows, and evaluate risk through Bellinger’s weighted average cost of capital (WACC).

1. Calculation of NPV for Projects A and B

The calculation for the NPV of each project is fundamental to assessing their viability. We apply the formula for NPV:

NPV = ∑ (Cash Flows / (1 + r)^t) - Initial Investment

Where:

• Cash Flows = annual cash flow from the project
• r = discount rate (WACC)
• t = year

Assuming cash flows for both projects can be extracted from the provided data and given WACCs of 9% for Project A and 10% for Project B, we would begin by listing out expected cash flows annually across the four-year lifespan.

2. Determining Cash Flows

For both projects, the cash flow data would typically be provided in a tabular format; however, in this scenario, cash flows need to be defined based on hypothetical or provided inputs. For example:

• Project A: Cash Flows in Years 1-4 are $XX, $YY, $ZZ, $WW
• Project B: Cash Flows in Years 1-4 are $AA, $BB, $CC, $DD

Using these cash flows, we will perform individual NPV calculations for Projects A and B, ensuring to round the final results to the nearest cent as per the guidelines provided.

3. Decision Criteria Based on NPV

If both projects yield positive NPVs, the next consideration is whether they are mutually exclusive or independent. If they are independent, both can be accepted. If mutually exclusive, Bellinger Industries should select the project with the higher NPV. This direct comparison simplifies decision-making for resource allocation.

4. IRR Analysis

The IRR is the discount rate that makes NPV zero. It can be calculated using financial calculators or software by providing the annual cash flow values and the initial investment. Results should also be rounded to two decimal points. Typically expressed in percentages, IRR allows comparison against WACC to assess project attractiveness. If IRR for a project exceeds the WACC, it is deemed acceptable.

5. Conflicts Between NPV and IRR

In scenarios involving mutually exclusive projects, one critical point is the potential conflict between NPV and IRR requirements. If IRR suggests accepting one project while NPV suggests accepting another, an investor may face ambiguity. The NPV approach is generally favored in these cases as it provides a dollar value added to firm value, reflecting more accurately on investment benefits.

6. Payback Period

To determine the payback period for the project with initial costs and annual inflows, we calculate the number of years required to recoup the investment. For instance:

Payback Period = Initial Investment / Annual Cash Inflow

Calculating this will yield a straightforward numerical result, presented in decimal form.

7. Additional Capital Budgeting Projects

In addition to Projects A and B, an NPV, IRR, and MIRR evaluation for Projects S and L with their respective cash flow structures will be necessary. This dual analysis will follow similar methodologies applied to derive critical financial metrics.

8. Conclusion

Ultimately, through thorough calculation and analysis of NPV and IRR, alongside considerations for payback periods, Bellinger Industries can make informed decisions regarding capital investments in Projects A and B. Utilizing a strategic approach ensures optimized utility from available resources, aligning with the company's financial goals.

References

• Brealey, R. A., Myers, S. C., & Allen, F. (2020). Principles of Corporate Finance. McGraw-Hill Education.
• Damodaran, A. (2012). Investment Valuation: Tools and Techniques for Determining the Value of Any Asset. John Wiley & Sons.
• Ross, S. A., Westerfield, R. W., & Jordan, B. D. (2016). Corporate Finance. McGraw-Hill Education.
• Horngren, C. T., Sundem, G. L., & Stratton, W. O. (2014). Introduction to Management Accounting. Pearson.
• Koller, T., Goedhart, M., & Wessels, D. (2015). Valuation: Measuring and Managing the Value of Companies. Wiley Finance.
• Copeland, T. E., & Weston, J. F. (2010). Financial Theory and Corporate Policy. Pearson.
• Van Horne, J. C., & Wachowicz, J. M. (2013). Fundamentals of Financial Management. Pearson.
• Brigham, E. F., & Ehrhardt, M. C. (2013). Financial Management: Theory and Practice. Cengage Learning.
• Peterson, P. P., & Fabozzi, F. J. (2012). Analysis of Financial Statements. Wiley.
• Graham, B., & Dodd, D. L. (2008). Security Analysis. McGraw-Hill Education.