Real Asset Valuation and Capital Budgeting
Transcription
Real Asset Valuation and Capital Budgeting
Capital Budgeting • Real Asset Valuation and Profitability – – – – – NPV IRR MIRR Payback Cross-over rates • Capital Budgeting process – – – – Cash flows that matter WACC Sensitivity analysis Incorporating risk in capital budgeting Real Asset Valuation • Valuation • Measuring Profitability – The good (NPV) – The bad (IRR) – Cross-over rate – The ugly (Payback) – MIRR Real Asset Valuation • PV(asset)=PV(future cash flows from asset) CF1 CF 2 CF 3 CFn PV (asset ) ... 2 3 n (1 R ) (1 R ) (1 R) (1 R) • 3 elements: – CF=cash flow – Maturity=n – Interest rate=RAverage cost of moneyCost of capital? • What are the determinants of the firm’s value? • What would the firm’s value be if it had a perpetual cash flow? • Can the firm get value from other factors? The good: Net Present Value • Formula: CF1 CF 2 CF 3 CFn NPV (asset ) ... I /O 2 3 n (1 R) (1 R) (1 R) (1 R) • Where I/O is the initial outlay • It measures the $ profitability, taking into account time value of money and risk. It is often referred to as the “extra” $ available to the owners…any comments? • It assumes that cash flows are reinvested at R. NPV Calculation R=10% Year 0 1 2 3 4 A CF -350 50 100 150 200 B CF -250 125 100 75 50 NPV Calculation CF1 CF 2 CF 3 CFn NPV (asset ) ... I /O 2 3 n (1 R) (1 R) (1 R) (1 R) • For A: 50 100 150 200 NPV (asset) 350 2 3 4 (1 .1) (1 .1) (1 .1) (1 .1) NPV(A)=27.4 • For B: NPV (asset) 125 100 75 50 250 2 3 4 (1 .1) (1 .1) (1 .1) (1 .1) NPV(B)=36.78 The Bad: Internal rate of return • IRR is the minimum return (yield) on a real investment so that the present value of the future cash flows is equal to the I/O--It is the (breakeven) rate that sets NPV equal to zero. CF1 CF 2 CF 3 CFn I /O ... 2 3 (1 IRR) (1 IRR) (1 IRR) (1 IRR)n • IRR=Additional cents on the $ invested • It assumes that CFs are reinvested at IRR • It might include several (irrelevant) solutions • It might provide contradictory results with NPV IRR Calculation R=10% Year 0 1 2 3 4 IRR A CF -350 50 100 150 200 12.91% B CF -250 125 100 75 50 17.80% A-B CF -100 -75 0 75 150 8.1%??? NPV vs. IRR • NPV and IRR will generally give us the same decision • Exceptions – Non-conventional cash flows – cash flow signs change more than once – Mutually exclusive projects • Initial investments are substantially different • Timing of cash flows is substantially different Another Example – Nonconventional Cash Flows • Suppose an investment will cost $90,000 initially and will generate the following cash flows: – Year 1: 132,000 – Year 2: 100,000 – Year 3: -150,000 • The required return is 15%. • Should we accept or reject the project? NPV Profile IRR = 10.11% and 42.66% $4,000.00 $2,000.00 NPV $0.00 ($2,000.00) 0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.25 0.3 0.35 0.4 0.45 0.5 0.55 ($4,000.00) ($6,000.00) ($8,000.00) ($10,000.00) Discount Rate Summary of Decision Rules • The NPV is positive at a required return of 15%, so you should Accept • If you use the financial calculator, you would get an IRR of 10.11% which would tell you to Reject • You need to recognize that there are nonconventional cash flows and look at the NPV profile IRR and Mutually Exclusive Projects • Mutually exclusive projects – If you choose one, you can’t choose the other – Example: You can choose to attend graduate school at either Harvard or Stanford, but not both • Intuitively you would use the following decision rules: – NPV – choose the project with the higher NPV – IRR – choose the project with the higher IRR Example With Mutually Exclusive Projects Period Project A Project B 0 -500 -400 1 325 325 2 325 200 IRR 19.43% 22.17% NPV 64.05 60.74 The required return for both projects is 10%. Which project should you accept and why? NPV Profiles IRR for A = 19.43% $160.00 IRR for B = 22.17% $140.00 Crossover Point = 11.8% $120.00 NPV $100.00 $80.00 A B $60.00 $40.00 $20.00 $0.00 ($20.00) 0 0.05 0.1 0.15 ($40.00) Discount Rate 0.2 0.25 0.3 Conflicts Between NPV and IRR • NPV directly measures the increase in value to the firm • Whenever there is a conflict between NPV and another decision rule, you should always use NPV • IRR is unreliable in the following situations – Non-conventional cash flows – Mutually exclusive projects Summary – Discounted Cash Flow Criteria • Net present value – – – – Difference between market value and cost Take the project if the NPV is positive Has no serious problems Preferred decision criterion • Internal rate of return – – – – Discount rate that makes NPV = 0 Take the project if the IRR is greater than the required return Same decision as NPV with conventional cash flows IRR is unreliable with non-conventional cash flows or mutually exclusive projects • Payback period – Length of time until initial investment is recovered – Take the project if it pays back within some specified period – Doesn’t account for time value of money and there is an arbitrary cutoff period A Better Method: MIRR • Assume that Cash Flows are reinvested at the opportunity cost rate. • Bring all positive cash flows to the future=FV(Positive cash flows) • Bring all negative cash flows to the present =PV(Negative cash flows) • Then, • FV(Positive cash flows)= PV(Negative cash flows) x FVIF(n, MIRR) Example: MIRR • For Project A FV (CF ) 50 (1 .1) 3 100 (1 .1) 2 150 (1 .1)1 200 (1 .1) 0 552 .55 PV (CF-) 350 552 .55 1.58 350 Then, MIRR 12% FVIF (4;MIRR) • Do Project B… R=10% Year 0 1 2 3 4 A CF -350 50 100 150 200 B CF -250 125 100 75 50 The Ugly: Payback • Payback: length of time until the sum of an investment’s cash flows equals its cost. YearCF Cumulated CF 1 200 200 2 400 600 3 600 1200 I/O=$1,000 Payback=2 year + 400/600=2 2/3 year • No time value • No risk • Focuses on liquidity; thus, biased against long term projects • What is the most common measure of profitability in corporate America? Payback Calculation R=10% Year 0 1 2 3 4 Payback A CF -350 50 100 150 200 3.25 years B CF -250 125 100 75 50 2.33 years Capital Budgeting • Capital budgeting – Cash flow • Start form nothing=CFA • Expand or Replace=ΔCFA – Cost of capital Cash Flows That Matters... • Stand-alone principle: • Cash flow that matters in a new project: Cash flow from assets • Cash flow that matters in a replacement or expansion project: Incremental Cash flow from assets • Also, (Cash flow from assets) (operating cash flow) - (NWC spending) - (Capital spending) Incremental Cash Flow Analysis (case of replacement or expansion Project) Δ revenues + Δ costs (“-” for an increase in costs, “+” for savings in costs) + Δ Depreciation (“+” for an increase in DPR, “-” for a decrease in DPR) + Δ taxes (“-” for an increase in taxes, “+” for savings in taxes) + Δ NWC sp.(“-” for an increase in NWC sp., “+” for a decrease in NWC sp.) + Δ Fixed Assets spending (“-” for an increase in FA sp., “+” for a decrease in FA sp.) --------------------------------------Incremental (Δ )Cash flow from assets Costs that matter…or not • Sunk costs (R&D, consulting fee) • Opportunity cost and externalities: cost of using a rented vs. own building space (opportunity cost: you could lease/rent it for a certain amount of dollar) • NWC: it is recovered at the end (2 techniques) • Terminal value (the value at the end…) • Initial outlay • Financing costs – Are they included in “cash flow from assets”? – Would you consider them in evaluating the profitability of a project? Why? How? More Complicated Case: REPLACEMENT PROJECT Ex: you are looking at replacing an old processing system with a new one. Installation costs of the new system (net of taxes) are $485,000, which is going to be depreciated to zero over five years. The new system can be scrapped for $60,000. The pre-tax operating cost savings are $100,000 per year. also, the new system requires an initial net working capital injection of $50,000. The tax rate is approximately 34%. The discount rate for this project is 15%. Go or no-go with the replacement? An other replacement Problem • Original Machine – – – – – – Initial cost = 100,000 Annual depreciation = 9000 Purchased 5 years ago Book Value = 55,000 Salvage today = 65,000 Salvage in 5 years = 10,000 • New Machine – – – – Initial cost = 150,000 5-year life Salvage in 5 years = 0 Cost savings = 50,000 per year – 3-year MACRS depreciation • Required return = 10% • Tax rate = 40% Cost Cutting… • Your company is considering a new computer system that will initially cost $1 million. It will save $300,000 a year in inventory and receivables management costs. The system is expected to last for five years and will be depreciated using 3year MACRS. The system is expected to have a salvage value of $50,000 at the end of year 5. There is no impact on net working capital. The marginal tax rate is 40%. The required return is 8%. More Complicated Case: EXPANSION PROJECT Ex: HEP a tech company is looking at a full scale production of its “atomic filtration” device (AFD). The marketing department estimates that an additional 15,000 units can be sold at $2,000 a piece. Additional Equipment needed would cost $9.5 million and $0.5 million in installation. This equipment can be depreciated straight line in 5 years to zero. Initial net working capital injection is $4 million. The life of the project is 4 years at the end of which it can be sold for $2 million. Variable cost are not changing from prior the expansion— i.e., 60% of sales. However, fixed costs will increase at least by $5 million a year. The marginal tax rate is approximately 40%. The discount rate for this project is 15%. Go or no-go with the expansion? Sensitivity Analysis/ Simulation • A probability function for NPV • Simulation Value at risk? • Sensitivity analysis What variables really matter? • Crystal ball example • Real Options