Selecting Discount Rate: Minimum Acceptable Rate of Return
Selecting Discount Rate: Minimum Acceptable Rate of Return
Discount Rate
Lower discount rates: Higher Discount Rates:
Increase the number of Decrease the number of
Evaluation Issues viable projects viable projects
Favour projects with high Favour projects with more
CVEN9701 initial capital outlay of the costs being delayed,
such as maintenance costs
Favour projects with long Favour projects with short
term benefits term benefits
Equity Financing Debt Financing
• Information is presented to potential stockholders in a • Information is presented to a bank
prospectus
– Previous business performance – Previous business performance
– Business plan and future expectations – Business plan and future expectations
– Risks and opportunities – Risks and opportunities
• Investors purchase stock if value is less than their
perception of value • Quantity raised depends upon
– Expected future dividends and stock price – Bankers expectation of what the company can repay
– Investor perception of risk – may be different to the
company • Interest Rates determined from
– Investor discount rate – General market rates
• Stock price determined by market – Risk premium – comparison with similar projects
Economic Evaluation ‐ Issues 1
WACC MARR > WACC
• Weighted Average Cost of Capital • Some money is spent on compulsory
“investments” because of government
• WACC = (E/V)ie + (D/V)id * (1 – tr) regulations, enhancing employee morale,
safety
• E = the firm’s total equity
• D = the firm’s total debt
• V = E + D
• ie, id = cost of equity, debt
• tr = tax rate
• The return paid by companies varies due to many
risk factors
Points below the line are
– Overall economy dominated by other portfolios
– Industry specific
– Company specific 100% investment in
Minimum Variance
• Companies with higher variability are more risky Portfolio
– Chance of low or even negative returns
Variance
– Unsecured Creditors
Market Portfolio
– Shareholders
Variance
Economic Evaluation ‐ Issues 2
Leverage Leverage is risky
No borrowing With borrowing
• Companies can increase return on equity by
borrowing Amount to invest $10 000 $10 000
No borrowing With borrowing Extra from borrowing $10 000
Amount to invest $10 000 $10 000
Total investment $10 000 $20 000
Extra from borrowing $10 000
Total investment $10 000 $20 000 Loss @ 5% ‐ $500 ‐$1 000
Return @ 20% $2 000 $4 000 Interest @ 10% ‐$1 000
Interest @ 10% $1 000
Return after repaying debt ‐ $500 ‐$2 000
Return after repaying debt $2 000 $3 000
and capital
and capital
Rate of return on capital 20% 30% Rate of return on capital ‐5% ‐20%
Economic Evaluation ‐ Issues 3
Triple Bottom Line Weightings
• Economic • Who decides?
• Ecological / Environmental • Should they be linear?
• Social
• Private sector only interested in profit
– (and reputation)
• Public sector expected to consider public
E
EI wi Vi 1 Vi 0 D
i1
NPV
• Red flags for special problems • Eliminate B and D
– Environmental quality may not be fungible • Linear weightings would also rule out F
Intangibles Externalities
• Shadow Prices • Costs to third parties
– What price would you be willing to pay to reduce • Benefits to third parties
a constraint
– Pay to have vs pay to accept • How do we ensure these are considered?
– Incentives
• Example: Carbon Trading – Deterrents
• Risk Society
Economic Evaluation ‐ Issues 4
Life Cycle Cost Sensitivity
• Some projects may have large costs at the end • Small changes in exponent make big changes
of their life in exponential result
– For example nuclear reactor clean up cost
– How to ensure that money is put aside? • How accurate is the forecast?
• Non‐environmentally friendly materials
• Expensive disposal of materials
– Different party must pay
– No fore‐knowledge
Economic Evaluation ‐ Issues 5