L 3 - Investment Management Incl. Solutions 2012

1 Markus Neuhaus I Corporate Finance I neuhauma@ethz.
ch
Corporate Finance
Investment Management
Dr. Markus R. Neuhaus
Patrick Schwendener, CFA, CAIA

Autumn Term 2012
2 Markus Neuhaus I Corporate Finance I neuhauma@ethz.ch

Autumn Term 2012
21.09. No lecture No lecture
28.09. Fundamentals (4 hours) M. Neuhaus & M. Schmidli
05.10. Investment Management M. Neuhaus & P. Schwendener
19.10. Mergers & Acquisitions I & II (4 hours) M. Neuhaus & S. Beer
26.10. Taxes (4 hours) M. Neuhaus & M. Marbach
02.11. Business Valuation (4 hours) M. Neuhaus & M. Bucher
09.11. Value Management M. Neuhaus, R. Schmid & G. Baldinger
30.11. Legal Aspects I. Pschel
07.12. Turnaround Management M. Neuhaus & R. Brunner
14.12. Financial Reporting M. Neuhaus, M. Jeger & T. Busch
21.12. Summary, repetition M. Neuhaus
Corporate Finance: Course overview

Autumn Term 2012
Markus R. Neuhaus
PricewaterhouseCoopers AG, Zrich

Phone: +41 58 792 40 00
Email: markus.neuhaus@ch.pwc.com

Grade Chairman
Qualification Doctor of Law (University of Zurich), Certified Tax Expert
Career Development Joined PwC in 1985, became Partner in 1992 and CEO from 2003
2012, became Chairman in 2012
Subject-related Exp. Corporate Tax
Mergers & Acquisitions
Lecturing SFIT: Executive in Residence, lecture: Corporate Finance
Multiple speeches on leadership, business, governance, commercial
and tax law
Published Literature Author of commentary on the Swiss accounting rules
Publisher of book on transfer pricing
Author of multiple articles on tax and commercial law, M&A, IPO, etc.
Other professional roles: Member of the board of conomiesuisse, member of the board
and chairman of the tax chapter of the Swiss Institute of
Certified Accountants and Tax Consultants
4 Markus Neuhaus I Corporate Finance I neuhauma@ethz.ch Autumn Term 2012

Grade Advisory Senior Manager
Qualification lic.oec.HSG, CFA, CAIA
Career Development Joined PwC Corporate Finance in October 2004
Subject-related Exp. Numerous projects in the field of valuation
Lecturing Treuhandkammer - Business valuations using DCF technique
KV Zurich Business School - Capital budgeting
ZHAW Zurich University of Applied Sciences - Corporate Finance
Seminar
Published Literature Several articles on valuation topics
Patrick Schwendener
PricewaterhouseCoopers AG, Zrich

Phone: +41 58 792 15 08
Email: patrick.schwendener@ch.pwc.com

Contents
Learning targets
Pre-course reading
Lecture Investment management
Case study
Solution to case study

Autumn Term 2012
Learning targets
Know the discipline of investment management and its relevant stakeholders and
understand their contributions and responsibilities
Understand the strategic importance of investing and the various types of investments
Distinguish between static and dynamic methods and know the characteristics of the
various analysis methods in each category
Know when to apply which methods and be able to make a qualified judgment whether
an investment opportunity should be undertaken or not
Know potential limitations and shortcomings of quantitative capital budgeting methods

Autumn Term 2012
Contents
Learning targets
Pre-course reading
Case study

Autumn Term 2012
Pre-course reading
Books
Mandatory reading
Brealey, Myers, Allen (2011): chapter 2 (pp. 48 - 55)
Optional reading
Volkart (2011): chapter 4 (pp. 277 - 298)
Presentation slides
Structure of lecture (pp. 1 - 11)
Case study (pp. 46 - 58)
Autumn Term 2012
Contents
Learning targets
Pre-course reading
Case study

Autumn Term 2012
Agenda (1/2)
1. Introduction
Investment process
Nature of investment opportunities
Need for investment management
Overview of capital budgeting methods
2. Static methods
Static methods
Cost and profit comparison method
Simple payback period method
Average rate of return method (Return on investment method)
Conclusion on static methods
Autumn Term 2012
Agenda (2/2)
3. Dynamic methods
Compounding and discounting
Opportunity cost of capital
Dynamic methods
Net present value method (NPV)
Internal rate of return method (IRR)
Dynamic payback period method
Annuity method
Conclusion on dynamic methods
4. Case study
Circuit AG
5. Solution to case study
6. Q&A and discussion
Autumn Term 2012
Agenda: Introduction
Investment process
Nature of investment opportunities
Autumn Term 2012
Investment process (1/2)
Shareholders prefer to be rich rather than poor. Therefore, they want the firm to invest
available cash in every project that is worth more than it costs (circle of cash)
If the firm is perceived to fall short of that goal, shareholders prefer to invest their capital
themselves more profitably outside the company on their own
Investment
(project X)
Firm Shareholders
Investment
(financial assets)
Cash
Option 2:
The firm pays dividend
to its shareholders
Option 1:
The firm makes
investment decision
Source: Brealy, Myers, Allen (2011), p. 131.
Autumn Term 2012
Shareholders
invest for
themselves
Investment process (2/2)
Most organisations have developed special procedures and methods for dealing with
investment management, involving
the formulation of long-term goals as part of the overall strategy process
the search for and identification of new investment opportunities
the estimation and forecasting of relevant parameters
the development of decision rules
the controlling and monitoring of investment projects
Consequently, investment management has many different stakeholder groups. For
instance, engineering manpower is indispensable as it
helps translate technical talk into financial talk
provides relevant data for financial models
Autumn Term 2012
Nature of investment opportunities (1/2)
A capital investment can generally be characterized as follows
Lapse of a significant period of time (more than one year) between investment
outlay and receipt of benefits
Benefits are unevenly distributed over the expected useful life
Investment outlay is mostly long-term in nature and hardly reversible
Therefore, making capital investments is obviously a vital activity in business. Important
goals include
Achievement of strategic goals
Abolition of capacity constraints
Maintenance of the asset base
Compliance with legal conditions
Autumn Term 2012
Nature of investment opportunities (2/2)
In practice, capital investments can be grouped using various characteristics
By categories of investment projects (not exhaustive):
New investments
Expansion investments
Replacement investments
Productivity investments
Infrastructure investments
By degree of dependence:
Mutually exclusive investments
Complementary investments
Substitute investments
Autumn Term 2012
Capital investments can be huge and have a significant impact on the future financial
performance and the value of the firm
When analyzing capital investment opportunities, companies are usually confronted with
a series of challenges
Limited capital resources
Limited predictability of relevant data
Relevant data partly insufficiently quantifiable
The tools and methods of investment management help overcome the complexity of
investing by providing a sound basis for decision making
Investment
Financing
Profitability /
excess return
Future value
of the firm
Autumn Term 2012
The term capital budgeting refers to a firms entire process of analyzing investment
opportunities and determining opportunities that are worth being pursued and realized
Several methods of analyzing investment opportunities have evolved which can be
divided into static and dynamic methods
Historically, static methods were developed first. Today, professionals typically make
use of the dynamic methods and apply static methods as 'rules of thumb' at best
Static methods Dynamic methods
Cost comparison method
Profit comparison method
Average rate of return method
(Return on investment method)
Annuity method
Autumn Term 2012
Agenda: Static methods
Static methods
Average rate of return method (Return on investment method)
Autumn Term 2012
Most easily understood methods
Analysis of average per year or average per produced unit if capacities are different
Cost comparison method: Choice of investment opportunity with lowest costs:
Cost comparison method = min (average annual costs) or min (average costs per unit)
Profit comparison method: Choice of investment opportunity with highest profits:
Profit comparison method = max (average annual profit) or max (average profit per unit)
Autumn Term 2012
Simple payback period method (1/2)
The simple payback period method (SPP) considers the initial investment and the
resulting annual cash flows and tells the investor the time it takes to recover the initial
investment

Decision rule: Accept an investment opportunity when its payback period is shorter
than the expected useful life, i.e. when total cumulative cash flows exceed the required
investment
In case of uneven cash flows, cumulate actual annual cash flows
If investment opportunities with different useful lives are compared, determine how
many times the investment's cash flows will pay back the initial investment outlay
(expected useful life / payback period = total cash flows / initial investment outlay)
Simple payback period =
Required investment
Average annual cash flow
Autumn Term 2012
Simple payback period method (2/2)
Example 1: Even cash flow pattern
Investment sum: 100
C Annual cash flow: 20
Expected useful life: 10 years Accept project as payback < 10 years

Example 2: Uneven cash flow pattern (useful life: 5 years)
Accept project as payback < 5 years
Year
Nominal
cash flow
Cumulated
cash flow
0 (today) -100 -100
1 30 -70
2 35 -35
3 35 0
4 40 40
5 40 80
SPP =
Required investment
C annual cash flow
= 5 years
Autumn Term 2012
Average rate of return method (Return on investment
method) (1/2)
The average rate of return (ARR) or Return on investment (ROI) can be calculated by
dividing the benefit of an investment, i.e. earnings before interest payments, by the
average capital tie-up

Decision rule: ARR is usually compared to some firm-specific threshold called hurdle
rate, opportunity cost of capital, cost of capital or minimum rate of return. Projects with
an ARR above the threshold should be realized
ARR is a popular metric due to its versatility (can be defined differently) and simplicity.
The downside of this is that it is prone to manipulation
Practitioners often use ARR as a means of relative performance measurement
ARR is also known as return on investment, accounting rate of return or book rate of
return
ARR =
C Net profit + C Interest
C Capital tie-up (= C Inv. capital)
=
Earnings before interest
C Capital tie-up (= C Inv. capital)
Autumn Term 2012
Average rate of return method (Return on investment
method) (2/2)
Example
Initial investment outlay: 300 C Net profit: 30
Depreciation period (years): 10 Imputed interest rate: 10%
Liquidation value: 60 Hurdle rate: 15%

Accept project as ARR > 15%
ARR =
C Net profit + C Interest
C Capital tie-up
=
30 + 18
180
= 26.7%
C Interest = C Capital tie-up * Imputed interest rate = 180 * 10.0% = 18.0
C Capital tie-up =
Initial outlay + Liquidation value
2
=
300 + 60
2
= 180
Autumn Term 2012
Pros
Static methods are easy to understand
Time and effort for data collection is manageable

Cons
Static methods only consider "average periods"
Time value of money not considered
Potential risk of oversimplification

Use static methods as rules of thumb at best
Autumn Term 2012
Agenda: Dynamic methods
Compounding and discounting
Opportunity cost of capital
Dynamic methods
Annuity method
Autumn Term 2012
Compounding and discounting (1/3)
Time value of money
Investors prefer to receive a payment of a fixed amount of money today rather than the
equal amount of money at a point of time in the future, all other circumstances being
equal. In other words, to forego the use of money today, investors must receive some
compensation in the future
Compounding interest
Describes the process of adding accumulated interest to the principal, so that interest is
earned on interest from that moment on. In other words, compounding determines the
future value of a principal
Discounting interest
Describes the inverse process, i.e. finding the present value (today) of an amount of
cash received at some future date. The future value of each cash flow is reduced by
applying an appropriate discount rate
Autumn Term 2012
PV FV
1
FV
2
FV
3
C
o
m
p
o
u
n
d

i
n
t
e
r
e
s
t

t
Compounding:

FV
3
= PV * (1+r)
3
Discounting:

PV = FV
3
*

General:

FV
n
= PV * (1+r)
n

PV = FV
n
*

1
(1+r)
n
1
(1+r)
3
Autumn Term 2012
Example applying an interest rate of 10%

Compounding and discounting are very sensitive to changes in the discount rate
Year
Nominal
cash flow
Compound
factor @ 10%
Compound
cash flow (FV)
Nominal
cash flow
Discount
factor @ 10%
Discounted
cash flow (PV)
1 100 1.611 161 100 0.909 91
2 100 1.464 146 100 0.826 83
3 100 1.331 133 100 0.751 75
4 100 1.210 121 100 0.683 68
5 100 1.100 110 100 0.621 62
Total 500.0 671.6 500.0 379.1
Compounding Discounting
Year
Nominal
cash flow
Compound
factor @ 15%
Compound
cash flow (FV)
Nominal
cash flow
Discount
factor @ 15%
Discounted
cash flow (PV)
Total 500.0 775.4 500.0 335.2
Autumn Term 2012
Opportunity cost of capital (1/2)
The opportunity cost of capital for an investment project is the expected rate of return
demanded by investors in common stocks or other securities subject to the same risks
as the project
Therefore, determining the opportunity cost of capital for an investment project involves
Searching for securities with identical risk profiles (perfect match) and
Determining the expected return of these securities
Discounting the investment project's expected cash flow at its opportunity cost of capital
will result in the price that investors would be willing to pay for the project
In practice, it is usually difficult to find such securities. A companys "weighted average
cost of capital" (WACC) is often taken as a convenient approximation for the opportunity
cost of capital
A company WACC needs to be adjusted for projects whose risk profile is different from
the company risk profile
Autumn Term 2012
Opportunity cost of capital (2/2)
The riskier a project, the higher the return required by investors. Factors that need to be
considered include:
Inflation
Entrepreneurial business risk
Industry / sector risk
Project-specific risks
Increasing the share of debt capital (cheaper than equity capital) will not lower the
opportunity cost of capital of an investment project (neglecting the impact of taxes, for
further details see Miller Modigliani in lecture (business valuation)
The terms opportunity cost of capital, weighted average cost of capital, discount factor,
hurdle rate are often used interchangeably

Autumn Term 2012
Net present value method (1/3)
The net present value (NPV) is defined as the total present value of a time series of
future cash flows less an initially required investment

Decision rule: Accept investment opportunities offering a positive net present value
Required input parameters:
Required investment (C
0
)
Expected payoffs/cash flows (C
t
)
Number of years (t)
Discount rate/hurdle rate/opportunity cost of capital (r)
( )
=
|
|
.
|
\
|
+
+ =
t
1 i
t
t
0
r 1
C
C NPV
( ) ( ) ( )
T
T
2
2
1
1
0
r 1
C
r 1
C
r 1
C
C NPV
+
+ +
+
+
+
+ =

Autumn Term 2012
C
0
PV
C
1
C
2
C
3
C
4
C
n
t
0

1

n

3

2

4

NPV
Example: Discount rate 10%
Year 0 1 2 3 4 5 Total
Income 0 30 35 35 40 40 180
Capital investment -100 0 -100
Cash flow -100 30 35 35 40 40 80
Discount factor 1.000 0.909 0.826 0.751 0.683 0.621
Discounted cash flow -100 27 29 26 27 25
Cum discounted cash flow -100 -73 -44 -18 10 35
NPV 35
C
5
5

Some numbers are rounded.
Autumn Term 2012
Cash flows pattern Flat Increasing Decreasing
Discount rate 10% 15% 10% 15% 10% 15%
NPV 36 21 35 18 38 23
Sound estimation of discount rate and cash flows is crucial as NPV is very sensitive to
these parameters
Distribution and timing of the cash flows impact the NPV as more distant cash flows are
discounted to a greater extent than earlier cash flows

Among mutually exclusive projects the one with the highest NPV should be chosen
1
The following table shows the detailed cash flows underlying the three scenarios defined above.
Year 1 2 3 4 5 Total
Flat cash flows 36 36 36 36 36 180
Increasing cash flows 30 35 35 40 40 180
Decreasing cash flows 40 40 35 35 30 180
1

Autumn Term 2012
Internal rate of return method (1/4)
The internal rate of return (IRR) is defined as the rate of return that makes the net
present value equal to zero, i.e. the rate at which the present value of the expected
cash flows equals the required investment (or the NPV is zero after a defined number of
years)

Decision rule: Accept investment opportunities offering rates greater than their
opportunity cost of capital (hurdle rate)
0
)
t
)
Number of years (t)
( )
0
IRR 1
C
C NPV
t
1 i
t
t
0
=
|
|
.
|
\
|
+
+ =

=
( ) ( ) ( )
0
IRR 1
C
IRR 1
C
IRR 1
C
C NPV
T
T
2
2
1
1
0
=
+
+ +
+
+
+
+ =

Autumn Term 2012
=
C
0
PV
0

Year
Cash
flows
22% PV 23% PV
0 -100 1.000 -100.0 1.000 -100.0
1 30 0.820 24.6 0.813 24.4
2 35 0.672 23.5 0.661 23.1
3 35 0.551 19.3 0.537 18.8
4 40 0.451 18.1 0.437 17.5
5 40 0.370 14.8 0.355 14.2
NPV 0.2 -2.0
Example: Interpolation of IRR
IRR = 22%
+ 1% * (0.2/2.2)
= 22.1%
C
1
C
2
C
3
C
4
C
n
t
1

n

3

2

4

C
5
5

Discount rate = ?
Autumn Term 2012
Provides relative values compared to the absolute results of the NPV method
Results can be misleading when compared without considering required investment
IRR assumes that a project's cash flows can be reinvested at the same rate of return,
which can be a doubtful assumption
IRR is widely used in workday life and many alternative applications have been
developed
The later a project's cash flows will occur, the lower the IRR will be (provided total
nominal cash flow is equal), i.e. IRR (decreasing) > IRR (flat) > IRR (increasing)
Cash flows pattern Flat Increasing Decreasing
Discount rate 10% 15% 10% 15% 10% 15%
NPV 36 21 35 18 38 23
IRR 23.4% 22.1% 24.8%
1
See page 34 for detailed cash flow pattern assumptions.
1

Autumn Term 2012
The IRR rule contains several pitfalls:
Conflicting results for mutually exclusive projects
Multiple rates of return (change in the sign of the cash flow stream, referred to as
"Descartes' rule of signs")
Lending vs. borrowing
Multiple opportunity costs

Autumn Term 2012
NPV vs. IRR
1
Investment opportunities with discount rates below IRR will yield positive NPV and
should be accepted and vice versa
IRR and NPV analyses result in the same answer when applied properly, but NPV is
easier to use and less prone to wrong decisions
Only IRR is based on the reinvestment assumption but not NPV

NPV is superior - in case of conflicting results, go with NPV!
Discount
rate
IRR
NPV
NPV > 0
NPV < 0
Discount rate < IRR
Discount rate > IRR
1
See Brealy, Myers, Allen (2011), p. 131ff for a detailed explanation.
Autumn Term 2012
Dynamic payback period method (1/3)
The dynamic payback period method (DPP) determines the length of time required for
an investments cash flows, discounted at its opportunity cost of capital, to recover its
initial required investment
Decision rule: Accept an investment opportunity when its payback duration is shorter
than the expected useful life (same as for static payback method)
0
)
t
)
Expected useful life (t)
Discount rate/hurdle rate/opportunity cost of capital (r)
Autumn Term 2012

t
CF1

CF5

CF3

CF2

CF4

Payback period = ?
PV

C
0
Example: DPP using a discount rate of 10%
DPP = 3.0
+ (18/28)
= 3.6

SPP = 3.0
Year
Nominal
cash flow
Cumulated
cash flow
Discount
factor
Discounted
cash flow
Cumulated
cash flow
0 (today) -100 -100 1.000 -100 -100
1 30 -70 0.909 27 -73
2 35 -35 0.826 29 -44
3 35 0 0.751 26 -18
4 40 40 0.683 27 10
5 40 80 0.621 25 35
Static payback (SP) Dynamic payback (DP)
Some numbers are rounded.
Autumn Term 2012
DPP provides useful results and is often applied as a complementary method to NPV
but should not be used as the sole investment decision criterion
NPV and DPP can lead to different results depending on
the distribution of cash flows over the investment's useful life
the designated time limit of the investment
DPP omits all cash flows after the investment sum is recovered, which may be
inadequate for long-running investments
In practice, both simple and dynamic payback durations are often used as simple
measures of risk since short payback durations are generally considered safer than
longer periods (liquidity aspect)
Autumn Term 2012
Annuity method (1/2)
An annuity is a series of equal annual cash flows over a given period. The sum of these
cash flows is equal to a project's NPV

Decision rule: Accept investment opportunities with annuities greater than zero
The annuity method is similar to NPV but somewhat more difficult to calculate
Based on the initial investment outlay, the rate of return and the project's time horizon,
the required cash flow is calculated (equals IRR or NPV of zero). This required cash
flow is then subtracted from the project's actual cash flow. The difference represents the
annuity, which in sum must be equal to the project's NPV
The use of annuities is often unnecessary as NPV analyses will come to identical results
Only two arguments support the use of the annuity method:
Annuities help to calculate the NPV for perpetual cash flows (e.g. terminal value
calculation in business valuation)
As a one-period measure annuities can be interpreted more easily than NPV
Annuity (finite) = NPV *
(1 + r)
T
* r
(1 + r)
T
- 1
Annuity (infinite) = NPV * r
Autumn Term 2012
Present value interest
factor for annuity
Annuity method (2/2)
Calculation of future and present values of ordinary annuity and annuity due:
Future value interest
factor for annuity
Ordinary =
(1+r)
n
-1
r
1
r
Due =
(1+r)
n
-1
r
* (1+r)
r*(1+r)
n
1
- Ordinary =
Due =
1
r r*(1+r)
n
1
-
* (1+r)
Year
Nominal
cash flow
Compound
factor @ 10%
Compound
cash flow (FV)
Nominal
cash flow
Discount
factor @ 10%
Discounted
cash flow (PV)
1 100 1.611 161 100 0.909 91
2 100 1.464 146 100 0.826 83
3 100 1.331 133 100 0.751 75
4 100 1.210 121 100 0.683 68
5 100 1.100 110 100 0.621 62
Total 500.0 6.716 671.6 500.0 3.791 379.1
Compounding Discounting
Autumn Term 2012
Pros
Consideration of time value of money
Consideration of effective cash flows instead of average values
Enable detailed analysis of the investment project

Cons
Time and effort for data collection can be overwhelming
Sensitivity of results to changes of some parameters (e.g. WACC)
Risk of neglecting aspects of non-monetary nature
Calculations are more complex, prone to error and time-consuming
Uncertainty of future projections

Dynamic methods are preferred over static methods
Autumn Term 2012
Agenda: Case study
Circuit AG
Autumn Term 2012
Circuit AG
The Swiss Circuit AG (Circuit) was founded in 1975 and is a well
established producer of medium and high quality printed circuit boards
(PCB)
Circuit produces only in Switzerland at four plants
Since 2005, domestic and European demand has been significantly
declining. However, Circuit faces only slightly weaker demand in the
area of high-quality circuit boards and only a moderate slowdown in the
medium quality sector
The latest industry outlook is very solid and Circuit is expected to
experience above-average growth
Given these circumstances, Circuit is now examining potential
investment opportunities in the field of high-quality multi-layer circuit
boards
Autumn Term 2012
Circuit AG: High-speed milling (1/4)
The product manager of Circuit's high-frequency PCB department has proposed two
alternative investments in the field of high-speed milling. The following data have been
gathered
Alternative A Alternative B
Expected useful life (in years) 6.0 6.0
Sales volume (units per year) 14'000 18'000
Sales price (CHF per unit) 10.0 10.0
Initial investment outlay 200'000 250'000
Construction costs 18'000 28'000
Freigth costs 2'000 2'000
Liquidation value after 8 years 16'000 0
Fixed operating costs (per year) 6'000 22'000
Variable unit costs (CHF per unit) 4.6 3.9
Tax rate (% per year) 20.0% 20.0%
Imputed interest rate (% per year) 6.0% 6.0%
6
Autumn Term 2012
Identify the preferred investment using
the profit comparison method
the average rate of return method
the static payback method
Discuss and justify your overall decision

Autumn Term 2012
Revenue
./. Variable costs
./. Fixed costs
EBITDA
./. Depreciation
EBIT
./. Average interest
EBT
./. Tax
Average profit
Rank
Autumn Term 2012

Static payback period method
Average profit
Average interest
Average capital tie-up
Average rate of return
Rank
Average profit
+ Average depreciation
Average cash flow
Total investment outlay
Static payback period in years
Rank
Autumn Term 2012
Circuit AG: Etching technology (1/6)
In early 2012, Mr. Sell, Chief Strategy Officer in Circuit's high-frequency PCB
department, has proposed to venture into the field of plasma etching. However, based
on preliminary studies, Mr. Sell currently still favors two different etching technologies,
wet etching and plasma etching. While wet etching is expected to be an expiring
technology, the market is not sure whether plasma etching will advance to the state of
the art technology. Circuit can invest only in one technology
Mr. Sell has told you that he favors IRR, because the results of NPV can be misleading.
He has already assessed plasma etching and determined its IRR to be 23.3%. He asks
you to calculate the IRR for the potential investment in wet etching and hand in a
reasonable proposal in which technology to invest
Use the following pages to determine the IRR by interpolation
Autumn Term 2012
IRR calculation for wet etching technology (low IRR bound)

Cash flow
Discount rate Present value
Capital outlay year 0
-150
Cash flow year 1 80
Cash flow year 2 75
Cash flow year 3 55
Cash flow year 4 20
Cash flow year 5 10 0.3277
Net present value
Wet etching @ %
Autumn Term 2012
IRR calculation for wet etching technology (high IRR bound)
Cash flow
-150
Cash flow year 1 80
Cash flow year 2 75
Cash flow year 3 55
Cash flow year 4 20
Cash flow year 5 10 0.3149
Net present value
Wet etching @ %
Autumn Term 2012
As part of your investment proposal, you have also produced the following chart.
Describe it and comment on the impact on your investment appraisal
-40
-20
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
0
%
3
%
6
%
9
%
1
2
%
1
5
%
1
8
%
2
1
%
2
4
%
2
7
%
3
0
%
Plasma etching
Wet etching
r
NPV
Autumn Term 2012
As part of the investment appraisal, Mr. Sell also asks for a net present value
calculation for both technologies. The appropriate discount rate has been determined to
amount to 15%
Compare the results obtained by the different methods and formulate a final investment
recommendation
Cash flow
Discount factor Present value
-150
1.000 -150
Cash flow year 1 30 0.870 26
Cash flow year 3 60
Cash flow year 4 75
Cash flow year 5 90
Net present value
Rank
Plasma etching
Autumn Term 2012
Cash flow
-150
1.000 -150
Cash flow year 3 55
Cash flow year 4 20
Cash flow year 5 10
Net present value
Rank
Wet etching
Autumn Term 2012
Contents
Learning targets
Pre-course reading
Case study
Solution to cases

Autumn Term 2012
Circuit AG: Solution high-speed milling (1/4)
Calculation of necessary inputs
Total investment outlay 220'000 280'000
Average capital tie-up 118'000 140'000
Average interest 7'080 8'400
Average depreciation 34'000 46'667
Autumn Term 2012
Average profit per unit 1.6 1.5
Rank 1 2
Revenue 140'000 180'000
./. Variable costs -64'400 -70'200
./. Fixed costs -6'000 -22'000
EBITDA 69'600 87'800
./. Depreciation -34'000 -46'667
EBIT 35'600 41'133
./. Average interest -7'080 -8'400
EBT 28'520 32'733
./. Tax -5'704 -6'547
Average profit 22'816 26'187
Autumn Term 2012

Static payback period method
Average interest 7'080 8'400
Average capital tie-up 118'000 140'000
Average rate of return 25.34% 24.70%
Rank 1 2
+ Average depreciation 34'000 46'667
Average cash flow 56'816 72'853
Total investment outlay 220'000 280'000
Static payback period in years 3.87 3.84
Rank 2 1
Autumn Term 2012
Overall assessment

Investment outlay and total profit of Alternative A are smaller (220'000 vs.
280'000 and 22'816 vs. 26'187). However, profit per unit is larger for
Alternative A (1.6 vs. 1.5)
ARR is marginally higher for Alternative A (25.3% vs. 24.7%)
Payback period for both Alternative A and Alternative B are shorter than the
expected life and approximately equal (3.87 vs. 3.84)
Based on the three methods applied above, Alternative A outperforms Alternative
B. However, consider market size and demand in your investment
recommendation
Profit comparison method 1 2
Average rate of return method 1 2
Static payback period method 2 1
Autumn Term 2012
Circuit AG: Solution etching technology (1/6)
IRR calculation for wet etching technology (low IRR bound)

Cash flow
-150
1.0000 -150
Net present value 1.629
Wet etching @ 25 %
Autumn Term 2012
IRR calculation for wet etching technology (high IRR bound)
Cash flow
-150
1.0000 -150
Net present value -0.688
Wet etching @ 26 %
IRR wet etching = 25% + 1% * (1.629/[1.629+0.688]) = 25.7%
IRR wet etching (25.7%) > IRR plasma etching (23.3%)
Autumn Term 2012
The graph provides a comparison of IRR and NPV
-40
-20
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
0
%
3
%
6
%
9
%
1
2
%
1
5
%
1
8
%
2
1
%
2
4
%
2
7
%
3
0
%
Plasma etching
Wet etching
r
NPV
IRR plasma
etching =
23.3%
IRR wet
etching =
25.7%
NPV wet etching < NPV plasma etching Perform NPV analysis!
Autumn Term 2012
Net present value calculation for plasma etching (discount rate: 15%)
Cash flow
-150
1.000 -150
Net present value 37
Rank 1
Plasma etching
Autumn Term 2012
Cash flow
-150
1.000 -150
Net present value 29
Rank 2
Wet etching
Net present value calculation for wet etching (discount rate: 15%)
Autumn Term 2012
Overall assessment

IRR of wet etching is higher than the IRR of plasma etching (25.7% vs.
23.3%)
NPV @ 15% is higher for plasma etching than for wet etching (37 vs. 29)
Conflicting NPV and IRR results are due to the different cash flow patterns of
each technology. While wet etching cash flows will decrease, those of plasma
etching will increase
Pay attention when dealing with mutually exclusive investment projects
Based on the two methods applied above, plasma etching outperforms wet
etching and should be recommended in your investment proposal
Wet etching Plasma etching
IRR 1 2
NPV 2 1
Autumn Term 2012

L 3 - Investment Management Incl. Solutions 2012

Hochgeladen von

Dokumentinformationen

Originalbeschreibung:

Copyright

Verfügbare Formate

Dieses Dokument teilen

Dokument teilen oder einbetten

Freigabeoptionen

Stufen Sie dieses Dokument als nützlich ein?

Sind diese Inhalte unangemessen?

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

L 3 - Investment Management Incl. Solutions 2012

Hochgeladen von

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

1 Markus Neuhaus I Corporate Finance I neuhauma@ethz.

Das könnte Ihnen auch gefallen