super project
DESCRIPTION
TRANSCRIPT
Valuation of the Super Project
Group Members:
XXX XXXXX
XXX XXXXX
Gordon Schwabe
XXX XXXXX 10.04.2023
Fachhochschule Brandenburg · University of Applied Sciences · Fachbereich Wirtschaft Page10.04.2023
AGENDA
1. Case summary
2. Problem statement
3. Clarifying problems & solutions
4. Comments on the 3 evaluation approaches
5. Recommendations on evaluation
6. Cash flow statement
7. Conclusion
Valuation of the Super Project
2
Fachhochschule Brandenburg · University of Applied Sciences · Fachbereich Wirtschaft Page10.04.2023
Case Summary
• General Foods is a large corporation organized by productl
• Super is a proposed new instant desert, based on a “flavored, water-soluble, agglomerated powder.”
• General Foods has numerous projects with a strict criteria to judge their value for the company
• There are basically three types of capital investment proposals at General Foods:
• Safety
• Quality
• Increased profit
Valuation of the Super Project
3
Fachhochschule Brandenburg · University of Applied Sciences · Fachbereich Wirtschaft Page10.04.2023
Problem Statement
• 3 methods, each passes with advantages and disadvantages
• Incremental / Facilities used / Fully allocated
• Memos indicate that General Foods’ finance personnel are questioning the same criteria’s ability to accurately reflect the value of the Super project
• No precise estimation of company value, because of the high variance in the evaluation methods
Valuation of the Super Project
INCREMENTAL
• ROFE = 63%
FACILITIES USED
• ROFE = 34%
FULLY ALLOCATED
• ROFE = 25%
4
Fachhochschule Brandenburg · University of Applied Sciences · Fachbereich Wirtschaft Page10.04.2023Valuation of the Super Project
Problem Statement – What is ROFE?
GF uses Return On Funds Employed (ROFE) to evaluate the viability of capital projects, and to weigh one project against another to determine
prioritization.
ROFE = EBIT / Capital Invested (book value) Ratio of EARNINGS created from the book value of capital invested
• Using EBIT, does not capture net operating cash flow
• Uses book value (depreciated value) of capital investments
• If capital assets are depreciated, they appear to create a cash flow
• Depreciation is an accounting expense not a cash flow
• Artificially biases long-term asset-intensive projects, as they have bigger apparent depreciation cash flows
• Does not capture the time value of money; interest and inflation
ROFE is not a tool to evaluate capital projects. Even used as a
metric to compare capital earnings performance, it has flaws.
5
Fachhochschule Brandenburg · University of Applied Sciences · Fachbereich Wirtschaft Page10.04.2023Valuation of the Super Project
Problem Statement - How we should deal with…
• Test-market expenses
• Erosion of Jell-O contribution margin
• Allocation of charges for the use of excess agglomerator capacity
• Overhead expenses
6
Fachhochschule Brandenburg · University of Applied Sciences · Fachbereich Wirtschaft Page10.04.2023Valuation of the Super Project
Test-market expenses
• Should only be taken into account if they can be attributed to the particular project
• In the Super case these expenses had been made before the Super project had started
Will not be taken into account in the FCF
7
Fachhochschule Brandenburg · University of Applied Sciences · Fachbereich Wirtschaft Page10.04.2023Valuation of the Super Project
Erosion of Jell-O contribution margin
• Super will displace part of Jell-O´s market share
Erosion of Jell-O contribution margin should be taken into account
8
Fachhochschule Brandenburg · University of Applied Sciences · Fachbereich Wirtschaft Page10.04.2023Valuation of the Super Project
Allocation of charges for the use of excess agglomerator capacity
• Not counted in the FCF of the Super Project
• Charges represent opportunity costs for the Jell-O devision or future projects
Take costs into account on a corporate level
9
Fachhochschule Brandenburg · University of Applied Sciences · Fachbereich Wirtschaft Page10.04.2023Valuation of the Super Project
Erosion of Jell-O contribution margin
• Should be taken into account if they can be attributed to the particular project
General Foods Corp. already counted theses costs in the CF of Jell-O
10
Fachhochschule Brandenburg · University of Applied Sciences · Fachbereich Wirtschaft Page10.04.2023Valuation of the Super Project
Overhead Expenses
• Should be taken into account if these expenses can be attributed to Super
• Overhead expenses for the Super Project are not clearly defined
Overhead expenses will be taken into account in the FCF
11
Fachhochschule Brandenburg · University of Applied Sciences · Fachbereich Wirtschaft Page10.04.2023Valuation of the Super Project
Incremental Basis
• This evaluation approach uses only directly identified cash flows Only incremental approaches has been taken into account
Jell-O facilities and production capacity are not relevant for Super because they have already been counted in the CF.
This execution of Incremental Basis is flawed because it:• Includes sunk costs (the marketing study)• Fails to account for relevant increasing overhead costs.• Fails to take into account income-tax-reducing depreciation.• Utilizes ROFE. Again, ROFE is no good for capital budgeting
12
Fachhochschule Brandenburg · University of Applied Sciences · Fachbereich Wirtschaft Page10.04.2023Valuation of the Super Project
Facilities-Used Basis
• Super will use 1/2 of Jell-O’s agglomerator
• Super will use 2/3 of Jell-O’s building
• Super “pro-rata” share is $453 K
• Charges Super with the facility overhead ($28k p/y). This approach
• In the capital budgeting process only incremental cash flows are taken into account.
• Only shifts costs ($453K in facilities) to Super, which is an accounting maneuver and does not effect the cashflow
• It’s a “net zero” method, it just moves costs
Useful for accounting, not for capital budgeting
13
Fachhochschule Brandenburg · University of Applied Sciences · Fachbereich Wirtschaft Page10.04.2023Valuation of the Super Project
Fully Allocated Basis
Facilities-Used Basis + overhead expenses
• Overhead expenses:
• Selling, general and administrative costs
This approach
• Gives the most inclusive analysis of existing cash flow
• Adds overhead costs correctly
14
Fachhochschule Brandenburg · University of Applied Sciences · Fachbereich Wirtschaft Page10.04.2023Valuation of the Super Project
Evaluation of the Super Project
GF can do this by:
1. Taking into account incremental cash flows
2. Modifying their income statement to deduct depreciation before calculating tax
3. Ignore sunk costs (marketing test, Jell-O facilities, etc.)
4. Remove depreciation from capital assets for purposes of evaluation
5. Accept overhead from growth/doubling powdered dessert line
15
Fachhochschule Brandenburg · University of Applied Sciences · Fachbereich Wirtschaft Page10.04.2023Valuation of the Super Project
Recommendations evaluation of the Super Project
• $200k for high speed filling/packaging equipment, finish packing room
• $360k market test – irrelevant
• Opportunity cost for Jell-O’s facilities and equipment
• Not relevant – same opportunity for any project using this building
• From corporate POV, hard to sell to move in some business to utilize temporarily excess Jell-O facilities, low feasibility
• Capital depreciation – non-cash expense – irrelevant
• Capital depreciation expense tax deduction – relevant to operating cash flow
• Shift $453k pro-rata share of Jell-O facilities and agglomerator – Incremental test – irrelevant
16
Fachhochschule Brandenburg · University of Applied Sciences · Fachbereich Wirtschaft Page10.04.2023Valuation of the Super Project
Recommendations Evaluation of the Super Project
• $28k avg. yearly depreciation of Jell-O facilities – Incremental test – irrelevant
• $19k business expansion capital for distribution system – Incremental test – relevant
• Expansion capital depreciation expense tax deduction – relevant to operating cash flow
• $90k additional yearly overhead expense for business expansion – Incremental test – relevant
17
Fachhochschule Brandenburg · University of Applied Sciences · Fachbereich Wirtschaft Page10.04.2023Valuation of the Super Project
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11
FCF Incremental
-200 -518.11022446647
-5.45598229167295
5.16990578633012
86.1474979420782
246.099709127303
221.056489399153
233.411166603169
245.889556739094
263.028135302359
303.209933593774
FCF Facility used
-453 -518.11022446647
6.42107431331856
16.3871259132665
96.7048815909596
255.99725629813
229.634363613869
241.32920433983
253.1477579977
269.626500082909
345.458273212964
FCF Fully Allocated
-672 -518.11022446647
6.42107431331856
16.3871259132665
96.7048815909596
212.942144064894
186.579251380634
198.274092106595
210.092645764465
226.571387849674
333.833392909991
-700.00
-500.00
-300.00
-100.00
100.00
300.00
500.00
Am
ou
nt
Free Cash Flow
18
Fachhochschule Brandenburg · University of Applied Sciences · Fachbereich Wirtschaft Page10.04.2023Valuation of the Super Project
Free Cash Flow
Net Sales Net Earnings
Discount rate
4,66% 7,69%
NPV 447,59 248,64
IRR 13% 13%
19
Net Sales Net Earnings
Discount rate
4,66% 7,69%
NPV 280,38 67,31
IRR 9% 9%Net Sales Net
Earnings
Discount rate
4,66% 7,69%
NPV -102,79 -286,13
IRR 3% 3%
INCREMENTAL
FACILITIES USED
FULLY ALLOCATED
Fachhochschule Brandenburg · University of Applied Sciences · Fachbereich Wirtschaft Page10.04.2023Valuation of the Super Project
Conclusion
- An expansion or broadening of market capture by appealing to somewhat parallel consumer needs
- Take advantage of short term availability of Jell-O facilities - in the long term it is not a better project just because it fits a facility that is temporarily unused
Main Points:
- NPV is in 2 approaches positive
- IRR is in 2 approaches higher than discount rate (decision premise)
- Payback after the 6th year (shorter than normal payback period)
Do the investment
20
Fachbereich Wirtschaft
Thank you for your attention
Fachhochschule Brandenburg · University of Applied Sciences · Fachbereich Wirtschaft Page10.04.2023Valuation of the Super Project
Appendix – Incremental CF
22
Fachhochschule Brandenburg · University of Applied Sciences · Fachbereich Wirtschaft Page10.04.2023Valuation of the Super Project
Appendix – Facility Used CF
23
Fachhochschule Brandenburg · University of Applied Sciences · Fachbereich Wirtschaft Page10.04.2023Valuation of the Super Project
Appendix – Fully Allocated CF
24
Fachhochschule Brandenburg · University of Applied Sciences · Fachbereich Wirtschaft Page10.04.2023Valuation of the Super Project
Appendix – Excel File
Excel File
25
Fachhochschule Brandenburg · University of Applied Sciences · Fachbereich Wirtschaft Page10.04.2023Valuation of the Super Project
Appendix - Depreciation
26
Fachhochschule Brandenburg · University of Applied Sciences · Fachbereich Wirtschaft Page10.04.2023Valuation of the Super Project
Appendix – Opportunity costs
27
Fachhochschule Brandenburg · University of Applied Sciences · Fachbereich Wirtschaft Page10.04.2023Valuation of the Super Project
Appendix – Erosion of Jell-O
28
Fachhochschule Brandenburg · University of Applied Sciences · Fachbereich Wirtschaft Page10.04.2023Valuation of the Super Project
Appendix – Tax rate
29