Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.
New Heritage Doll Company Report
INTRODUCTION
New Heritage Doll Company is a firm that has ventured into Doll production w...
year 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013
Cash
outlays
$(000) 42 43.93 45.95 48.06 50..27 52.5
Cash flows forecast is used to cap...
and factors to influence the Budgeting Company to accept the project for
implementation.
The theoretical reason behind “Ma...
(c) Increased development cost for the technology modification and infrastructure
Practically the proposed project is to h...
Presentation of DCFs and arguments for assumptions Match My Doll Clothing Line
Total cost= $ 3,520,000
Terminal Cash flow ...
2014 1392 0.7084 986.09
2015 1503+ 361 0.6499 1211.41
4555.09
NPV $(000) = 4555.09- 3520= 1085.09
The NPV is positive mean...
Design My doll Clothing Line
Total cost $(000) = 5811+1000+435= 7246
Terminal Cash flow$(000)= 875
Using NPV analysis;
Yea...
Designmy Doll
(1201)
PVIF12%
PV TRY 7%
(1201) 1.00 (1201) 1.0 (1201)
550 0.8929 491.00 0.9346 514.03
1794 0.7972 1430.18 0...
Working Capital Assumptions
Minimum Cash Balance % of Sales
2012 $(000) 2013 $(000) 2014 $(000)
Match My Doll
3% x 6860=
2...
MATCH NY DOLL
Let 12%be b
9%=be a
Pv9%
(1250) 1.00 (1250)
583 0.9174 534.844
994 0.8417 836.65
1277 0.7722 986.10
1392 0.7...
12% be b
9% be a
(1201) 1.00 1200
550 0.9174 504.07
1794 0.8417 1510.0
2724 0.7722 2103.47
3821 0.7084 2706.80
Npv = 5623....
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in …5
×

New heritage doll company report

New heritage doll company solution

Related Books

Free with a 30 day trial from Scribd

See all

Related Audiobooks

Free with a 30 day trial from Scribd

See all
  • Be the first to comment

New heritage doll company report

  1. 1. New Heritage Doll Company Report INTRODUCTION New Heritage Doll Company is a firm that has ventured into Doll production which has sought to extend its brand in order to broaden its market framework and more importantly capitalise on high levels of customer loyalty. The vice president of the Company, Emily Harris is to forward her project proposal to the Budgeting Committee for evaluation. The Vice-president’s objective for proposing the project stood out based on potential to strengthen the Company’s division of production and to drive future growth. Emily Harris has to produce a compelling project to avoid the committee to decline the proposal. Basis of assessment There are two projects between which the company will have decision option to accept or drop the proposal. The method of project evaluation would be based on discounting cash flows (DCFs) and thereafter determining the Net Present value (NPV) of each of the proposed project. The project proposal with the positive and highest NPV would be acceptable for investment. If the project has a positive NPV suggests that such a project is generating more cash than is required to service the debt and to provide the appropriate returns to the firm’s shareholders and this cash accrues solely to the firm’s shareholders. If the firm projects generate a negative NPV then the project is not feasible. New Heritage Doll Company managed to produce a capital budgeting structure in order to evaluate the revenue generated in the Doll industry. It is clearly evident that, a segment of the Doll industry generates the income progressively with an increasing rate of 4.6%. It is a project that has a going concern as illustrated; The Doll industry Company revenues outlays: market for doll toy and game industry
  2. 2. year 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 Cash outlays $(000) 42 43.93 45.95 48.06 50..27 52.5 Cash flows forecast is used to capture the incremental effect of a proposed project in order to acknowledge the breakeven point and profit or loss time frame If the company continues with its investment in for toy and game segment it is going to experience the economies of scale and have high operating profits. However, for a company to embrace another project proposal it has to oversight its financial capacity to fund the project .Meaning for any project which does generate insignificant revenues the Company must cultivate the capital rationing. Similarly, the Company must consider some factors in the assessment of project’s risk. Factors considered in the assessment of a project’s risk include; (a)Whether the project product’s required new traders or consumers who are willing to accept the goods or services rendered by the Company (b)Where the project proposal requires high level of the fixed costs, the project to be appraised is at very high risk considering such costs do not generate high returns. (c)Sensitivity of the selling price of the finished goods (d)High level of breakeven production volumes PROBLEM IDENTIFICATION The Heritage Doll Company is appraising two proposed projects that are; Design My Doll and Match My Doll Clothing. The Vice president must have a compelling reasons
  3. 3. and factors to influence the Budgeting Company to accept the project for implementation. The theoretical reason behind “Match My Doll Clothing” to be implemented by the Company Budgeting Committee is that; (a) The products produced do fully match all season clothing for the young girls and their preferred doll; (b)Popularity of the Company’s product (c) It was the best time for the expansion due to its popularity For the Design Your Own Doll; (a)The Companies products would have high correlation with the consumers (b)The Company’s doll can be customized based on the tastes and prefers by the consumers (c) Permanent customer loyalty (d) Dolls could command a continued selling proposed (e)The Company has the potential to strengthen and the future growth The Company is also limited to take this project due to the following reasons for proposal; (a)The Company Low production runs and volumes (b)Limited gradation of customization increased manufacturing complication, the production costs increased with a significant rate
  4. 4. (c) Increased development cost for the technology modification and infrastructure Practically the proposed project is to have the following investment costs; Match my Doll clothing line and Design My doll cash outlay Titles Initial expense$(000) Upfront R&d$(000) Investment in working capital$(000) Property, plant and equipment$(000) Total cost $(000) Match my Doll clothing 625 625 800 1470 3520 Design my Doll 841 360 4610 (1000) 5811 Difference (216) 265 (3810) 2470 (2291) This means that the Design my Doll has got higher Total cost by $ 2291 than the Match my Doll Clothing. If Company uses the total cost to appraise these projects the Match Doll clothing would be feasible for acceptance since it has less of capital invested on it yet much returns would be realised. Design my Doll would be rejected due to its high costs of investment. Critically, the prudent way to evaluate the Company’s feasibility in order to invest on it is by analysing the returns or the operating profits. If the firm’s is to experience some losses the Company should reject such a proposal otherwise accept the proposal. However, if the firm is operating at a breakeven point the Company may have the option to forecast whether it is a going concern.
  5. 5. Presentation of DCFs and arguments for assumptions Match My Doll Clothing Line Total cost= $ 3,520,000 Terminal Cash flow in 2015= $361,000 Using NPV analysis Year Operating profit $(000) PVIF,9% PV 2011 583 0.9174 534.84 2012 994 0.8417 836.65 2013 1277 0.7722 986.10
  6. 6. 2014 1392 0.7084 986.09 2015 1503+ 361 0.6499 1211.41 4555.09 NPV $(000) = 4555.09- 3520= 1085.09 The NPV is positive meaning that the project is feasible. Internal rate of return IRR=a+(A/A-B *a-b)%) IRR=12%(1945.1/1945.1-2267.44) * 7% -12%) =0.0362 3.6% TRY12% PVIFPV PV TRY 7% PV 1250 1.OO 1250 1.0 1250 583 0.8929 520.56 0.9346 544.87 944 0.7972 792.42 0.8734 868.16 12.77 0.7118 908.97 0.8163 1042.42 NPV 1945 NPV 2267.41
  7. 7. Design My doll Clothing Line Total cost $(000) = 5811+1000+435= 7246 Terminal Cash flow$(000)= 875 Using NPV analysis; Year Operating profit $(000) PVIF,9% PV 2011 550 0.9174 504.57 2012 1794 0.8417 1510 2013 2724 0.7722 2103.47 2014 2779 0.7084 1968.64 2015 2946+ 875 0.6499 2483.21 8569.95
  8. 8. Designmy Doll (1201) PVIF12% PV TRY 7% (1201) 1.00 (1201) 1.0 (1201) 550 0.8929 491.00 0.9346 514.03 1794 0.7972 1430.18 0.8734 1566.88 2724 0.7118 1938.44 0.8163 2223.60 3821 0.6991 2671.26 0.7629 2915.04 NPV 5329.96 8419.55 NPV $(000) = 8569.95- 7246= 1323.95 The NPV is positive meaning that the project is feasible. IRR=12% (5329.96/5329.96/5329.96-8419.55) *7%-12%) 0.01035 =1.035% Conclusively, both of the projects are feasible but Design my Doll has the higher Net Present value $ 238.86 than the Match My Doll Clothing. This means that the Company would accept Design My Doll for its investment. It again means that this project, Design My Doll generates high cash flows compared to the other, match my doll clothing. High returns is for the company would be realized, and therefore the projects that the Vice President, Emily Harris would go with is Design my Doll. One of the key distinctions between the two projects, Match My Doll Clothing and Design My doll is that the two are mutually exclusive projects. These are projects are those whose cash flows are related, they do have the same function and they thus compete with one another. This means that the acceptance of one project eliminates from further consideration other projects.
  9. 9. Working Capital Assumptions Minimum Cash Balance % of Sales 2012 $(000) 2013 $(000) 2014 $(000) Match My Doll 3% x 6860= 205.8 3% x8409= 352.27 3% x 9082= 272.46 Design My Doll 3% x 6000= 180 3% x 14360= 430.8 3% x 20222= 606.66 It is assumed that the working capital is apportion or percentage ratio of revenue generated from sales and capital itself comprised approximately 15% of the Company’s earnings before income taxation and it is within the Capital budgeting of New Heritage Doll company. Sensitivity analysis The Company should maximize on Cash management by capital rationing on the project accepted.Net present Value of the project should be implemented as it reflects the time value of money invested in the accepted project. Similarly this can be further be elaborated by computation of IRR of each two project proposal
  10. 10. MATCH NY DOLL Let 12%be b 9%=be a Pv9% (1250) 1.00 (1250) 583 0.9174 534.844 994 0.8417 836.65 1277 0.7722 986.10 1392 0.7084 986.10 2093.69 IRR=9%(2093.69/2093.69-1945.1)*(12%-9%)) =3.8% DESIGN MY DOLL Let
  11. 11. 12% be b 9% be a (1201) 1.00 1200 550 0.9174 504.07 1794 0.8417 1510.0 2724 0.7722 2103.47 3821 0.7084 2706.80 Npv = 5623.84 IRR=9%{5623.84/5623.84-5329.96 * (12%-9%)) =0.0517 =5.17% The internal rate of return is the most critical method to determine the decision option for accepting the project proposal. In this case Design my Doll again has the highest IRR meaning it has the highest operating rate of returns with the shortest payback period of the cost of capital and therefore it is opted to be accepted. Recommendation and its support by discussion and analysis Design My Doll is best project proposal to be accepted instead of Match My Doll by the Budgeting Committee since it has the higher Net present value, Higher IRR and the shortest payback period as it is computed above.

×