CASE Queensland Food CorpIn early January 2003, the senior-mana.docx

CASE: Queensland Food Corp
In early January 2003, the senior-management committee of
Queensland Food Corp was to meet to draw up the firm’s capital
budget for the new year. Up for consideration were 11 major
projects that totaled over $20.8 million. Unfortunately, the
board of directors had imposed a spending limit of only $8.0
million; even so, investment at that rate would represent a major
increase in the firm’s asset base of $65.6 million. Thus the
challenge for the senior managers of Queensland Food Corp was
to allocate funds among a range of compelling projects
nominated for consideration.
The Company
Queensland Food Corp, headquartered in Brisbane, Australia,
was a producer of high-quality ice cream, yogurt, bottled water,
and fruit juices. Its products were sold throughout two states
(Queensland, New South Wales) and two territories (ACT and
Northern Territory). (See Exhibit 1 for map of the company’s
marketing region.)
Exhibit 1 – Queensland Food Corp, located in Australia
Queensland Food Corp sales had been static since 2000 (see
Exhibit 2), which management attributed to low population
growth in Northern Territory and market saturation in some
areas. Outside observers, however, faulted recent failures in
new-product introductions.
Exhibit 2 - Summary of Financial Results (millions AUD except
per share amounts)
End of Fiscal Year
2000
2001
2002
Gross Sales

$100.8
$100.7
$100.8
Net Income
5.1
4.9
3.7
Dividends
2.0
2.0
2.0
Earnings Per Share
0.85
0.82
0.66
Shareholders’ Equity (Book Value)
18.2
20.6
23.5
Shareholders’ Equity (Market value)
45.3
39.0
22.9
Total Assets
47.7
58.0
65.6
Most members of management wanted to expand the company’s
market presence and introduce more new products to boost
sales.
Resource Allocation
The capital budget at Queensland Food Corp was prepared
annually by a committee of senior managers who then presented
it for approval by the board of directors. The committee
consisted of five managing directors, the president Chief

Executive (CEO), and the chief finance officer (CFO).
Typically, the CEO solicited investment proposals from the
managing directors. The proposals included a brief project
description, a financial analysis, and a discussion of strategic or
other qualitative consideration.
As a matter of company policy, investment proposals at
Queensland Food Corp were subjected to two financial tests,
payback and internal rate of return (IRR). Financial tests were
considered hurdles and had been established in 2001 by the
management committee and varied according to the type of
project:
Exhibit 3 -Company Policy for Project Approval
Project Type
Minimum Acceptable IRR
Maximum Acceptable Payback (Years)
1. Market/Product Extension
12%
6
2. New Product/Markets
10%
5
3. Efficiency Improvements
8%
4
4. Environmental/Safety
Not required
Not Applicable
In January 2003, the estimated weighted-average cost of capital
(WACC) for Queensland Food Corp was 10.5 percent. In
describing the capital-budgeting process, the CFO, Tony Austin,
said, “We use the sliding scale of IRR tests as a way of
recognizing differences in risk among the various types of
projects. Where the company takes more risk, we should earn
more return. The payback test signals that we are not prepared
to wait for long to achieve that return.”

At the conclusion of the most recent meeting of the directors,
the board voted unanimously to limit capital spending in 2003
to $8.0 million.
Exhibit 4 - Project Proposals
Project ID
Project Description
Cost (Millions)
Project Type
1
Distribution Truck Fleet Replacement/Expansion
2.2
Efficiency (or Expansion)
2
New Plant Construction
3.0
Market Extension
3
Existing Plant Expansion
1.0
Market Extension
4
Fat Free(!) Greek Yogurt/Ice Cream Development/Introduction
1.5
New Product
5
Plant Automation and Conveyor System
1.4
Efficiency
6
Wastewater Treatment (4 plants)
0.4
Environmental Compliance
7

Market Expansion West (Western Territory)
2.0
New Market
8
Market Expansion South (Victoria)
2.0
New Market
9
Snack Food Development/Introduction
1.8
New Product
10
Computer-based Inventory Control System
1.5
Efficiency
11
Bundaberg Rum Acquisition
4.0
New Product
1. Distribution Truck Fleet Replacement/Expansion. Wayne
Ramsey proposed to purchase 100 new refrigerated tractor
trailer trucks, 50 each in 2003 and 2004. By doing so, the
company could sell 60 old, fully depreciated trucks over the two
years for a total of $120,000. The purchase would expand the
fleet by 40 trucks within two years. Each of the new trailers
would be larger than the old trailers and afford a 15 percent
increase in cubic meters of goods hauled on each trip. The new
tractors would also be more fuel and maintenance efficient. The
increase in number of tucks would permit more flexible
scheduling and more efficient routing and servicing of the fleet
than at present and would cut delivery times and, therefore,
possibly inventories. It would also allow more frequent
deliveries to the company’s major markets, which would reduce
loss of sales cause by stock-outs. Finally, expanding the fleet
would support geographical expansion over the long term. As

shown in Exhibit 3, the total net investment in trucks of $2.2
million and the increase in working capital to support added
maintenance, fuel, pay-roll, and inventories of $200,000 was
expected to yield total cost savings and added sales potential of
$770,000 over the next seven years. The resulting IRR was
estimated to be 7.8 percent, marginally below the minimum 8
percent required return on efficiency projects. Some of the
managers wondered if this project would be more properly
classified as “efficiency” than “expansion.”
2. New Plant Construction. Ian Gardner noted that Queensland
Food Corp’s yogurt and ice-cream sales in the southeastern
region of the company’s market were about to exceed the
capacity of its Sydney manufacturing and packaging plant. At
present, some of the demand was being met by shipments from
the company’s newest most efficient facility, located in Darwin,
Australia. Shipping costs over that distance were high however,
and some sales were undoubtedly being lost when marketing
effort could not be supported by delivery. Gardner proposed
that a new manufacturing and packaging plant be built in ACT,
Australia, just at the current southern edge of Queensland Food
Corp’s marketing region, to take the burden off the Sydney and
Darwin plants.
The cost of this plant would be $2.5 million and would entail
$500,000 for working capital. The $1.4 million worth of
equipment would be amortized over seven years, and the plant
over ten years. Through an increase in sales and depreciation,
and decrease in delivery costs, the plant was expected to yield
after-tax cash flows totaling $2.4 million and an IRR of 11.3
percent over the next ten years. This project would be classified
as a market extension.
3. Existing Plant Expansion. In addition to the need for
greater production capacity in Queensland Food Corp’s
southeastern region, its Cairns’ plant had reached full capacity.
This situation made the scheduling of routine equipment
maintenance difficult, which, in turn, created production-
scheduling and deadline problems. This plant was one of two

highly automated facilities that produced Queensland Food
Corp’s entire line of bottled water, mineral water, and fruit
juices. The Cairn’s plant supplied Northern Territory and
Queensland (the major market).
The Cairn’s plants capacity could be expanded by 20 percent for
$1.0 million. The equipment ($700,000) would be deprecated
over seven years, and the plant over ten years. The increased
capacity was expected to result in additional production of up to
$150,000 per year, yielding an IRR of 11.2 percent. This project
would be classified as a market extension.
4. Fat Free(!) Greek Yogurt/Ice Cream
Development/Introduction. David D. Jones noted that recent
developments in the European market showing promise of
significant cost savings to food producers as well as stimulating
growing demand for low-calorie products. The challenge was to
create the right flavor to complement or enhance the other
ingredients. For ice-cream manufacturers, the difficulty lay in
creating a balance that would result in the same flavor as was
obtained when using traditional yogurt/ice cream.
$1.5 million would be needed to commercialize a yogurt line
that had received promising results in consumer and production
tests. This cost included acquiring specialized production
facilities, working capital, and the cost of the initial product
introduction. The overall IRR was estimated to be 17.3 percent.
Jones stressed that the proposal, although highly uncertain in
terms of actual results, could be viewed as a means of
protecting present market share, because other high-quality ice-
cream producers carrying out the same research might introduce
these products; if the HooRoo Cakes brand did not carry a fat
free line and its competitors did, the HooRoo Cakes brand might
suffer. This project would be classed in the new-product
category of investments.
5. Plant Automation. Ian Gardner also requested $1.4 million
to increase automation of the production lines at six of the
company’s older plants. The result would be improved

throughout speed and reduced accidents, spillage, and
production tie-ups. The last two plants the company had built
included conveyer systems that eliminated the need for any
heavy lifting by employees. The systems reduced the chance of
injury to employees; at the six older plants, the company had
sustained on average of 75 missed worker-days per year per
plant in the last two years because of muscle injuries sustained
in heavy lifting. At an average hourly wage of $14.00 per hour,
over $150,000 per year was thus lost, and the possibility always
existed of more serious injuries and lawsuits. Overall cost
savings and depreciation totaling $275,000 per year for the
project were expected to yield an IRR of 8.7 percent. This
project would be classed in the efficiency category.
6. Water Treatment (4 plants). Queensland Food Corp
preprocessed a variety of fresh fruits at its Brisbane and Darwin
plants. One of the first stages of processing involved cleaning
the fruit to remove dirt and pesticides. The dirty water was
simply sent down the drain and into the like-named rivers.
Recent legislation from the Department of Sustainability,
Environment, Water, Population and Communities (Australian
Government) called for any waste water containing even the
slight traces of poisonous chemicals to be treated at the sources
and gave companies four years to comply. As and
environmentally oriented project, this proposal fell outside the
normal financial tests of project attractiveness. Gardner noted,
however, that the wastewater treatment equipment could be
purchased today for $400,000; he speculated that the same
equipment would cost $1.0 million in four years when
immediate conversion became mandatory. In the intervening
time, the company would run the risks that Australian
Government and local regulators would shorten the compliance
time or that the company’s pollution record would become
public and impair the image of the company in the eyes of the
consumer. This project would be classed in the environmental
category.
7. Market Expansion West (Western Territory) and 8. Market

Expansion South (Victoria). Mick Dell’Orco recommend that
the company expand its market westward to include the Western
Territory and to the south (Victoria, South Australia and
Tasmania). He believed it was time to expand sales of ice
cream, and possibly yogurt, geographically. It was his theory
that the company could sustain expansions in both directions
simultaneously, but practically speaking, Dell’Orco doubted
that the sales and distribution organizations could sustain both
expansions at once.
Each alternative geographical expansion had its benefits and
risks. If the company expanded southward, it could reach a
large population with a great appetite for frozen dairy products,
but it would also face more competition from local and state ice
cream manufacturers. The southward expansion would have to
be supplied by facilities in ACT and New South Wales, at least
initially.
Looking to the west, consumers in Western Territory have
substantial purchasing power due to the explosion in the mining
industry, but the population is significantly less than in the
southward expansion geographical area. Expansion to the west
would require building consumer demand and planning for
future plants to produce products in Western Territory.
Expansion to the west would need to be supplied by rail from
Darwin facilities and further redistribution truck fleet.
The initial cost for each proposal was $2 million in working
capital. The bulk of the costs were expected to involve the
financing of distributorships, but over the ten-year forecast
period, the distributors would gradually take over the burden of
carrying receivables and inventory. Both expansion proposals
assumed the rental of suitable warehouse and distribution
facilities. The after-tax cash flow was expected to be $3.75
million for southward expansion and $2.75 million for westward
expansion. Dell’Orco pointed out that southward expansion
meant a higher possible IRR but that moving westward was a
less risky proposition. The projected IRRs were 21.4 percent
and 18.8 percent for southward and westward expansion,

respectively. These projects would be classed in the new
market category.
9. Snack Food Development/Introduction. David D. Jones
suggested that the company use the excess capacity in its
Darwin facility to produce a line of snack foods of dried fruits
to be test-marketed in Northern Territory. He noted the strength
of the HooRoo brand in that area and the success of other food
and beverage companies that had expanded into snack food
production. He also argued that the company’s reputation for
wholesome, quality products would be enhanced by a line of
dried fruits and that name association with the new product
would probably even lead to increased sales of the company’s
other products among health-conscious consumers.
Equipment and working capital invests were expected to total
$1.5million and $300,000, respectively, for this project. The
equipment would be depreciated over seven
able to support further plant expansions in other strategic
locations. The IRR expected to be 20.5 percent, well above the
IRR required for new product projects (12 percent).
10. Computer-based Inventory Control System. Wayne Ramsey
had pressed for three years unsuccessfully for a state-of-the-art
computer-based inventory-control system that would link field
sales reps, distributors, drivers, warehouses, and possibly
retailers. The benefits of such a system would be shortening
delays in ordering and order processing, better control of
inventory, reduction of spoilage, and faster recognition of
changes in demand at the customer level. Ramsey was reluctant
to quantify these benefits, because they could range between
modest and quite large amounts. This year he presented a cash-
flow forecast as part of a business case for the project. An
initial outlay of $1.2 million for the system, followed by
$300,000 next year for ancillary equipment. The inflows
reflected depreciation tax shields, tax credits, cost reductions in
warehousing, and reduced inventory. He forecasted these

benefits to last for only three years. Even so, the project’s IRR
was estimated to be 16.2 percent. This project would be classed
in the efficiency category.
11. Bundaberg Rum Acquisition. Anthony Mitchel had
advocated making diversifying acquisitions in an effort to move
beyond the company’s mature core business but doing so in a
way that exploited the company’s skills in brand management.
He had explored six possible related industries, in the general
field of consumer packaged goods, and determined that a
promising small liquor manufacturer, Bundaberg Rum, offered
unusual opportunities for real growth and, at the same time,
market protection through branding. He had identified
Bundaberg Rum as a well-established brand of liquor as the
leading private Australian manufacturer of rum, located in
Bundaberg, Queensland.
The proposal was expensive: $1.5 million to buy the company
and $2.5 million to renovate the company’s facilities completely
while simultaneously expanding distribution to new
geographical markets. The expected returns were high: after-tax
cash flows were projected to be $13.4 million, yielding an IRR
of 28.7 percent. This project would be classed in the new-
product category of proposals.
Conclusion
Each member of the management committee was expected to
come to the meeting prepared to present and defend a proposal
for the allocation of Queensland Food Corp’s capital budget of
$8.0 million. Exhibit 3 summarizes the various projects in terms
of their free cash flows and the investment-performance criteria.
Exhibit 5 - Free Cash Flow and Analysis of Proposed Projects
(Note 1) ($ millions AUD)
Project
1.
Distribution Truck Fleet Replacement/ Expansion
(Note 3)
2.

New Plant Construction
3.
Existing Plant Expansion
4.
Yogurt/ Ice Cream Development/ Introduction
5.
Plant Automation
7.
Market Expansion (Western Territory)
8
Market Expansion South (Victoria)
9
Snack Food Development/ Introduction
10
Computer-based Inventory Control System
11
Bundaberg Rum Acquisition (Note 5)
Investment
Property
2.0
2.5
1
1.5
1.4

0
0
1.5
1.5
3.0
Working Capital
0.20
0.50
0
0
0
2.0
2.0
0.30
0
1.0
Year
Expected Free Cash Flow (Note 4)
0
-1.14
-3.0
-1.0
-0.50
-1.4
-2.0
-2.0
-1.8
-1.2
-1.5
1
-0.79
0.20
0.125

-0.50
0.275
0.35
0.3
0.3
0.55
-2.0
2
0.30
0.50
0.150
-0.50
0.275
0.4
0.35
0.4
0.55
0.50
3
0.35
0.55
0.175
0.3
0.275
0.45
0.4
0.45
0.50
0.90
4
0.40
0.60
0.20

0.3
0.275
0.5
0.45
0.50
1.1
5
0.45
0.63
0.225
0.4
0.275
0.55
0.5
0.50
1.3
6
0.50
0.65
0.25
0.45
0.275
0.6
0.55
0.50
1.5
7
0.70
0.675
0.15

0.5
0.275
0.65
0.6
0.50
1.7
8
0.50
0.15
0.55
0.7
0.65
0.50
1.9
9
0.53
0.15
0.6
0.75
0.7
0.50
2.1
10
0.55
0.15

0.65
0.8
0.75
0.50
5.9
Undiscounted Sum
0.77
2.375
0.725
2.25
0.525
3.75
3.25
2.85
0.4
13.4
Payback (Years)
6
6
6
7
6

5
6
5
3
5
Max Payback Accepted
4
6
5
5
4
6
6
6
4
6
IRR
7.8%
11.3%
11.2%
17.3%
8.7%
21.4%
18.8%
20.5%
16.2%
28.7%
Min Accepted ROR
8.0%
10.0%
10.0%
12.0%
8.0%
12.0%
12.0%
12.0%

8.0%
12.0%
NPV at Corp WAAC (10.5%)
-0.192
0.099
0.028
0.521
-0.087
1.199
0.900
0.895
0.116
4.79
NPV at Min ROR
-0.013
0.187
0.055
0.388
0.032
0.990
0.071
0.731
0.178
4.143
Equivalent Annuity (Note 2)
-0.002
0.030
0.009
0.069
0.006
0.175
0.125
0.129
0.069
0.733

1Project Number 6 not included
2Equivalent Annuity is that level of equal payments over 10
years that yields a NPV at the minimum required rate of return
for that project. It corrects for differences in duration among
various projects. In ranking projects based on EA, larger
annuities create more investor wealth than smaller annuities.
3Reflects $1.1 million spent initially and at end of year 1
4Free cash flow = incremental profit or cost savings after taxes
+ depreciation – investment in fixed assets
5$1.5 million would be spent in year one, $2.0 million in year
two, and 0.5 million in year 3.
Case Study Questions (100 points)
1. Financial Analysis:(25 points)
a. Which NPV of those shown in Exhibit 5 should be used?
Why?
b. Using all NPV forms presented in Exhibit 5, rank the
projects.
c. Since the wastewater treatment project is a cost of doing
business, it does not have a NPV. Suggest a way to evaluate the
effluent project.
d. List the projects that would be funded or unfunded using
the financial analysis (include Project 6 in your list)
2. Weighted Scoring Model Analysis (60 points)
Based on the paper by Englund and Graham (1999), Chapter 2
(Kloppenborg (2017)) and the case information,
a. Use a scoring model to evaluate and select projects (pp. 45-
47, Kloppenborg):
i. List and define potential criteria
ii. List and define those criteria that are mandatory (i.e.,
screening) criteria
iii. Weight the remaining criteria using an AHP process
b. Which projects were screened from further consideration in
part 2a, ii?

c. Rank order the remaining projects based on the group
analysis.
3. Were the results different between the financial analysis
(Question 1) and the weighted scoring model (Question 2)
approach? If yes, why? (5 points)

CASE Queensland Food CorpIn early January 2003, the senior-mana.docx

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

Similar to CASE Queensland Food CorpIn early January 2003, the senior-mana.docx

Similar to CASE Queensland Food CorpIn early January 2003, the senior-mana.docx (20)

More from jasoninnes20

More from jasoninnes20 (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

CASE Queensland Food CorpIn early January 2003, the senior-mana.docx