Can anyone help with this case (Warner Oil Company Case)? I need to do a Second Analysis (First analysis is already completed see below) where the new bond rate goes up to 10.4% and determine if the refunding is still viable. Please use the bond refunding model given below and provide excel formulas for calculations.

Bond Refunding Model

Bond Refunding First Analysis
Current bond issue information
Par value	30,000,000
coupon rate	11.50%
original maturity	20
remaining maturity	15
original flotation costs	400,000
Call premium	8%
Tax rate	30%
New issue information
Coupon rate	10.0000%
maturity	15
flotation costs ($30,000,000 x 2.8%)	840,000
Time between issues (months)	1
rate on surplus funds (annual)	7%
a. Perform a complete bond refunding analysis. What is the bond refunding's NPV?
Initial investment outlay to refund old issue:
Call premium on old issue = $30,000,000 x 8%		2,400,000.00
After-tax call premium = $2,400,000 x (1- 30%)		1,680,000.00
New flotation cost =		840,000.00
Old flotation costs already expensed = $400,000/20 x (20-15)		100,000.00
Remaining flotation costs to expense = $400,000 -$100,000		300,000.00
Tax savings from old flotation costs = 300,000 x 30%		90,000.00	You get to expense the remaining flotation costs
Additional interest on old issue after tax = $30,000,000 x 11.50% x 1/12 x (1-30%)		201,250.00	This is interest paid on the old bond issue between when the new bonds are issued and the old bonds are retired
Interest earned on investment in T-bonds after tax =($30,000,000 x 7% x 1/12 x(1-30%)		122,500.00	This is interest earned on the proceeds from the new bonds before they are used to pay off the old bonds.
Total investment outlay = $1680000+840,000-$90,000+ $201,250 - $122,500		2,508,750.00
Annual Flotation Cost Tax Effects:
Annual tax savings on new flotation = $840,000 x 30%/15		16,800.00
Tax savings lost on old flotation = (400,000 x 30%/20		6,000.00
Total amortization tax effects = (16,800 - 6000)		10,800.00
Annual interest savings due to refunding:
Annual after tax interest on old bond = $30,000,000 x 11.50% x (1- 30%)		2,415,000.00
Annual after tax interest on new bond =$30,000,000 x 10% x (1-30%)		2,100,000.00
Net after tax interest savings = (2415000-2100000)		315,000.00
Annual cash flows = ($10,800 + $315,000)		325,800.00
NPV of refunding decision = - 2,508,750 + PV(7%,15,-325,800,0)		458,608.38
c. At what interest rate on the new debt is the NPV of the refunding no longer positive?
Use Goal Seek to set cell D60 to zero by changing cell C28.
	"Break-even" interest rate =	10.472%

CASE Warner Motor Oil Company Gina Thomas was concerned about the feel for he bond refunding process. She effect that high interest expenses were having proposed to call in an 50 percent on the bottom line reported profits of Warner $30,000,000 issue that was scheduled to Motor oil Co. Since joining the company mature in the year 2025. The bonds had been three years ago as vice president of finance, issued in 2005 and since it was now 2010, she noticed that operating profits appeared to the bonds had 5 years remaining to be improving each year, but that earnings maturity. It was Gina's intent to replace the after interest and taxes were declining because bonds with a new $30,000,000 issue tha of high interest charges would have the same maturity date 15 years Because interest rates had finally started into the future as that of the original 2005 declining after a steady increase, she thought it issue. Based on advice from the firm' was time to consider the possibility of investment banking firm, Walston and Sons refunding a bond issue. As she explained to her the bonds could be issued at a rate of 10 boss, Al Rosen, refunding meant calling in percent. Joe Walston, a senior partner in the a bond that had been issued at a high interest rate investment banking firm, further indicated and replacing it with a new bond that was that the underwriting cost on the new issue similar in most respects, but carried a lower would be 2.8 percent of the $30,000,000 interest rate. Bond refunding was only feasible amount involved in a period of declining interest rates. Al Rosen, Before she could do her analysis, Gina who had been the CEO of the company for the needed to accumulate information on the old last seven years understood the general concept 1.50 percent bond issue that she was but he still had some questions proposing to refund. The original bond He said to Gina, "If interest rates are going ndenture indicated that the bonds had an 8 down, bond prices are certain to be going up percent call premium, and that the bonds Won hat make it quite expensive to buy could be called anytime after five years. Gina outstanding issues so tha explained to Al Rosen that the bondholder we can replace hem with new issues?" Gina had a quick and were protected from having their bonds called direct answer. "No, and the reason is that the n for the first five years after issue, but that old issues have a call provision associated he bonds were fa game after that with them." A call provision allows the firm Furthermore, from the sixth through the n bonds at slightly over par (usually 8 13th year, the call premium went down by O cal to 10 percent above par) regardless of what percent per year. By the 14th year after the market price is ssue, there was call premium and no the corporation could merely call in the bonds The Proposed Refunding Decision at par. Since n this case five years had Gina thought if she could present passed, the call premium would be exactly specific example to Al he would have a better ight percen