Capital Rationing Decision for a Service Company involving Four Proposals Renaissance Capital Group is considering allocating a limited amount of capital investment funds among four proposals. The amount of proposed investment, estimated operating income, and net cash flow for each proposal are as follows: Investment Year Operating Income Net Cash Flow Proposal A: $680,000 1 $ 64,000 2 64.000 3 64,000 4 $ 200,000 200,000 200,000 160,000 160,000 5 920,000 24,000 Proposal B: $320,000 1 $ 90,000 2 4 24,000 $240,000 $ 26,000 26,000 6,000 6,000 (44,000) $ 20,000 $ 33,400 31,400 28,400 90,000 70,000 70,000 20,000 $340,000 5 Proposal C: $108,000 1 2 $ 55,000 53,000 50,000 3 Check My Work Previous 3 80,000 160,000 4 20,000 100,000 5 0 80,000 $300,000 $700,000 The company's capital rationing policy requires a maximum cash payback period of three years. In addition, a minimum average rate of return of 12% required on all projects. If the preceding standards are met, the nat present value method and present value indexes are used to rank the remaining proposals. Present Value of $1 at Compound Interest Year 6% 10% 12% 15% 20% 1 0.943 0.909 0.893 0.870 0.833 2 0.890 0.826 0.292 0.756 0.694 3 0.540 0.751 0.712 0.658 0.579 0.792 0.683 0.636 0.572 0.482 5 0.747 0.621 0.567 0.497 0.402 6 0.705 0.564 0.507 0.432 0.335 7 0.665 0.513 0.452 0.370 0.229 0.627 0.467 0.404 0.32) 0.233 9 0.592 0A24 0.361 0.284 0.194 10 0.558 0.386 0.322 0.247 0.162 2. Giving effect to straight-line depreciation on the investments and assuming no estimated residual value, compute the average rate at return for each of the four proposals. If required, round your answers to one decimal place. Average Rate of Return Proposal A % Proposal Proposal * Proposal D 3. Using the following format, summarize the results of your computations in parts (1) and (2) by placing the calculated amounts in the first two columns on the left and indicate which proposals should be accepted for further analysis and which should be rejected. If required, round your answers to one decimal place. Proposal Cash Payback Period Average rate of Return Accept or Reject B D 4. For the proposals accepted for further analysis in part (3), compute the net present value. Use a rate of 15% and the present value of si table above. Round to the nearest dollar. Select the proposal accepted for further analysis Check My Work Present value of net cash flow total Less amount to be invested Net present value 5. Compute the present value index for each of the proposals in part (4). If required, round your answers to two decimal places. Select proposal to compute Present value index Present value index (rounded) 6. Rank the proposals from most attractive to least attractive, based on the present values of net cash now computed in part (4) Rank ist Rank 2nd 7. Rank the proposals from most attractive to least attractive, based on the present value Indexes computed in part (5). Rank Ist Rank 2nd 8. The analysis indicates that although Proposal has the larger net present value, it is not as attractive as Proposal in terms of the amount of present value per dollar invested, Proposal requires the larger investment. Thus, management should use investment resources for Proposal before investing in Proposal absent any other . CM Capital Rationing Decision for a Service Company involving Four Proposals Renaissance Capital Group is considering allocating a limited amount of capital investment funds among four proposals. The amount of proposed investment, estimated operating income, and net cash flow for each proposal are as follows: Investment Year Operating Income Net Cash Flow Proposal A: $680,000 1 $ 64,000 2 64.000 3 64,000 4 $ 200,000 200,000 200,000 160,000 160,000 5 920,000 24,000 Proposal B: $320,000 1 $ 90,000 2 4 24,000 $240,000 $ 26,000 26,000 6,000 6,000 (44,000) $ 20,000 $ 33,400 31,400 28,400 90,000 70,000 70,000 20,000 $340,000 5 Proposal C: $108,000 1 2 $ 55,000 53,000 50,000 3 Check My Work Previous 3 80,000 160,000 4 20,000 100,000 5 0 80,000 $300,000 $700,000 The company's capital rationing policy requires a maximum cash payback period of three years. In addition, a minimum average rate of return of 12% required on all projects. If the preceding standards are met, the nat present value method and present value indexes are used to rank the remaining proposals. Present Value of $1 at Compound Interest Year 6% 10% 12% 15% 20% 1 0.943 0.909 0.893 0.870 0.833 2 0.890 0.826 0.292 0.756 0.694 3 0.540 0.751 0.712 0.658 0.579 0.792 0.683 0.636 0.572 0.482 5 0.747 0.621 0.567 0.497 0.402 6 0.705 0.564 0.507 0.432 0.335 7 0.665 0.513 0.452 0.370 0.229 0.627 0.467 0.404 0.32) 0.233 9 0.592 0A24 0.361 0.284 0.194 10 0.558 0.386 0.322 0.247 0.162 2. Giving effect to straight-line depreciation on the investments and assuming no estimated residual value, compute the average rate at return for each of the four proposals. If required, round your answers to one decimal place. Average Rate of Return Proposal A % Proposal Proposal * Proposal D 3. Using the following format, summarize the results of your computations in parts (1) and (2) by placing the calculated amounts in the first two columns on the left and indicate which proposals should be accepted for further analysis and which should be rejected. If required, round your answers to one decimal place. Proposal Cash Payback Period Average rate of Return Accept or Reject B D 4. For the proposals accepted for further analysis in part (3), compute the net present value. Use a rate of 15% and the present value of si table above. Round to the nearest dollar. Select the proposal accepted for further analysis Check My Work Present value of net cash flow total Less amount to be invested Net present value 5. Compute the present value index for each of the proposals in part (4). If required, round your answers to two decimal places. Select proposal to compute Present value index Present value index (rounded) 6. Rank the proposals from most attractive to least attractive, based on the present values of net cash now computed in part (4) Rank ist Rank 2nd 7. Rank the proposals from most attractive to least attractive, based on the present value Indexes computed in part (5). Rank Ist Rank 2nd 8. The analysis indicates that although Proposal has the larger net present value, it is not as attractive as Proposal in terms of the amount of present value per dollar invested, Proposal requires the larger investment. Thus, management should use investment resources for Proposal before investing in Proposal absent any other . CM
