Glen was recently hired by Centrick Sporting as a junior budget analyst. He is working for the Venture Capital Division and has been given for capital budgeting projects to evaluate. He must give his analysis and recommendation to the capital budgeting committee on May 28th. Glen has a B.S. in accounting from WWU (2014) and passed the CPA exam (2017). He has been in public accounting for 2 years. During that time he earned an MBA from Seattle U. He would like to be the CFO of a company someday--maybe Centrick Sporting-- and this is an opportunity to get onto that career track and to prove his ability. As Glen looks over the financial data collected, he is trying to make sense of it all. He already has the most difficult part of the analysis complete -- the estimation of cash flows. Through some internet research and application of finance theory, he has also determined the firms beta. Here is the information that Glen has accumulated so far: The Capital Budgeting Projects He must choose one of the four capital budgeting projects listed below:

Capital Structures

Centrick Sporting has the following capital structure, which is considered to be optimal:

Debt	35%
Preferred Equity	10%
Common Equity	55%
	100%

Cost of Capital

Glen knows that in order to evaluate the projects he will have to determine the cost of capital for each of them. He has been given the following data, which he believes will be relevant to his task.

(1)The firms tax rate is 38%.

(2)Centrick Sporting has issued a 8% semi-annual coupon bond with 9 years term to maturity. The current trading price is $876.

(3)The firm has issued some preferred stock which pays an annual 10.5% dividend of $100 par value, and the current market price is $114.

(4) The firms stock is currently selling for $66.80 per share. Its last dividend (D₀) was $3.95, and dividends are expected to grow at a constant rate of 5.8%. The current risk free return offered by Treasury security is 2.8%, and the market portfolios return is 12.5%. Centrick Sporting has a beta of 0.96. For the bond-yield-plus-risk-premium approach, the firm uses a risk premium of 2%.

(5) The firm adjusts its project WACC for risk by adding 2.0% to the overall WACC for high-risk projects and subtracting 2.0% for low-risk projects.

Glen knows that Centrick Sporting executives have favored IRR in the past for making their capital budgeting decisions. His professor at Seattle U. said NPV was better than IRR. His textbook says that MIRR is also better than IRR. He is the new kid on the block and must be prepared to defend his recommendations.

First, however, Glen must finish the analysis and write his report. To help begin, he has formulated the following questions:

3. What is the estimated cost of common equity using the bond-yield-plus-risk-premium approach?

4. What is the final estimate for r_s?

5. What is Centrick Sporting's overall WACC?

6. Do you think the firm should use the single overall WACC as the hurdle rate for each of its projects? Explain.

Table 1 B D 0 (20,800,000) (19,900,000) (21,600,000) (15,100,000) 1 7,770,000 4,990,000 5,850,000 4,700,000 7,770,000 2 5,740,000 6,070,000 6,250,000 3 5,870,000 6,870,000 6,870,000 6,950,000 4 5,870,000 8,750,000 6,070,000 7,790,000 High Risk Average Low Average Table 1 shows the expected after-tax operating cash flows for each project. All projects are expected to have a Axear life. The projects differ in size (the cost of the initial investment), and their cash flow patterns are different. They also differ in risk as indicated in the above table. The capital budget is $20 million and the projects are mutually exclusive. Table 1 B D 0 (20,800,000) (19,900,000) (21,600,000) (15,100,000) 1 7,770,000 4,990,000 5,850,000 4,700,000 7,770,000 2 5,740,000 6,070,000 6,250,000 3 5,870,000 6,870,000 6,870,000 6,950,000 4 5,870,000 8,750,000 6,070,000 7,790,000 High Risk Average Low Average Table 1 shows the expected after-tax operating cash flows for each project. All projects are expected to have a Axear life. The projects differ in size (the cost of the initial investment), and their cash flow patterns are different. They also differ in risk as indicated in the above table. The capital budget is $20 million and the projects are mutually exclusive