Problem 1.

The Elberta Fruit Farm of Ontario always has hired transient workers to pick its annual cherry crop. Janessa Wright, the farm manager, just received information on a cherry picking machine that is being purchased by many fruit farms. The machine is a motorized device that shakes the cherry tree, causing the cherries to fall onto plastic tarps that funnel the cherries into bins. Ms. Wright has gathered the following information to decide whether a cherry picker would be a profitable investment for the Elberta Fruit Farm:

1. Currently, the farm is paying an average of $230,000 per year to transient workers to pick the cherries.
2. The cherry picker would cost $520,000. It would be depreciated using the straight-line method and it would have no salvage value at the end of its 5-year useful life.
3. Annual out-of-pocket costs associated with the cherry picker would be: cost of an operator and an assistant, $78,000; insurance, $2,000; fuel, $10,000; and a maintenance contract, $13,000

Required:

1. Determine the annual savings in cash operating costs that would be realized if the cherry picker were purchased.

2a. Compute the simple rate of return expected from the cherry picker.

2b. Would the cherry picker be purchased if Elberta Fruit Farms required rate of return is 12%?

3a. Compute the payback period on the cherry picker.

3b. The Elberta Fruit Farm will not purchase equipment unless it has a payback period of five years or less. Would the cherry picker be purchased?

4a. Compute the internal rate of return promised by the cherry picker.

4b. Based on this computation, does it appear that the simple rate of return is an accurate guide in investment decisions?

Problem 2.

Casey Nelson is a divisional manager for Pigeon Company. His annual pay raises are largely determined by his divisions return on investment (ROI), which has been above 23% each of the last three years. Casey is considering a capital budgeting project that would require a $4,700,000 investment in equipment with a useful life of five years and no salvage value. Pigeon Companys discount rate is 19%. The project would provide net operating income each year for five years as follows:

Sales			$	4,400,000
Variable expenses				2,000,000
Contribution margin				2,400,000
Fixed expenses:
Advertising, salaries, and other fixed out-of-pocket costs	$	800,000
Depreciation		940,000
Total fixed expenses				1,740,000
Net operating income			$	660,000

Required:

1. What is the projects net present value?

2. What is the projects internal rate of return?

3. What is the projects simple rate of return?

4-a. Would the company want Casey to pursue this investment opportunity?

4-b. Would Casey be inclined to pursue this investment opportunity?

Problem 3.

Silven Industries, which manufactures and sells a highly successful line of summer lotions and insect repellents, has decided to diversify in order to stabilize sales throughout the year. A natural area for the company to consider is the production of winter lotions and creams to prevent dry and chapped skin.

After considerable research, a winter products line has been developed. However, Silvens president has decided to introduce only one of the new products for this coming winter. If the product is a success, further expansion in future years will be initiated.

The product selected (called Chap-Off) is a lip balm that will be sold in a lipstick-type tube. The product will be sold to wholesalers in boxes of 24 tubes for $10 per box. Because of excess capacity, no additional fixed manufacturing overhead costs will be incurred to produce the product. However, a $115,500 charge for fixed manufacturing overhead will be absorbed by the product under the companys absorption costing system.

Using the estimated sales and production of 165,000 boxes of Chap-Off, the Accounting Department has developed the following manufacturing cost per box:

Direct material	$	4.70
Direct labor		3.00
Manufacturing overhead		2.10
Total cost	$	9.80

The costs above relate to making both the lip balm and the tube that contains it. As an alternative to making the tubes for Chap-Off, Silven has approached a supplier to discuss the possibility of buying the tubes. The purchase price of the supplier's empty tubes would be $2.00 per box of 24 tubes. If Silven Industries stops making the tubes and buys them from the outside supplier, its direct labor and variable manufacturing overhead costs per box of Chap-Off would be reduced by 10% and its direct materials costs would be reduced by 30%.

Required:

1. If Silven buys its tubes from the outside supplier, how much of its own Chap-Off manufacturing costs per box will it be able to avoid? (Hint: You need to separate the manufacturing overhead of $2.10 per box that is shown above into its variable and fixed components to derive the correct answer.)

2. What is the financial advantage (disadvantage) per box of Chap-Off if Silven buys its tubes from the outside supplier?

3. What is the financial advantage (disadvantage) in total (not per box) if Silven buys 165,000 boxes of tubes from the outside supplier?

4. Should Silven Industries make or buy the tubes?

5. What is the maximum price that Silven should be willing to pay the outside supplier for a box of 24 tubes?

6. Instead of sales of 165,000 boxes of tubes, revised estimates show a sales volume of 203,000 boxes of tubes. At this higher sales volume, Silven would need to rent extra equipment at a cost of $70,000 per year to make the additional 38,000 boxes of tubes. Assuming that the outside supplier will not accept an order for less than 203,000 boxes of tubes, what is the financial advantage (disadvantage) in total (not per box) if Silven buys 203,000 boxes of tubes from the outside supplier? Given this new information, should Silven Industries make or buy the tubes?

7. Refer to the data in (6) above. Assume that the outside supplier will accept an order of any size for the tubes at a price of $2.00 per box. How many boxes of tubes should Silven make? How many boxes of tubes should it buy from the outside supplier?