Those pictures are for the case 24 Victoria Chemicals, and my question is

Q. Would you recommend moving forward with the Merseyside project? Why or why not?

24 CASE Victoria Chemicals plc (A): The Merseyside Project Late one afternoon in January 2008, Frank Greystock told Lucy Morris,. "No one satisfied with the analysis so far, but the suggested changes could kill the proj- ect. If solid projects like this can't swim past the corporate piranhas, the company will never modernize" Morris was plant manager of Victoria Chemicals Merseyside Works in Liverpool. England. Her controller. Frank Greystock. was discussing a capital project that Morris wanted to propose GBP12 million expenditure to renovate and rationalize the polypropy lene production line at the Merseyside plant in order to make up for deferred maintenance and to exploit opportunities to achieve increased production efficiency to senior management. The project consisted of a (British pounds) Victoria Chemicals was under pressure from investors to improve its financial per- formance because of the accumulation of the tirm's common shares by a well-known corporate raider. Sir David Benjamin. Earnings had fallen to IS0 pence per share at the end of 2007 from around 250 pence per share at the end of 2006. Morris thus believed that the time was ripe to obtain funding from corporate headquarters for a modernization program for the Merseyside Works-at least she bad believed this until Greystock presented her with several questions that had only recently surfaced Victoria Chemicals and Polypropylene Victonia Chemicals, a msjor competor in the worlkdwide chemicals industry, was a lead ing producer of polypropylene, a polymer used in an extremely wide variety of prod ucts (ranging from medical products to packaging tilm, carpet tihers, and automobile n medicaldi This case was prepured by Roben F Bruncr as a hasis for class discussion asb thae effective or inctfieutive handling of an alministrative Situsiuim Victona Chemicnls is a hehonal sompany realecting