Problem
Definition/Opportunity Statement
Justification for the
establishment of an office in Warri
Problem/
Need Formulation and Evaluation
Commercial and operational trends are driving changes
in business in the area. The establishment of an office in the area will have a
major impact on our customers, products, processes, finance and the
competition.
Feasible Alternatives
The following options are
available for adoption:
·
Alternative A – Establish an
office in Warri
·
Alternative B - Not to establish
an office in Warri
Criteria Selection
Selection criteria of the alternatives are as
follows[1]:
·
Affordable cost – within budget
·
Minimum – Office space(x3), Warehouse
(x1), Workshop (x1)
·
Nearness to pipeline quality gas
·
Ease of accessibility from other major
towns in the region
Selected Alternative
The selected
alternative is to establish an office in Warri at a location that meets all the
above mentioned criteria.
Financial
Analysis
Project
Financial Evaluation Worksheet
|
|||||||||||||
Project Title or Description:
|
ESTABLISHMENT
OF AN OFFICE IN WARRI, DELTA STATE
|
||||||||||||
Year
|
0
|
1
|
2
|
3
|
4
|
5
|
6
|
7
|
8
|
9
|
10
|
Totals
|
|
Calender Year
|
2010
|
2011
|
2012
|
2013
|
2014
|
2015
|
2016
|
2017
|
2018
|
2019
|
2020
|
||
1
|
Capital
Investment
|
735,461
|
|||||||||||
Operating
Cash Flows
|
|||||||||||||
2
|
Revenue
|
7,922,253
|
9,506,704
|
11,408,045
|
13,689,654
|
16,427,584
|
19,713,101
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
78,667,341
|
3
|
Variable Cost (or COGS)
|
6,337,803
|
7,605,363
|
9,126,436
|
10,951,723
|
13,142,067
|
15,770,481
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
62,933,873
|
4
|
Gross Profit or Margin
|
1,584,451
|
1,901,341
|
2,281,609
|
2,737,931
|
3,285,517
|
3,942,620
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
15,733,468
|
5
|
Fixed Costs (or Sales & Admin)
|
792,225
|
950,670
|
1,140,804
|
1,368,965
|
1,642,758
|
1,971,310
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
7,866,734
|
6
|
Fixed Costs (R&D)
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
7
|
Depreciation (Tax)
|
0
|
73,546
|
132,383
|
105,906
|
84,725
|
67,810
|
54,203
|
48,173
|
48,173
|
48,246
|
72,296
|
735,461
|
8
|
Profit Before Tax (Net Profit)
|
792,225
|
877,124
|
1,008,421
|
1,263,059
|
1,558,033
|
1,903,501
|
(54,203)
|
(48,173)
|
(48,173)
|
(48,246)
|
(72,296)
|
7,131,273
|
9
|
Tax (no interest charge)
|
308,968
|
342,078
|
393,284
|
492,593
|
607,633
|
742,365
|
(21,139)
|
(18,787)
|
(18,787)
|
(18,816)
|
(28,195)
|
2,781,197
|
10
|
Profit After Tax
|
483,257
|
535,046
|
615,137
|
770,466
|
950,400
|
1,161,135
|
(33,064)
|
(29,385)
|
(29,385)
|
(29,430)
|
(44,100)
|
4,350,077
|
Other Cash Flows
|
|||||||||||||
11
|
Capital Investment
|
(735,461)
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
(735,461)
|
12
|
Change in Working Capital
|
(396,113)
|
(79,223)
|
(95,067)
|
(114,080)
|
(136,897)
|
(164,276)
|
985,655
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
13
|
Depreciation (Tax)
|
0
|
73,546
|
132,383
|
105,906
|
84,725
|
67,810
|
54,203
|
48,173
|
48,173
|
48,246
|
72,296
|
735,461
|
14
|
Total Cash Annual Cash Flow
|
(648,316)
|
529,369
|
652,453
|
762,292
|
898,229
|
1,064,669
|
1,006,794
|
18,787
|
18,787
|
18,816
|
28,195
|
4,350,077
|
15
|
Discount Factor
|
1.00000
|
0.82645
|
0.68301
|
0.56447
|
0.46651
|
0.38554
|
0.31863
|
0.26333
|
0.21763
|
0.17986
|
0.14864
|
|
16
|
Discounted Cash Flow
|
(648,316)
|
437,495
|
445,634
|
430,294
|
419,030
|
410,476
|
320,796
|
4,947
|
4,089
|
3,384
|
4,191
|
|
17
|
Cumulative Cash Flow
|
(648,316)
|
(118,947)
|
533,506
|
1,295,798
|
2,194,027
|
3,258,696
|
4,265,490
|
4,284,278
|
4,303,065
|
4,321,881
|
4,350,077
|
|
Payback avaluation
|
0
|
0
|
2
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
||
18
|
Net Present Value
|
1,832,021
|
( at
|
21.0%
|
discount rate)
|
||||||||
19
|
Internal Rate of Return
|
63.0%
|
( with
|
10.0%
|
initial guess - increase
or decrease to find a solution)
|
||||||||
20
|
Payback (Years)
|
2
|
( Calc
|
ulated as the first
non-zero year)
|
|||||||||
Base Assumptions
|
|||||||||||||
Cost of Goods Sold/Price
|
80.0%
|
||||||||||||
Sales & Admin/Revenue
|
10.0%
|
||||||||||||
Typical Working Capital Rate
|
5.0%
|
||||||||||||
Income Tax Rate
|
39.0%
|
||||||||||||
Discount Rate
|
21.0%
|
||||||||||||
Depreciation Schedule
|
|||||||||||||
Assumed Gov't Allowable
|
0.0000
|
0.1000
|
0.1800
|
0.1440
|
0.1152
|
0.0922
|
0.0737
|
0.0655
|
0.0655
|
0.0656
|
0.0983
|
||
Depreciation
|
0
|
73,546
|
132,383
|
105,906
|
84,725
|
67,810
|
54,203
|
48,173
|
48,173
|
48,246
|
72,296
|
||
Working Capital Schedule
|
|||||||||||||
Working Capital Req't
|
396112.6615
|
475335.1938
|
570402.2326
|
684482.6791
|
821379.2149
|
985655.0579
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
||
Change In Working Capital
|
396112.6615
|
79222.5323
|
95067.03876
|
114080.4465
|
136896.5358
|
164275.843
|
-985655.0579
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
||
Working Capital Recovery
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
||
Total WC Change
|
396112.6615
|
79222.5323
|
95067.03876
|
114080.4465
|
136896.5358
|
164275.843
|
-985655.0579
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
||
Sensitivity
Analysis
The
project viability depends on the volume of business generated with the
customers in this region.
Sensitivity
analysis to proposed contingencies given that the volume of business is tending
to low includes:
o
Look for other type of business solution offers
o
Re-invigorate marketing strategy for other lines of our business
o
Continue to showcase our current level of contract performance with
a view to attracting more business
o
Enter into price agreement with customer for new lines of products
Sensitivity
analysis to proposed cost savings failing to materialize includes:
o
Re-evaluate work procedures and methodology
o
Re-evaluate staff engagement status
o
Reassign job roles and personnel
o
Re-training
Conclusion
This business case
recommends the establishment of an office comprising office spaces, a workshop
and warehouse at Warri, Delta State, Nigeria that will save 20% in service
costs.
This
schedule will enable the company to realize the project’s net present value of
$4,900,017.00
by July 1, 2020 – better still $1,152,863.00 by July 1, 2013.
The office
establishment will cost an estimated USD242, 446.60 in the first year, (CAPEX
and OPEX inclusive).
The payback period is 1 year.
References:
1.
Sullivan,
W., Wicks, E., Koelling, P., Kumar, p., & Kumar, N. (2012). Engineering economy (15th
edition). England: Pearson Education
Limited.
2.
Purdue
OWL APA style, (2011). APA formatting and style guide. Retrieved from http://owl.english.purdue.edu/owl/resource/560/19/
[1] Sullivan, W.,
Wicks, E., Koelling, P., Kumar, p., & Kumar, N. (2012). Engineering economy (15th
edition). England: Pearson Education
Limited.
Sorry Lucky...... Gotta reject this posting.....
ReplyDeleteFirst of all, you still aren't following the step by step process...... You started off with a decent problem statement but from that point on, you totally missed the remaining steps.
Also, the specifications require a MINIMUM of 3 references and you only provided two of them.
My best advice would be to contact Reginald or Folameki or Joseph.... Ask them to help you restructure this same problem statement.
Also, for a decision like this is it normally done using ONLY financial analysis? Aren't there usually intangibles (i.e. brand image)that figure into the decision making equation?
You may want to consider using some of the multi-attribute decision making models from Chapter 14? Especially the COMPENSATORY approaches?
Bottom line- you have a good case study with lots of potential, but now you need to focus on mastering the step by step process shown on page 7, Figure 1-1 of your Engineering Economics.
BR,
Dr. PDG, Doha, Qatar
PS Please repost as W6.1_Lucky_Business Case.
ReplyDeleteAlso, when you cite Engineering Economy, you need to cite the actual pages you are referencing....
BR,
Dr. PDG, Doha, Qatar