Keisha M. Smith Bus 436 Due Date: 04/30/15 Super Project Analysis After carefully reviewing Super Project’s data‚ I’ve come to the conclusion that test market expenses and the allocation of charges for the use of the excess agglomerator capacity are not incremental because they are sunken costs that have already been accounted for. Whether Super is accepted or rejected‚ they will not affect the cash flows beyond current calculations. Overhead expenses is incremental because the expansion needed
Premium Risk Accept
The Super Project The Super Project case mainly deals with the efficiency of project tool analysis in capital budgeting process. The three techniques that General Foods management used to determine whether Super Project was a worthwhile project were: • Incremental basis • Facilities-used basis • Fully allocated facilities and costs basis The three techniques mentioned above will be discussed in more details in question 4 below. Questions: 1. What are the relevant cash flows for General Foods
Premium Net present value Internal rate of return Cash flow
The Super Project Flows: 1) Test Market Expenses: Do not Include it is a sunk cost and cannot be recovered if the project were not to become operational. 2) Overhead cost: The Super project will initially not require incremental overhead costs. However‚ if and when the project grows‚ incremental overhead expenses will be incurred specific to the project. This has to be captured in capital budgeting to accurately assess the project. Here we assume that the project will not require considerable
Premium Net present value Internal rate of return Investment
**What is NPV?** a) If the value of NPV is greater than 0‚ then the project is a go! In other words‚ it’s profitable and worth the risk. b) If the value of NPV is less than 0‚ then the project isn’t worth the risk and is a no-go. So NPV takes risk and reward into consideration‚ which is why we use it in the world of corporate finance and capital budgeting. **Example** In order for us to calculate NPV‚ let’s use the following example. Suppose we’d like to make 10% profit on a 3
Premium Net present value
The Super Project Introduction General Foods (GF) expects Super‚ a new powdered dessert‚ to capture 10% share of the total dessert market (2% coming from the erosion of Jell-O sales). The company’s Financial Analyst has issued a memo comparing three alternative techniques for project evaluations‚ illustrating the problems and limitations inherent in using ROFE (return on funds employed) and payback as evaluation methods. The disparate ROFE results obtained with these methods are due to differences
Premium Net present value Cash flow Internal rate of return
The Super Project Case Study FIN 3717 Braden Eddy‚ Lauren Gear and Dakota Conravey The Super Project Case Study FIN 3717 Braden Eddy‚ Lauren Gear and Dakota Conravey Statement of Facts General Foods is a large corporation organized by product lines. They are evaluating Super Project‚ the manufacture of a new powdered dessert. Crosby Sanberg‚ a financial analysis manager‚ must determine the value in accepting the proposal‚ along with J.C. Kresslin‚ the Corporate Controller. The Super
Premium Net present value
Principles of Managerial Finance MBA6‚ GROUP 1 Phelps Toy Company TOYS Prepared by :Essam Gayad ‚ Aladdin Al-Jajeh‚ Majed Mourtada ‚ Shaza.Rifaai MHD Obada Morad Date 22nd May 2012 MBA6 -MF Phelps toy company case‚ 6 YEARS BUDGET STUDY‚ PROJECT FEASIBLITY Table (1) sales and net income of the company for the past years. year 1974 1975 1976 1977 1978 1979 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 $SALES 150‚000 240‚000 756‚000 1‚340‚000 2‚680‚000 3‚320‚000 5‚580‚000
Premium Baseball Net present value Standard deviation
[February 3 2011] Analysis of the future | Fast-Food industry The fast food industry in Canada is like no other in the world. Canada has long been a country of indulging and not caring about consequences. Stats Canada published that in 2004‚ 23.1% of the Canadian population was overweight. It has also been noted that the obesity rate seen a sharp increase during 1978 to 1980. The fast food industry did begin in the early part of the 1950’s‚ but didn’t truly take off till the 1980’s. In
Premium Fast food
Super Project Case What are the relevant cash flows that General Foods should use in evaluating the Super Project? In particular‚ how should management deal with such issues as Test-market expenses? Overhead Expenses? Erosion of Jell-O contribution margin? Allocation of charges for the use of the excess agglomerator? The relevant cash flows that General Foods should use in evaluating the Super Project are considered Incremental cash flows and are “the changes in the firm’s cash flows
Premium Economics Cash flow Income statement
The Super Project – Summary Introduction In 1967‚ General Foods was considering to expand their portfolio with a new product called Super. Super was a dessert supposed to penetrate a dessert market in growth. The investment required $200K‚ $80K for building modifications and $120K for machinery and equipment. General Foods already had an agglomerator that could be used to manufacture Super. The $120K was meant to pay for packaging machinery. In order to decide whether to accept or decline this
Premium Evaluation Investment