Running Simulation Paper

Group Member: Huiqiong Wang, Zhengyangzi Zhan, Yang Zhou
Group Number: 5
Date: 10/22/2014
Instructor: Janet BartholowIntroduction
This paper is aim to find the best way to run the New Heritage Doll Company by running simulation. We use different strategies to selecting projects in each round by using limited budget. We have run the simulation more than ten times to make sure we found the best way to run the company and the company is in the best condition. The given scenario is never change and we have the opportunity to run simulation multiple times, it made us easier to know which strategy is the best.
We use different strategies in each one of our simulations. These strategies can mainly divided into three parts, which are conservative
approach, spending approach which means we use every cent of our budget to make more money and focus on net present value.We have a small budget of 8.9 million dollars at the beginning of each round of simulation, and the rest of the budget of each year can save to the next year.
In first several rounds, we took the conservative approach idea. It can help us familiar with how to run the simulation and can help us to control that limited budget as well. In addition, only using the low to medium project can help the company avoiding from the future because we do not want to put the company's future in a high risk position.
Round 1
We are going to analysis the round that was using the conservative approach. In this round, the projects I selected for the year one (2009) are: Toddler Doll Accessory Line and New Doll Film/DVD. According to the report, the Toddler Doll Accessory Line of accessories performed in line with expectations regarding both sales and costs. We have learned from the article, the New Heritage Doll Company’s production division wants to product more product that forcing on toddlers so we think choosing this project is a good choice for the company. Also this project is a low risk project with 7.70% project discount rate. We think we should better keep this project because it is a risk low project with positive NPV (7.15) and a good IRR (25.06%).
The New Doll Film/DVD project is a licensing project and according to the report that the film was released on schedule and the marketing promotion was very successful. Otherwise, the sales of DVD was better than previous films. This project is a medium risk project and the company discount rate for this project is 7.40%. This project also produce a positive NPV which is 9.37 and with an IRR of 238.61% which was extremely high. However the payback index is negative which is -3.84 but we think since its payback period is shout which is only 1.43 years so we will still keep this project.
As we can see from the table one, at the end of 2010, the revenue of production division is 128.75 million. The revenue is higher than the production revenue of 2009 which was 125 million. And the revenue from licensing division at the end of 2010 is also higher than it in 2009 which is 25.48 million, 0.98 million higher than it was in 2009. However, in both of these two divisions their Earnings before Interest, Taxes, Depreciation and Amortization (EBITDA) is slightly lower than 2009 and the net income is also a little lower too. We will put more details to see if these projects are actually work.
< Insert table 1>
In year two (2010), the projects which I have chosen are: Warehouse Facility Consolidation, Expansion of Mail-order Catalog Business to Asia and Retail Store Expansion in Northeast.
The Warehouse Facility Consolidation project is aim to improve the NH’s warehouse facilities and can save the company’s operating costs as well as increase the shipping speed. This project is in retail division with an NPV of 2.29, an IRR of 13.56%, and a payback period of 8.23 years and a payback index of 0.31. Also, this project was considered as a medium risk project with 9.25% discount rate. Expansion of Mail-order Catalog Business to Asia is a retail division project, it is considering expanding its mail-order to the Asian market. Although there two possibilities that might happen, succeed or fail, it viewed as a low risk project with very low lifetime project costs which is only 2.73 million. It had an IRR of 19.77%, a discount rate of 8.46%, and a payback period is more than 10 years and the profitability index of this project is 2.85. I choose this project is because the Asian market is a very big market, since the project is low risk and the cost of this project is very low, we think it is worth to try, because if this project is succeed, the company will earn more profit. The last project we selected for this year is Retail Store Expansion in Northeast. The NPV of this project is 5.34 and it had an IRR of 37.45%, a discount rate of 10.04% and a payback period is 5.33 years. We suggested
the discount rate can adjusted to 10.50% to make this project on a safe status. This high-risk projects because open new stores in other countries can always be risky. We pick this project is because it was a desired project for the company.
At the end of 2011, we can see from the table 2, we can see the net sales of retail division is 199.62 million, 4.87 million higher than 2010 (194.75 million), however the increasing in cost of goods sold and their Selling General and Administrative Expenses turns out the EBITDA of 2011(3.79) is lower than 2010 (5.04).
<Insert table 2> In addition, the net sales of licensing has jump to 36.50 million in 2011 and the EBITDA and its net income has a very big increase, which are 21.99 and 12.99. So the pervious object which I selected in 2009 acutely works. (Table 1)
In year three (2011), we selected four projected which are: Doll Video Game, Tween Book Series, New Inventory Control System for Warehouse and Replace Assembly Equipment at Sacramento Facility.
The Doll Video Game is a licensing project and the report says that this project did not performed as good as expectations but it is still stay in positive. This project has an NPV of 1.06 an IRR 115.90% which is very high, a discount rate of 7.40% and the payback year is 2.24 years and the profitability index is 8.73 million. This is a medium risk project with only 0.40 million lifetime project cost. We think this is a good project even though it has not much assets. However we suggest they can increase the project discount rate from 7.40% to 8.00%. The Tween Book Series has an NPV of 6.14, an IRR of 43.57%, a discount rate of 6.89%, and a payback period of 5.24 years and 13.64 profitability index. This is a low risk licensing project and according to the company report, this project has boosted its revenue and will definitely give contribution to the company. So we will keep this project. We selected the New Inventory Control System for Warehouse is because it can help the company reduce the cost of carrying inventory and make more savings. This is a low risk retailing project also with very low cost, and there is no gain or loss of using this project but it can help the company reduce the cost. Replace Assembly Equipment at Sacramento Facility is a low risk production project, we choose this project is because it has a high IRR which is 38.64% and a very low of production cost. Due to the low risk the NPV of this project is low which is only 0.06.
We can see from the table three, at the end of 2012, the company's net sales has risen to 306.65 million, increasing year by year from year 2009, and the net income as well.
We use the same method to pick projects for the rest two years of this run. We focused more on low risk project and in this run we did not expected too much on our APV and our net income.
In this run we hope the company can always get the future benefits rather than take a high risk and too impatient for success. In addition, there are not many projects had an ideally NPV, so we are not surprised about the final result. Also, we have tried our best to maintain the balance of each of the three divisions to keep the company in the same structure and to maintain the equal growth as well.
This run end with an APV of 424.79, a revenue of 348.17 million, which is not bad and 23.49 million net income. The net income is not big but we use the minimum budget to make the biggest profit.
Round 2
Next, this is the second simulation we choose to explain. In this simulation we got APV (Adjusted present value) equals 597.79 and the revenue equals 393.43 million. The operation income equals 44.21 million. From the company consolidated Income Statement, we can see that the net income finally ended in 26.53 million. From the Balance Sheet, the total net asset equals 278.85 million, the total current liabilities equals 64.05 million and the total liabilities and shareholders equity equals 278.85 million. In this simulation our approach is to spent ever money we got, we thought this might gives us the highest return and the highest APV.
In 2009, we choose three projects to funding.
They are: 1.‘Match my Doll’ Clothing Line, 2.Retail Store Expansion in Northeast and 3.New Doll Film / DVD. We choose these three projects because they are all high or medium risks. Usually the high risk comes with the high return. So we want to see what will happen if we all choose high or medium risker projects. Even if these three projects do not have good 1 Yr. EBITDA, it has the highest three 5 Yr. EBITDA. So when we choose these three projects we do not want it went well in the first year but for the future benefits. After a whole year running, in 2010 the net income was 12.58 million and it was less than 2009. The revenue became 252.42 million and the APV we got this year was 319.38. This is not a problem now because the future view form the financial analysis and project details were going very
well.
In 2010, we choose four projects to funding. They are: 1.Toddler Doll Accessory Line, 2.‘Grow With Me’ Doll Line, 3.Tween Book Series and 4.Expansion of Mail-order Catalog Business to Asia. After the first year’s three high or medium risk projects, this year we want to reduce a little bit risk. So we take Toddler Doll Accessory Line, Expansion of Mail-order Catalog Business to Asia and Tween Book series, they are both low risk projects. Also this time, we want to focus on the NPV, the first and second choice we made has 7.15 and 6.83 NPV. The third choice we made is based on the IRR because the rest projects basically has the same NPV, so we choice the project which has the highest IRR which is 43.57. The last choice we made is because we want to use all of budget we got. This can help us get higher return. Also, this project has 13.64 profit index and the payback year was 5.24. The revenue for 2011 was 276.70 and the APV went to 363.16. The net income became 16.75 million. This means the projects we choose in 2009 worked a lot better than 2010, we got a rise net income.
In 2011, we choose six projects to funding. They are: 1.Acquisition of Children’s magazine, 2.’Match My Doll’ Clothing Line, Expansion of Concept. 3.’Dolls of the World’ Initiative, 4.Doll Video Game, 5.Replace Assembly Equipment at Sacramento Facility and 6. In this year’s project, our idea was also to spend every penny of the budget we got because we went higher return. When we choose the first project, it’s kind of hard choose between ‘Acquisition of Children’s Magazine’ and ‘Acquisition of Electronic Toy Manufacturer’. They were both have limited time, high NPV and high 5 Yr. EBITDA. Finally we decided choose Acquisition of Children’s Magazine it has the highest NPV which is 28.96 million and highest IRR which is 19.52%. Even though this project do not have the highest 5 Yr. EBIDTA it has a lot less project costs and payback year. The second and third projects we choose was based on the NPV which were 8.31 million and 6.32 million and 5 Yr. EBIDTA which were 3.60 million and 4.61million. The forth and fifth project we choose were base on the IRR. The last project we choose was because we want higher return and the more projects we choose can bring us more net sales. This means we can have more net income. In 2012, our revenue was 314.13 million and the APV went to 437.09. The net income went to 19.97 million
In 2012, we choose six projects to funding. They are: 1.’Design Your Own Doll’, 2.Toddlers Music CD Series, 3.Virtual Doll Community, 4.Bookstore Café and Writers’ Club, 5.Expansion to England and 6.EDI Supplier Software System. In this year’s projects, we use the same approach: spent every penny to get us the highest return. The four projects we made were based on the NPV which are 9.76million, 6.97million, 6.89million and 6.71 million. The last two projects we choose were because it has the low project cost among other projects we can choose. We spend all the penny we can use till we do not have enough money to buy another project. This will bring us more return without a lot of costs. In 2013, our revenue rise to 358.41 million and the APV was 529.84. The net income in this year was 23.88 million.
In 2013 we choose five projects to funding. They are: 1. Dollhouses with Miniature Dolls, 2.Children’s Accessories Line, 3.Cable TV Program, 4.Coupon Promotion/Frequent Shopper Campaign and 5. Young authors Book Series. The first two projects we choose is based on the 5 Yr. EBITDA. The high 5 Yr. EBITDA can bring us more profits in the future. The rest of our projects we choose was based on the IRR and project costs. The revenue was 393.43 million and APV was 597.79. Net income rise to 26.53 million.By using this strategy can help company get a big increase income and can contribute a lot of profit. However, according to the results we think this simulation can work for a long term.
Round 3
In this round, our strategy was very simple and different than before. We only seeking for projects which have high net present value (NPV) when we made decisions for the New Heritage Doll Company every year. In addition, the projects we chose had high risk. It is said that “Higher risk, higher reward, so we did not avoid high risk projects in this round. At last, we got a highest APV than before, was about 641.39. Current revenue was 372.10 and 24.45 in net income (Table 4).
<Insert table 4>
At first, we have budget constraint of 2010 was 8.9. Since we focus on Net Present Value this time, we choose “Match My Doll” Clothing Line, New Doll Film/DVD and Toddler Doll Accessory Line, because these three have higher NPV, which were 6.46, 9.37, and 7.15 respectively. The risk of “Match My Doll” Clothing Line project was high, the New Doll Film/DVD with medium risk, and Toddler Doll Accessory Line has low risk. After the selecting, we remain 1.14 budget.
Then we moved to 2011, with the remained 1.14 previous year, we had 10.04 budget constraints. With the same strategy, we choose “Grow with Me” Doll Line (NPV: 6.83) and Tween Book Series (NPV: 6.14) which two have high NPV. The “Grow with Me” Doll Line has high risk and Tween Book Series with low risk. Even though, the NPV of “Dolls of the World” Initiative and New East Distribution Facility projects have high NPV, we have not enough budgets to take those two projects. We also choose Expansion of Mail-order Catalog Business to Asia (1.57) although it has not high net present value, we afford it and the risk of the project is low. Moreover, we think it can increase sale for the company. With the selection above, we remain 2.44 budgets. The company APV in 2011, increase to 358.11.
There comes to 2012, we had 11.34 budget constraint. We selected Acquisition of Electronic Toy Manufacturer (NPV: 16.34, high risk), “Match My Doll” Clothing Line Expansion of Concept (NPV: 8.31, medium risk) and “Dolls of the World” Initiative (NPV: 6.32, high risk) because of their high net present value. We chose Retail Store Expansion in Northeast (NPV: 5.49, high risk) was because it fit the company’s expansion strategy. Also, we selected Replace Assembly Equipment at Sacramento Facility project (NPV: 0.06) and New Inventory Control System for Warehouse project (NPV: 0.05) with both low risk, and Doll Video Game (1.06, medium) projects. This time, we not only choose the project with high NPV, but also try to spend as much budget as we had. Through this way, the company NPV has a large increase and reach to 436.77.
In the 2013, we have budget of 12.58. We chose six projects this year, they are EDI Supplier Software System(NPV:0.05, low risk), “Design Your Own Doll”(NPV: 9.76, high risk), Expansion to England( NPV:0.93, medium risk), Virtual Doll Community(NPV:5.04, high risk), Bookstore Café and Writers’ Club(NPV:6.71, medium risk), and Toddlers Music CD Series(NPV:6.97, medium risk), remained 4.93 budget and got 577.45 in company NPV.
Finally, in 2014, we had budget Constraint 13.83. We selected Dollhouses with Miniature Dolls (NPV: 9.09, high risk), Young Authors Book Series (NPV: 8.15, medium risk) and Coupon Promotion/Frequent Shopper Campaign (NPV: 6.04, low risk) because their high net present value. We also want to take Warehouse Facility Consolidation and New East Coast Distribution Facility, but we short of money. Finally, we remain 5.13 budget and got 641.39 in company NPV in 2014.
Conclusion:
Finally, according to our results, it turns out that to be safe is not always the best option on running a company. Sometimes you need to take some risk, it is not always a bad thing. So we decide to choose round 3 as our final option. The approach we use for this round is to focus on the high NPV and not avoid taking high risk objects as well, this seems like a good solution to choose our five year’s projects. Because this round have a long-term benefit, even though it does not went that well. From the cash flow statement, we can see that the net income rise every year and till 2024 the net income can reach 99.22 million.
Table 1
(Production Consolidated)
2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014
Income Statement
Net Sales125.00 128.75 137.81 145.91 151.94 157.29
'- Cost of Goods Sold-77.50 -79.82 -85.55 -90.65 -94.43 -97.77
Gross Profit 47.50 48.93 52.2655.26 57.51 59.52
'- Depreciation` -6.00 -6.00 -6.13 -6.13 -6.14 -6.32
'- Increase in SG&A -34.06 -35.73 -37.50-39.63 -41.20 -42.64
'+ Profit (Loss) on Sale of PP&E 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00Earnings Before Interest and Taxes 7.44 7.198.64 9.50 10.17 10.56
Interest Expense -2.09 -2.15-2.19 -2.25 -2.33 -2.44
Earnings Before Income Taxes 5.35 5.04 6.45 7.25 7.84 8.12
Taxes -2.14 -2.02 -2.58 -2.90 -3.14 -3.25
Net Income 3.21 3.02 3.87 4.35 4.70 4.87
(Licensing Consolidated) 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014
Income Statement
Net Sales 24.50 25.48 36.50 37.06 42.01 46.82
'- Cost of Goods Sold -2.90 -3.02 -4.32 -4.39 -7.09 8.84
Gross Profit 21.6022.46 32.18 32.67 34.92 37.98'- Depreciation -0.50-0.50 -0.50 -0.50 -0.50 0.52'- Increase in SG&A -6.64-8.66-9.68 -10.80 -11.52 12.85'+ Profit (Loss) on Sale of PP&E 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.000.00 0.00Earnings Before Interest and Taxes 14.45 13.30 21.99 21.3722.89 24.61
Interest Expense -0.33 -0.33 -0.34 -0.36-0.38 0.42
Earnings Before Income Taxes 14.12 12.97 21.65 21.0122.51 24.19
Taxes -5.65 -5.19 -8.66 -8.40-9.01 -9.68
Net Income 8.47 7.78 12.99 12.6113.51 14.51
Table 2
(Retail Consolidated)
2009 2010 20112012 20132014
Income Statement
Net Sales190.00 194.75 199.62233.11 244.87262.02
'- Cost of Goods Sold-114.00 -116.85 -119.77-139.54 -146.49156.64
Gross Profit 76.00 77.90 79.85 93.57 98.37105.38
'- Depreciation -6.00 -6.00-6.00 -6.16 -6.68-6.92
'- Increase in SG&A -65.20 -66.86-70.06 -80.86 -81.25-88.92
'+ Profit (Loss) on Sale of PP&E 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Earnings Before Interest and Taxes 4.8 5.04 3.79 6.55 10.45 9.54
Interest Expense -1.89 -2.13 -2.11 -2.38 -2.57 -2.70
Earnings Before Income Taxes 2.91 2.92 1.67 4.16 7.88 6.85
Taxes -1.16 -1.17 -0.67 -1.67 -3.15-2.74
Net Income 1.74 1.75 1.00 2.50 4.734.11
Table 3 ( company Consolidated)
2009 20102011 20122013 2014
Income Statement
Net Sales245.75 252.42270.57 306.65324.86 348.17
'- Cost of Goods Sold-100.65 -103.13-106.28 -125.15-134.06 145.29
Gross Profit 145.10 149.29164.29 181.50190.81 202.88
'- Depreciation -12.50 -12.50-12.63 -12.79-13.33 -13.76
'- Increase in SG&A -105.90 -111.25-117.24 -131.30-133.97 144.41
'+ Profit (Loss) on Sale of PP&E 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Earnings Before Interest and Taxes26.70 25.53 34.42 37.41 43.51 44.71
Interest Expense -4.32 -4.61-4.65 -4.99 -5.29 -5.56
Earnings Before Income Taxes 22.38 20.9229.77 32.42 38.23 39.15
Taxes -8.95 -8.37-11.91 -12.97 -15.29 15.66
Net Income 13.4312.55 17.86 19.45 22.94 23.49
Table 4