* * Yogi’s Minimum * Case 08-4 * * Background * * A public utility company‚ Big Bear Power‚ has signed a 10-year non-cancelable lease from Goliath Company for a combustion turbine. The lease agreement is signed on December 15‚ 2004 and Big Bear has the right to use the turbine as of January 1‚ 2005. * Annual lease payments are $1 million per year‚ payable ratably over 12 months at the beginning of each month‚ according to the lease agreement. The minimum rent
Premium Renting Payment Leasing
I. Introduction Victoria Chemicals is one of the leading producers of Polypropelene‚ a polymer that is used in many products ranging from carpet fibers‚ automobile automobile components‚ packaging film and more. When Victoria Chemicals started up in 1967 they built two plants‚ one in Merseyside‚ England and one in Rotterdam‚ Holland. Both plants were identical to each other and produced an equal amount of goods. Morris Greystock‚ the controller of the Merseyside plant had notice a decline in
Premium Net present value Internal rate of return
Introduction The following report shows that the proposal of the modernisation project should obtain funding from the corporate headquarters of Victoria Chemicals. The project has an initial outlay of GBP12 million to renovate and rationalise the polypropylene production line at Merseyside plant. This is done in order to make up for deferred maintenance and exploit opportunities to achieve increased efficiency. This report will look at the following four main areas of concern in order
Premium Net present value Internal rate of return Discounted cash flow
CASE STUDY VICTORIA CHEMICALS plc (A): The Merseyside Project Submitted to: Prof. Roy C. Ybanez MSFIN 222 Submitted by: BASCON‚ Roland Billy CAJEGAS‚ Lester ORTIZ‚ Karmi Ann SALVADORA‚ Jerick Cezar 14 October 2014 Problem Statement Victoria Chemicals (VC) experienced a significant downturn in its financial performance from 2006 to 2007. The company was under pressure to improve its financial performance as its earnings ad fallen 38% (from 250 pence to 180 pence per share). The
Premium Net present value Discounted cash flow Internal rate of return
VICTORIA CHEMICALS plc (A) The Merseyside Project Presented by Group 2 : Aldy Rifianto‚ Dedy Mardianto Floriana Nataly‚ Hiralalitya Lextro Kristiano Concorda Natallia Winata‚ Wita Puspadilla Yosua Bangun THE MERSEYSIDE PROJECT SUMMARY PROBLEM IDENTIFICATION ALTERNATIVE SOLUTION RECOMENDATION SUMMARY • Victoria Chemicals‚ a major competitor in the Worldwide chemicals industry‚ was a leading producer of polypropylene‚ a polymer used in an extremely wide variety of products SUMMARY Victoria Chemicals
Premium Net present value Internal rate of return Chemical industry
Case 22: Victoria Chemicals The Merseyside Project Table of Contents Executive Summary 3 Problem Statement 3 Key Decision Criteria 4-5 Data Analysis 5-6 Alternatives Analysis 6-7 Recommendations 8 Action and Implementation Plan 8-9 Exhibits 10 References 11 Executive Summary Victoria Chemicals is a major competitor in the worldwide chemicals industry. They are a leading producer of polypropylene‚ which is a polymer used in products such as: medical products and carpet fibers.
Premium Cost Net present value Costs
Background Victoria Chemicals‚ a major player in the global chemical industry that supplies polypropylene‚ polymer that used to manufacture carpet fibers‚ packaging‚ automobile parts to the customers in Europe and the Middle East. Apart from numerous small producers‚ the company also receives the threats from the other seven major competitors. The company owns two plants in Europe‚ one being Merseyside Works‚ England and Rotterdam Facility‚ Holland. Both plants were built in 1967 and are identical
Premium Cost Chemical industry Proposals
Executive Summary of Victoria Chemicals Problem Definition: The organization‚ Victoria Chemicals‚ must determine whether or not to improve engineering efficiency through facility improvements at its production plant Merseyside Works. Relevant Facts: The Merseyside Project was evaluated with respect to the following criteria: (1) Impact on earnings per share (2) Payback (3) Discounted cash flow (“DCF”) and (4) Internal Rate of Return (“IRR”). The initial assessment of this project was based
Premium Net present value Internal rate of return
Question 1 Issues Arising From Case The issues are the future viability of the plant for producing EPC and the long-term effects of not upgrading this production line. The additional upgrade will result in additional production‚ but as mentioned by the sales director if there is no demand for the increase in supply and Rotterdam plants excess will be added to the Mersey side quantities the plant upgrade could ultimately result in a dropping of prices to shift supply. The transport division is also
Premium Management Capital expenditure Generally Accepted Accounting Principles
1. Victoria Chemicals evaluate its capital-expenditure proposals in four ways. They are average annual addition to earnings per share‚ payback period‚ net present value‚ and internal rate of return. An earnings per share method is to indicate a company’s profitability. For Victoria Chemical‚ this was calculated with the average annual earnings per share contribution of the engineering-efficiency project over its entire economic life. However‚ for the basis of the calculation‚ the project’s initiator
Premium Net present value Cash flow Rate of return