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
hese two cases to consider the investment decisions of managers of large chemical companies are made in January 2001. The A ‘case‚ a go / no-go project evaluation regarding improvements to a polypropylene production plant. The B ‘case‚ checked the same project‚ but from a higher level‚ where the executive is an either / or investment decision between two mutually exclusive projects. The goal of the two cases is to expose students to a broad range of capital budgeting … Read more » These two cases
Premium Net present value Internal rate of return
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
Victoria Chemicals: Case study Introduction Victoria Chemicals is a major competitor in the worldwide chemical industry. They are a leading producer of polypropylene‚ which is a polymer used in products such as medical products and automobile components. Victoria Chemicals started up in 1967 when 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. In 2008 these two plants have an old-fashioned
Premium Net present value Cash flow
VICTORIA CHEMICALS PLC THE MERSEYSIDE AND ROTTERDAM PPROJECTS I would choose Merseyside project rather than Rotterdam’s not only for its superior prospect based on the quantitative criteria‚ but also for a more rational strategy consideration. For the four investment criteria‚ here’s the elaboration. NPV. Since the two plants are of identical scale‚ age‚ design and similar project size‚ it makes sense to use NPV to compare the two projects. Not taken into account the erosion at Merseyside‚
Premium Net present value Finance Project
Case #22 Victoria Chemicals Synopsis and Objectives go/no-go decision 1. The identification of relevant cash flows; in particular‚ the treatment of: a. sunk costs b. cash flows obtained by cannibalizing another activity within the firm c. exploitation of excess transportation capacity d. corporate overhead allocations e. cash flows of unrelated projects f. inflation. 2. The critical assessment of a capital-investment evaluation system. 3. The treatment of conflicts of interest
Premium Net present value Discounted cash flow Internal rate of return
Manager of Diamond Chemicals Merseyside was discussing a capital project with her controller that Morris wanted to propose to senior management. The project consisted of a 9 million pounds expenditure to renovate and rationalize the polypropylene production line at the Merseyside plant in order to make up for the deferred maintenance and to exploit opportunities to achieve production efficiency. The proposed Capital Program Morris had assumed responsibility for the Merseyside works only 12 months
Premium Depreciation Generally Accepted Accounting Principles Internal rate of return
Group Paper Analysis‚ Team 4 4/22/2010 Victoria Chemicals (B) Group Case Study Introduction Victoria Chemicals’ Intermediate Chemicals Group (ICG) is evaluating two mutually exclusive proposals on their capital expenditures. The Liverpool and Rotterdam plants have compiled separate proposals. Each proposal had the potential to increase the polypropylene output by 7 percent for their plant respectively. Victoria Chemicals could not view a 14 percent increase companywide being feasible‚
Premium Net present value
Case #22 Victoria Chemicals Synopsis and Objectives go/no-go decision 1. The identification of relevant cash flows; in particular‚ the treatment of: a. sunk costs b. cash flows obtained by cannibalizing another activity within the firm c. exploitation of excess transportation capacity d. corporate overhead allocations e. cash flows of unrelated projects f. inflation. 2. The critical assessment of a capital-investment evaluation system
Premium Net present value Discounted cash flow
Victoria Chemicals: The Merseyside Project Executive Summary Victoria Chemicals is facing pressures from investors to improve its financial performances. The plant manager is currently considering whether to accept a GBP 12million initial outlay project to renovate its polypropylene production line at Merseyside plant. The benefit of the plant is the lower energy requirement of production and a greater manufacturing capacity. This report consist a recommendation for the plant manager which consists
Premium Net present value Discounted cash flow Cash flow