Caso 04

www.elsolucionario.
net
Chapter 8
Rate of Return Analysis: Multiple Alternatives
Solutions to Problems
8.1 (a) The rate of return on the increment has to be larger than 18%.
(b) The rate of return on the increment has to be smaller than 10%.
8.2 Overall ROR: 30,000(0.20) + 70,000(0.14) = 100,000(x)

x = 15.8%
8.3 There is no income associated with service alternatives. Therefore, the only way to
www.elsolucionario.net
obtain a rate of return is on the increment of investment.
8.4 The rate of return on the increment of investment is less than 0.
8.5 By switching the position of the two cash flows, the interpretation changes
completely. The situation would be similar to receiving a loan in the amount of the
difference between the two alternatives if the lower cost alternative is selected. The
rate of return would represent the interest paid on the loan. Since it is higher than
what the company would consider attractive (i.e., 15% or less), the loan should not
be accepted. Therefore, select the alternative with the higher initial investment, A.
8.6 (a) Both processors should be selected because the rate of return on both exceeds the
company’s MARR.
(b) The microwave model should be selected because the rate of return on increment
of investment between the two is greater than 23%.
8.7 (a) Incremental investment analysis is not required. Alternative X should be selected
because the rate of return on the increment is known to be lower than 20%
(b) Incremental investment analysis is not required because only Alt Y has ROR
greater than the MARR
(c) Incremental investment analysis is not required. Neither alternative should be
selected because neither one has a ROR greater than the MARR.
(d) The ROR on the increment is less than 26%, but an incremental investment
analysis is required to determine if the rate of return on the increment equals or
exceeds the MARR of 20%
(e) Incremental investment analysis is not required because it is known that the ROR
on the increment is greater than 22%.
Chapter 8 1
PROPRIETARY MATERIAL. © The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All rights reserved. No part of this Manual may be
displayed, reproduced or distributed in any form or by any means, without the prior written permission of the publisher, or used
beyond the limited distribution to teachers and educators permitted by McGraw-Hill for their individual course preparation. If you are
a student using this Manual, you are using it without permission.
8.8 Overall ROR: 100,000(i) = 30,000(0.30) + 20,000(0.25) + 50,000(0.20)

i = 24%
8.9 (a) Size of investment in Y = 50,000 – 20,000

= $30,000
(b) 30,000(i) + 20,000(0.15) = 50,000(0.40)

i = 56.7%
8.10 Year Machine A Machine B B–A
0 -15,000 -25,000 -10,000

1 -1,600 -400 +1200
2 -1600 -400 +1200
3 -15,000 –1600 + 3000 -400 +13,200
4 -1600 -400 +1200
5 -1600 -400 +1200
6 +3000 –1600 +6000 – 400 +4200
8.11 The incremental cash flow equation is 0 = -65,000 + x(P/A,25%,4), where x is

the difference in the operating costs of the processes.
x = 65,000/2.3616
= $27,524
Operating cost of process B = 60,000 – 27,524

= $32,476
8.12 The one with the higher initial investment should be selected because it yields a
rate of return that is acceptable, that is, the MARR.
8.13 (a) Find rate of return on incremental cash flow.

0 = -3000 –200(P/A,i,3) + 4700(P/F,i,3)
i = 10.4% (Excel)
(b) Incremental ROR is less than MARR; select Ford.
8.14 (a) 0 = -200,000 + 50,000(P/A,i,5) + 130,000(P/F,i,5)
Solve for i by trial and error or Excel

i = 20.3% (Excel)
(b) i > MARR; select process Y.
Chapter 8 2
8.15 0 = -25,000 + 4000(P/A,i,6) + 26,000(P/F,i,3) – 39,000(P/F,i,4) + 40,000(P/F,i,6)

i = 17.4% (Excel)
i > MARR; select machine requiring extra investment: variable speed
8.16 0 = -10,000 + 1200(P/A,i,4) + 12,000(P/F,i,2) + 1000(P/F,i,4)

i = 30.3% (Excel)
Select machine B.
8.17 0 = -17,000 + 400(P/A,i,6) + 17,000(P/F,i,3) + 1700(P/F,i,6)
i = 6.8% (Excel)
Select alternative P.
8.18 0 = -90,000 + 10,000(P/A,i,3) + 20,000(P/A,i,6) (P/F,i,3) + 5000(P/F,i,10)

i = 10.5% (Excel)
i < MARR; select alternative J.
8.19 Find P to yield exactly 50% and the take difference.

0 = -P + 400,000(P/F,i,1) + 600,000(P/F,i,2) + 850,000(P/F,i,3)
P = 400,000(0.6667) + 600,000(0.4444) + 850,000(0.2963)
= $785,175
Difference = 900,000 – 785,175

= $114,825
8.20 Let x = M & O costs. Perform an incremental cash flow analysis.
0 = -75,000 + (-x + 50,000)(P/A,20%,5) + 20,000(P/F,20%,5)

0 = -75,000 + (-x + 50,000)(2.9906) + 20,000(0.4019)
x = $27,609
M & O cost for S = $-27,609
Chapter 8 3
8.21 0 = -22,000(A/P,i,9) + 4000 + (12,000 – 4000)(A/F,i,9)

i = 14.3% (Excel)
i > MARR; select alternative N
8.22 Find ROR for incremental cash flow over LCM of 4 years
0 = -50,000(A/P,i,4) + 5000 + (40,000 – 5000)(P/F, i,2)(A/P, i,4) + 2000(A/F,i,4)

i = 6.1% (Excel)
i < MARR; select semiautomatic machine
8.23 0 = -62,000(A/P,i,24) + 4000 + (10,000 – 4000)(A/F,i,24)

i = 4.2% per month is > MARR = 2% per month (Excel)
Select alternative Y
8.24 0 = -40,000(A/P,i,10) + 8500 – 500(A/G,i,10)

i = 10.5% is < MARR = 17% (Excel)
Select Z1
8.25 Find ROR on increment of investment.

0 = -500,000(A/P,i,10) + 60,000
i = 3.5% < MARR
Select design 1A
8.26 Develop a cash flow tabulation.
Year Lease, $ Build, $ B – L, $

0 -108,000 -50,000 – 270,000 -212,000
1 -108,000 0 +108,000
2 -108,000 0 +108,000
3 0 +55,000 + 60,000 +115,000
0 = -212,000(A/P,i,3) + 108,000 + (115,000 - 108,000) (A/F,i,3)
Chapter 8 4
i = 25.8% < MARR (Excel)
Lease space
8.27 Select the one with the lowest initial investment cost because none of the
increments were justified.
8.28 (a) A vs DN: 0 = -30,000(A/P,i,8) + 4000 + 1000(A/F,i,8)

i = 2.1% (Excel)
Method A is not acceptable
B vs DN: 0 = - 36,000(A/P,i,8) + 5000 + 2000(A/F,i,8)
i = 3.4% (Excel)
Method B is not acceptable
C vs DN: 0 = - 41,000(A/P,i,8) + 8000 + 500(A/F,i,8)

i = 11.3% (Excel)
Method C is acceptable
D vs DN: 0 = - 53,000(A/P,i,8) + 10,500 - 2000(A/F,i,8)

i = 11.1% (Excel)
Method D is acceptable
(b) A vs DN: 0 = -30,000(A/P,i,8) + 4000 + 1000(A/F,i,8)

i = 2.1% (Excel)
Eliminate A
B vs DN: 0 = - 36,000(A/P,i,8) + 5000 + 2000(A/F,i,8)

i = 3.4% (Excel)
Eliminate B
C vs DN: 0 = - 41,000(A/P,i,8) + 8000 + 500(A/F,i,8)

i = 11.3% (Excel)
Eliminate DN
Chapter 8 5
C vs D: 0 = - 12,000(A/P,i,8) + 2,500 - 2500(A/F,i,8)

i = 10.4% (Excel)
Eliminate D
Select method C
8.29 Rank alternatives according to increasing initial cost: 2,1,3,5,4
1 vs 2: 0 = -3000(A/P,i,5) + 1500
(A/P,i,5) = 0.5000
i = 41.0% (Excel)
Eliminate 2
3 vs1: 0 = -3500(A/P,i,5) + 1000
(A/P,i,5) = 0.2857
i = 13.2% (Excel)
Eliminate 3
5 vs 1: 0 = -10,000(A/P,i,5) + 2500
(A/P,i,5) = 0.2500
i = 7.9% (Excel)
Eliminate 5
4 vs1: 0 = -17,000(A/P,i,5) + 6000

(A/P,i,5) = 0.3529
i = 22.5% (Excel)
Eliminate 1
Select machine 4
8.30 Alternatives are revenue alternatives. Therefore, add DN
(a) DN vs 8: 0 = -30,000(A/P,i,5) + (26,500 – 14,000) + 2000(A/F,i,5)

i = 31.7% (Excel)
Eliminate DN
8 vs 10: 0 = -4000(A/P,i,5) + (14,500 – 12,500) + 500(A/F,i,5)

i = 42.4% (Excel)
Eliminate 8
10 vs 15: 0 = -4000(A/P,i,5) + (15,500 – 14,500) + 500(A/F,i,5)

Chapter 8 6
i = 10.9% (Excel)
Eliminate 15
10 vs 20: 0 = -14,000(A/P,i,5) + (19,500 – 14,500) + 1000(A/F,i,5)

i = 24.2% (Excel)
Eliminate 10
20 vs 25: 0 = -9000(A/P,i,5) + (23,000 – 19,500) + 1100(A/F,i,5)

i = 29.0% (Excel)
Eliminate 20
Purchase 25 m3 truck
(b) For second truck, purchase truck that was eliminated next to last: 20 m3
8.31 (a) Select all projects whose ROR > MARR of 15%. Select A, B, and C
(b) Eliminate alternatives with ROR < MARR; compare others incrementally:
Eliminate D and E
Rank survivors according to increasing first cost: B, C, A
B vs C: i = 800/5000
= 16% > MARR Eliminate B
C vs A: i = 200/5000
= 4% < MARR Eliminate A
Select project C
8.32 (a) All machines have ROR > MARR of 12% and all increments of investment have
ROR > MARR. Therefore, select machine 4.
(b) Machines 2, 3, and 4 have ROR greater than 20%. Increment between 2 and 3 is
justified, but not increment between 3 and 4. Therefore, select machine 3.
8.33 (a) Select A and C.

(b) Proposal A is justified. A vs B yields 1%, eliminate B; A vs C yields 7%,
eliminate C; A vs D yields 10%, eliminate A. Therefore, select proposal D
(c) Proposal A is justified. A vs B yields 1%, eliminate B; A vs C yields 7%,
eliminate C; A vs D yields 10%, eliminate D. Therefore, select proposal A
Chapter 8 7
8.34 (a) Find ROR for each increment of investment:

E vs F: 20,000(0.20) + 10,000(i) = 30,000(0.35)
i = 65%
E vs G: 20,000(0.20) + 30,000(i) = 50,000(0.25)

i = 28.3%
E vs H: 20,000(0.20) + 60,000(i) = 80,000(0.20)

i = 20%
F vs G: 30,000(0.35) + 20,000(i) = 50,000(0.25)

i = 10%
F vs H: 30,000(0.35) + 50,000(i) = 80,000(0.20)

i = 11%
G vs H: 50,000(0.25) + 30,000(i) = 80,000(0.20)
i = 11.7%
(b) Revenue = A = Pi
E: A = 20,000(0.20) = $4000
F: A = 30,000(0.35) = $10,500
G: A = 50,000(0.25) = $12,500
H: A = 80,000(0.20) = $16,000
(c) Conduct incremental analysis using results from part (a):

E vs DN: i = 20% > MARR eliminate DN
E vs F: i = 65% > MARR eliminate E
F vs G: i = 10% < MARR eliminate G
F vs H: i = 11% < MARR eliminate H
Therefore, select Alternative F
(d) Conduct incremental analysis using results from part (a).

E vs DN: i = 20% >MARR, eliminate DN
E vs F: i = 65% > MARR, eliminate E
F vs G: i = 10% < MARR, eliminate G
F vs H: i = 11% = MARR, eliminate F
Select alternative H
(e) Conduct incremental analysis using results from part (a).

E vs DN: i = 20% > MARR, eliminate DN
E vs F: i = 65% > MARR, eliminate E
F vs G: i = 10% < MARR, eliminate G
F vs H: i = 11% < MARR, eliminate H
Chapter 8 8
Select F as first alternative; compare remaining alternatives incrementally.

E vs G: i = 28.3% > MARR, eliminate E
G vs H: i = 11.7% < MARR, eliminate H
Therefore, select alternatives F and G
8.35 (a) ROR for F: 10,000(0.25) + 15,000(0.20) = 25,000(i)

i = 22%
ROR for G: 25,000(0.22) + 5000(0.04) = 30,000(i)

i = 19%
Increment between E and G: 10,000(0.25) + 20,000(i) = 30,000(0.19)
i = 16%
Increment between E and H: 10,000(0.25) + 50,000(i) = 60,000(0.30)

i = 31%
Increment between F and H: 25,000(0.22) + 35,000(i) = 60,000(0.30)

i = 35.7%
Increment between G and H: 30,000(0.19) + 30,000(i) = 60,000(0.30)

i = 41%
(b) Select all alternatives with ROR ≥ MARR of 21%; select E, F, and H.
(c) Conduct incremental analysis using results from table and part (a).
E vs F: i = 20% < MARR, eliminate F
E vs G: i = 16% < MARR, eliminate G
E vs H: i = 31% > MARR, eliminate E
Select alternative H.
FE Review Solutions
8.36 Answer is (a)

8.37 Answer is (c)
8.38 Answer is (c)
8.39 Answer is (b)
8.40 Answer is (d)
Chapter 8 9
8.41 Answer is (b)

8.42 Answer is (b)
8.43 Answer is (b)
Extended Exercise Solution
1. PW at 12% is shown in row 29. Select #2 (n = 8) with the largest PW value.
2. #1 (n = 3) is eliminated. It has i* < MARR = 12%. Perform an incremental analysis of

#1 (n = 4) and #2 (n = 5). Column H shows i* = 19.49%. Now perform an
incremental comparison of #2 for n = 5 and n = 8. This is not necessary. No extra
investment is necessary to expand cash flow by three years. The i* is infinity. It is
obvious: select #2 (n = 8).
3. PW at 2000% > $0.05. i* is infinity, as shown in cell K45, where an error for
IRR(K4:K44) is indicated. This analysis is not necessary, but shows how Excel can
be used over the LCM to find a rate of return.
Chapter 8 10
Chapter 8 11
Case Study 1 Solution
1. Cash flows for each option are summarized at top of the spreadsheet. Rows 9-19 show
annual estimates for options in increasing order of initial investment: 3, 2, 1, 4, 5.
2. Multiple i* values: Only for option #2; there are 3 sign changes in cash flow and
cumulative cash flow series. No values other than 10.07% are found in the 0 to 100%
range.
3. Do incremental ROR analysis after removing #1 and #2. See row 22. 4-to-3
comparison 4-to-3 yields 59.85%, 5-to-4 has no return because all incremental cash
flows are 0 or negative. PW at 25% is $785.25 for #4, which is the largest PW.
Conclusion: Select option #4 – trade-out with friend.
Chapter 8 12
4. PW vs. i charts for all 5 options are on the spreadsheet.
Options Approximate
compared breakeven____
1 and 2 26%
3 and 5 27
2 and 5 38
1 and 5 42
3 and 4 50
5. Force the breakeven rate of return between options #4 and #3 to be equal to MARR =
25%. Use trial and error or Solver on Excel with a target cell of G22 (to be 25% or
.25 on the Solver window) and changing cell of C6. Make the values in years 5
through 8 of option #3 equal to the value in cell C6, so they reflect the changes. The
answer obtained should be about $1090, which is actually $1,090,000 for each of 4
years.
Required minimum selling price is 4(1090,000) = $4.36 million.
Chapter 8 13
Case Study 2 Solution
1. By inspection only: Select Plan A since its cash flow total at 0% is $300, while Plan B
produces a loss of the same amount ($-300).
2. Calculations for the following are shown on the spreadsheet below.
PW at MARR approach:
PW at 15%: PWA = -$81.38 and PWB = +$81.38. Plan B is selected

PW at 50%: PWA = +$16.05 and PWB = -$16.05. Plan A is selected.
The decisions contradict each other when the MARR is different. It does not seem
logical to accept plan A at a higher interest rate (50%) and at 0%, but reject it at a
mid-point interest rate (15%). The PW at MARR method is not working!
ROR approach:
The cash flow series have two sign changes, so a maximum of two roots may be
found. An ROR analysis using Excel functions for the two plans produce two
identical roots for each plan:
i*1 = 9.51% and i*2 = 48.19%
There are two i* values; it is not clear which value to use for a decision on project
acceptability. Further, when there are multiple i* values, the PW analysis ‘at the
MARR’ does not work, as demonstrated above.
Chapter 8 14
3. Incremental ROR analysis is shown on the spreadsheet below.
Plan B has a larger initial investment than A. The incremental cash flow series (B-
A) has two sign changes. The use of the IRR function finds the same two roots:
9.51% and 48.19%. Incremental ROR analysis offers no definitive resolution.
Chapter 8 15
4. Composite rate of return approach
Plan A (a) MARR = 15% and c = 15%
F0 = 1900; F1 = 1900(1.15) -500 = 1685; F2 = 1685(1.15) -8000 = -6062.25;

F3 = -6062.25(1+ i') +6500 = 437.75 –6062.25i'
F4 = 0 = F3(1+ i') +400
So i' = 13.06% < MARR = 15%. Reject Plan A.
(b) MARR = 15% and c = 45%
F0 = 1900; F1=1900(1.45) -500 = 2255;

F2 = 2255(1.45) -8000 = -4730.25; F3 = -4730.25(1+ i') +6500 = 1769.75
– 4730.25i' F4 = 0 = F3(1+ i') +400.
So i' = 43.31% > MARR= 15%. Accept Plan A.
(c) MARR = 50% and c = 50%
F0 = 1900; F1 = 1900(1.50) -500 = 2350; F2 = 2350(1.50) -8000 = -4475;

F3 = -4475(1+i') +6500 = -4475i' + 2025
F4 = 0 = F3(1+ i') +400.
So i ' = 51.16% > MARR = 50%. Accept Plan A.
Plan B (a) MARR = 15% and c = 15%
F0 = -1900; F1 = -1900(1+ i') +500; F2 = -1900(1+ i')2 +500(1+ i') +8000;

F3 = (1.15)F2 –6500
F4 = 0 = F3(1.15) -400.
So i' = 17.74% > MARR = 15%. Accept Plan B.
(b) MARR = 15% and c = 45%
F0 = -1900; F1 = -1900(1+i') +500; F2 = -1900(1+ i')2 +500(1+ i') +8000;

F3 = -1900(1.45) (1+ i')2 +500(1.45)(1+ i') +8000(1.45) –6500
F4 = 0 = F3(1.45) - 400.
So i' = 46.14% > MARR = 15%. Accept Plan B
(c) MARR = 50% and c = 50%
F0 = -1900; F1 = -1900(1+ i') +500; F2 = -1900(1+ i')2 +500(1+ i') +8000;

F3 = -1900(1. 5)(1+ i')2 +500(1.5)(1+ i') +8000(1.5) – 6500
F4 = 0 = F3(1.5) - 400.
So i' = 49.30% < MARR = 50%. Reject Plan B.
Chapter 8 16
d) Discussion: Plan B is superior to Plan A for c values below i*2, i.e., B’s composite
rate of return is higher. However, for c values above i*2, plan A
gives a higher (composite) rate of return.
Conclusion: The composite rate of return evaluation yields unambiguous results

when a reinvestment rate is specified.
Chapter 8 17

Caso 04

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Caso 04

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Caso 04

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

www.elsolucionario.

Rate of Return Analysis: Multiple Alternatives

8.2 Overall ROR: 30,000(0.20) + 70,000(0.14) = 100,000(x)

8.4 The rate of return on the increment of investment is less than 0.

8.8 Overall ROR: 100,000(i) = 30,000(0.30) + 20,000(0.25) + 50,000(0.20)

8.9 (a) Size of investment in Y = 50,000 – 20,000

(b) 30,000(i) + 20,000(0.15) = 50,000(0.40)

8.10 Year Machine A Machine B B–A

0 -15,000 -25,000 -10,000

8.11 The incremental cash flow equation is 0 = -65,000 + x(P/A,25%,4), where x is

Operating cost of process B = 60,000 – 27,524

8.13 (a) Find rate of return on incremental cash flow.

(b) Incremental ROR is less than MARR; select Ford.

8.14 (a) 0 = -200,000 + 50,000(P/A,i,5) + 130,000(P/F,i,5)

Solve for i by trial and error or Excel

(b) i > MARR; select process Y.

8.15 0 = -25,000 + 4000(P/A,i,6) + 26,000(P/F,i,3) – 39,000(P/F,i,4) + 40,000(P/F,i,6)

Solve for i by trial and error or Excel

i > MARR; select machine requiring extra investment: variable speed

8.16 0 = -10,000 + 1200(P/A,i,4) + 12,000(P/F,i,2) + 1000(P/F,i,4)

Solve for i by trial and error or Excel

8.17 0 = -17,000 + 400(P/A,i,6) + 17,000(P/F,i,3) + 1700(P/F,i,6)

8.18 0 = -90,000 + 10,000(P/A,i,3) + 20,000(P/A,i,6) (P/F,i,3) + 5000(P/F,i,10)

Solve for i by trial and error or Excel

8.19 Find P to yield exactly 50% and the take difference.

Difference = 900,000 – 785,175

8.20 Let x = M & O costs. Perform an incremental cash flow analysis.

0 = -75,000 + (-x + 50,000)(P/A,20%,5) + 20,000(P/F,20%,5)

M & O cost for S = $-27,609

8.21 0 = -22,000(A/P,i,9) + 4000 + (12,000 – 4000)(A/F,i,9)

Solve for i by trial and error or Excel

i > MARR; select alternative N

0 = -50,000(A/P,i,4) + 5000 + (40,000 – 5000)(P/F, i,2)(A/P, i,4) + 2000(A/F,i,4)

Solve for i by trial and error or Excel

i < MARR; select semiautomatic machine

Solve for i by trial and error or Excel

8.24 0 = -40,000(A/P,i,10) + 8500 – 500(A/G,i,10)

Solve for i by trial and error or Excel

8.25 Find ROR on increment of investment.

8.26 Develop a cash flow tabulation.

Year Lease, $ Build, $ B – L, $

0 = -212,000(A/P,i,3) + 108,000 + (115,000 - 108,000) (A/F,i,3)

Solve for i by trial and error or Excel

i = 25.8% < MARR (Excel)

8.28 (a) A vs DN: 0 = -30,000(A/P,i,8) + 4000 + 1000(A/F,i,8)

B vs DN: 0 = - 36,000(A/P,i,8) + 5000 + 2000(A/F,i,8)

C vs DN: 0 = - 41,000(A/P,i,8) + 8000 + 500(A/F,i,8)

D vs DN: 0 = - 53,000(A/P,i,8) + 10,500 - 2000(A/F,i,8)

(b) A vs DN: 0 = -30,000(A/P,i,8) + 4000 + 1000(A/F,i,8)

B vs DN: 0 = - 36,000(A/P,i,8) + 5000 + 2000(A/F,i,8)

C vs DN: 0 = - 41,000(A/P,i,8) + 8000 + 500(A/F,i,8)

C vs D: 0 = - 12,000(A/P,i,8) + 2,500 - 2500(A/F,i,8)

8.29 Rank alternatives according to increasing initial cost: 2,1,3,5,4

3 vs1: 0 = -3500(A/P,i,5) + 1000

4 vs1: 0 = -17,000(A/P,i,5) + 6000

8.30 Alternatives are revenue alternatives. Therefore, add DN

(a) DN vs 8: 0 = -30,000(A/P,i,5) + (26,500 – 14,000) + 2000(A/F,i,5)

8 vs 10: 0 = -4000(A/P,i,5) + (14,500 – 12,500) + 500(A/F,i,5)

i1 = 9.51% and i2 = 48.19%