Lawn Depot Case
Autor: ecgonzal • May 4, 2015 • Case Study • 1,216 Words (5 Pages) • 2,416 Views
Lawn, Inc. – Capital Budgeting
- Lawn Depot’s market value capital structure is as follows:
Cost of Capital components –
L/T Debt = $310 → Wd=50%
P/S = $145 → Wps=24%
S/T Debt = $50 → Wsd=8%
CE = $110 → Wre=18%
Total = $615
Cost of Debt = YTM(1-T) = .08(1-.40) = 4.8%
Cost of Preferred Stock = D/P(1-F) = $9/$100(1-.10) = 10%
Cost of Retained Earnings = D/P+g = $10/$60+0 = 16.6%
Cost of S/T Debt = YTM(1-T) = .07(1-.40) = 4.2%
Cost of New Common Stock = D/P(1-F) = $10/$60(1-.20) = 20.83%
WACCre = KdWd+KpsWps+KreWre+KsdWsd
= 4.8%(50%)+10%(24%)+16.6%(18%)+4.2%(8%)
= 8%
WACCncs = 12.5%(1-.40)(50%)+10%(24%)+20.83%(18%)+4.2%(8%)
= 10.24%
- Breakpoint = Retention Ratio → (1-Div. Payout)(RE)/Wre + Depreciation
= (1-.60)(80M)/18% = 177.78 + 60M depreciation = $237.78M
3.
Component Weight $0-$124M Over $124M
LT Debt 50% 4.8% =.2.4% 7.5% = 3.75%
ST Debt 8% 4.2% = .336% 2% = .16%
Pfd Stock 24% 10% = 2.4% 10% = 2.4%
Common Eq 18% 16.16% = 2.9% 20.83%=3.75%
8% 10.06%
** DRAW MCC SCHEDULE
4a. The internal rate of return for Project A* is 20%, based on the cost of the project being $30 and the estimated annual cash inflows for 8 years is $7.81.
** DRAW IOS AND MCC SCHEDULE
4b. All of the projects’ IRRs are higher than the WACC, so we accept them all. Projects A and A* are mutually exclusive projects, and the IRRs of both exceed the cost of capital. However, the NPV of project A is greater than that of project A*. Therefore, we accept project A since they are mutually exclusive and its NPV is higher, and we accept project B since the IRR is higher than the WACC.
...