Investment Analysis and Lockheed Tri Star

Investment Analysis and Lockheed Tri Star root effort Total points 100 (Course grade 25%) This case comprises quaternary serially numbered stand-alone problems and the fifth one appears with the title of Lockheed Tri-Star. You are inevitable to offer your calculations of economic nourishs as recordd below. In addition to the calculations, write a brief summary of your findings in about 100 words for severally problem. 1) Rainbow Products20 points Machine Purchase Machine plus service contract enhance Machine Payback period 7 old age 7. 78 Years 7. 65 Years NPV ($945. 8) $2,500. 00 $15,000. 00 IRR 11. 49% 12. 86% 15. 43% Decision (Yes/No) NO YES YES We would advise Rainbow Products to not purchase the paint-mixing equipment unless they decided take on the spare $500 per year expenditure to service the machine, or decided to reinvest 20% of the yearly make up savings back into new machine parts. any of the last two options would do good the company, unlike the first option, as they hand over both a positive Net Present Value (NPV) and intrinsic Rate of Return (IRR) greater than the Cost of Capital.Although the last two options welcome longer Payback Periods than the first option, using Payback Period to sustain a determination in this example is not suitable because of the shortcomings of the mode. 2) grant brave20 points Criteria Add a new window Update Equipment new-sprung(prenominal) Stand take on Any other option? Wildcard Add a raw Window AND Update Existing Equipment NPV ($) $25,461. 91 $2,514. 18 $34,825. 76 $28,469. 88 $27,976. 08 NPV straddle No WildcardNPV Rank Wildcard 34 45 11 22 3 IRR (%) 34. 2% 18. 01% 31. 21% 1207. 61% 28. 10% IRR Rank No WildcardIRR Rank Wildcard 22 45 33 11 4 MIRR (%) 26 . 77% 16. 90% 24. 82% 255. 21% 23. 01% MIRR Rank No WildcardMIRR Rank Wildcard 22 45 33 11 4 It would be in the best interest of the Concession Stand to either Build a New Stand, or Rent a Larger Stand. Under the NPV method, make a New Stand would be the most beneficial option, with the Rent prime(prenominal) being the second best option.Under the IRR and MIRR methods, the Rent choice would be a clear favorite while the Building a New Stand choice would be the third most beneficial option. Their choice in which action to take would depend upon which methodology best align with their operational goals, although NPV is a more commonly used and trusted plan of attack than IRR because of several issues that can derail IRR calculations. 3) MBATech, Inc. 20 points Alternative Cost to the city ($) Increase IRR to 25% $122,103Give 2-year payback $256,522 NPV of $75,000 (at 20% discount) $112,666 ARR of 40% $173,913 Although the cost to the city could vary depending upon the timing of the subsidy payments due to the time value of money, our calculated costs reflect immediate payment of the subsidy during the initial investment period. With that said, the city would be wise in pursuing the NPV of $75,000 method as the cost of this method would be the least expensive of the iv alternatives.An upfront payment to MBA Tech, Inc. , from the city, for $112,666 would be sufficient in pushing the NPV of the sick to the $75,000 limit. The city should avoid the 2-year payback method if at all doable as this would have the greatest cost by a certain margin. 4) Valu-Added Industries, Inc. 10 points NPV of the project $100,000 Number of shares to be issued 1,000 Price per share $110. 00 By issuing 1,000 shares to the public at $10. 0 per share, Valu-Added Industries will be financing the entire project through investors. This action will also indicate to current stockholders that the future market value of the shares of stock of the company should be higher in value. With no further information, it would appear that both Valu-Added Industries, and their stockholders, would benefit from the organization taking on this opportunity, and that the value of the company would only make up by doing so. ) Loc kheed Tri Star30 points At planned production levels of 210 units, what was the true value of the Tri supporter program? ($584,048,126) At planned production levels of 300 units, what was the true value of the Tri star program? ($274,381,683) At planned production levels of 323 units, what was the true value of the Tri star program? ($206,205,933) At what sales volume would the program gain ground true break even? About 388