Question

Leonard, a company that manufactures explosionproof motors, is considering two alternatives for expanding its international export capacity. Option 1 requires equipment purchases of $900,000 now and $560,000 two years from now, with annual M&O costs of $79,000 in years 1 through 10. Option 2 involves subcontracting some of the production at costs of $280,000 per year beginning now through the end of year 10. Neither option will have a significant salvage value.
Required:
Use a present worth analysis to determine which option is more attractive at the company’s MARR of 20% per year. (Note: Check out the spreadsheet exercises for new options that Leonard has been offered recently.)

Answer 1

Answer:

Since the total present value of Option 2 of – $1,453,892 is lower than the total present value of Option 1 of – $1,620,094, it implies that Option 2 costs less and more attractive at the company’s MARR of 20% per year than Option 1. Therefore, Option 2 should be selected.

Explanation:

Note: See the attached excel file for the calculation of the total present values (in bold red color) of the two alternatives for expanding international export capacity.

Present worth can be described as an equivalence method of analysis in which the cash flows of an investment or a project are discounted to a single present value.

From the attached excel file, we have:

Total present value of Option 1 = – $1,620,094

Total present value of Option 2 = – $1,453,892

Since the total present value of Option 2 of – $1,453,892 is lower than the total present value of Option 1 of – $1,620,094, it implies that Option 2 costs less and more attractive at the company’s MARR of 20% per year than Option 1. Therefore, Option 2 should be selected.

Download xlsx