Assume there are two possible rent contracts:
Contract 1: Deposit US$150,000. No rent and get back US$150,000 after two years.
Contract 2: Deposit US$10,000. Rent of US$12,000 per year. Get back US$10,000 after two years.
If my discount factor is 1% then contact 1’s NPV > contract 2’s NPV. If my discount factor is 10% then the inverse would be true.
The solutions says that c.8.2% is the breakeven point where both contracts would be equal.
However, assume my discount factor was say 4%. Under the standard calculation, contract 1 would have the following cash flows:
T0: (150,000) T1: 0 T2: (150,000)/((1.04)^2)
This would give an NPV of (11,317).
Contract 2 would have the following cash flows:
T0: (10,000) T1: (12,000)/((1.04)^1) T2: (2000)/(1.04)^2
This gives an NPV of (23,387.57)
BUT
Contract 2 has the added advantage of me having to spend US$140,000 less at the outset. That US$140,000 has the advantage of giving me cash flows of US$5,600 (US$140,000(0.04))(1.04) in the first year (the first year figure would also earn that 4%) and US$5,600 (The amount earned in the second year).
Shouldn’t these cash flows also be added to contract 2 above thus making the solution (breakeven point of 8.2%) wrong?
Repellendus sed consequuntur omnis neque debitis dolore repudiandae voluptas. Inventore quisquam harum est ex. Quae illo omnis fugit facilis omnis placeat corporis. Ut ipsa possimus nostrum. Ab animi exercitationem autem. Ut quod aut a voluptas necessitatibus consectetur vitae.
Voluptates voluptas aut commodi qui quasi. Quod exercitationem tempora maxime culpa ut modi. Possimus magnam optio tempore explicabo illum. Fuga alias reprehenderit ipsa vitae. Quia assumenda placeat non corporis mollitia adipisci.
See All Comments - 100% Free
WSO depends on everyone being able to pitch in when they know something. Unlock with your email and get bonus: 6 financial modeling lessons free ($199 value)
or Unlock with your social account...