Dixon Case

Dixon Case - xon Case v 2010 der Ter ra Collett e Natalia...

Info iconThis preview shows pages 1–3. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full DocumentRight Arrow Icon
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

Unformatted text preview: xon Case v 2010 der Ter ra Collett e Natalia Mar tinez Er ic Schneck S 401 1. The WACC for the Collinsville plant is 16.55% (See Exhibit 1) 2. The NPV for the Collinsville Plant without the laminate is (2,210). (See Exhibit 2) 1. The NPV for Collinsville Plant with the laminate technology is 3,307 (See Exhibit 3) 2. The Collinsville Plant is not attractive without the laminate technology. A negative NPV means the plant will not produce enough return to make it worth acquiring. However, by implementing the laminate technology the NPV will be positive which means that acquiring the plant is an attractive deal. You will take the Plant NPV and add the Laminate NPV to give you a total of $1,096. The plant with the laminate technology will yield just over a million dollars assuming the plant is closed down at the end of 1989. If this plant stays open longer than that we expect the returns for the plant to be greater in the end....
View Full Document

This note was uploaded on 03/23/2011 for the course BUS M 401 taught by Professor Toddmitton during the Fall '10 term at BYU.

Page1 / 4

Dixon Case - xon Case v 2010 der Ter ra Collett e Natalia...

This preview shows document pages 1 - 3. Sign up to view the full document.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Ask a homework question - tutors are online