How Buy Now and Pay Later (BNPL) Works in the Retail Industry?
The retail industry has been constantly innovating in order to become financially more viable. There are several innovations which have been introduced in the retail industry. However, very few innovations have been as effective as the Buy Now Pay Later (BNPL). The use of Buy Now Pay Later (BNPL) payments has been increasing over the […]
Price to Cash Flow Ratio – Meaning, Formula and Interpretation
“Cash is King” say the bigwigs on Wall Street. That is why the valuation of shares is done on the basis of discounted cash flow model rather than discounted earnings model. The price to cash flow ratio provides an analyst with a shortcut for finding companies that have been undervalued in comparison to their cash […]
Pros and Cons of Financial Fair Play Rules
In the previous article, we have already seen how certain football clubs in Europe have been using their money power in order to muscle their way to the top of the league. Hence, in order to prevent this, certain organizations such as EUFA have created certain financial fair play rules. The aim of these rules […]
Financial and Economic Models used in the Equity and Currency Markets
We often read about how electronic and software based trading is the norm in stock or equity markets as well as currency and other financial markets. Indeed, anyone who is remotely connected with the stock market or for that matter any financial market would know that there are trading systems and trading software that help […]
Home Country Bias
The activities of most investors have historically been limited to their home country. This is largely because earlier, there were rules which made the transfer of capital between countries an arduous process. Not only was the process complex, but it also took a lot of time and was riddled with transaction costs. This is the […]
In the previous articles we have seen how we can convert a possible future stream of cash flows to its present value today to make investment decisions. We choose amongst competing projects and the one with the highest NPV is usually selected. But sometimes this may not be the appropriate thing to do.
Example:
Consider the fact that the firm has to choose between two types of software to run its day to day operations. Now both these software are identical in the sense that they do the same job in pretty much the same manner. However, their costs are different and so is the duration of their licenses.
Software A costs $20,000 upfront, has a life of 4 years and the company will have to pay $2,500 as annual maintenance charge to the vendor. Software B, on the other hand costs $10,000 upfront requires an annual maintenance charge of $3000 for 3 years which is the duration of its license. Now, how does the company make a financially prudent decision and choose the more cost effective software.
The Problem:
Under normal circumstances, this would have been a pretty straightforward decision. The NPV of both the software could have been computed. Since we are talking about costs and not revenues, we would have selected the one with the lowest NPV. But there is a slight problem. The life of both the software is different. One will have to be renewed after 4 years while the other will have to be renewed after 3 years. So, the value of a future cash flow is contingent upon the decision that we make now. So, just looking at the NPV will be making a decision with incomplete information! The bottom line is that since the life of both these software is different, we can’t really decide amongst them on the basis of NPV alone.
Here we have the concept of equivalent annual costs to the rescue. The approach to the problem is simple if we look at it from this point of view. We now have lump sum NPV’s which can be derived from the costs that have been stated above.
Assuming a discount rate of 10%, the NPV of software A and software B is $25,386 and $15,873 respectively. Our common sense approach would tell us to chose software B because of its lower NPV, but we just discussed why that would not be a wise choice because the duration of their licenses is different.
So, instead we start to view them as if we have taken these software on rent. This means that we will convert the NPV for software A into an annuity for 4 years, whereas that of software B for 3 years. By doing so, we will be able to bring both the costs down to an annual level. It is like choosing between software A or software B on the basis of which has the lowest annual rental payment. This nullifies the fact that they have different license durations.
Now, if we consider the present value of software A as $25,387, assume a 10% discount rate, the annual cost would be $8,008 for a period of 4 years.
Similarly, the present value of software B is $15,873, assuming the same 10% discount rate, the annual cost of software B would be $6,382 for a period of 3 years.
Since, the costs are annual, the number of years really do not matter. We are therefore facing a choice between an annual rent of $8,008 and $6,382. $6,382 is the lower rent and therefore software B is a more financially prudent choice.
Now, just to clarify, we are not taking the software on rent. We are buying it outright. The assumption regarding renting out the software was a metaphor to ensure that the concept of equivalent annual costs becomes easier to understand.
Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *
