A project to build a toll road will take 3 years to complete, costing three payments of $50 million, paid at the start of each year (at times 0, 1, and 2).
After completion, the toll road will yield a constant $10 million at the end of each year forever with no costs. So the first payment will be at t=4.
The required return of the project is 10% pa given as an effective nominal rate. All cash flows are nominal.
What is the payback period?
Calculate the effective annual rates of the following three APR's:
- A credit card offering an interest rate of 18% pa, compounding monthly.
- A bond offering a yield of 6% pa, compounding semi-annually.
- An annual dividend-paying stock offering a return of 10% pa compounding annually.
All answers are given in the same order:
##r_\text{credit card, eff yrly}##, ##r_\text{bond, eff yrly}##, ##r_\text{stock, eff yrly}##
The following cash flows are expected:
- 10 yearly payments of $80, with the first payment in 3 years from now (first payment at t=3).
- 1 payment of $600 in 5 years and 6 months (t=5.5) from now.
What is the NPV of the cash flows if the discount rate is 10% given as an effective annual rate?
A wholesale store offers credit to its customers. Customers are given 60 days to pay for their goods, but if they pay immediately they will get a 1.5% discount.
What is the effective interest rate implicit in the discount being offered? Assume 365 days in a year and that all customers pay either immediately or the 60th day. All of the below answer choices are given as effective annual interest rates.
Your friend just bought a house for $1,000,000. He financed it using a $900,000 mortgage loan and a deposit of $100,000.
In the context of residential housing and mortgages, the 'equity' or 'net wealth' tied up in a house is the value of the house less the value of the mortgage loan. Assuming that your friend's only asset is his house, his net wealth is $100,000.
If house prices suddenly fall by 15%, what would be your friend's percentage change in net wealth?
Assume that:
- No income (rent) was received from the house during the short time over which house prices fell.
- Your friend will not declare bankruptcy, he will always pay off his debts.
Your firm's research scientists can begin an exciting new project at a cost of $10m now, after which there’s a:
- 70% chance that cash flows will be $1m per year forever, starting in 5 years (t=5). This is the A state of the world.
- 20% chance that cash flows will be $3m per year forever, starting in 5 years (t=5). This is the B state of the world.
- 10% chance of a major break through in which case the cash flows will be $20m per year forever starting in 5 years (t=5), or instead, the project can be expanded by investing another $10m (at t=5) which is expected to give cash flows of $60m per year forever, starting at year 9 (t=9). Note that the perpetual cash flows are either the $20m from year 4 onwards, or the $60m from year 9 onwards after the additional $10m year 5 investment, but not both. This is the C state of the world.
The firm's cost of capital is 10% pa.
What's the present value (at t=0) of the option to expand in year 5?
In Australia in the 1980's, inflation was around 8% pa, and residential mortgage loan interest rates were around 14%.
In 2013, inflation was around 2.5% pa, and residential mortgage loan interest rates were around 4.5%.
If a person can afford constant mortgage loan payments of $2,000 per month, how much more can they borrow when interest rates are 4.5% pa compared with 14.0% pa?
Give your answer as a proportional increase over the amount you could borrow when interest rates were high ##(V_\text{high rates})##, so:
###\text{Proportional increase} = \dfrac{V_\text{low rates}-V_\text{high rates}}{V_\text{high rates}} ###
Assume that:
- Interest rates are expected to be constant over the life of the loan.
- Loans are interest-only and have a life of 30 years.
- Mortgage loan payments are made every month in arrears and all interest rates are given as annualised percentage rates (APR's) compounding per month.
Question 547 PE ratio, Multiples valuation, DDM, income and capital returns, no explanation
A firm pays out all of its earnings as dividends. Because of this, the firm has no real growth in earnings, dividends or stock price since there is no re-investment back into the firm to buy new assets and make higher earnings. The dividend discount model is suitable to value this company.
The firm's revenues and costs are expected to increase by inflation in the foreseeable future. The firm has no debt. It operates in the services industry and has few physical assets so there is negligible depreciation expense and negligible net working capital required.
Which of the following statements about this firm's PE ratio is NOT correct? The PE ratio should:
Note: The inverse of x is 1/x.
A $100 stock has a continuously compounded expected total return of 10% pa. Its dividend yield is 2% pa with continuous compounding. What do you expect its price to be in 2.5 years?
Suppose the current Australian exchange rate is 0.8 USD per AUD.
If you think that the AUD will appreciate against the USD, contrary to the rest of the market, how could you profit? Right now you should: