Competing Visions of Stork: The Role of Active Investors Net Present Value (NPV) / MBA Resources

Introduction to Net Present Value (NPV) - What is Net Present Value (NPV) ? How it impacts financial decisions regarding project management?

NPV solution for Competing Visions of Stork: The Role of Active Investors case study

At Oak Spring University, we provide corporate level professional Net Present Value (NPV) case study solution. Competing Visions of Stork: The Role of Active Investors case study is a Harvard Business School (HBR) case study written by Philippe Haspeslagh, Justin Brodie-Smith. The Competing Visions of Stork: The Role of Active Investors (referred as “Stork Supervisory” from here on) case study provides evaluation & decision scenario in field of Strategy & Execution. It also touches upon business topics such as - Value proposition, .

The net present value (NPV) of an investment proposal is the present value of the proposal’s net cash flows less the proposal’s initial cash outflow. If a project’s NPV is greater than or equal to zero, the project should be accepted.

NPV = Present Value of Future Cash Flows LESS Project’s Initial Investment

---

Case Description of Competing Visions of Stork: The Role of Active Investors Case Study

The case discusses a conflict over strategy between the Management and Supervisory Board of Stork, a Dutch diversified company active in Aerospace, Food Systems, Technical Services and Prints, and two hedge funds, Centaurus and Paulson, which since 2004 have build a sizeable stake in the company. When an announced delisting and sale to private equity buyers fails , and management announces it intention to stick to a diversified strategy, the hedge funds decide to press the issue of a focus on aerospace. In October 2006 the hedge funds succeed in getting a majority at the AGM for their proposal to focus the company on aerospace. Nevertheless management, supported by its Supervisory Board, continues to consider such a strategy as too risky, and the vote as non-binding. In what had become one of the bitterest disputes of corporate governance in Dutch history, the Entreprise Chamber of the Court of Amsterdam takes the unprecedented step to appoint three "wise men" to the Supervisory Board of Stork, with a deciding vote in matters of strategy. In the meantime, Marel, an Icelandic Food machinery company has also build up a sizeable stake, hoping to be able to improve its chances of buying the Food Systems Division of Stork.

Case Authors : Philippe Haspeslagh, Justin Brodie-Smith

Topic : Strategy & Execution

Related Areas :

---

Calculating Net Present Value (NPV) at 6% for Competing Visions of Stork: The Role of Active Investors Case Study

Years	Cash Flow	Net Cash Flow	Cumulative     Cash Flow	Discount Rate @ 6 %	Discounted Cash Flows
Year 0	(10025094)	-10025094	-	-
Year 1	3467022	-6558072	3467022	0.9434	3270775
Year 2	3954173	-2603899	7421195	0.89	3519200
Year 3	3959234	1355335	11380429	0.8396	3324249
Year 4	3236853	4592188	14617282	0.7921	2563891
TOTAL			14617282		12678115

The Net Present Value at 6% discount rate is 2653021

In isolation the NPV number doesn't mean much but put in right context then it is one of the best method to evaluate project returns. In this article we will cover -

Different methods of capital budgeting

What is NPV & Formula of NPV,
How it is calculated,
How to use NPV number for project evaluation, and
Scenario Planning given risks and management priorities.

---

Capital Budgeting Approaches

Methods of Capital Budgeting

There are four types of capital budgeting techniques that are widely used in the corporate world –

1. Payback Period
2. Net Present Value
3. Profitability Index
4. Internal Rate of Return

Apart from the Payback period method which is an additive method, rest of the methods are based on Discounted Cash Flow technique. Even though cash flow can be calculated based on the nature of the project, for the simplicity of the article we are assuming that all the expected cash flows are realized at the end of the year.

Discounted Cash Flow approaches provide a more objective basis for evaluating and selecting investment projects. They take into consideration both –

1. Timing of the expected cash flows – stockholders of Stork Supervisory have higher preference for cash returns over 4-5 years rather than 10-15 years given the nature of the volatility in the industry.
2. Magnitude of both incoming and outgoing cash flows – Projects can be capital intensive, time intensive, or both. Stork Supervisory shareholders have preference for diversified projects investment rather than prospective high income from a single capital intensive project.

---

Formula and Steps to Calculate Net Present Value (NPV) of Competing Visions of Stork: The Role of Active Investors

NPV = Net Cash In Flowt1 / (1+r)t1 + Net Cash In Flowt2 / (1+r)t2 + … Net Cash In Flowtn / (1+r)tn
Less Net Cash Out Flowt0 / (1+r)t0

Where t = time period, in this case year 1, year 2 and so on.
r = discount rate or return that could be earned using other safe proposition such as fixed deposit or treasury bond rate. Net Cash In Flow – What the firm will get each year.
Net Cash Out Flow – What the firm needs to invest initially in the project.

Step 1 – Understand the nature of the project and calculate cash flow for each year.
Step 2 – Discount those cash flow based on the discount rate.
Step 3 – Add all the discounted cash flow.
Step 4 – Selection of the project

Why Strategy & Execution Managers need to know Financial Tools such as Net Present Value (NPV)?

In our daily workplace we often come across people and colleagues who are just focused on their core competency and targets they have to deliver. For example marketing managers at Stork Supervisory often design programs whose objective is to drive brand awareness and customer reach. But how that 30 point increase in brand awareness or 10 point increase in customer touch points will result into shareholders’ value is not specified.

To overcome such scenarios managers at Stork Supervisory needs to not only know the financial aspect of project management but also needs to have tools to integrate them into part of the project development and monitoring plan.

Calculating Net Present Value (NPV) at 15%

After working through various assumptions we reached a conclusion that risk is far higher than 6%. In a reasonably stable industry with weak competition - 15% discount rate can be a good benchmark.

Years	Cash Flow	Net Cash Flow	Cumulative     Cash Flow	Discount Rate @ 15 %	Discounted Cash Flows
Year 0	(10025094)	-10025094	-	-
Year 1	3467022	-6558072	3467022	0.8696	3014802
Year 2	3954173	-2603899	7421195	0.7561	2989923
Year 3	3959234	1355335	11380429	0.6575	2603261
Year 4	3236853	4592188	14617282	0.5718	1850681
TOTAL					10458666

The Net NPV after 4 years is 433572

(10458666 - 10025094 )

---

Calculating Net Present Value (NPV) at 20%

If the risk component is high in the industry then we should go for a higher hurdle rate / discount rate of 20%.

Years	Cash Flow	Net Cash Flow	Cumulative     Cash Flow	Discount Rate @ 20 %	Discounted Cash Flows
Year 0	(10025094)	-10025094	-	-
Year 1	3467022	-6558072	3467022	0.8333	2889185
Year 2	3954173	-2603899	7421195	0.6944	2745953
Year 3	3959234	1355335	11380429	0.5787	2291223
Year 4	3236853	4592188	14617282	0.4823	1560982
TOTAL					9487344

The Net NPV after 4 years is -537750

At 20% discount rate the NPV is negative (9487344 - 10025094 ) so ideally we can't select the project if macro and micro factors don't allow financial managers of Stork Supervisory to discount cash flow at lower discount rates such as 15%.

Acceptance Criteria of a Project based on NPV

Simplest Approach – If the investment project of Stork Supervisory has a NPV value higher than Zero then finance managers at Stork Supervisory can ACCEPT the project, otherwise they can reject the project. This means that project will deliver higher returns over the period of time than any alternate investment strategy.

In theory if the required rate of return or discount rate is chosen correctly by finance managers at Stork Supervisory, then the stock price of the Stork Supervisory should change by same amount of the NPV. In real world we know that share price also reflects various other factors that can be related to both macro and micro environment.

In the same vein – accepting the project with zero NPV should result in stagnant share price. Finance managers use discount rates as a measure of risk components in the project execution process.

Sensitivity Analysis

Project selection is often a far more complex decision than just choosing it based on the NPV number. Finance managers at Stork Supervisory should conduct a sensitivity analysis to better understand not only the inherent risk of the projects but also how those risks can be either factored in or mitigated during the project execution. Sensitivity analysis helps in –

What can impact the cash flow of the project.

What are the uncertainties surrounding the project Initial Cash Outlay (ICO’s). ICO’s often have several different components such as land, machinery, building, and other equipment.

What will be a multi year spillover effect of various taxation regulations.

What are the key aspects of the projects that need to be monitored, refined, and retuned for continuous delivery of projected cash flows.

Understanding of risks involved in the project.

Some of the assumptions while using the Discounted Cash Flow Methods –

Projects are assumed to be Mutually Exclusive – This is seldom the came in modern day giant organizations where projects are often inter-related and rejecting a project solely based on NPV can result in sunk cost from a related project.

Independent projects have independent cash flows – As explained in the marketing project – though the project may look independent but in reality it is not as the brand awareness project can be closely associated with the spending on sales promotions and product specific advertising.

---

Negotiation Strategy of Competing Visions of Stork: The Role of Active Investors

References & Further Readings

Philippe Haspeslagh, Justin Brodie-Smith (2018), "Competing Visions of Stork: The Role of Active Investors Harvard Business Review Case Study. Published by HBR Publications.