Credible Warning or False Alarm? What the US Knew on September 10th, 2001 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 Credible Warning or False Alarm? What the US Knew on September 10th, 2001 case study

At Oak Spring University, we provide corporate level professional Net Present Value (NPV) case study solution. Credible Warning or False Alarm? What the US Knew on September 10th, 2001 case study is a Harvard Business School (HBR) case study written by Kirsten Lundberg, Ernest May. The Credible Warning or False Alarm? What the US Knew on September 10th, 2001 (referred as “Qaeda Fbi” from here on) case study provides evaluation & decision scenario in field of Strategy & Execution. It also touches upon business topics such as - Value proposition, Leadership, Project management, Risk management, Security & privacy, Strategic planning.

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 Credible Warning or False Alarm? What the US Knew on September 10th, 2001 Case Study

Well before the fateful morning of September 11, 2001, the threat posed to Americans and the United States by Osama bin Laden and his al Qaeda ("The Base") network of terrorists was well documented and closely monitored. Two US agencies-the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) and the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI)-each maintained units devoted to bin Laden. In 1998 and 2000, al Qaeda attacks on US targets had precipitated intensive investigations which yielded a wealth of knowledge about the terrorist operation. Those attacks also promoted increased cooperation between the FBI and CIA, which regularly exchanged personnel and information. Moreover, throughout the summer of 2001, there had been a steady drumbeat of warnings about terrorist attacks, which the US government treated with utmost seriousness. American travelers abroad, US embassies, businesses and military installations were all in a heightened state of alert. The Federal Aviation Authority issued general warnings to airlines. An FBI office reported on suspicious Middle Eastern men taking flying lessons in Phoenix; an aviation student in Minnesota was arrested. The CIA notified the FBI that two suspected al Qaeda members were in the US. This case brings together accounts of what U.S. law enforcement and intelligence agencies knew about al Qaeda before September 11, 2001 and raises the question of why that knowledge-tips, satellite pictures, intercepted communications, defector reports, courtroom testimony-did not thwart the terrorist attacks on the World Trade Center in New York and the Pentagon in Washington. It frames, in particular, the challenges of synthesizing intelligence-the difficulties involved in assembling seemingly random incidents into a coherent picture and distinguishing between credible warnings and probable false alarms. It can be used as a vehicle for discussion about intelligence-gathering per se, as well as government inter-agency and inter-departmental coordination. HKS Case Number 1662.0

Case Authors : Kirsten Lundberg, Ernest May

Topic : Strategy & Execution

Related Areas : Leadership, Project management, Risk management, Security & privacy, Strategic planning

---

Calculating Net Present Value (NPV) at 6% for Credible Warning or False Alarm? What the US Knew on September 10th, 2001 Case Study

Years	Cash Flow	Net Cash Flow	Cumulative     Cash Flow	Discount Rate @ 6 %	Discounted Cash Flows
Year 0	(10004138)	-10004138	-	-
Year 1	3455638	-6548500	3455638	0.9434	3260036
Year 2	3981524	-2566976	7437162	0.89	3543542
Year 3	3944443	1377467	11381605	0.8396	3311830
Year 4	3235488	4612955	14617093	0.7921	2562810
TOTAL			14617093		12678218

The Net Present Value at 6% discount rate is 2674080

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

---

Formula and Steps to Calculate Net Present Value (NPV) of Credible Warning or False Alarm? What the US Knew on September 10th, 2001

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 Qaeda Fbi 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 Qaeda Fbi 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	(10004138)	-10004138	-	-
Year 1	3455638	-6548500	3455638	0.8696	3004903
Year 2	3981524	-2566976	7437162	0.7561	3010604
Year 3	3944443	1377467	11381605	0.6575	2593535
Year 4	3235488	4612955	14617093	0.5718	1849901
TOTAL					10458943

The Net NPV after 4 years is 454805

(10458943 - 10004138 )

---

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	(10004138)	-10004138	-	-
Year 1	3455638	-6548500	3455638	0.8333	2879698
Year 2	3981524	-2566976	7437162	0.6944	2764947
Year 3	3944443	1377467	11381605	0.5787	2282664
Year 4	3235488	4612955	14617093	0.4823	1560324
TOTAL					9487633

The Net NPV after 4 years is -516505

At 20% discount rate the NPV is negative (9487633 - 10004138 ) so ideally we can't select the project if macro and micro factors don't allow financial managers of Qaeda Fbi 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 Qaeda Fbi has a NPV value higher than Zero then finance managers at Qaeda Fbi 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 Qaeda Fbi, then the stock price of the Qaeda Fbi 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 Qaeda Fbi 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 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.

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

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 Credible Warning or False Alarm? What the US Knew on September 10th, 2001

References & Further Readings

Kirsten Lundberg, Ernest May (2018), "Credible Warning or False Alarm? What the US Knew on September 10th, 2001 Harvard Business Review Case Study. Published by HBR Publications.