CORPORATION
CHEMICAL
Executive Summary
Dixon, an American specialty chemical producer, wants to buy Collinsville plant from
American Chemical Corporation, another typical chemical company in 1979. Dixon wants
to diversify its product line buy acquiring the aforesaid plant, which produces sodiumchlorate to supply to paper producers in Southeastern part of the US. This plant initially
cost USD 12 million and additional USD 2.25 million needed to buy laminate technology
to increase efficiency and profitability of the plant in order.
Dixon has conducted thorough marketing research for the industry providing cash flow
analysis on purchase of the plant. The cash flow analysis based with and without laminate
technology cases, where the company should decide whether it should go on further to buy
that plant and technology.
Calculating of WACC
2.1 Assumptions for calculations in the case:
Plant life is 10 years (p.4)
Salvage value of plant is 0 (p.4)
Book value of plant at end of 1979 is 10.6 million (=12 million purchase price- 1.4 million
working capital)
Tax rate is 48% (calculated from Exhibit 7)
For the period from 1980 to 1984: all data of sales, depreciation and manufacturing and
other costs are given in the case (Exhibit 8)
For the period from 1984 to 1989 we use the below assumption:
Price growth rate is 8% (p.4)
Power cost growth rate is 12% (p.4)
Net working capital is always 9% of sales (Exhibit 8, current asset and liability items
remain historical to sales)
PPE and depreciation are based on historical data in 1980-1984 period (Exhibit8)
Capital investment are based on historical data in 1980-1984 period (Exhibit 8)
Variable and fixed costs: we use 4-year average growth rates calculated based on Exhibit 8.
So non-power variable cost growth rate is 11%, fixed cost growth rate is 6%, selling
expenses growth rate is 7% and R&D expenses growth rate is at5%
- To use this 4-year average growth rates, we assume that the scale of operations of this
plant is constant so we need to adjust such cost growths to account for inflation. If the scale
increases we should consider growths in costs on percentage of sale basis.
Cost of capital:
a. Calculate beta of sodium chlorate:
The of Dixon is 1.06 (Exhibit 7). This beta may be irrelevant to the project to buy
Collinsville plant because Dixon produces specialty chemical products but never produce
sodium chlorate. The systematic risk of the project could be the risk of the production of
sodium chlorate in the industry. Therefore, we calculate beta of the project based on the
beta of the sodium chlorate industry.
We do not simply use the beta of Brunswick and Southern, 2 firms purely produce sodium
chlorate, because they are small in the industry and their stocks might not be traded largely
on the market. Hence, we decide to calculate the beta of all firms that produce sodium
chlorate to see the trend of beta of all firms in the market since we believe that such trend
can be a benchmark for calculating the beta of sodium chlorate for Dixons project.
The average beta is calculated from the formula: asset = equity / [1+ (1-t)*D/E], where
D is debt, E is equity and t is tax rate. To simplify the calculation, we assume that all these
firms have tax rate at 48% and debt is zero. The detailed calculation is provided in the
Appendix 1. From the table, we notice that the betas of 3 diversified chemical producers
American Chemical, Kerr-McGee and Int. Minerals and Chemicals (Ga is a paper company
and Pennwalt is a large diversified chemical producer) is less than the market beta (1.00).
We also observe that the two pure play firms (last 2 rows) have higher beta than the market
beta. Thus, sodium chlorate may have higher beta than other chemical products. Because
sodium chlorate is totally new to Dixon, we assume that Dixon plays the role of a pure
sodium chlorate producer and consider the average of the beta of Brunswick and Southern
as the beta for Dixon in this project. This beta is =1.09. The beta 1.09 seems more
reasonable as Dixon may have more risk to take the project than other companies who
already produce this product for a long time.
Now, Dixon needs to re-lever this beta by using its own target capital structure (35%, p.4).
The formula for re-levered beta is: levered equity = asset * [1+ (1-t)*D/E] = 1.09*[1+
(1-0.48) *0.35/0.65] = 1.40.
Recommendations
Based on our analysis, we would like to make recommendations as follows:
Most fundamentally, a firm that is operating in the interests of its shareholders should try to
accept all projects that increase the wealth of the shareholders. In case of Collinsville, we
use NPV to approach to our recommendations.
Based on our calculation, without the laminate addition, the NPV of Collinsville turns out
to be negative (-3,703 thousand USD). Under this circumstance, we recommend not to
invest in this project since it is against shareholders interests.
But at the same time new Laminate Technology would allow company to considerably cut
power cost and completely eliminate graphite costs. Additional USD 2.25 million is needed
to install this new technology. We consider this technology as a subproject attached to
Collinsville and calculate its NPV. The NPV of this new technology is USD 6,634
thousand. That means, by using laminate technology, NPV of Collinsville will change to
USD 2,931 thousand. Under this new circumstance, our recommendation is to invest in
Collinsville because it will not only increase the wealth of the shareholders, but also
complement its strategy of supplying chemicals products to the paper and pulp industry.