Anda di halaman 1dari 8


Proyek Lanjut

Fakultas Magister Teknik Tatap Muka Kode MK Disusun Oleh

FT Sipil - MK MK20000 Budi Susetyo

Abstract Kompetensi
Pengertian studi kasus cashflow Memahami beberapa kasus terkait
proyek dan investasi cashflow proyek dan investasi
Studi Kasus Cashflow Proyek & Investasi


Anggaran investasi proyek (capital

( budgeting)) lebih luas ruang lingkupnya dibandingkan
anggaran proyek konstruksi (construction
( project budgeting). Bagi investor, aanggaran
proyek konstruksi hanya merupakan sebagian dari anggaran investasi suatu proyek.

Bahan bacaan keterkaitan antara anggaran investasi proyek dengan anggaran proyek
konstruksi diperlihatkan pada uraian berikut ini. Diperlihatkan aliran kas ((cahflow)
pembiayaan proyek dengan menggunakan pinjaman (bond).
( Berbagai permasalahan juga
akan berdampak pada aliran kas proyek konstruksi, seperti sengketa perburuhan, sert
pembayaran yang terlambat.

Penjelasan lebih rinci disertai contoh diuraikan berikut ini.

2016 Manajemen Proyek Lanjut

2 Budi Susetyo
Pusat Bahan Ajar dan eLearning
Financing of Constructed Facilities

1. Project versus Corporate Finance

We have focused so far on problems and concerns at the project level. While this is the
appropriate viewpoint for project managers, it is always worth bearing in mind that
projects must fit into broader organizational decisions and structures. This is part
true for the problem of project finance, since it is often the case that financing is planned
on a corporate or agency level, rather than a project level. Accordingly, project managers
should be aware of the concerns at this level of decision making.

A construction project is only a portion of the general capital budgeting problem faced by
an owner. Unless the project is very large in scope relative to the owner, a particular
construction project is only a small portion of the capital budgeting pr
problem. Numerous
construction projects may be lumped together as a single category in the allocation of
investment funds. Construction projects would compete for attention with equipment
purchases or other investments in a private corporation.

Financing is usually performed at the corporate level using a mixture of long term
corporate debt and retained earnings. A typical set of corporate debt instruments would
include the different bonds and notes discussed in this chapter. Variations would typically
de different maturity dates, different levels of security interests, different currency
denominations, and, of course, different interest rates.

Grouping projects together for financing influences the type of financing that might be
obtained. As noted earlier,
lier, small and large projects usually involve different institutional
arrangements and financing arrangements. For small projects, the fixed costs of
undertaking particular kinds of financing may be prohibitively expensive. For example,
municipal bonds require
quire fixed costs associated with printing and preparation that do not
vary significantly with the size of the issue. By combining numerous small construction
projects, different financing arrangements become more practical.

While individual projects may not be considered at the corporate finance level, the
problems and analysis procedures described earlier are directly relevant to financial
planning for groups of projects and other investments. Thus, the net present values of
different financing arrangements
arrangements can be computed and compared. Since the net present
values of different sub-sets
sets of either investments or financing alternatives are additive,
each project or finance alternative can be disaggregated for closer attention or aggregated
to provide information
ation at a higher decision making level.

Example 1 : Basic types of repayment schedules for loans.

Coupon bonds are used to obtain loans which involve no payment of principal until the
maturity date. By combining loans of different maturities, however, it is possible to

2016 Manajemen Proyek Lanjut

3 Budi Susetyo
Pusat Bahan Ajar dan eLearning
achieve almost any pattern of principal repayments. However, the interest rates charged
on loans of different maturities will reflect market forces such as forecasts of how interest
rates will vary over time. As an example, Table 1. illustratestrates the cash flows of debt
service for a series of coupon bonds used to fund a municipal construction project; for
simplicity not all years of payments are shown in the table.

In this financing plan, a series of coupon bonds were sold with maturity datdates ranging
from June 1988 to June 2012. Coupon interest payments on all outstanding bonds were to
be paid every six months, on December 1 and June 1 of each year. The interest rate or
"coupon rate" was larger on bonds with longer maturities, reflecting an assumption that
inflation would increase during this period. The total principal obtained for construction
was $26,250,000 from sale of these bonds. This amount represented the gross sale amount
before subtracting issuing costs or any sales discounts; the amount available to support
construction would be lower. The maturity dates for bonds were selected to require
relative high repayment amounts until December 1995, with a declining repayment
amount subsequently. By shifting the maturity dates and amounts ofof bonds, this pattern of
repayments could be altered. The initial interest payment (of $819,760 on December 1,
1987), reflected a payment for only a portion of a six month period since the bonds were
issued in late June of 1987.

TABLE 1. Illustration of a Twenty-five

Twenty five Year Maturity Schedule for Bonds

Date Maturing Principal Corresponding Interest Rate Interest Due Annual Debt Service

Dec. 1, 1987 $819,760 $819,760

June 1, 1988 $1,350,000 5.00% 894,429
Dec. 1, 1988 860,540 3,104,969
June 1, 1989 1,450,000 5.25 860,540
Dec. 1, 1989 822,480 3,133,020
June 1, 1990 1,550,000 5.50 822,480
Dec. 1, 1990 779,850 3,152,330
June 1, 1991 1,600,000 5.80 779,850
Dec. 1, 1991 733,450 3,113,300
June 1, 1992 1,700,000 6.00 733,450
Dec. 1, 1992 682,450 3,115,900
June 1, 1993 1,800,000 6.20 682,450
Dec. 1, 1993 626,650 3,109,100
. . . . .
. . . . .
. . . . .
June 1, 2011 880,000 8.00 68,000
Dec. 1, 2011 36,000 984,000
June 1, 2012 96,000 8.00 36,000
Dec. 1, 2012 996,000

2016 Manajemen Proyek Lanjut

4 Budi Susetyo
Pusat Bahan Ajar dan eLearning
2. Shifting Financial Burdens

The different participants in the construction process have quite distinct perspectives on
financing. In the realm of project finance, the revenues to one participant represent an
expenditure to some other participant. Payment delays
delays from one participant result in a
financial burden and a cash flow problem to other participants. It is common occurrence
in construction to reduce financing costs by delaying payments in just this fashion.
Shifting payment times does not eliminate financing
financing costs, however, since the financial
burden still exists.

Traditionally, many organizations have used payment delays both to shift financing
expenses to others or to overcome momentary shortfalls in financial resources. From the
owner's perspective,, this policy may have short term benefits, but it certainly has long
term costs. Since contractors do not have large capital assets, they typically do not have
large amounts of credit available to cover payment delays. Contractors are also perceived
as credit
edit risks in many cases, so loans often require a premium interest charge.
Contractors faced with large financing problems are likely to add premiums to bids or not
bid at all on particular work. For example, A. Maevis noted:

...there were days in New York

York City when city agencies had trouble attracting bidders; yet
contractors were beating on the door to get work from Consolidated Edison, the local
utility. Why? First, the city was a notoriously slow payer, COs (change orders) years
behind, decision process
ss chaotic, and payments made 60 days after close of estimate. Con
Edison paid on the 20th of the month for work done to the first of the month. Change
orders negotiated and paid within 30 days-60
days 60 days. If a decision was needed, it came in
10 days. The number ber of bids you receive on your projects are one measure of your
administrative efficiency. Further, competition is bound to give you the lowest possible
construction price.

Even after bids are received and contracts signed, delays in payments may form th
the basis
for a successful claim against an agency on the part of the contractor.

The owner of a constructed facility usually has a better credit rating and can secure loans
at a lower borrowing rate, but there are some notable exceptions to this rule, particularly
for construction projects in developing countries. Under certain circumscircumstances, it is
advisable for the owner to advance periodic payments to the contractor in return for some
concession in the contract price. This is particularly true for large
large-scale construction
projects with long durations for which financing costs and capital
capital requirements are high.
If the owner is willing to advance these amounts to the contractor, the gain in lower
financing costs can be shared by both parties through prior agreement.

Unfortunately, the choice of financing during the construction period iis often left to the
contractor who cannot take advantage of all available options alone. The owner is often
shielded from participation through the traditional method of price quotation for
construction contracts. This practice merely exacerbates the problem
problem by excluding the
owner from participating in decisions which may reduce the cost of the project.

Under conditions of economic uncertainty, a premium to hedge the risk must be added to
the estimation of construction cost by both the owner and the contractor.
contractor. The larger and
longer the project is, the greater is the risk. For an unsophisticated owner who tries to

2016 Manajemen Proyek Lanjut

5 Budi Susetyo
Pusat Bahan Ajar dan eLearning
avoid all risks and to place the financing burdens of construction on the contractor, the
contract prices for construction facilities are likely to be increased to reflect the risk
premium charged by the contractors. In dealing with small projects with short durations,
this practice may be acceptable particularly when the owner lacks any expertise to
evaluate the project financing alternatives or the
the financial stability to adopt innovative
financing schemes. However, for large scale projects of long duration, the owner cannot
escape the responsibility of participation if it wants to avoid catastrophes of runrun-away
costs and expensive litigation. The construction of nuclear power plants in the private
sector and the construction of transportation facilities in the public sector offer ample
examples of such problems. If the responsibilities of risk sharing among various parties in
a construction project can be clearly defined in the planning stage, all parties can be
benefited to take advantage of cost saving and early use of the constructed facility.

Example 2 : Effects of payment delays

Table 2. shows an example of the effects of payment timing on the the general contractor and
subcontractors. The total contract price for this project is $5,100,000 with scheduled
payments from the owner shown in Column 2. The general contractor's expenses in each
period over the lifetime of the project are given in Column
Column 3 while the subcontractor's
expenses are shown in Column 4. If the general contractor must pay the subcontractor's
expenses as well as its own at the end of each period, the net cash flow of the general
contractor is obtained in Column 5, and its cumulative
cumulative cash flow in Column 6.

TABLE 2. An Example of the Effects of Payment Timing

General General
Owner Contractor's Subcontractor's Contractor's Cumulative
Period Payments Expenses Expenses Net Cash Flow Cash Flow

1 --- $100,000 $900,000 - $1,000,000 - $1,000,000

2 $950,000 100,000 900,000 - 50,000 - 1,050,000
3 950,000 100,000 900,000 - 50,000 - 1,100,000
4 950,000 100,000 900,000 - 50,000 - 1,150,000
5 950,000 100,000 900,000 - 50,000 - 1,200,000
6 1,300,000 - - 1,300,000 100,000
Total $5,100,000 $500,000 $4,500,000 $100,000

Note: Cumulative cash flow includes no financing charges.

2016 Manajemen Proyek Lanjut

6 Budi Susetyo
Pusat Bahan Ajar dan eLearning
In this example, the owner withholds a five percent retainage on cost as well as a payment
of $100,000 until the completion of the project. This $100,000 is equal to the expected
gross profit of the contractor without considering financing costs or cash fl flow
discounting. Processing time and contractual agreements with the owner result in a delay
of one period in receiving payments. The actual construction expenses from the viewpoint
of the general contractor consist of $100,000 in each construction period pplus payments
due to subcontractors of $900,000 in each period. While the net cash flow without regard
to discounting or financing is equal to a $100,000 profit for the general contractor,
financial costs are likely to be substantial. With immediate payment to subcontractors,
over $1,000,000 must be financed by the contractor throughout the duration of the
project. If the general contractor uses borrowing to finance its expenses, a maximum
borrowing amount of $1,200,000 in period five is required even withou without considering
intermediate interest charges. Financing this amount is likely to be quite expensive and
may easily exceed the expected project profit.

By delaying payments to subcontractors, the general contractor can substantially reduce

its financing requirement.
uirement. For example, Table 3. shows the resulting cash flows from
delaying payments to subcontractors for one period and for two periods, respectively.
With a one period delay, a maximum amount of $300,000 (plus intermediate interest
charges) would have to be financed by the general contractor. That is, from the data in
Table 2,, the net cash flow in period 1 is -$100,000,
$100,000, and the net cash flow for each of the
periods 2 through 5 is given by:

$950,000 - $100,000 - $900,000 = -$ 50,000

Finally, the net cash flow for period 6 is:

$1,300,000 - $900,000 = $400,000

Thus, the cumulative net cash flow from periods 1 through 5 as shown in Column 2 of
Table 3. results in maximum shortfall of $300,000 in period 5 in Column 3. For the case
of a two period payment delay to the subcontractors, the general contractor even runs a
positive balance during construction as shown in Column 5. The positive balance results
from the receipt of owner payments prior to reimbursing the subcontractor's expenses.
This positive balance can be placed in an interest bearing account to earn additional
revenues for the general contractor. Needless to say, however, these payment delays mean
extra costs and financing problems to the subcontractors. With a two period dela delay in
payments from the general contractor, the subcontractors have an unpaid balance of
$1,800,000, which would represent a considerable financial cost.

2016 Manajemen Proyek Lanjut

7 Budi Susetyo
Pusat Bahan Ajar dan eLearning
TABLE 3. An Example of the Cash Flow Effects of Delayed Payments

One Period Payment Delay Two Period Payment Delay

Period Net Cash Flow Cumulative Cash Flow Net Cash Flow Cumulative Cash Flow

1 - $100,000 - $100,000 - $100,000 - $100,000

2 - 50,000 - 150,000 850,000 750,000
3 - 50,000 - 200,000 - 50,000 700,000
4 - 50,000 - 250,000 - 50,000 650,000
5 - 50,000 - 300,000 - 50,000 600,000
6 400,000 100,000 400,000 1,000,000
7 - 900,000 100,000

Ref. Hendrikcson, Project Management for Construction,

Construction Web
eb version, 2003

2016 Manajemen Proyek Lanjut

8 Budi Susetyo
Pusat Bahan Ajar dan eLearning