1 / 12

Capital Budgeting and Investment Decision

Capital Budgeting and Investment Decision. Nia Christina 16598. Article from CRP. Title : Capital Budgeting: NPV v. IRR Controversy

lavender
Download Presentation

Capital Budgeting and Investment Decision

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Capital Budgeting and Investment Decision Nia Christina 16598

  2. Article from CRP • Title : Capital Budgeting: NPV v. IRR Controversy • Theory used by the article / research: Capital Budgeting, analysis of potential additions to fixed assets, long term decisions; involved large expenditures.

  3. Hypothesis of research: • NPV/IRR method is plain mathematics and does not pretend to be ranking device; it cannot be used as such either. • Mathematics is yes indeed a tool, but economics can only then be the master if the tool is used properly and the result are interpreted correctly. • Variable use in research: investment • Method of analysis: • Net Present Value (NPV) • IRR

  4. The Result: By way of the NPV/IRR method, one can assess the conditional acceptability of one investment proposal solely, and mathematics does not pretend that it states anything meaningful with regard to the order of two (or more) investment • Conclusions: The NPV/IRR method neglects substantialism. The NPV e.q IRR fails in numerous cases in making sound capital budgeting decision. Because in fact that the NPV/IRR method meets only nominalism.

  5. Article from students • The reason: Interested, because in China and Russia the strength of relationship can affect strongly in making investment decision.

  6. Title: Network triads: transitivity. Referral and venture capital decisions in China and Russia • Theory used by the article / research: Granovetter 1973, Social network theory postulates that personal networks actors tend to be transitive: one friends’ friends are likely to become one’s friend as well.

  7. Hypothesis of research: • The stronger the tie between the referee and the venture-capitalist, the stronger the referral. • The stronger the tie between the referee and the entrepreneur, the stronger the referral. • The venture capitalist’s trust in the referee is associated positively with investment decision. • The impact of referee-venture capitalist tie on referral will be greater in China than in Russia. • The impact of referee-entrepreneur tie on referral will be greater in China than in Russia. • The impact of venture capitalist’s trust in the referee on investment decisions will be greater in China than in Russia.

  8. Variable use in research: • Independent variables • Referee-venture capitalist tie • Referee-entrepreneur tie • Venture capitalist’s trust in the referee • Dependent variables • Investment selection • Control variables • VC firm age • The entrepreneurial team scale

  9. Method of analysis: Sample and data collection • The result: • 40% of private equity firms were fully or partially state-owned. The Chinese and Russian venture capitalists appeared to be experienced. • Two samples (china-Russia) significantly differ from each other in several variables. For example: Third-party referrals are stronger in Russia. However, the referee-venture capitalist tie is stronger in China. • The effect of dyadic ties on referral are significant and stable.

  10. Cont’d • VC firm size, IT industry, state ownership, entrepreneurial team, and growth potential have significant and positive effect on investment decisions. Hypothesis 3: supported • Reveal that the effect of the predictor variable on the outcome variables are significant and positive, and the regression coefficients are the same in two countries. Hypothesis 4: not confirmed. Reveal that the effects of referee-entrepreneur tie are statically not significant in both Beijing and Moscow. Hypothesis 5: rejected. • Reveals that trust of referee has no impact on investment decisions in China. In contrast other model shows that venture capitalist’s trust in the referee has significant positive effect on the investment decision of Russian venture capitalists. Hypothesis 6: not supported.

  11. Conclusions: • An empirical proof of the hitherto untested postulated of social network theory that transitivity is a function of tie strength and interpersonal trust. • Triads are transitive or not depends on the referee-investor relationship, referee-entrepreneur ties and trust in the third party. • The effects of dyadic ties and interpersonal trust on referral and investment decisions seems to be universal rather than country-or context specific, because industry factors have dominant effects on these outcomes variables. • Interpersonal trust has greater effect on dependent variable in Russia.

  12. Thank You

More Related