Replacement Decision Models

1. Replacement Decision Models (c) 2001 Contemporary Engineering Economics

2. Required Assumptions and Decision Frameworks • Planning horizon (study period) • Technology • Relevant cash flow information • Decision Frameworks (c) 2001 Contemporary Engineering Economics

3. Replacement Strategies under the Infinite Planning Horizon • Replace the defender now: The cash flows of the challenger will be used from today and will be repeated because an identical challenger will be used if replacement becomes necessary again in the future. This stream of cash flows is equivalent to a cash flow of AEC* each year for an infinite number of years. • Replace the defender, say, x years later: The cash flows of the defender will be used in the first x years. Starting in year x+1,the cash flows of the challenger will be used indefinitely. (c) 2001 Contemporary Engineering Economics

4. Example 11.5 Replacement Analysis under the Infinite Planning Horizon • Step 1:Find the remaining useful (economic) service life of the defender. (c) 2001 Contemporary Engineering Economics

5. Step 2: find the economic service life of the challenger. N = 1 year: AE(15%) = $7,500 N = 2 years: AE(15%) = $6,151 N = 3 years: AE(15%) = $5,847 N = 4 years: AE(15%) = $5,826 N = 5 years: AE(15%) = $5,897 NC*=4 years AEC*=$5,826 (c) 2001 Contemporary Engineering Economics

6. Step 3: Replacement Decisions NC*=4 years AEC*=$5,826 • Should we replace the defender now?No, because AED < AEC • If not, when is the best time to replace the defender? Need to conduct a marginal analysis. (c) 2001 Contemporary Engineering Economics

7. Marginal Analysis – When to Replace the Defender • Question: What is the additional (incremental) cost for keeping the defender one more year from the end of its economic service life, from Year 2 to Year 3? • Financial Data: • Opportunity cost at the end of year 2: $3,000 (market value of the defender at the end year 2) • Operating cost for the 3rd year: $5,000 • Salvage value of the defender at the end of year 3: $2,000 (c) 2001 Contemporary Engineering Economics

8. $2000 2 • Step 1: Calculate the equivalent cost of retaining the defender one more from the end of its economic service life, say 2 to 3. $3,000(F/P,15%,1) + $5,000 - $2,000 = $6,450 • Step 2: Compare this cost with AEC = $5,826 of the challenger. • Conclusion: Since keeping the defender for the 3rd year is more expensive than replacing it with the challenger, DO NOT keep the defender beyond its economic service life. 3 $3000 $5000 2 3 $6,450 (c) 2001 Contemporary Engineering Economics

9. Replacement Analysis with Tax Consideration • Whenever possible, replacement decisions should be based on the cash flows after taxes. • When computing the net proceeds from sale of the old asset, any gains or losses must be identified to determine the correct amount of the opportunity cost. • All basic replacement decision rules including the way of computing economic service life remain unchanged. (c) 2001 Contemporary Engineering Economics

10. Cost basis $20,000 $20,000 Total depreciation Book value $14,693 $5307 Book loss Market value $10,000 $4693 Loss tax credit Market value $10,000 Net proceeds from disposal ($11,877) $0 $4000 $8000 $12,000 $16,000 $20,000 Determining the Opportunity Cost with Tax Consideration (c) 2001 Contemporary Engineering Economics

11. Example 11.6 Replacement Analysis under an Infinite Planning Horizon • Economic service life calculation with tax consideration for Defender (Table 11.1) • Economic service life calculation with tax consideration for Challenger (Table 11.2) • Replacement Decision under the Infinite Planning Horizon (c) 2001 Contemporary Engineering Economics

12. (c) 2001 Contemporary Engineering Economics

13. (c) 2001 Contemporary Engineering Economics

14. (c) 2001 Contemporary Engineering Economics

15. (c) 2001 Contemporary Engineering Economics

16. (c) 2001 Contemporary Engineering Economics

17. When to Replace the Defender? (c) 2001 Contemporary Engineering Economics

18. Summary • In replacement analysis, the defenderis an existing asset; the challenger is the best available replacement candidate. • The current market value is the value to use in preparing a defender’s economic analysis. Sunk costs—past costs that cannot be changed by any future investment decision—should not be considered in a defender’s economic analysis. (c) 2001 Contemporary Engineering Economics

19. Two basic approaches to analyzing replacement problems are the cash flow approach and the opportunity cost approach. • The cash flow approach explicitly considers the actual cash flow consequences for each replacement alternative as they occur. • The opportunity cost approach views the net proceeds from sale of the defender as an opportunity cost of keeping the defender. (c) 2001 Contemporary Engineering Economics

20. Economic service life is the remaining useful life of a defender, or a challenger, that results in the minimum equivalent annual cost or maximum annual equivalent revenue of owning and operating the asset. • We should use the respective economic service lives of the defender and the challenger when conducting a replacement analysis. • Ultimately, in replacement analysis, the question is not whether to replace the defender, but when to do so. • The AE method provides a marginal basis on which to make a year-by-year decision about the best time to replace the defender. • As a general decision criterion, the PW method provides a more direct solution to a variety of replacement problems, with either an infinite or a finite planning horizon, or a technological change in a future challenger. (c) 2001 Contemporary Engineering Economics

21. The role of technological change in asset improvement should be weighed in making long-term replacement plans • Whenever possible, all replacement decisions should be based on the cash flows after taxes. (c) 2001 Contemporary Engineering Economics