In: Finance
Sri Lanka |
Malaysia |
|
Initial investment ($’000,000) |
250 |
500 |
Land lease (years) |
10 |
15 |
Payback period (years) |
7 | 11 |
IRR% |
15% |
16.25% |
WACC | 15% | 15% |
Evaluation of the two proposals: |
Financial factors |
$ amt. of Investment is high for Malaysia |
In case of SriLanka , the initial investment is recovered by 7 years ,but the same takes 10 yrs. For Malaysia. Both pays back within the lease period |
Malaysian proposal scores over SriLanka's as its IRR 16.25% >WACC 15% |
Non-financial factors : |
SriLanka's economy & its people thrive on tea plantation-business , |
so may be a good option where quality tea-leaves as well as both quality and cheap labor availability is possible. |
But the country's political climate will be the major deciding factor , with too much of internal strifes, which will categorise this as a high-risk investment. |
For that , there is not much of an incentive in the form of IRR , |
but for the fact that the initial investment is half of that required for Malaysia. |
But as far as Malaysia is concerned, adequate quantum of physical labor will not be available, as here, the tea does not form much part of the whole agricultural produce. |
As a result, quality will also be less than that of SriLanka and the wages also high, in the event of the Malaysian government having raised the minimum wages. |
But the wage part might be taken care of by the increased IRR |
provided Tea Life is prepared to spend twice the amount of initially , with respect to this investment. |
Taking into consideration , all the above financial & non-financial factors |
Malaysia seems to be of low-risk category , fetching a better IRR , not only when compared to that of SriLanka but also the WACC of 15% |