The state of Georgia is considering the construction of a high-speed rail system to alleviate traffic congestion, especially across the Atlanta Metropolis at a cost of $45 billion. Some of the funding will come from the Deutsche Bank financial institution, while most of it will be through the issuance of state bonds, with the rest financed by private investors who will own shares in the rail system. Explain how financial intermediation is necessary to make this project a reality. Why couldn’t the state use the tax revenues it collects during the current year to pay for it?

Capital Structure and Growth
Edwards Construction currently has debt outstanding with a market value of $95,000 and a cost of 9 percent. The company has EBIT of $8,550 that is expected to continue in perpetuity. Assume there are no taxes.

a. What is the value of the company's equity? What is the debt-to-value ratio?
b. What are the equity value and debt-to-value ratio if the company's growth rate is 3 percent?
c. What are the equity value and debt-to-value ratio if the company's growth rate is 7 percent?

Show all the steps and don't round off calculations.

On January 1, 2021, the Mason Manufacturing Company began construction of a building to be used as its office headquarters. The building was completed on September 30, 2022. Expenditures on the project were as follows:

On January 1, 2021, the company obtained a $4,400,000 construction loan with a 14% interest rate. The loan was outstanding all of 2021 and 2022. The company’s other interest-bearing debt included two long-term notes of $2,000,000 and $8,000,000 with interest rates of 10% and 12%, respectively. Both notes were outstanding during all of 2021 and 2022. Interest is paid annually on all debt. The company’s fiscal year-end is December 31.

Required:
1. Calculate the amount of interest that Mason should capitalize in 2021 and 2022 using the specific interest method.
2. What is the total cost of the building?
3. Figure the amount of interest expense that will appear in the 2021 and 2022 income statements.

• Req 1 and 3
• Required the amount of interest that Mason should capitalize in 2021 and 2022 using the specific interest method and interest expense that will appear in the 2021 and 2022 income statements. (Do not round intermediate calculations.)
• Interest capitalized    2021 2022
• $ $

Interest expense $ $

Total cost of building $

) Large Mart is currently using its own engineers and equipment to build the machinery for a new factory in Armidale in which tablet computers will be produced. Last week, the director of Large Mart’s engineering department (who usually works in Sydney) travelled (by car) from Sydney to Brisbane to attend a conference. On his way to the conference he stopped in Armidale to visit the team that is building the machinery for the new factory. During his visit to Armidale he completed a tour of the construction side and gave an interview to the local newspaper about the factory’s future benefits to the Armidale economy. The director of Large Mart’s engineering department has contacted the CFO to request that the expenditure associated with his trip between Sydney and Armidale should be included in the cost of the new machinery (he argues the expenditure should be capitalised) because he believes that the cost of the his trip are directly attributable to the construction of the factory. The CFO is not sure if the travel expenditure of the director of Large Mart’s engineering department can be capitalised and has asked you to research the following points. a) Provide a detailed outline of the requirements that must be fulfilled before any expenditure associated with the machinery for the new factory can be capitalised. b) Discuss whether or not the travel costs that the director of Large Mart’s engineering department incurred for his trip between Sydney and Armidale meet the requirements that you have identified in part a of this question.

timber construction industry challenges

important of form work in construction

I try to add the table content work, they will not allow me.. see below in another post pls

One question pls i need help with this, kindly show your work as well so that i can learn. I WILL RATE IT AND LEAVE A COMMENT. THANKS

Tidal Wave is considering purchasing a water park in San Diego comma California​, for $ 1 950 000. The new facility will generate annual net cash inflows of $ 500 000 for eight years. Engineers estimate that the facility will remain useful for eight years and have no residual value. The company uses​ straight-line depreciation. Its owners want payback in less than five years and an ARR of 10​% or more. Management uses a 14​% hurdle rate on investments of this nature.

Requirement 1. Compute the payback​ period, the​ ARR, the​ NPV, and the approximate IRR of this investment.​ (If you use the tables to compute the​ IRR, answer with the closest interest rate shown in the​ tables.) ​(Round the payback period to one decimal​ place.)

​(Round the percentage to the nearest tenth​ percent.)

​(Round your answer to the nearest whole​ dollar.)

The IRR​ (internal rate of​ return) is between

▼

16% and 18%

20% and 22%

22% and 24%

18% and 20%

.

Requirement 2. Recommend whether the company should invest in this project.

​Recommendation:

▼

Do not invest in the new facility.

Invest in the new facility.

Kindly summarize this Literature Review Section 3.2 Efficient Techniques and Performance Measurement Recently, developed techniques compare the efficiency of similar service organizations by explicitly considering their use of multiple inputs to produce multiple outputs. These new efficiency techniques are often divided into two categories. One broad category consists of the linear programming procedures used in this paper (DEA). The second category is a set of regression-based techniques that derive inefficiency estimates from two-part error terms, and has been called the econometric or stochastic frontier approach. Both techniques use sample firms to construct an efficient production frontier. The frontier is efficient in the sense that a firm operating on the frontier could not increase output without increasing its input utilization, or it could not reduce its input utilization without decreasing output. Deviations from the frontier represent inefficiencies, and are termed X-inefficiencies in the finance and economics literature. Efficient frontier techniques avoid the need to develop a standard cost for each service provided and are more comprehensive and reliable that using a set of operating ratios and profit measures. These techniques permit managers and researchers to service organizations and identify units that are relatively inefficient, determine the magnitude of the inefficiency, suggest alternative strategies to reduce the inefficiencies, all in a composite measure. Moreover, these techniques provide an estimate of the overall efficiency level of the market that is under consideration. We know of only two studies that use efficient frontier techniques in the hotel industry. The first is that of Morey and Ditman (1995) who measure the relative performance of hotel general managers using DEA. The authors gathered input-output data for 54 hotels from a geographically dispersed area. They found that managers were operating 89 percent efficiency. In other words, given their output, managers on average could reduce their inputs by 11 percent. The study reported that the least efficient hotel was 64 percent efficient. These results are relatively high compared to those found in other industry studies that utilize DEA. Large efficiency scores are indicators of High performance and competition (Leibenstein 1966). Thus in an economic context, the market for lodging services appears to be operating efficiently. Anderson et al. (1998) argue for the benefits of using a stochastic frontier methodology in addition to DEA in order to accurately assess performance. Using a classical stochastic frontier model, they also find the hotel industry to be performing relatively efficiently, with efficiency measures above 90 percent. While both of these studies are informative, neither provides any information on the source of the inefficiencies. The source of the inefficiencies, whether technical or allocative in nature, is important information that managers need in order to take proactive positions to increase performance. We re-examine hotel efficiency using a method of DEA that provides significantly more detailed results and we further analyze the inefficiency sources. The following section describes our procedure.

SECTION 4 EFFICIENCY DETERMINATION

Section 4.1 The DEA Technique

Within the DEA framework, performance of an individual firm is evaluated with respect to an efficient frontier, which is constructed by taking linear combinations of existing firms. While there are several DEA approaches, wee use an unput-base approach, assuming that inputs are contracted proportionally with exogenous outputs. The procedure relies on sophisticated mathematics; however, the following simplified graphical example deomstates how th eefficiency measures are computed.

Figure 1 displays tha overall (OE) and (TE), and allocativ (AE) efficiency measures. In this example, we assume two inputs (X1 and X2), one output (Y), and constant returns to scale. Additionally, we assume that technology is fixed and that input prices are represented as PP. Firm A is X-efficient since it produces along output isoquant Y by utilizing the least inputs. Suppose thee is a firm operating at point C and producing an output equivalent of that produced along Y. C is uses more inputs than A to produce the output Y and is classified as inefficient with an overall efficiency score of 0D/0C )or equivalenly and inefficiency score of DC/0C).

Overall inefficiency can be decomposed into its techhnical and allocattive components. Without being able to alter input allocations, the bestt that firmC could have done was to operate at point B. The "extra" input usage that was incurred by firm C as a percentage of total input usage is the technical inefficiency measure and can be dpressed as BC/0C The technical efficiency of firm C is ecpresses as 0B/0C. Allocative inefficiency representts managerial failurd to use the optimal input mix. Here, allocative inefficiencies for firm C can be represented by DB/0B, and allocatvie effficiency is expressed as 0D/0B.

Technical efficiency can be further decomposed into technical (PTE) and scale (SE) efficiency measures. Pure technical inefficiency simply refers to deviations from the efficient frontier that result rom failure to utilize the employed resoures efficiently. Hence, this measure assumes that firms are operating at constant return to scale. Scale ineficiencies, on the other hand are losses due tofailure to operate at constant returns to scale. Figure 2 illustrates these two efficiency measures. In this figure, the Y-axis represents output and the X-axis represents input conbinations that contain an equal amount of both input 1 an dinput 2. The graph shows three observations denoted A, B, and C, respectively. Two frontiers are illustrated, a fronier assuming constant returns to scale instead of decreasing or increasing returns toscale.

After completing this analysis, we examine the SE measure to determine if it equals one. If the SE measure equals one, firms are operating at constant returns to scale. If SE does not equal one, we then determine whether the firms are oeprating at increasing or decreasing returns to scale (see Appendix A for a mathematical treatment of DEA).