3 ms·
This comment could not be further from the truth, as I feel you do not have strong basis in understanding what the weighted cost of capital refers to. Here is
by sml0820 12y ago
This comment could not be further from the truth, as I feel you do not have strong basis in understanding what the weighted cost of capital refers to.
Here is an example calculation of an infrastructure project:
http://investment.infrastructure.gov.au/publications/reports/pdf/north_south_rail/annexure_8.pdf http://investment.infrastructure.gov.au/publications/reports...
Also, your ghost city comment is irrelevant, which I already addressed in a prior comment.
And as a final point, even with a 6% WACC in an ideal scenario, which I addressed, the NPV is still -3.33 billion.
- Retric 12y agoThe most important equation in that was this: Dr * (1 – EQ) + Er * EQ Where: Dr = the appropriate return for debt funding invested Er = the appropriate rate for equity funding invested EQ = the proportion of funding invested as equity While it does not take into account risk it separates out private equity vs loans. If you get a loan at 6% for 90% of a project's costs and that project returns 6.5% then your private equity return is 6.5% + 9 * .5% = 11%. Thus, if you can get a vary low interest loan say 2% your private return can be high even if the project barely breaks 2%. Why might he be able to get a loan for 2%, well China might look at having an alternative to the panama cannal in another country as worth a vary low interest loan. Or far more likely IMO the project might be building more than just a canal as infrastructure projects often make other local investments vary valuable. AKA build a subway and now every apartment within walking distance is suddenly worth significantly more.