This might be attributed to the lac

This might be attributed to the lack of financial
sophistication and limited use of computer technology in that era. Mao (1970) and
Schall, Sundam, and Geijsbeek (1978) specifically point to NPV as the least popular
capital budgeting tool; a result in contrast to modern financial theory. Klammer (1972)
reports a preference for general discounted cash flow models, and subsequently, the
overwhelming majority of published research indicate management prefer the use of
internal rate of return (IRR) over all other capital budgeting methods. 1 Eight studies
dating from 1970 to 1983 show profitability index, a ratio of present value and initial
cost, to be the least most popular capital budgeting tool. Recently, Jog and Srivastava
(1995) and Pike (1996) indicate a decreased acceptance of accounting rate of return in
Canada and the United Kingdom, respectively.2
Interestingly, throughout the literature,
NPV has always trailed IRR in management preference. Managers have argued the
perception of a percentage return is more easily understood and comparable than an
absolute dollar value increase in shareholder wealth. Therefore, in the past, managers
have chosen IRR over NPV. Evans and Forbes (1993) argue management view IRR as a
more cognitively efficient measure of comparison. In a comparison of past studies, it is
seen that managers are moving toward NPV as a method of choice, but never to the level
of IRR.
Academics have long argued for the superiority of NPV over IRR for several
reasons. First, NPV presents the expected change in shareholder wealth given a set of projected cash flows and a discount rate. For mutually exclusive projects, there is some
dispute over the appropriate method. Second, when cash flows come in over a longer
time period, NPV assumes the intermediate term cash flows are reinvested at the cost of
capital. Internal rate of return, on the other hand, assumes the intermediate term cash
flows are reinvested at the IRR, which for any positive NPV project is higher than the
cost of capital.3
Finally, NPV is not sensitive to multiple sign changes in cash flows. It
is a method that presents the expected dollar amount that shareholder wealth would
increase or decrease upon the acceptance of a project.

ผลลัพธ์ (อังกฤษ) 2:

Might this be attributed to the Lack of Financial
Sophistication and use of Computer Technology Limited in that Era. Mao (1970) and
Schall, Sundam, and Geijsbeek (1978th) Point specifically to NPV As the least popular
Capital budgeting Tool; a result in contrast to modern financial theory. Klammer (1972)
Discounted Cash Flow reports a Preference for general models, and subsequently, the
overwhelming majority of Published Research Management indicate prefer the use of
internal rate of Return (IRR) over all Other Capital budgeting methods. 1 Eight Studies
dating from 1,970th to 1,983 Show profitability index, a ratio of present value and initial
cost, to be the least popular Most Capital budgeting Tool. Recently, Jog and Srivastava
(1,995th) and Pike (1,996th) indicate a rate of Return Decreased Acceptance of accounting in
Canada and the United Kingdom, Respectively.2
Interestingly, throughout the literature,
has always trailed NPV IRR in Preference Management. Managers have argued the
perception of a percentage Return is easily understood and comparable More than an
Absolute Dollar Shareholder value increase in wealth. Therefore, in the Past, Managers
have Chosen IRR over NPV. Evans and Forbes (1,993) argue Management View IRR As a
measure of comparison More cognitively efficient. In a comparison of Past Studies, it is
seen that Managers are Moving toward NPV As a method of Choice, but Never to the level
of IRR.
Academics have long argued for the superiority of NPV IRR over for several
Reasons. First, NPV presents the expected change in shareholder wealth given a set of projected cash flows and a discount rate. Exclusive Projects for mutually, there is Some
dispute over the appropriate method. Second, when Cash flows Longer Come in over a
time period, NPV assumes the Intermediate term Cash flows are reinvested at the cost of
Capital. Internal rate of Return, on the Other Hand, assumes the Intermediate term Cash
flows are reinvested at the IRR, which for any positive NPV Project is Higher than the
cost of Capital.3
Finally, NPV is not sensitive to changes in Cash flows Sign multiple. . It
is a method that presents the expected Dollar amount Shareholder wealth that would
increase or Decrease upon the Acceptance of a Project.

ผลลัพธ์ (อังกฤษ) 3:

This might be attributed to the lack of financial
sophistication and limited use of computer technology in that era. Mao. (1970) and
Schall Sundam and Geijsbeek (,, 1978) specifically point to NPV as the least popular
capital budgeting tool; a. Result in contrast to modern financial theory. Klammer (1972)
reports a preference for general discounted cash, flow models. And, subsequently the
.Overwhelming majority of published research indicate management prefer the use of
internal rate of return (IRR) over all. Other capital budgeting methods. 1 Eight studies
dating from 1970 to 1983 show, profitability index a ratio of present value. And initial
cost to be, the least most popular capital budgeting tool. Recently Jog and, Srivastava
.(1995) and Pike (1996) indicate a decreased acceptance of accounting rate of return in
Canada and the, United Kingdom respectively.2
. Interestingly throughout the, literature
NPV, has always trailed IRR in management preference. Managers have argued the
perception. Of a percentage return is more easily understood and comparable than an
absolute dollar value increase in shareholder wealth.Therefore in, the, past managers
have chosen IRR over NPV. Evans and Forbes (1993) argue management view IRR as a
more. Cognitively efficient measure of comparison. In a comparison of, past studies it is
seen that managers are moving toward. NPV as a method, of choice but never to the level
of IRR.
Academics have long argued for the superiority of NPV over IRR. For several
, First reasons.NPV presents the expected change in shareholder wealth given a set of projected cash flows and a discount rate. For mutually. Exclusive projects there is, some
dispute over the appropriate method. Second when cash, flows come in over a longer
time. Period NPV assumes, the intermediate term cash flows are reinvested at the cost of
capital. Internal rate, of return on. The, other handAssumes the intermediate term cash
flows are reinvested at, the IRR which for any positive NPV project is higher than the
cost. Of capital.3
Finally NPV is, not sensitive to multiple sign changes in cash flows. It
is a method that presents the expected. Dollar amount that shareholder wealth would
increase or decrease upon the acceptance of a project.