Discuss about the Accounting conservatism and cost of capital.
Detecting the financial viability of old and new loader truck with relevant calculations conducted for Flying Airline Company:
Situation 1 (Not replacing Old loader) |
Particulars | Amount |
Depreciation for old loader | $ 25,000.00 |
Write off for old loader | $ 0.00 |
Proceeds from sale of old loader | $ 0.00 |
Depreciation for new loader | $ 0.00 |
Operating costs involved for old loader | $ 80,000.00 |
Total Operating cost | $ 105,000.00 |
The calculation that is conducted in the above table mainly helps in identifying the overall operating cost incurred by Flying Airline Compony, when old loader truck is used in its operations. The total operating cost mainly amounts to $105,000, which includes depreciation and operating cost involved for the old loader. This relevant calculation of cost incurred from equipment allows the management to take adequate decision for cutting its cost and increase their profitability. Cannon (2014) mentioned that with the evaluation of cost analysis management can detect actual cost incurred by its operations, which helps in making adequate management decision.
Situation 1 (Replacing Old loader) |
Particulars | Amount |
Depreciation for old loader | $ 0.00 |
Write off for old loader | $ 25,000.00 |
Proceeds from sale of old loader | $ (5,000.00) |
Depreciation for new loader | $ 20,000.00 |
Operating costs involved for old loader | $ 50,000.00 |
Total Operating cost | $ 90,000.00 |
The table mainly represent the overall cost if the old loader is replaced with the new loader truck. Relevant reduction in operating cost is detected from operations, which could eventually help the management of Flying Airline Company to take adequate cost decision. The decline operation cost mainly declined from the value of $105,000 to $90,000, which is relevantly a profit of $15,000 identified from the implementation of new loader truck. The company with the help of cost analysis can detect financial enhancement, which is attained from the implementation of the new loader. On the other hand, Collier (2015) argued that viability of cost analysis mainly reduces when adequate research is not conducted by the management on cost. The relevant reduction of cost is detected from the sale proceeds of the old loader, which cannot continue in next year. Hence, from second year the overall operation cost will be at the level of $95,000, which is relatively lower from the current expenses incurred by the company.
Situation 1 (Differential cost) |
Particulars | Amount |
Depreciation for old loader | $ 0.00 |
Write off for old loader | $ 0.00 |
Proceeds from sale of old loader | $ 5,000.00 |
Depreciation for new loader | $ (20,000.00) |
Operating costs involved for old loader | $ 30,000.00 |
Total Operating cost | $ 15,000.00 |
The differential calculation conducted in the above table mainly helps in understanding the overall cost savings, which could be conducted by Flying Airline Company after implementing the new loader truck in its operations. The overall differential cost analysis mainly indicates total difference in operating cost by $15,000, which is obtained by the company if new loader is implemented. The difference in actual operation cost between old and new loader can be detected from the above calculation, which amounts to $30,000. Hence, the implementation of new loader truck could eventually allow the company to attain higher profits, due to reduction in its operating cost. In this context, D’Onza, Greco and Allegrini (2016) mentioned that management with the evaluation of differential cost can detect financial improvement, which could improve their cash inflow and reduce cash outflow. Therefore, Flying Airline Company could adequately use the new loader truck, as it helps in reducing operating cost, which in turn improves its profit generation capacity.
Detecting non-stop route and one-stop route financial viability by conducting adequate calculation:
Situation 2 (Non-Stop Route) |
Particulars | Amount |
Revenue from passenger | $ 240,000.00 |
Revenue from Cargo | $ 80,000.00 |
San Francisco (landing fees) | $ 0.00 |
Cost (Flight crew) | $ (2,000.00) |
Cost (Fuel) | $ (21,000.00) |
Cost (Meal) | $ (4,000.00) |
Cost (Aircraft maintenance) | $ (1,000.00) |
Net revenue from operations | $ 292,000.00 |
The calculation conducted in the above table mainly represents the revenue that will be generated from nonstop route, which is currently conducted by Flying Airline Company. In addition, the company is mainly able to generate profit of $292,0000 from its operation in nonstop route. The operations conducted by the company Flying Airline Company is mainly helps in generating higher profits. The total revenue of $320,000 is mainly identified from the non-stop route, which could help in improving its profitability. On the other hand, the total cost of $28,000 is conducted by Flying Airline Company in non-stop route. Evaluation of overall cost and revenue incurred from operations could eventually help in detecting financial viability of the operations (Evans and Popova 2016).
Situation 2 (With stop route) |
Particulars | Amount |
Revenue from passenger | $ 251,000.00 |
Revenue from Cargo | $ 80,000.00 |
San Francisco (landing fees) | $ (5,000.00) |
Cost (Flight crew) | $ (3,400.00) |
Cost (Fuel) | $ (26,000.00) |
Cost (Meal) | $ (4,900.00) |
Cost (Aircraft maintenance) | $ (1,000.00) |
Net revenue from operations | $ 290,700.00 |
The financial viability of with stop route can be identified from above calculations conducted in above table. The relevant profit of the company will mainly amount to $290,700, when implementing the with stop route mentioned in situation 2. The evaluation also indicates the increment in passenger revenue, which is achieved by the company when one route stop is adopted. However, the increment in revenue was mainly supported by rising expenses incurred from the new operations. This could eventually lead to rising total cost from operations, which reducing actual profit incurred from the process. The extra cost incurred from lading fees of San Francisco is relatively reducing the profits that is obtained from the new one route operation. Fleischman and Parker (2017) stated that evaluation of financial cost could eventually help the management in identifying the excess expenses conducted on operations, which could help in improving their profitability.
Situation 2 (Differential cost) |
Particulars | Amount |
Revenue from passenger | $ (11,000.00) |
Revenue from Cargo | $ 0.00 |
San Francisco (landing fees) | $ 5,000.00 |
Cost (Flight crew) | $ 1,400.00 |
Cost (Fuel) | $ 5,000.00 |
Cost (Meal) | $ 900.00 |
Cost (Aircraft maintenance) | $ 0.00 |
Net revenue from operations | $ 1,300.00 |
The calculation conducted on differential cost analysis is understood from the operations, which might help in detecting financial viability of one stop route. From the evaluation relevant loss can be identified by Flying Airline Company if one stop route is adopted. This could eventually decline the actual profits obtained by $1,300, as expenses from operations has increased relatively. Therefore, total revenue from implementing the one stop route is could generate profit of $290,700, while the nonstop route could obtain $292,000. Hence, the Flying Airline Company needs to reject the one stop route, as it will reduce the actual revenue generated from operations. Gillion et al. (2016) mentioned that the use of operational cost analysis could eventually help the companies in detecting financial viability of each projects.
Evaluating other factors, which needs to be evaluated before conducting any decision for Flying Airline Company:
The evaluation of overall condition presented in Situation II could help in detecting other factors before reaching any decision. The economic factor needs to be evaluated by Flying airline company, which could help in understating the purchasing power of consumers. This detection of purchasing power could eventually help in understanding ability of the consumer to pay relevant price for the services provided by Flying Airline Company. In addition, operational increment of the company after implementing one stop route could be identified, which might help in expanding its operations (Grant 2016). This expansion of the operations could eventually help in generating higher revenue in long term. Both economic and operational factor needs to be evaluated by Flying Airline Company before taking any kind of decision based on financial perspective.
Stating the calculations needed by Flying Airline Compony to accept the special tourist charter proposal when adequate spare capacity is present:
Situation 3 |
Particulars | Amount |
Revenue from passenger | $ 250,000.00 |
Revenue from Cargo | $ 30,000.00 |
Total revenue from operations | $ 280,000.00 |
Variable expenses | $ 90,000.00 |
Fixed cost | $ 80,000.00 |
Total expenses from operations | $ 170,000.00 |
Profit from operations | $ 110,000.00 |
Profit under normal circumstance generated from the overall operation could be identified from the above calculation. The overall revenue of $280,000 is mainly identified from the operations, which comprises revenue from both passengers and cargo. On the other hand, the total expenses comprise with variable and fixed cost incurred from the operations, which amount of $170,000. Thus, both total expense and revenue mainly allows the organisation to generate the overall profit of $110,000 under normal circumstances. Isard et al. (2017) mentioned that with the evaluation of overall cost and revenue management can detect project viability and make adequate investment decision.
Situation 3 |
Particulars | Amount |
Revenue from passenger | $ 160,000.00 |
Revenue from Cargo | $ 0.0 |
Total revenue from operations | $ 160,000.00 |
Variable expenses | $ 85,000.00 |
Fixed cost | $ 0.0 |
Total expenses from operations | $ 85,000.00 |
Profit from operations | $ 75,000.00 |
The valuation of the overall table helps in identifying the profits that will be generated from the proposed New Special Tourist Charter Flight. In addition, the total revenue is mainly generated from passengers, while no revenue is accumulated from cargo operations. On the other hand, the revenue generated from passengers is relatively low, as compared to revenue generated under normal circumstances. Furthermore, the overall expenses incurred from the New Special Tourist Charter Flight is variable expense on the assumption that space is available to Flying Airline Company to accommodate the charter plane. The accommodation of the charter plane is mainly declining the overall fixed cost incurred by the company. This relevant omission of the fixed cost is mainly reducing the overall total expenses incurred from operations. Moreover, profits from operations is detected to be at the levels of $75,000. The profit level is relatively lower than the profit generated under normal circumstances. Joda and Bragger (2015) mentioned that companies by evaluating different cost factors can detect viability of the proposal presented by customers. However, Lanen (2016) argued that management needs to evaluate all the cost factors or else the project would increase expenses and hamper financial stability of the organisation.
From the overall evaluation, Flying Airline Company could eventually help in generating higher revenue from its operations, as fixed income will be provided from the touristy company. Hence, accepting the proposal of New Special Tourist Charter Flight could eventually help Flying Airline Company to improves its profitability in long run. However, under normal circumstance the company would attain higher profit, but constant orders would not be provided. Therefore, accepting the proposal for New Special Tourist Charter Flight could help in improving its financial viability. Li (2015) cited that cost analysis allow the company to evaluate performance of its operations in different circumstance and detect the minimum revenue requirement for achieving breakeven. The detection of breakeven value and units allow the management to take operational decision for improving its current financial capability.
Mentioning the viability of the new proposal with adequate calculation when there is no space available to Flying Airline Company:
Situation 3 |
Particulars | Amount |
Revenue from passenger | $ 160,000.00 |
Total revenue from operations | $ 160,000.00 |
Variable expenses | $ 85,000.00 |
Fixed cost | $ 80,000.00 |
Total expenses from operations | $ 165,000.00 |
Loss from operations | $ (5,000.00) |
Relevant loss is calculated from the above table, if no spare space is available to Flying Airline Company. The loss of $5,000 can be detected if Flying Airline Company accept the offer for New Special Tourist Charter Flight. The company will incur an extra fixed cost of $80,000 for accommodating the new charter plane for supporting its activities. This could eventually increase loss from operations, which will incur by Flying Airline Company due to the increased total expenses (Marglin 2014). Hence, if no extra space is available then the company needs to reject the proposal for New Special Tourist Charter Flight, as it might hamper its future financial stability.
Reference
Cannon, J.N., 2014. Determinants of “sticky costs”: An analysis of cost behavior using United States air transportation industry data. The Accounting Review, 89(5), pp.1645-1672.
Collier, P.M., 2015. Accounting for managers: Interpreting accounting information for decision making. John Wiley & Sons.
D’Onza, G., Greco, G. and Allegrini, M., 2016. Full cost accounting in the analysis of separated waste collection efficiency: A methodological proposal. Journal of environmental management, 167, pp.59-65.
Evans, D.K. and Popova, A., 2016. Cost-effectiveness analysis in development: Accounting for local costs and noisy impacts. World Development, 77, pp.262-276.
Fleischman, R.K. and Parker, L.D., 2017. What is Past is Prologue: Cost Accounting in the British Industrial Revolution, 1760-1850 (Vol. 6). Routledge.
Gillion, J.F., Sanders, D., Miserez, M. and Muysoms, F., 2016. The economic burden of incisional ventral hernia repair: a multicentric cost analysis. Hernia, 20(6), pp.819-830.
Grant, R.M., 2016. Contemporary strategy analysis: Text and cases edition. John Wiley & Sons.
Isard, W., Azis, I.J., Drennan, M.P., Miller, R.E., Saltzman, S. and Thorbecke, E., 2017. Methods of interregional and regional analysis. Taylor & Francis.
Joda, T. and Brägger, U., 2015. Digital vs. conventional implant prosthetic workflows: a cost/time analysis. Clinical oral implants research, 26(12), pp.1430-1435.
Lanen, W., 2016. Fundamentals of cost accounting. McGraw-Hill Higher Education.
Li, X., 2015. Accounting conservatism and the cost of capital: An international analysis. Journal of Business Finance & Accounting, 42(5-6), pp.555-582.
Marglin, S.A., 2014. Public Investment Criteria (Routledge Revivals): Benefit-Cost Analysis for Planned Economic Growth. Routledge.
Mishan, E.J., 2015. Elements of Cost-Benefit Analysis (Routledge Revivals). Routledge.
Othus, M., Bansal, A., Koepl, L., Wagner, S. and Ramsey, S., 2017. Accounting for Cured Patients in Cost-Effectiveness Analysis. Value in Health, 20(4), pp.705-709.
Patassini, D., 2017. Beyond benefit cost analysis: accounting for non-market values in planning evaluation. Routledge.
Zeff, S.A., 2016. Forging accounting principles in five countries: A history and an analysis of trends. Routledge.