IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/jacrfn/v20y2008i2p79-83.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Single vs. Multiple Discount Rates: How to Limit “Influence Costs” in the Capital Allocation Process

Author

Listed:
  • John Martin
  • Sheridan Titman

Abstract

Most finance textbooks suggest that companies evaluate investment projects using discount rates that reflect both the debt capacity and the unique risks of the project. In practice, however, companies often use their company‐wide WACC to evaluate such investments because of the difficulty of (and subjectivity involved in) estimating the risk of individual projects, and the potential for managerial bias and influence to distort the estimates. This article proposes a practicable method for calculating the cost of capital that produces different discount rates for investment projects with different risks while minimizing the “influence costs” that arise when managers have discretion in the choice of discount rates. The proposed approach makes use of market information (in the form of the firm‐wide costs of debt and equity), thereby limiting managerial discretion, while typically still providing a good approximation of theoretically correct, project‐specific discount rates. The key to the method's effectiveness is its use of a project's debt capacity to define the capital structure weights, where debt capacity is defined by the amount of debt financing the project will support without lowering the firm's credit rating.

Suggested Citation

  • John Martin & Sheridan Titman, 2008. "Single vs. Multiple Discount Rates: How to Limit “Influence Costs” in the Capital Allocation Process," Journal of Applied Corporate Finance, Morgan Stanley, vol. 20(2), pages 79-83, March.
  • Handle: RePEc:bla:jacrfn:v:20:y:2008:i:2:p:79-83
    DOI: 10.1111/j.1745-6622.2008.00182.x
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-6622.2008.00182.x
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/j.1745-6622.2008.00182.x?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Tor Brunzell & Eva Liljeblom & Mika Vaihekoski, 2013. "Determinants of capital budgeting methods and hurdle rates in Nordic firms," Accounting and Finance, Accounting and Finance Association of Australia and New Zealand, vol. 53(1), pages 85-110, March.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bla:jacrfn:v:20:y:2008:i:2:p:79-83. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.blackwellpublishing.com/journal.asp?ref=1078-1196 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.