Factors Affecting the Replacement of Equipment

THE interesting and carefully developed formula which Professor Bucky presents for answering the question of whether proposed new equipment will give a net return on investment equal to or greater than that on present equipment starts with an assumption that the management may make this relative return a determining factor in its decision whether or not the new equipment should be provided. I do not question that in some cases the management may take this position, but I would point out the error involved in so doing. The proper test is not a comparison of the return on new as compared with the return on old investment, but is rather a comparison of the return on a particular new investment as compared with the return which would be obtainable from some other new investment which now might be made. Then I would point out that I believe Professor Bucky is in error in using as a factor in his computations the item of unamortized cost of old investment. The financial advantage to be derived from a new investment does not depend on the extent to which we may in the past have written off the cost of old equipment, nor does it even depend upon what was the original cost of that old equipment. Even the salvage or resale value of the old equipment will only enter into the picture to the extent that the present salvage or resale value differs from the ultimate salvage or resale value otherwise to be obtained, after due allowance for the interest factor.