Χρηµατοοικονοµική ανάλυση βιωσιµότητας

Transcript

1 Χρηµατοοικονοµική ανάλυση βιωσιµότητας Αθήνα, Απρίλιος 2013 ΣΥΣTEMA ΜΕΛΕΤΗΤΙΚΗ ΕΠΕ - ΑΛΙΚΗ ΤΣΑΡΟΥΧΗ Μεσογείων 409, Αγία Παρασκευή τηλ: , fax: ipap@systema.com.gr Σαµοθράκης 4, Νέα Ερυθραία τηλ: , fax: atsaro@tee.gr

2 Περιεχόµενα Executive Summary Project description Demand analysis Estimation of revenues Maintenance and operating costs Financial analysis and indicators Union Assistance Sensitivity and risk analysis Επιτελική περίληψη Συνοπτική περιγραφή του έργου Εκτίµηση επιβατικής κίνησης Προβλεπόµενα έσοδα Κόστος συντήρησης και λειτουργίας Χρηµατοοικονοµική ανάλυση και δείκτες ποσοστό κοινοτικής συνδροµής Ανάλυση ευαισθησίας και κινδύνων Εισαγωγή Ιστορικό και αντικείµενο της µελέτης Μεθοδολογική Προσέγγιση Οµάδα Έργου Ευχαριστίες Προσδιορισµός έργου Περιγραφή του έργου Ιστορικό και πρόοδος του έργου ιαχωρισµός φυσικού και οικονοµικού αντικειµένου µεταξύ Γ ΚΠΣ και ΕΣΠΑ Εναλλακτικές επιλογές (σενάρια) Προϋπολογισµός Χρηµατοδότηση έργου Υπολειµµατική αξία έργου Εκτίµηση Επιβατικής Κίνησης Προσδιορισµός Επιβατικής Κίνησης Έτους Βάσης Εκτίµηση Μελλοντικής Επιβατικής Κίνησης Σενάριο ΧΩΡΙΣ το έργο Σενάριο ΜΕ το έργο Συγκριτική αξιολόγηση των σεναρίων ΧΩΡΙΣ και ΜΕ το έργο Προβλεπόµενα Έσοδα Κατηγορίες προβλεπόµενων εσόδων Προβλεπόµενα έσοδα από κόµιστρα Ονοµαστικό εισιτήριο και µέσο κόµιστρο (έσοδο) ανά επιβάτη Εκτίµηση εσόδων από κόµιστρα Προβλεπόµενα λοιπά έσοδα Προβλεπόµενα συνολικά έσοδα Κόστος συντήρησης και λειτουργίας Σύµπραξη ΣΥΣTEMA Μελετητική ΕΠΕ Αλίκη Τσαρούχη 2

3 4.1.1 Γενικά Παραγόµενο έργο Κόστος µισθοδοσίας προσωπικού συντήρησης και λειτουργίας Γενικά - Παραδοχές Συνοδοί συρµών Προσωπικό συντήρησης Προσωπικό λειτουργίας σταθµών Προσωπικό Κέντρου Ελέγχου Λειτουργίας (ΚΕΛ) Λοιπό διοικητικό προσωπικό Συνολικό προσωπικό και κόστος µισθοδοσίας Κόστος ενέργειας Κόστος ανταλλακτικών απάνες καθαρισµού, φύλαξης και συντήρησης στοιχείων σταθµών Άλλες δαπάνες Συνολικό κόστος συντήρησης και λειτουργίας Χρηµατοοικονοµική ανάλυση Μεθοδολογία και παραδοχές Κόστος υλοποίησης της επένδυσης Χρηµατοοικονοµικοί δείκτες αποτελέσµατα ανάλυσης Υπολογισµός κοινοτικής συνδροµής Χρηµατοοικονοµική αξιολόγηση επενδυµένων κεφαλαίων («εθνικών πόρων») Ανάλυση χρηµατοοικονοµικής βιωσιµότητας της επένδυσης Ανάλυση ευαισθησίας και κινδύνων Μεθοδολογία Αποτελέσµατα - συµπεράσµατα Παράρτηµα: Χάρτης έργου Σύµπραξη ΣΥΣTEMA Μελετητική ΕΠΕ Αλίκη Τσαρούχη 3

4 Κατάλογος Πινάκων και ιαγραµµάτων Table 1: Project cost per programming period...7 Table 2: Project Cost...8 Table 3: Without Project Scenario: Future Demand per mode...10 Table 4: With Project Scenario: Future Demand per mode...11 Table 5: Projected Revenues (realistic scenario)...13 Table 6: Number of employees and annual personnel cost for the years Table 7: Maintenance and operating cost for Thessaloniki Metro...16 Table 8: Calculation of Union Assistance...18 Table 9: Financial analysis for the realistic sub-scenario...20 Table 10: Financial return on national capital...22 Table 11: Financial Sustainability...24 Table 12: Results of the sensitivity analysis (realistic scenario)...26 Πίνακας 1: Προϋπολογισµός έργων ανά χρονική περίοδο...29 Πίνακας 2: Προϋπολογισµός έργου...30 Πίνακας 3: Σενάριο ΧΩΡΙΣ το έργο: Μελλοντική Ζήτηση ανά µέσο...32 Πίνακας 4: Σενάριο ΜΕ το έργο: Εκτίµηση ζήτησης ανά µέσο για το σενάριο ΜΕ το έργο...33 Πίνακας 5: Εκτίµηση εσόδων (ρεαλιστικό σενάριο)...34 Πίνακας 6: Προσωπικό και κόστος µισθοδοσίας Μετρό Θεσσαλονίκης για τα έτη Πίνακας 7: Συνολικό κόστος συντήρησης και λειτουργίας του Μετρό Θεσσαλονίκης...37 Πίνακας 8: Υπολογισµός κοινοτικής συνδροµής...39 Πίνακας 9: Χρηµατοοικονοµική ανάλυση έργου Μετρό Θεσσαλονίκης για το ρεαλιστικό σενάριο...41 Πίνακας 10: Χρηµατοοικονοµική ανάλυση επενδυµένων κεφαλαίων (εθνικών πόρων)...41 Πίνακας 11: Ανάλυση Χρηµατοοικονοµικής βιωσιµότητας...45 Πίνακας 12: Αποτελέσµατα ανάλυσης ευαισθησίας για χρηµατοοικονοµική ανάλυση...48 Πίνακας 0.1: Μέση ετήσια µεταβολή είκτη Τιµών Καταναλωτή...51 Πίνακας 1.1: Προϋπολογισµός έργων...58 Πίνακας 1.2: Προϋπολογισµός σύµβασης µελέτης - κατασκευής...60 Πίνακας 1.3: Προϋπολογισµός λοιπών εργασιών έργου...60 Πίνακας 1.4: ιάρθρωση χρηµατοδότησης έργου...61 Πίνακας 2.1: Ελάχιστες, Μέγιστες και Μέσες τιµές ελαστικοτήτων ζήτησης ανά µέσο και παράµετρο...65 Πίνακας 2.2: Σενάρια µεταβολών ανά παράµετρο...66 Πίνακας 2.3 : Έτος βάσης 2012 ιορθωµένη Επιβατική κίνηση ανά µέσο...67 Πίνακας 2.4 : Μέση ετήσια µεταβολή ΑΕΠ για τα έτη Πίνακας 2.5: Εκτίµηση µεταβολής στη ζήτηση ανά µέσο λόγω ετήσιας µεταβολής ΑΕΠ...69 Πίνακας 2.6: Εκτίµηση ζήτησης (επιβιβάσεις ανά µέσο για το σενάριο ΧΩΡΙΣ το έργο) Πίνακας 2.7: Ετήσια αύξηση µετακινήσεων µε Μετρό από τον πρώτο χρόνο λειτουργίας του, όπως δίνεται από το µοντέλο µετακινήσεων και αποµείωση της λόγω επικαιροποίησης παραδοχών ΑΕΠ...70 Πίνακας 2.7: Εκτίµηση ζήτησης ανά µέσο για το σενάριο ΜΕ το έργο...72 ιάγραµµα 1: Σενάριο ΜΕ το έργο: Επιβιβάσεις στο Μετρό στο Βασικό, Ρεαλιστικό και Απαισιόδοξο σενάριο...74 ιάγραµµα 2 Συνολικές µετακινήσεις ΧΩΡΙΣ και ΜΕ το έργο (Ρεαλιστικό υπο-σενάριο)...75 Σύµπραξη ΣΥΣTEMA Μελετητική ΕΠΕ Αλίκη Τσαρούχη 4

5 ιάγραµµα 3 Μετακινήσεις ανά µέσο ΧΩΡΙΣ και ΜΕ το έργο (Ρεαλιστικό υπο-σενάριο)...76 Πίνακας 3.1: Στοιχεία για τον υπολογισµό του µέσου εσόδου ανά επιβάτη...79 Πίνακας 3.2: Εκτίµηση εσόδων από κόµιστρα...80 Πίνακας 3.3: Έσοδα λειτουργίας ετών Πίνακας 3.4: Εκτίµηση λοιπών εσόδων (εκτός των εσόδων από κόµιστρα)...82 Πίνακας 3.5: Εκτίµηση συνολικών εσόδων...83 Πίνακας 4.1: Ανθρώπινο δυναµικό Μετρό Αθήνας...86 Πίνακας 4.2: Ετήσιο κόστος µισθοδοσίας Μετρό Αθήνας...86 Πίνακας 4.3: Προσωπικό και κόστος µισθοδοσίας Μετρό Θεσσαλονίκης για τα έτη Πίνακας 4.4: Ετήσιο κόστος ενέργειας Μετρό Αθήνας...89 Πίνακας 4.5: Ετήσιο κόστος ανταλλακτικών Μετρό Αθήνας...90 Πίνακας 4.6: Ετήσιο κόστος λοιπών δαπανών Μετρό Αθήνας...90 Πίνακας 4.7: ιάφορα άλλα έξοδα του Μετρό Αθήνας...91 Πίνακας 4.8: Συνολικό κόστος συντήρησης και λειτουργίας του Μετρό Θεσσαλονίκης...93 Πίνακας 5.1: Κόστος υλοποίησης της επένδυσης...98 Πίνακας 5.2: Κύρια χρηµατοοικονοµικά µεγέθη...99 Πίνακας 5.3: Υπολογισµός κοινοτικής συνδροµής Πίνακας 5.4: Χρηµατοοικονοµική ανάλυση έργου Μετρό Θεσσαλονίκης για το ρεαλιστικό σενάριο Πίνακας 5.5: Χρηµατοοικονοµική ανάλυση έργου Μετρό Θεσσαλονίκης για το βασικό σενάριο Πίνακας 5.6: Χρηµατοοικονοµική ανάλυση έργου Μετρό Θεσσαλονίκης για το απαισιόδοξο σενάριο Πίνακας 5.7: Χρηµατοοικονοµική ανάλυση επενδυµένων κεφαλαίων (εθνικών πόρων) Πίνακας 5.8: Ανάλυση Χρηµατοοικονοµικής βιωσιµότητας Πίνακας 6.1: Αποτελέσµατα ανάλυσης ευαισθησίας για χρηµατοοικονοµική ανάλυση Σύµπραξη ΣΥΣTEMA Μελετητική ΕΠΕ Αλίκη Τσαρούχη 5

6 Executive Summary Σύµπραξη ΣΥΣTEMA Μελετητική ΕΠΕ Αλίκη Τσαρούχη 6

7 1. Project description The project involves the construction of a driverless metro system for the city of Thessaloniki (base project). The main project characteristics of the base project are the following (see also the map in the Annex): 13 modern center platform stations 9.5 km of Line (with two independent single track tunnels) constructed mostly (7.7 km) by means of two Tunnel Boring Machines. The remaining section of the Line will be constructed by the Cut and Cover method. 24 ultra-automatic and state-of-the-art trains, fully air-conditioned, which will be run without a train driver, with an attendant aboard the train. Platform screen doors, which guarantee greater safety level A Depot at Pylea covering a surface of 50,000 square meters. The Depot facilities will include the operational and administrative headquarters of the metro system. Within the framework of the same development plan, provision has been made for the development of one underground parking facility at Nea Elvetia station (capacity 650 places). The project also includes the required electrical, mechanical and railway systems, the project detailed design and research, preliminary works such as traffic arrangements and utilities network relocation, extended archaeological surveys and protection of the ancient findings and other important monuments. The construction of the project started in June 2006 and it was co-financed by the 3 rd CSF ( , ERDF) through the OP/RAPUD. During the NSRF period ( ) the project is supposed to be cofinanced by the ROP Macedonia and Thrace. The beneficiary of the project is Attiko Metro SA, the stateowned company that is responsible for the construction of the Athens Metro network while the operator will be a state owned company other than Attiko Metro SA. The non eligible cost and the part of the eligible cost that is not financed by the ERDF is covered by national funds. These funds are financed by EIB loan agreements. The loan agreement s duration is 30 years, it grants a 10-year grace period and it amounts to The project cost includes all of the required expenditure for its implementation (design-construction contract which includes also the archaeological surveys and the rolling stock supply, utilities, expropriations, project management and others) and it can be analyzed as follows according to the programming period (3 rd CSF, NSRF and programming period): Table 1: Project cost per programming period, Current prices, not including VAT Period Expenditure , , ,72 Total ,00 The VAT element isn t eligible because it is recovered (it is not definitely borne ) by Attiko Metro SA. Therefore, all expenditures do not include VAT. The project cost is analyzed in the following table: Σύµπραξη ΣΥΣTEMA Μελετητική ΕΠΕ Αλίκη Τσαρούχη 7

8 Year Design- Construction contract Utilities Table 2: Project Cost Project management, Current prices, not including VAT Expropriation Others Total ,00 0,00 0,00 0, , , ,00 0,00 0,00 0, , , ,00 0,00 0,00 0, , , , , ,89 0, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,96 0, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,93 0, , , , , ,29 0, , ,72 Σύνολο , , , , , ,00 The projects residual value equals the residual value of the Civil Engineering Works ( ,96 in current prices ,26 in 2012 prices), because the useful life of the electrical/mechanical works coincides with the end of the time horizon of the analysis (2046). 2. Demand analysis In order to estimate the passenger demand of Thessaloniki Metro and the modal split with and without the project, a traditional four-step traffic model, that was developed in 2007 under the framework of a feasibility study elaborated for Attiko Metro, was used. Within that model, two scenarios were examined: a) Without Project (i.e. Metro) scenario b) With Project (i.e. Metro) scenario Results were provided for the target years 2002 and 2012, which (in 2007) were supposed to be the first and the tenth year of metro operation. Year 2012 represents the base year of the current study, however the model s values should be updated taking into consideration the economic crisis in Greece during the last five years, which affected both the mobility and the modal split. A mathematical approach based on modes elasticity on several parameters (economic indicators such as GDP growth, wages and purchasing power, fares, level of public transport service and gas price) was adopted, following relative literature review (McCarthy, 2001, Transportation Economics), in order to calculate the decrease in the demand in each mode (private vehicle and taxi, bus and metro). This approach was validated using real, official data from the Thessaloniki Bus Authority and finally 8,4% decrease was adopted for public transport and 15,3% for private vehicle trips. The methodology for the demand forecasts differ between the two scenarios. More specifically, for the Without Project scenario the annual change in the demand was estimated taking into account the elasticity of each mode with regards to the expected GDP growth (based on national data and IMF projections). On the other hand, the calculation of the annual change of the metro demand for the With Project scenario from , 30-years metro operation period, is based on the annual growth rate indicated by the Σύµπραξη ΣΥΣTEMA Μελετητική ΕΠΕ Αλίκη Τσαρούχη 8

9 transport demand model. Adopting IMF projections regarding GDP rates for , three subscenarios were examined for the period : i. Business as Usual sub-scenario: annual GDP growth for the years = 3,0%, as foreseen by the transport demand model. In this case, the study team adopted the growth rates as defined by the model. ii. Realistic sub-scenario: annual GDP growth for the years = 2,5%. The model s growth rates were slightly decreased taking into consideration the elasticity of metro usage with regards to GDP growth rate. iii. Pessimistic sub-scenario: annual GDP growth for the years = 1,5%. The model s growth rates were decreased even more, taking into consideration the elasticity of metro usage with regards to GDP growth rate. The comparison of these three sub-scenarios implied insignificant differences for the purposes of the current study, however the Financial Analysis will provide results for all sub-scenarios. The demand forecasts for both scenarios (Without and With Project) are presented in the following tables. Σύµπραξη ΣΥΣTEMA Μελετητική ΕΠΕ Αλίκη Τσαρούχη 9

10 Table 3: Without Project Scenario: Future Demand per mode Year Private vehicle - taxi Bus Total Σύµπραξη ΣΥΣTEMA Μελετητική ΕΠΕ Αλίκη Τσαρούχη 10

11 Year Private Vehicle - Taxi Business As Usual sub-scenario: annual GDP growth = 3,0% Bus Metro Total Table 4: With Project Scenario: Future Demand per mode Private Vehicle - Taxi Realistic sub-scenario: annual GDP growth = 2,5% Bus Metro Total Private Vehicle - Taxi Pessimistic sub-scenario: annual GDP growth =1,5% Bus Metro Total Σύµπραξη ΣΥΣTEMA Μελετητική ΕΠΕ Αλίκη Τσαρούχη 11

12 Year Private Vehicle - Taxi Business As Usual sub-scenario: annual GDP growth = 3,0% Bus Metro Total Private Vehicle - Taxi Realistic sub-scenario: annual GDP growth = 2,5% Bus Metro Total Private Vehicle - Taxi Pessimistic sub-scenario: annual GDP growth =1,5% Bus Metro Total Σύµπραξη ΣΥΣTEMA Μελετητική ΕΠΕ Αλίκη Τσαρούχη 12

13 3. Estimation of revenues The revenues induced by the Thessaloniki Metro (base project) to the operator include the following categories: Ticket revenues, generated by the estimated demand Commercial revenues from advertisements, optical fibers, renting some of the systems stations etc Revenues generated by the use of the parking facilities Annual ticket revenues are calculated as the product of annual demand and the average charge for the use of the metro system. The estimation of the average charge (as a proportion of the value of the simple ticket) is based on the data provided by the operator of the Athens Metro network (STA.SY. SA), e.g. annual revenues for the years (11 months for 2012) and the corresponding number of annual passengers. It is estimated that the average charge equals 55% of the value of the simple ticket. Taking into consideration, that the value of the simple ticket for the Thessaloniki buses network is 0,80 and that the proportion of the value of the Athens metro ticket to the simple buses ticket is 1,12, the values of the simple ticket for the Thessaloniki metro equals 0,90 and the corresponding average charge is 0,49. Commercial revenues are estimated at 8,6% of the ticket revenues. The average revenue per passenger generated by the parking facilities is estimated at 0,0066 /passenger (as derived by the STA.SY. data). The projected revenues for the realistic scenario are presented in the following table. Year Table 5: Projected Revenues (realistic scenario) Demand Ticket revenues Commercial revenues Parking revenues, 2012 prices Total revenues Σύµπραξη ΣΥΣTEMA Μελετητική ΕΠΕ Αλίκη Τσαρούχη 13

14 του έργου Μετρό Θεσσαλονίκης Year Demand Ticket revenues Commercial revenues Parking revenues Total revenues Maintenance and operating costs The estimation of the maintenance and operating costs for the Thessaloniki metro is based on the data provided by STA.SY for the Athens Metro and on former CBA s for Thessaloniki and Athens Metro networks. It is estimated that annual rides will be performed (to both directions), or vehiclekilometers (the route will be 9,6km long and each train will have 4 cars). The assumptions for the personnel costs during the time horizon of the analysis are summed as follows: The average annual personnel cost by personnel category (e.g. average cost per employee) is considered reduced to 75% of the corresponding cost for This reduction reflects the reductions proposed (and implemented) for the civil servants by the fiscal strategy for Greece. For the same reason, the average annual personnel cost is considered unchanged for the time horizon (there will be no salary increases). The payroll costs of the maintenance personnel for the first year of operation will be decreased by 50%, for the second year by 10% and for the third year by 5%, because the first year s maintenance is included in the construction contract. The number of employees is considered unchanged during the time horizon of the analysis. The estimation of the total number of employees and the corresponding personnel cost (in 2012 prices) are presented in the table below: Table 6: Number of employees and annual personnel cost for the years Personnel category Number of employees Total cost Train attendants ,46 Maintenance personnel ,23 Stations personnel ,57 Other personnel ,85 Personnel of the Operational Center ,88 Total ,99, 2012 prices Σύµπραξη ΣΥΣTEMA Μελετητική ΕΠΕ Αλίκη Τσαρούχη 14

15 του έργου Μετρό Θεσσαλονίκης The total energy cost (electricity) is divided into two sub-categories: traction current cost and other electricity costs (e.g. for the stations, the depot etc). The traction current cost component for the first year of operation (2017) of the project is estimated at ,08 (2012 prices) and it is calculated as the product of the unit cost (0,196 /vehiclekilometer) and the annual number of performed vehicle kilometers. The rest of the electricity costs are estimated as 81% of the traction current cost and they are ,21 for the first year of operation. Attiko Metro and the operator will constantly seek ways to cut energy costs, therefore it is considered that the corresponding expenditures will not increase during the time horizon of the analysis. The average unit cost for spare parts includes the cost for spare parts for the superstructure, for the rolling stock and for ticket issuing and collection equipment. The two former cost categories depend on the vehicle kilometers performed. The total cost for spare parts for the first year after the maintenance period included in the construction contract is ,68. The cleaning, guarding and maintenance of elevators and escalators cost for 2017 is estimated at ,15. Its estimation is based on the data provided by STA.SY. SA and they are decreasing annually by 1,0%. Other operating costs include insurance costs, advertising and promotion costs and other expenses (consumables supply, stationery, watering, telecommunications etc). The average unit insurance cost is estimated at 0,00281 /passenger (2012 prices). The advertising and promotion costs are decreasing year by year according to public awareness and the metro rate of usage. All other expenses depend on the number of employees and the average unit cost/employee is 2.239,34 (2012 prices). Base on the aforementioned assumptions the maintenance and operating costs for the Thessaloniki Metro are presented in the following table. Σύµπραξη ΣΥΣTEMA Μελετητική ΕΠΕ Αλίκη Τσαρούχη 15

16 Year Personnel cost Traction current Table 7: Maintenance and operating cost for Thessaloniki Metro Electricity Other electricity Spare parts Station maintenance Insurance costs Other expenses, 2012 prices Promotion Total costs , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,06 Σύµπραξη ΣΥΣTEMA Μελετητική ΕΠΕ Αλίκη Τσαρούχη 16

17 Year Personnel cost Traction current Electricity Other electricity Spare parts Station maintenance Insurance costs Other expenses Promotion Total costs , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,35 Σύµπραξη ΣΥΣTEMA Μελετητική ΕΠΕ Αλίκη Τσαρούχη 17

18 5. Financial analysis and indicators Union Assistance The methodology and assumptions for the financial analysis are summed as follows: The construction of the project will be completed by the end of Therefore, the first year of operations is The time horizon expands to 2046, in order to include 30 years of full operation of the project. Base year is The financial analysis is conducted in constant (real) 2012 prices (which were converted from current prices by using Greek CPI index for the past years and the October 2012 Midterm framework for fiscal strategy projections for the next years until 2016). All financial cash flows were discounted with a 5,0% discount rate (according to the EU CBA Guide and WD 4 guidelines). All financial cash flows before 2010 (first year of the analysis) are also discounted with 5,0% discount rate and accrued on the first year (2010). The investment cost includes the all costs regardless of the programming period and of the source of finance. The VAT component is not eligible because it is recovered by the beneficiary (Attiko Metro SA). The financial flows do not include VAT. The principal results of the financial analysis for the realistic sub-scenario are summed as follows. The financial analysis itself is presented in Table 9 at the end of this chapter. (5%)= (5%)= 0,42 (6%)= (6%)= 0,36 (4%)= (4%)= 0,48 IRR= -0,55% (5%)= 31,43% (5%)= 68,57% As it is depicted by these results, the project needs to be co-financed for all possible discount rates, since its FNPV less than zero and the B/C is less than one. Based on the analysis of the investment cost in eligible and non eligible expenditure, the calculation of the Union Assistance is as follows: Table 8: Calculation of Union Assistance Value 1. Eligible cost (in euro, not discounted) = [ΕC] Financing Gap = [FGR] 68,57% 3. Decision amount [DA] = [FGR] * [ΕC] Co-financing rate of the priority axis (%) 85% 5. Union assistance (Euros)= (3)*(4) The appraisal of the financial return on national capital (which produces the FNPV(K) and FRR(K) indicators) takes into account all sources of financing except for the EU contribution, in order to estimate the profitability of the investment after the EU contribution. As the results of Table 10 at the end of this chapter depict, the investment is far from profitable after the EU contribution, since the FNPV(K) = and the FRR(K)= -1,60%. Σύµπραξη ΣΥΣTEMA Μελετητική ΕΠΕ Αλίκη Τσαρούχη 18

19 The financial sustainability of the project regards the ability of the project to produce enough annual revenues to cover annual expenses, in order not to run out of cash in the future. In the financial sustainability table the inflows include revenues and the financial resources (loans and public national and EU- funding) and the outflows include investment cost, operating and maintenance cost and loans reimbursement. As the financial sustainability table depicts (Table 11 at the end of this chapter), the cumulated cash flows of the investment, from 2007 and onwards are positive, which means that the project is financially sustainable. Σύµπραξη ΣΥΣTEMA Μελετητική ΕΠΕ Αλίκη Τσαρούχη 19

20 Year Investment Cost Table 9: Financial analysis for the realistic sub-scenario Outflows Inflows Maintenance and operation cost Revenues Residual Value Euros, 2012 Total outflows Total inflows Net cash flows Σύµπραξη ΣΥΣTEMA Μελετητική ΕΠΕ Αλίκη Τσαρούχη 20

21 Year Investment Cost Outflows Inflows Maintenance and operation cost Revenues Residual Value Total outflows Total inflows Net cash flows Total NPV of Discounted Cash flows 5,0% ,0% ,0% Financial indicators (5%)= 31,43% (5%)= 68,57% (5%)= (5%)= 0,42 (6%)= 26,29% (6%)= 73,71% (6%)= (6%)= 0,36 (4%)= 37,90% (4%)= 62,10% (4%)= (4%)= 0,48 FIRR= -0,55% Σύµπραξη ΣΥΣTEMA Μελετητική ΕΠΕ Αλίκη Τσαρούχη 21

22 Year Investment cost (national capital) Table 10: Financial return on national capital Outflows Inflows EIB Loan reimbursement (interest & capital) Operation & maintenance cost Revenues Residual value Total Outflows, 2012 Total inflows Net cash flows Σύµπραξη ΣΥΣTEMA Μελετητική ΕΠΕ Αλίκη Τσαρούχη 22

23 Year Investment cost (national capital) Outflows Inflows EIB Loan reimbursement (interest & capital) Operation & maintenance cost Revenues Residual value Total Outflows Total inflows Net cash flows Total NPV of discounted cash flows 5,0% Financial indicators (5%)= (5%)= 0,46 FIRR(Κ)= -1,60% Σύµπραξη ΣΥΣTEMA Μελετητική ΕΠΕ Αλίκη Τσαρούχη 23

24 Year Investment cost Outflows Inflows Loan reimburse ment Operation & maintenance cost Table 11: Financial Sustainability Revenues Public funds EIB Loan drawdown Total outflows Total inflows, Current prices Net cash flows Cumulated net cash flows Σύµπραξη ΣΥΣTEMA Μελετητική ΕΠΕ Αλίκη Τσαρούχη 24

25 Year Investment cost Outflows Inflows Loan reimburse ment Operation & maintenance cost Revenues Public funds EIB Loan drawdown Total outflows Total inflows Net cash flows Cumulated net cash flows Total Σύµπραξη ΣΥΣTEMA Μελετητική ΕΠΕ Αλίκη Τσαρούχη 25

26 6. Sensitivity and risk analysis Sensitivity analysis includes the examination of the variation of the financial indicators (mostly FNPV) according to variations of the variables that affect it. Critical variables are considered those that their variation by ±1% results in variations of FNPV of at least ±1%, provided that the project will lose its need for co-financing if these variables change in a realistic manner. The variables examined in this CBA are: The annual rate of change in demand The average charge (proportion of the value of the nominal (simple) ticket) The remaining investment cost (for the years ) The personnel cost (as a component of the maintenance and operation cost) None of the examined variables is considered to be critical, because there is none variation that causes an equal or bigger variation to the FNPV. However, it is examined which is the variation in demand, in the average charge and in the remaining investment cost that causes the FIRR to approximate the discount rate (5%) there isn t any variation that causes a positive FNPV. The results of this examination (that are presented in the following table) show that there isn t any realistic variation of these variables that produces an advantageous FIRR (e.g. the project will never be profitable). As the following table depicts, a FIRR that approximates the discount rate of the analysis is caused if: The annual rate of change in demand of the realistic scenario increases by 400% (in an annual basis). This increase causes the average annual rate of change in demand to equal 20% between , which is highly impracticable. In a case like this, the demand from 2031 and onwards would rise to passengers. The average charge increases by 250%. In this case its value would be 1,22, which means that the simple ticket would rise to 2,25 from 2017, which is even more expensive than the simple ticket of Athens. This assumption is also highly unrealistic. The remaining investment cost decreases to 70%, which is also unrealistic. Because none of the aforementioned changes is realistic and due to lack of historical evidence, to estimate the probability of the appearance of these variations, risk analysis has no practical use for this CBA and therefore it hasn t been conducted. The results of the sensitivity analysis for the realistic scenario are as follows: 1 Table 12: Results of the sensitivity analysis (realistic scenario) a/a Variable Variation Annual rate of change in demand 2 Average charge FNPV (5% discount rate) Variation of FNPV FIRR +1% annually ,21% -0,53% 68,43% 0% ,00% -0,55% 68,57% -1% annually ,21% -0,57% 68,72% +400% annually ,46% -5,03% +1% ,65% -0,50% 68,13% 0% ,00% -0,55% 68,57% -1% ,65% -0,61% 69,02% 250% ,08% 1,98% FG Σύµπραξη ΣΥΣTEMA Μελετητική ΕΠΕ Αλίκη Τσαρούχη 26